Consequences for Social Security Fraud Act

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. BENTZ. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 980, I call up the bill (H.R. 6678) to amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to provide that aliens who have been convicted of or who have committed Social Security fraud are inadmissible and deportable, and ask for its immediate consideration in the House.

The Clerk read the title of the bill.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. BENTZ. 6678.

Mr. Speaker, H.R. 6678 makes aliens inadmissible to and removed from the United States for committing Social Security fraud and identification document fraud.

The numbers are staggering. In 2017, before the Democrats opened our borders and produced the largest illegal mass migration in recorded history, there were 1.2 million cases in which illegal aliens used Social Security numbers that either belonged to someone else or were simply fabricated.

A 2020 GAO report on employment-related identity fraud identified more than 2.9 million Social Security numbers with risk characteristics associated with Social Security number misuse.

Last year, an investigative report published by RealClearInvestigations said this: ``Reports dating back over a decade show that hundreds of thousands of Americans are unknowingly `sharing' their Social Security numbers with illegal immigrants.

``Such victims may face tax bills for income they didn't earn or depleted benefits. Worse, some may experience the burden of bad credit histories and criminal records inaccurately attributed to themselves after being issued Social Security numbers that illegal aliens had previously invented and used.

``The overall impact on American citizens is largely unknown because Federal, State, and local governments as well as financial institutions have generally failed to notify them even when fraud is suspected.''

The Trump administration documented the extent of fraud during which time it notified 1.6 million employers of employees whose Social Security numbers didn't match government records.

The Biden administration then took over and has since brought 5 million illegal aliens into the United States.

They stopped the practice of notifying employers of fraudulent use of Social Security numbers. No doubt it was just too embarrassing.

This has been going on for years, but it is sure to have grown exponentially during the Biden administration. We don't know because the administration doesn't want us to know.

The current process for holding illegal aliens accountable for ID fraud is bureaucratized to the point of absurdity.

In one case, for example, an illegal alien trafficking in phony identification documents was placed in removal proceedings in 2005, and then nothing happened until 2013 when the endless appeals process finally concluded.

Despite the harm of Social Security fraud and the increasing number of illegal aliens committing it, there is no guarantee that an illegal alien committing it can be declared inadmissible to or removed from the United States.

In fact, in at least the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, the Ninth Circuit, and potentially the Fourth Circuit and 10th Circuit, certain Social Security fraud offenses do not carry immigration consequences.

This bill changes that arduous, counterintuitive, and lengthy process by streamlining the analysis and ensuring that criminal aliens can be held to account and quickly removed from the country for victimizing Americans through Social Security and identification document fraud.

In doing so, the Consequences for Social Security Fraud Act protects Americans and strengthens the immigration system.

Democrats today seem to be more concerned with the due process rights of illegal aliens than with the fact that those illegal aliens may be victimizing hardworking Americans. However, the Democrats' concerns are invalid.

For 80 years, the Board of Immigration Appeals has provided additional protections for aliens whose removability or inadmissibility is based on an admission. Under BIA precedent, to be considered an admission, an alien's admission must be explicit, unequivocal, and unqualified. The Department of Homeland Security then bears the burden to show by clear and convincing evidence that the statement meets that requirement for removability purposes.

Even then, the immigration judge would have to find that the admission fits within the relevant statutes and that the admission is based on reasonable, substantial, and probative evidence. The statutes cited in this bill have clear elements and shouldn't be a surprise to anyone. It should not be so difficult to remove aliens who commit Social Security fraud or identification document fraud.

Democrats' fearmongering contradicts the law, contravenes the text of the bill, and undermines efforts to ensure that illegal alien fraudsters can be removed from the United States.

H.R. 6678 simplifies the process for ensuring foreign nationals who defraud Americans while guests in our country can be removed from the United States.

The gentlewoman from Washington suggests that we have not, as Republicans, focused on a real solution, and I would draw her attention to H.R. 2. Any one of the solutions that people come up with is going to be dependent upon our having secured the border first, and for anyone to suggest otherwise is simply incorrect.

The solutions that are contained in that bill I hope will make their way this direction from the Senate, but I doubt it. I am looking forward to seeing whatever comes from that direction. H.R. 2 is a good approach to try to resolve what I will call as the initial issue that must be addressed.

The Consequences for Social Security Fraud Act requires that aliens be convicted of fraud or admit to such fraud. Contrary to the Democrats' talking points, not every ground for inadmissibility and removability in the Immigration and Nationality Act requires conviction. In fact, the language here is identical to the grounds of inadmissibility for crimes involving moral turpitude and controlled substances offenses under INA 212(a)(2).

Even for grounds of removability, convictions are not always required. For example, an alien can be removed for overstaying their visa, violating their nonimmigration status, or condition of entry, smuggling aliens, committing marriage fraud, being a drug user or drug addict, falsely claiming U.S. citizenship, or engaging in espionage.

By requiring at least an admission, this bill conforms to the pattern of other grounds of inadmissibility and removability. In a world of unsafe streets and far-left prosecutors who may never prosecute these offenses or will allow aliens to plead down to crimes that may not make them deportable, it makes no sense to strike the provision to require a conviction.

If an alien has admitted to such conduct, why can't the alien's own admission be used to show the alien is inadmissible or deportable? Democrats want to take illegal aliens at their word when they cross the border, even thought they destroy their passports and IDs, yet Democrats don't want to take aliens at their word when they admit to committing a crime in the United States. This defies common sense.

I want to return to my remark earlier and say, look, if we want to address issues such as E-Verify and challenges that small employers face, the first thing we have to do is secure the border, and the way we do that is with H.R. 2. The fact that the Democrats are, for whatever reason, ignoring the solutions to securing the border is beyond me because in order for us to move into these other areas to protect our farmers, our ranchers, and others, we have to secure the border first.

That is a challenge, I think, to those who want the border to be open. That is incredibly unfortunate because a huge portion of folks certainly in my district and in the United States realize that if we don't secure the border, all of this discussion about good and bad is moot. We have to secure the border first, and H.R. 2 does that.

Democrats claim this bill is unnecessary because aliens with fraud convictions are already inadmissible or removable. That couldn't be further from the truth.

Although aliens who committed some forms of fraud may be found inadmissible to or removable from the United States, many cannot be. In fact, in numerous Federal courts of appeal, certain Social Security fraud offenses do not carry immigration consequences.

Take this Ninth Circuit case, for instance: For 19 years, an illegal alien used another woman's Social Security number to obtain employment, get married twice, and obtain a driver's license, credit cards, and a HUD loan.

When the other woman learned of this fraud, she asked the illegal alien to stop using her identity. The illegal alien refused. Yet, the Ninth Circuit, doing legal gymnastics, determined that the illegal alien's fraud conviction did not carry certain immigration consequences because it was not a crime involving moral turpitude.

Even when courts get it right, it often takes them years to do so.

In a Fifth Circuit case from 2021, the alien already had been in removal proceedings for 6 years before the Federal appeals court finally found that his conviction did, in fact, make him inadmissible to the United States.

That is why H.R. 6678 is imperative to protect our communities from fraud and ensure aliens who engage in fraud can be more quickly removed from the United States.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. BENTZ. Mr. Speaker, it seems to me that the Democrats want to leave the border open and then facilitate the illegal presence of those in the United States.

Mr. Speaker, I am prepared to close, and I reserve the balance of my time.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. BENTZ. Mr. Speaker, contrary to the Democrats' talking points, this bill is necessary not only to protect Americans from fraud but also to hold aliens accountable for their criminal acts. This bill makes America safer. I urge my colleagues to support it.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source