To amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to give priority in the issuance of immigrant visas to the sons and daughters of Filipino World War II veterans who are or were naturalized citizens of the United States, and for other purposes.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague and dear friend, the gentleman from California, Mr. Honda, who is managing this Special Order, but more especially also as an outstanding leader in our Asian Pacific American community and currently serving as chairman of our Asian Pacific Congressional Caucus.

I want to also commend our Democratic leader, Ms. Nancy Pelosi, for her outstanding remarks. The fact that she also is a Member who has one of the largest constituencies in not only the State of California of our Asian Pacific American community, but, as Ms. Pelosi was making her statement, I recalled also her predecessor, someone whom I have had the highest admiration and respect for, a giant of a man not only in his ways but as an example, with a real great sensitivity and compassion for the needs of the Asian Pacific American community people, none other than the late Congressman Phil Burton.

I would also like to commend my colleagues, Congresswoman Juanita Millender-McDonald and Congressman Al Green, for their outstanding remarks this evening in this Special Order.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in celebration of the Asian Pacific American Heritage Month to acknowledge the contributions of our Asian Pacific American individuals and communities to the success of our great Nation. I commend my colleagues who founded this celebration in 1977 by introducing a resolution calling upon the President to proclaim the first 10 days in May Asian Pacific Heritage Week, former Representatives Norm Mineta and Frank Horton, and Senators Daniel K. Inouye and Senator Spark Matsunaga.

I think we need to also understand, Mr. Speaker, the dynamics. Those of us who are Americans, and we are very, very proud of being Americans, but whose roots are from the Asian Pacific region, and the dynamics of why the Asian Pacific region is so important, it is in our national interests, not only our national security, the economics, just about every phase of what is really critically important in our Nation in dealing with this region of the world which, by the way, two-thirds of the world's population is the Asian Pacific region. Six of the 10 largest armies in the world are in the Asian Pacific region. Our trade with the Asian Pacific region is four times greater than any other region in the world, including especially that of Europe.

I am reminded a couple of years ago what Senator Inouye said, for every one 747 that flies between the Atlantic and the United States, four 747s fly between the Asian Pacific region and our country.

Mr. Speaker, the Asian Pacific American community is vibrant and growing

with an estimated 14 million Asian American residents and another 975,000 Pacific Americans. I am proud to be a member of this Asian Pacific American community, a community that has produced so many inspiring individuals. In government, in the military, in the sciences, sports, entertainment, business, you name it, we have it.

In government, for example, especially from the great State of Hawaii, among the first, I guess you might say, U.S. Senator Hiram Fong, Senator Daniel Inouye, Senator Daniel Akaka, the first elected Asian American Governor of any State, Governor George Ariyoshi, our first native Hawaiian Governor, Governor John Waihee, our first Filipino American Governor, Governor Ben Cayetano.

We also have Mayor Neal Blaisdell, and the newly elected mayor of the city and county of Honolulu, Mufi Hannemann. We also have Lieutenant Governors Jimmy Kealoha and Duke Ainoa. Norm Mineta, a good friend of mine who is not only partly responsible for initiating this Heritage Month, but was always the first Asian Pacific American mayor of a major U.S. city like San Jose, he was also the first Asian Pacific American to be a member of a Presidential Cabinet when he was appointed as Secretary of Commerce in the year 2000 by former President Clinton and now is U.S. Secretary of Transportation appointed by President Bush.

Elaine Chao, another first. Secretary Chao is the first female Asian American Cabinet member, appointed Secretary of Labor by President Bush.

Gary Locke, first Asian American Governor on the mainland United States, elected Governor of the State of Washington in 1996. And I could never forget and my deepest respect to the late Congresswoman Patsy Mink, first Asian American female elected to the U.S. Congress since 1964. Then our late colleague and friend, my dear friend, the late Congressman Bob Matsui, who inspired me and mentored me throughout our time here together as a senior member of the House Committee on Ways and Means.

As a Vietnam veteran, Mr. Speaker, it would be ludicrous for me not to say something to honor the hundreds of thousands of Asian Pacific Americans who have and continue to serve in all the branches of the armed services of our Nation.

I would like to share with you the contributions of tens of thousands of Japanese American soldiers who volunteered to fight our Nation's enemies in Europe during World War II.

Mr. Speaker, we are all aware of the fact that after the surprise attack on Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941, by the Imperial Army of Japan, there was such an outrage and cry for an all-out war against Japan. In days afterwards, our President and the Congress formally declared war. But caught in this crossfire were hundreds of thousands of Americans, mind you Americans, who happened to be of Japanese ancestry.

Our national government immediately implemented a policy whereby over 100,000 Americans of Japanese ancestry were forced to live in what were called, supposedly, ``relocation camps''; I call them ``concentration camps.'' Their lands, their homes, and their properties were confiscated without due process of law.

It was also a time in our Nation's history that there was so much hatred and bigotry and racism against our Japanese American community. And yet despite all of this, leaving their wives, their parents, their brothers and sisters behind barbed-wire fences in these prison camps, the White House accepted the requests from tens of thousands of Japanese Americans who volunteered to join the Army, and as a result, two combat units were organized.

One was called the 100th Battalion, and the other was known as the 442nd Infantry Combat Group. Both were sent to Europe to fight. And I might say that I am very, very proud to have been associated and been a former member of the 100th Battalion, 442nd Infantry Combat Group out of the State of Hawaii.

Mr. Speaker, in my humble opinion, history speaks for itself in documenting that none have shed their blood more valiantly for our Nation than the Japanese American solders who served in those two combat units while fighting enemy forces in Europe during World War II.

The military records of the 100th Battalion and the 442nd Infantry are without equal. Those Japanese American units suffered an unprecedented casualty rate of 314 percent, and received over 18,000 individual decorations, many awarded posthumously for bravery and courage in the field of battle.

For your information, Mr. Speaker, 52 Distinguished Service Crosses, 560 Silver Stars, and 9,480 Purple Hearts were awarded to the Japanese American soldiers of the 100th Battalion and 442nd Infantry Group. I find it unusual, however, that only one Medal of Honor was given. Nonetheless, the 442nd Combat Group emerged as the most decorated combat unit of its size in the history of the United States Army.

President Truman was so moved by their bravery in the field of battle, as well as the tremendous sacrifices of the African American soldiers in World War II, that he issued an executive order to finally desegregate all of the branches of the armed services.

Senator Inouye lost his arm while engaged in battle against two German machine gun posts, and he was awarded the Distinguished Service Cross. After a congressional mandate to review again the military records of these two combat units some 5 years ago, I was privileged to attend a White House ceremony where President Clinton presented 19, 19 Congressional Medals of Honor to the Japanese American soldiers who were members of the 100th Battalion and 442nd Combat Infantry. Senator Inouye was one of those recipients of the Congressional Medal of Honor.

I submit, Mr. Speaker, these Japanese Americans paid their dues in blood to protect our Nation from its enemies. It is a shameful mark on the history of our country that when the patriotic survivors of the 100th Battalion and the 442nd Infantry returned to the United States to be reunited with their families, who were locked up behind barbed wire fences, living in prison camps, and could not even get a haircut in downtown San Francisco, simply because they looked Japanese, they were Japanese, and for that reason alone, even with their uniforms on, they were not given the privilege of getting a haircut.

My former colleague and now U.S. Secretary of Transportation, Norm Mineta, and the late Congressman Bob Matsui from Sacramento both spent some of the early years of their lives in these prison camps. Secretary Mineta told me one of the interesting features of these prison camps was posting of machine gun nests all around the camp, and everyone was told that these machine guns were posted to protect them against rioters. But then Secretary Mineta observed, if these machine guns were posted to guard us, why is it that they are all directed inside the prison camp rather than outside it?

I submit, ladies and gentlemen, my good friends, my colleagues, the wholesale and arbitrary abolishment of the constitutional rights of these loyal Japanese Americans should forever serve as a reminder and testament that this must never be allowed to occur again.

When this miscarriage of justice unfolded during World War II, Americans of German and Italian ancestry were not similarly jailed en masse. Some declared the incident as an outright example of racism and bigotry in its ugliest form.

After viewing the Holocaust Museum in Washington, I understand better why the genocide of some 6 million Jews has prompted the cry ``Never again, never again.'' Likewise, I sincerely hope that mass internments on the basis of race alone will never again darken the pages of the history of this great Nation.

Now, to those who say, Well, that happened decades ago, we must say that we have to continue to be on our guard for this kind of thing to happen again. I remember years ago the case of Bruce Yamashita, the Japanese American born and raised in the State of Hawaii, who was discharged from the Marine Corps after a training program as an officer candidate and an ugly display of racial discrimination.

The Marine Corps superiors taunted Yamashita with ethnic slurs and told him, We do not want your kind around here, go back to your own country. The

situation was made worse when a leading officer of the Marine Corps made a statement on the 60 Minutes program who said, Marine officers who are minorities do not shoot, swim or use compasses as well as white officers.

The Commandant later apologized for his remarks, but it was a little too late. And I am really happy to know that after all of the investigations that the Secretary of the Navy finally awarded Mr. Yamashita his commission as an officer and a captain in the United States Marine Corps.

The tradition continues today of the thousands of Asian Pacific Americans who served in the armed services. Retired General Eric Shinseki was the first Asian Pacific American four-star general who served as U.S. Army Chief of Staff.

Our Asian American Pacific Island soldiers are fighting for freedom in Iraq even as I speak. Just this past weekend I was privileged to witness in Germany the swearing in of a Samoan soldier by the name of Command Sergeant Major Iuniasolua Savusa as the Command Sergeant Major for U.S. Army Europe and the 7th Army.

I am very proud of Command Sergeant Major Savusa for his accomplishments. He is an inspiration and a great role model for our youth and other Asian Pacific Americans who currently serve in the military.

Mr. Speaker, I think at this point I want to defer to my good friend, the gentleman from California (Mr. Honda) the manager of this special order this evening. And I am sure that he may want to continue portions of his statement as well.

Mr. Speaker, how much time do we have remaining?

Mr. Speaker, I would like to offer my closing remarks. I say, Mr. Speaker, when I envision America I do not see a melting pot designed to reduce or removal racial differences. The America I see is a brilliant rainbow, a rainbow of ethnicities and cultures with each people proudly contributing in their own distinctive and unique way a better America for generations to come.

Asian Pacific Americans wish to find a just and equitable place in our society that will allow, like all Americans, to grow, to succeed, to achieve and to contribute to the advancements of this great Nation.

I would like to close my remarks by asking all of us here this evening, What is America all about?

I cannot think of it said better than on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial in the summer of 1963 when an African American minister by the name of Martin Luther King, Jr., poured out his heart and soul to every American who could hear his voice when he uttered these famous words, ``I have a dream. My dream is that one day my children will be judged not by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.''

That is what I believe America is all about, Mr. Speaker. Again, I thank my colleague and my good friend, the gentleman from California, for his management of this Special Order honoring all of the Asian Pacific American community in our country and the contributions that they have made to make our country to form a more perfect union.

I rise today in celebration of Asian Pacific American Heritage Month, to acknowledge the contributions of our Asian Pacific American individuals and communities to the success of our great Nation.

I commend my colleagues who founded this celebration in 1977 by introducing a resolution calling upon the President to proclaim the first ten days in May Asian/Pacific Heritage week--Representatives Norm Mineta and Frank Horton, and Senators Daniel K. Inouye and Spark Matsunaga.

The Asian Pacific American community is vibrant and growing, with an estimated 14 million Asian American residents and another 975,000 Pacific Americans.

I am proud to be a member of this Asian Pacific American community, a community that has produced so many inspiring individuals in government, the military, the sciences, sports, entertainment, and business. In government, for example: from Hawaii

Senators Hyrum Fong, Daniel Inouye, Daniel Akaka.

Governors George Ariyoshi, John Waihee, Ben Cayetano.

Mayors Neal Blaisdell and Mufi Hannemann, Lt. Governors Jimmy Kealoha and Duke Aiona.

Norm Mineta--my good friend was not only partly responsible for initiating APA Heritage Month, but was also the first Asian Pacific American mayor of a major U.S. city (San Jose). He was also the first Asian Pacific American to be a member of the Presidential Cabinet, when he was appointed as Secretary of Commerce in 2000 by former President Clinton and five years ago Mr. Mineta was appointed by President Bush as U.S. Secretary of Transportation.

Elaine Chao--another first, Secretary Chao is the first female Asian- American cabinet member, appointed Secretary of Labor in 2001, also appointed by President Bush.

Gary Locke--the first Asian-American governor on the mainland U.S., elected governor of Washington, 1996.

Patsy Mink--the first Asian-American female elected to Congress, in 1964 from Hawaii.

Bob Matsui--my dear friend and colleague who inspired me and mentored me throughout our time together here as a senior member of the House Committee on Ways and Means.

As a Vietnam Veteran, it would be ludicrous for me not to say something to honor the hundreds of thousands of Asian-Pacific Americans who have and continue to serve in all the branches of armed services of our Nation. I would like to share with you the contributions of the tens of thousands of Japanese-American soldiers who volunteered to fight our Nation's enemies in Europe during World War II.

Mr. Speaker, we are well aware of the fact that after the surprise attack on Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941, by the Imperial Army of Japan--there was such an outrage and cry for all-out war against Japan, and days afterward, our President and the Congress formally declared war--but caught in this cross-fire were hundreds of thousands of Americans--Americans mind you who happened to be of Japanese ancestry.

Our national government immediately implemented a policy whereby over one-hundred thousand Americans of Japanese ancestry, were forced to live in what were called relocations camps--but were actually more like prison or concentration camps. Their lands, homes and properties were confiscated without due process of law.

It was also a time in our Nation's history that there was so much hatred, bigotry and racism against our Japanese-American community--and yet despite all this--leaving their wives, their parents, their brothers and sisters behind barbed wire fences in these prison camps-- the White House accepted the request from tens of thousands of the Japanese-Americans who volunteered to join the Army. And as a result two combat units were organized--one was the 100th Battalion and the other known as the 442nd Infantry Combat Group--both were sent to fight in Europe.

In my humble opinion, history speaks for itself in documenting that none have shed their blood more valiantly for our Nation than the Japanese-Americans soldiers who served in these two combat units while fighting enemy forces in Europe during World War II.

The military records of the 100th Battalion and 442nd Infantry are without equal. These Japanese-American units suffered an unprecedented casualty rate of 314 percent and received over 18,000 individual decorations, many awarded posthumously, for bravery and courage in the field of battle.

For your information Mr, Speaker, 52 Distinguished Service Crosses, 560 Silver Stars, and 9,480 Purple Hearts, were awarded to the Japanese-American soldiers of the 100th Battalion and 442nd Infantry Group. I find it unusual; however, that only one Medal of Honor was ever given. Nonetheless, the 442nd Combat Group emerged as the most decorated combat unit of its size in the history of the United States Army.

President Truman was so moved by their bravery in the field of battle, as well as that of African-American soldiers during World War II, that he issued an executive order to finally desegregate all branches of the Armed Services.

Senator Inouye lost his arm while engaged in battle against two German machine gun posts and he was awarded the Distinguished Service Cross. After a Congressional mandate to review again the military records of these two combat units 5 years ago--I was privileged to attend the White House ceremony where President Clinton presented nineteen Congressional Medals of Honor to the Japanese-American soldiers who were members of 100th Battalion and 442nd Combat Infantry group--Senator Inouye was one of those recipients of the Medal of Honor.

I submit, Mr. Speaker, these Japanese-Americans paid their dues in blood to protect our Nation from its enemies. It is a shameful mark on the history of our country that when the patriotic survivors of the 100th Battalion and the 442nd Infantry returned to the United States to be reunited with their families who were locked-up behind barbed wire fences, living in prison camps--and could not even get a haircut in downtown San Francisco because they all looked Japanese--despite the fact that they too were Americans.

My former colleague and now U.S. Secretary of Transportation, Norman Mineta, and the late Congressman Bob Matsui from Sacramento both spent some of the early years of their lives in these prison camps.

Secretary Mineta told of one of the interesting features of these prison camps were postings of machine gun nests all around the camp and everyone was told that these machine guns were posted to protect them against rioters.

But then Secretary Mineta observed--if these machine guns are posted to guard us, why is it that they are all directed inside the prison camp compound and not outside?

I submit, ladies and gentlemen, the wholesale and arbitrary abolishment of the constitutional rights of these loyal Japanese- Americans should forever serve as a reminder and testament that this must never be allowed to occur again. When this miscarriage of justice unfolded during World War II, Americans of German and Italian ancestry were not similarly jailed en masse. Some declare the incident as an example of outright racism and bigotry in its ugliest form. After viewing the Holocaust Museum in Washington, I understand better why the genocide of some 6 million Jews has prompted the cry, ``Never Again, Never Again!'' Likewise, I sincerely hope that mass internments of the basis of race alone will never again darken the history of our great nation.

To those that say, well, that occurred decades ago, I say we must continue to be vigilant in guarding against such evil today.

Not long ago, we had the case of Bruce Yamashita, a Japanese-American from Hawaii who was discharged from the Marine Corps officer training program in an ugly display of racial discrimination. Marine Corps superiors taunted Yamashita with ethnic slurs and told him, ``We don't want your kind around here. Go back to your own country.'' The situation was made worse by the Commandant of the Marine Corps, a four star general, who appeared on television's ``Sixty Minutes'' and stated: ``Marine officers who are minorities do not shoot, swim, or use compasses as well as white officers.'' The Commandant later apologized for his remarks, but it was a little too late.

After years of perseverance and appeals, Mr. Yamashita was vindicated after proving he was the target of vicious racial harassment during his officer training program. The Secretary of the Navy's investigation into whether minorities were deliberately being discouraged from becoming officers resulted in Bruce Yamashita receiving is commission as a captain in the Marine Corps.

The tradition continues today of the thousands of Asian-Pacific Americans who serve in the armed services. Retired General Eric Shinseki was the first Asian-American four-star general who served as U.S. Army Chief of Staff. Our Asian-American and Pacific Island soldiers are fighting for freedom in Iraq even as I speak.

Just this past weekend, I was privileged to witness the swearing in of the Samoan soldier CSM Iuniasolua Savusa as the Command Sergeant Major for U.S. Army Europe and the 7th Army. I am very proud of Command Sergeant Major Iuni Savusa for his accomplishments. He is an inspiration and a great role model for our youth and other Asian- Pacific Americans who currently serving in the military.

Other outstanding Asian-Pacific Americans who have made significant contributions to our nation:

Dr. David Ho--pioneered treatment for HIV/AIDS and named by Time Magazine as its ``Man of the Year'' in 1996.

Dr. Hideyo Noguchi--isolated the syphilis germ in 1911, leading to a cure for the deadly disease.

Dr. Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar--Nobel Prize winner, evolution of stars, led to modern astrophysics.

Ellison Onizuka--the first Asian-American astronaut, 1985, Died aboard the Space shuttle Challenger in 1986.

Kalpana Chawla--Astronaut, first Indian American woman in space.

News, Sports, and Entertainment--

Ellen Nakashima--chief reporter for the Washington Post in Southeast Asia.

Connie Chung--in 1993, became the first Asian American to be a nightly news anchor for a major network.

Keanu Reeves--internationally renown actor.

Apolo Ohno--Olympic Gold & Silver Medalist, speed skating.

Jet Li--movie actor.

Kristi Yamaguchi--Olympic Gold Medalist, figure skating.

Dwayne Johnson--also known as the ``Rock,'' professional wrestler and movie star--Scorpine King, Walking Tell, Doomed.

Dr. Sammy Lee, Olympic gold medalist high diver.

Greg Louganis--Olympic gold.

Michelle Kwan: Olympic Silver and Bronze medalist, Figure skating.

Duke Kahanamokee, gold medalist swimmer.

Angela Perez Baraquio: First Asian American Miss America 2001 (Miss Hawaii).

Sarah Chang: world famous violinist.

Lucy Liu: Actress.

Bruce Lee: Martial Artist and Actor.

Tiger Woods: Golf Professional.

Michelle Wie: Professional Golfer.

Akebono (Chad Rowan): Sumo Wrestler (retired), yokozuna.

Konishiki Salevaia Afigaroe: Sumo wrestler, oyeki.

Musashimaru Peitari, Sumo wrestler, retired, yokozuna.

24 Samoan NFL football players in 2005/2006 season.

9 Native Hawaiian NFL football players.

5 Tongan Americans--NFL football players.

Mr. Speaker, when I envision America, I don't see a melting pot designed to reduce and remove racial differences. The America I see is a brilliant rainbow--a rainbow of ethnicities and cultures, with each people proudly contributing in their own distinctive and unique way--a better America for a generation of Americans yet unborn.

Asian-Pacific Americans wish to find a just and equitable place in our society that will allow them--like all Americans--to grow, to succeed, to achieve and to contribute to the advancement of this great nation.

Mr. Speaker, first as an American, whose roots are from the Asian Pacific Region, I would like to close my remarks by asking all of us here tonight, what is America about? I think it could not have been said better than on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial in the summer of 1963 when an African-American minister named Martin Luther King Jr. poured out his heart and soul to every American who could hear his voice, when he uttered these words: ``I have a dream. My dream is that one day my children will be judged not by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.''

That is what I believe America is all about.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the pending amendment be set aside.

Mr. President, I send an amendment to the desk.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that reading of the amendment be dispensed with.

Mr. President, this bill we are debating today, the immigration bill, will place a significant cost on the American taxpayers. I am particularly concerned that the provisions of this bill will impose a heavy strain on our social security system. That concern is why I am offering amendment number 3985.

The American public needs to understands what this bill would do. If enacted, it would allow the immigrants who receive amnesty to qualify for social security based on work performed prior to their amnesty. It allows people to qualify for social security based on work they did while they were illegally present in the United States and illegally working in the United States. Let me repeat that.

People who broke the law to come here and broke the law to work here can benefit from their conduct to collect social security. This bill is the pathway that allows that.

In some cases, illegal immigrants may have stolen an American citizen's identity. They may have stolen an American's social security number to fraudulently work. But it is that illegal conduct and fraudulent work that they will be allowed to use to qualify for social security.

Does this bill punish the people who stole an American citizen's identity? No, it does not. It rewards them. Does this bill consider the impact that the crime of identify theft had on the victim whose social security number was stolen? No, it does not. This bill gives them the full benefit of citizenship, with respect to social security benefits and rewards criminal conduct without any consideration for the victim.

There have been many media reports recently about illegal immigrants stealing Americans' social security numbers. To understand the potential scope of this problem, you have to un1erstand that every year employers are advised that nearly 800,000 employees do not have valid, I matching social security numbers. In too many cases, the number used belongs to someone else. And so, for a moment, I want the Senate to stop. I want my colleagues to think. And to consider the impact this theft and fraud has on the victims.

Rarely, does the Senate ever really consider the impact that crime has on the victim. Today Should be different. And so I am going to take a few moments to share with my colleagues a few of the stories of the victims of identity theft. In order to protect their privacy, I will only use the victim's first name.

Identify theft by illegal aliens has created many problems for Americans. Sometimes those problems involve the Internal Revenue Service. For example, Audra has been a stay-at-home mom since 2000. Over the last 3 years, the IRS has accused her of owing $1 million in back taxes. This is a picture of the first letter she received from the IRS saying she owed back taxes. Since that first letter, she has received many more.

Her story is clear. She has not worked in 6 years. Yet the IRS says she owes taxes for working the last three years. What she first thought was a mistake, later became clear. It was a case of identity theft. Her social security number was being used by at least 218 illegal immigrants, mostly in Texas, to obtain jobs.

Audra has obtained copies of the 218 W-2s that were used in 2004 by illegal immigrants using her Social Security number. This is a picture of the stack of those W-2s. In Audra's own words, she said, ``It was so overwhelming I couldn't be frustrated--I was just completely beyond that.'' She filed a complaint with the Federal Trade Commission. Her file at the Federal Trade Commission is very thick. Here is a picture of many of the documents in her file on this chart.

Identity theft by illegal immigrants has made it hard for some Americans to find a job of their own. When my staff spoke to Audra, she explained to them that she was not able to find a job of her own because of the theft of her Social Security number. This is a photo of the letter Audra received denying her employment because she is actually already employed by that same employer. Obviously, she is not, but someone else with her Social Security number is employed at that place of employment.

Audra is not the only American affected in this way. A few years ago, a woman named Linda applied for a job at a chain retailer, but her job application was turned down. Why? Because her potential employer told her that she was already working for that very same retailer. She, of course, knew better. She could not get a job because someone else had stolen her identity. Without knowing it, the thief also stole the job she could have been hired to do.

That is not what America should be about. People who want to work should be able to work. Identity theft by illegal immigrants has damaged many Americans' credit, making it hard for them to buy the basic necessities. In some cases, the victims of identity theft are denied social service benefits such as unemployment because records show they already have a job even though they are not working. In some cases, government records show they have many jobs all across the country.

I want to tell my colleagues about Caleb, who works in northern Nevada. He lives there with his wife and two children. Caleb is actually one of my constituents. This is a picture of Caleb and his daughter at the kitchen table. Caleb works hard as a construction worker to take care of his family. In December of 2003, Caleb was unable to find work because of the seasonal difficulties northern Nevada's construction industry faces. So Caleb applied for unemployment benefits. He was denied unemployment benefits. Why? Because he was told he was already working as a landscaper in Las Vegas. Many of my colleagues are probably not aware of the geography of Nevada. I am pretty confident that Caleb was not living in Reno and working in Las Vegas because that would mean he would have over a 1,000-mile commute every single day. Caleb and his wife contacted the employer of the identity thief. They learned that the person who used his Social Security number had previously given the employer at least 10 different Social Security numbers, and that person's resident alien card had expired.

In this picture, Caleb has many of the documents, including a copy of the expired resident alien card used by the person who stole his identity.

Not only does identity theft by illegal immigrants create problems for adults, it is also creates problems for young children, children who will likely have to deal with the consequences of someone stealing their Social Security number well into adulthood.

For example, Kelly's daughter is quite ambitious. Based on where she lives, and on where she works, she drives 80 miles each day to work at a steakhouse. I am sure her parents were surprised to learn about her commute since she does not even have a driver's license yet. In fact, Kelly's daughter has gotten off to quite an early start in life in the work world--considering she is only 5 years of age. Her Social Security number was being used by an illegal immigrant to work.

Stories like this are all too common. Many Southwest States such as Utah and Arizona, and even my home State of Nevada, have experienced a crime spree involving illegal immigrants using stolen identities of children. In one case in Utah, a child apparently owns a cleaning company and works as a prep cook at two restaurants in Salt Lake City. That is a lot of responsibility, especially for an 8-year-old boy. Another boy from Salt Lake City supposedly works for an express air freight company, quite an important job for an 11-year-old.

These stories are shocking. It is clear that illegal immigrants are purchasing false papers and using stolen Social Security numbers to obtain jobs. They are victimizing hard-working Americans, Americans who want to work. They are also victimizing these young children. The current Social Security policy and this bill will only make matters worse by granting benefits to those who are working here illegally.

I am offering an amendment to correct this problem. My amendment will help reduce this kind of document fraud. My amendment will also preserve the integrity of the Social Security system by ensuring that people are not able to receive Social Security benefits based on their prior unlawful activity.

I will explain my amendment to the American people and to the Senate. Under current law, individuals who work in the United States illegally and later obtain legal employment status can use their illegal work history to qualify for benefits. For example, if an illegal immigrant works in the United States for 9 years, and then receives legal status under this bill, the immigrant would qualify for full Social Security benefits after just 1 year of legal work. Essentially, the illegal immigrants can go back to the Social Security Administration and ask them for credit for his or her illegal work.

What is important to understand is that in order to go back to the Social Security system, the illegal immigrant must get legal status in some way. This bill is an avenue that gives them that legal status. This bill opens the door for illegal immigrants to get Social Security based on their illegal work history. My amendment closes that door.

I know some of my colleagues may argue that the illegal immigrants paid into the system, and as a result they should be able to collect benefits based on paying into the system. To those colleagues who feel that way, I say this: First, the crime of identity theft and Social Security fraud are not victimless crimes. The victims of these crimes are American citizens and legal immigrants. My staff has spoken to

some of these victims. Some victims' Social Security records are such a mess that the Social Security Administration has wiped out all of the work history from the victim's account. That is the only way they believed they could get a handle on the fraud associated with these folks' accounts. By wiping out all work history, the victim's own legal work history is also deleted. Basically, the victims is forced to start over to qualify for future Social Security benefits.

The Social Security Administration advised the victim that the victim's records are so bad that their only option was to erase the victim's work history. The victims can rebuild their accounts if they can produce their old W-2s. How many people in America can produce them? Some, maybe. If you are like me, and keep records forever, you will not have a problem. But for most Americans, who do not keep their past W-2s and old records, it will be impossible to prove their work history. As a result, some victims end up losing their ability to collect their Social Security based on their own legal work history.

At the same time, this bill would open the door to give Social Security benefits based on illegal work history. If Members oppose this amendment, Members are saying they want to reward illegal conduct with Social Security benefits while American citizens cannot collect their rightly earned benefits. This is simply unfair. That is not what America is about.

Second, Social Security is a system based on expectancy. For the illegal immigrants who paid into the system using a stolen Social Security card, they never did so thinking they would earn a retirement benefit. They did so, and I don't blame them, simply to get a job. They could not have possibly ever envisioned we would pass this bill in the Senate. They could not ever have thought that the Senate would let them go back and petition for Social Security benefits. They never had a reasonable expectation we would do this and, as a result, that they would be able to receive those benefits in the first place.

Third, for the vast majority of perpetrators who engaged in this kind of identity theft, the only way they would ever be able to petition the Social Security Administration is if we pass this bill. It is reasonable to oppose, as a condition to amnesty, a requirement that the people receiving amnesty give up or surrender their rights to petition for Social Security benefits for their previous illegal work.

I ask my colleagues to consider the message the Senate is sending to the victims if we do not agree to my amendment. The victim has already paid a heavy price. If the Senate does not agree to my amendment, the government will be saying: We reward the criminal and want to continue to punish the victim.

We will also be inviting future fraud. How, you might ask? If my amendment is not agreed to, there will be no way, none, for the Social Security Administration to determine who actually did the work associated with a particular Social Security number. If my amendment is not agreed to, this bill will create an incentive for people to engage in a second kind of fraud, one that is based on fraudulent use of W-2s to petition for illegal work credit. There would be no way for the Social Security Administration to give proper credit for that work if more than one person petitions for that credit.

I ask my colleagues to consider the burden this will place on the Social Security Administration itself. As of 2003, there were 255 million records in the Earnings Suspense File. That file is where Social Security places records when the name and social security number that is used do not match. How can the Social Security Administration process tens of millions of petitions to receive credit for illegally performed work? Without my amendment, the Social Security Administration will be inundated with petitions with no way to know how to handle them.

The promise of Social Security is for citizens and legal residents of the United States. Social Security was not intended for individuals who enter our country illegally, purchase fraudulent green cards and documentation on the black market, and use them to get jobs. It is wrong to allow people who have broken our laws to receive such a reward, especially when such activity places such a heavy toll on victims.

We should not now reward individuals who have knowingly engaged in illegal activity. We should not adopt a policy that will reward this illegal behavior while at the same time continuing to subject the innocent to further victimization. Rewarding illegal behavior is insulting to those immigrants who have played by the rules to qualify for benefits. It is also insulting to hard-working Americans who are paying into the Social Security system.

My amendment allows immigrants to begin accumulating credit to qualify for Social Security only after they have been assigned a valid Social Security number. It does not allow illegal immigrants to receive credit for their past illegal work. This approach is responsible and it is common sense. Especially when it comes to how the Social Security Administration will function.

I hope one of the principles we can reach consensus on is that illegal behavior should not be rewarded at the expense of victimizing American citizens. I cannot go home to Nevada and tell the people we allowed Social Security benefits to go to people who have worked in the United States illegally, especially when Nevadans are too often the victims of this kind of crime.

Mr. President, I will close now by making one additional observation. Under current law, it is a felony to steal and use somebody's Social Security number. Under this bill, we are waiving that felony. That, in and of itself, is amnesty for the crime of identity theft. I do not think that the Senate should go beyond granting amnesty for criminal identity theft. It is one thing to say that the perpetrator of the crime cannot be prosecuted for that felony, but it is quite another to allow the perpetrator to collect Social Security benefits. It is fundamentally unfair to do both when there are victims, like the ones I have talked about today.

So I hope people will see the common sense of this amendment and will, in a bipartisan fashion, overwhelmingly adopt this amendment. I urge my colleagues to adopt this amendment.

Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I say to the Senator, could I spend 5 minutes responding to a couple things, and then I would be willing to yield to the Senator for 5 minutes in morning business.

Just to respond to a couple of things the Senator from Massachusetts talked about, that section 614 and a provision in section 601 in this legislation on page 395 would ensure that aliens who received legal status, amnesty, whatever you want to call it, cannot be prosecuted for document fraud. He said they weren't receiving amnesty. If there was a felony they were committing, and now they can't be prosecuted, that sounds like amnesty to me.

A couple other points he brought up: Legal aliens who were here and who overstayed their visas have a legal Social Security number. They are paying into the system with a legal Social Security number. Even though they are here illegally, they would still be able to collect benefits.

Another point I want to address that the Senator from Massachusetts brought up concerned the Social Security Administration. These illegal workers would come to them and petition for the benefits, and they would have to prove that they actually worked where they worked, they paid in the taxes, and things like that. Let's try to think about the burden that this would place on the Social Security Administration itself.

Currently, there are 255 million earning suspense files. Those are the ones where the Social Security number and the work don't match, 255 million. Try to imagine how many of these are going to come forward with the Social Security Administration where people are trying to prove something to gain benefits. They are going to be overwhelmed. What is that going to do to the normal processing for people who have problems with their Social Security benefits? All of us have case workers back in our States who deal with seniors who have legitimate Social Security problems. Sometimes there are mistakes made. We have had people who have actually received a letter where the Social Security Administration told them that they had died. It was kind of a surprise to them. But they called us, and we were able to bring them back to life. We jokingly refer to these cases as Lazarus cases. It is a situation where they need speedy help. If the Social Security Administration is burdened with all of these millions of potential cases, it just boggles the mind how people could be against this amendment.

The next point I want to make is that the Senator from Massachusetts said that this illegal immigrant who is now legalized or regularized, whatever term you want to put on it, cannot go to the Social Security Administration, and they have to prove with documents. We have seen the kind of fraudulent documents used in the country today. These documents are not that difficult to produce, to defraud. There is a great incentive for them to do that. Once again, it will be an extra burden on the Social Security Administration trying to prove or disprove whether these documents are real.

The last point I want to make, the Senator said the people they are regularizing in this bill have to pay a fine. They have to pay back taxes. We have heard that over and over again: They have to pay back income taxes. They don't have to pay back Social Security taxes, the FICA taxes they didn't pay, only the income taxes. So let's be completely open and honest about what this bill does and about what my amendment seeks to correct.

When we are considering this amendment, we absolutely must consider what it is going to do to the Social Security Administration, what it is going to do to the trust fund and, mostly, what it is going to do to the victims. Rewarding illegal behavior while we are not taking care of the victims in the United States fundamentally is unfair.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, will the Senator yield?

Mr. President, I wish to ask my friend from Arizona a couple of questions about the bill and about my amendment in particular. The bill does not require that the people whose status is adjusted pay all back taxes. The bill only requires that people pay any back income taxes. There is no mention of FICA taxes in the bill. Is the Senator aware of that distinction?

First, if the alien is self-employed, that is not correct. Remember, the employer pays half and sends in those funds.

That is correct. But the bottom line is if they owe back FICA taxes under this bill, they do not have to pay those back taxes.

I have another question for my friend from Arizona. Is he aware that it is a felony to use someone's Social Security number?

Under this legislation, we forgive that felony. We grant amnesty for that felony.

Right. But, Mr. President, in Sections 601 and 614 of the legislation, it actually ensures that aliens who receive legal status cannot be prosecuted for document fraud, including the false use of Social Security numbers. Is the Senator aware of that?

Mr. President, I agree with the Senator from Arizona that many people are paying into the system. They paid into the system with no expectation of getting social security's benefit because they didn't know we would be enacting a bill like this. They paid into the system simply because that was the price to pay to get a job in the United States. The immigrant knew they were using an illegal Social Security number but without regards of the impact of the victim. I have reviewed case after case related to identity theft and Social Security fraud. These cases are occurring all over the United States. In every case, in every State, where someone's Social Security number was stolen by an illegal immigrant to use to find work, the victim's credit history is destroyed. Sometimes their work history is too. Earlier I talked about Caleb, a gentleman in Nevada. The illegal immigrant who used Caleb's Social Security number was not trying to harm that person but he did. Caleb applied for unemployment but couldn't get it because the agency said he was working when, in fact, he wasn't. He lives in Reno. They said he was working in Las Vegas. It was an illegal immigrant using his Social Security number in Las Vegas.

I never said this amendment is going to prevent identity theft. What I have said is that it is not right for somebody to steal somebody else's identity--granted for the noble purpose of getting a job--and reward the theft by giving work credit that counts towards Social Security. We should consider the victims who are forced to deal with the terrible consequences of the crime.

I will make two other points. The chairman of the Finance Committee supports this amendment. One of the reasons the chairman of the Finance Committee supports this amendment is because the Social Security Administration will not be able to make determinations with respect to the earnings suspense files that the Senator from Arizona referenced. As of 2003, there were 255 million instances where the social security number did not match the name given the employer. This bill will legalize those who are in the workforce today--the 7 million or so in the workforce out of the 12 million who are in the country. The effect of this amnesty over the next 10 years, will require the Social Security Administration to hire nearly an additional 2,000 employees to handle the cases of people who worked illegally, received amnesty under this bill, and are now applying for this benefit. A benefit they earned illegally.

Point No. 2 is, it is going to cost $1.7 billion in administrative costs--$1.7 billion in administrative costs. It does not include any future costs in benefits that the United States will have to pay. Some may say that the immigrants will have earned the benefit. But the Senate does not even know what amnesty will cost. The cost estimates for these policies are not known. My amendment is absolutely the right thing to do. Illegal immigrants did not expect to ever receive this benefit. They were using somebody's Social Security number or a made up one. They did so to get a job. I can appreciate that. I appreciate somebody trying to come to this country to better themselves. I don't believe we should reward the conduct of identity theft by giving people the right to claim the work history for purposes of Social Security.

Our Social Security trust fund is already in trouble. We all know that. This will further put the Social Security trust fund in trouble. The costs could be potentially huge. We don't even know that in this bill. That is why I think we should adopt this amendment.

Mr. President, we look forward to this. What was, then, the time allocation requested? Is it 25, 10, 10, 5? Is that what the Senator suggested?

So that is 25.

Then I think we would get 15.

Have we added all that up?

We have until 10 o'clock, and that time is divided.

If the Senator wants to speak for a few minutes, we can arrange that. I will withhold.

Can I ask unanimous consent we defer the vote at 10 clock until 10:05?

Fine.

Mr. President, we send an amendment to the desk on behalf of myself, Senator McCain, and Senator Graham.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent the reading of the amendment be dispensed with.

How much time remains?

We have 11 minutes?

I yield myself 4 minutes.

Mr. President, as we all know, yesterday the Senate voted to eliminate the H-2C immigrant's ability to self-petition for green cards after 4 years. I believe that vote was a mistake because it will have a devastating effect not just for temporary workers but for all workers and, basically, for all Americans.

The amendment we offer today would correct the mistake and take the good language from the Cornyn amendment to improve the underlying bill. This amendment will require that the Labor Department certify that no U.S. worker will be displaced by H-2C workers when they adjust to permanent status, as the Cornyn amendment requires. This amendment also restores the ability of H-2C workers to obtain a green card without being dependent on the generosity of the employers.

The self-petition feature of our temporary worker program is innovative and essential to workers' rights. All Americans lose if it is eliminated from the bill.

The reason temporary worker programs failed in the past, going back to the time of the Bracero Program, is because they did not protect workers' rights. For this new program to work without harming U.S. workers, H-2C workers must have the full set of rights. That is why our bill includes extensive labor protections for temporary workers.

Effectively, then, at the time after the 4 years, the individual will be able to make the petition for the green card, and they will also have to have a certification by the Department of Labor that there is no American able and willing to perform that job. There will have to be that kind of a finding. The self-petition gives that worker some rights and respect as an employee instead of being subject to the dangers we have seen in the past of exploitation by an employer that knows that worker can never get a chance to have a petition and can never get on the path for a green card without the employer giving the thumbs-up signal.

When that power relationship between the employer and the employee exists, we have seen exploitation in terms of wages, working conditions, and other unfortunate problems with regard to women.

This seems to be a solid compromise. It takes the framework of the Cornyn amendment, but it will also ensure that these petitioners are going to have to demonstrate there is that gap in terms of the labor market that they are able to fill and that there is not someone out there in the American labor market prepared to take that job. It seems to me to be a very important principle, a very concrete proposal, one I hope we can have accepted this morning.

I withhold the remainder of my time.

I will take 3 minutes for the membership, if they have a chance to review the amendment.

On page 1, second paragraph:

The Secretary of Labor determines and certifies that there

are not sufficient United States workers who are able,

willing, qualified, and available to fill the position in

which the alien is, or will be employed. . . .

So the Secretary of Labor has to make the certification that they will not be replacing an American worker.

Then, how are they going to be able to give the assurance they have had the 4 years that are included in the first paragraph, that ``the alien has maintained such nonimmigrant status in the United States for a cumulative period of not less than 4 years of employment''?

These are listed and include: records maintained by Social Security, records maintained by the employer, employment work verification, records maintained by the Internal Revenue Service, records maintained by other government agencies.

What we are saying, in the four different categories, those categories are government-held records or the employer-held records, not the employee-held records.

I don't know how it could be much clearer exactly what this amendment does. It is very clear. It is the certification that there is no American that is able, willing, and qualified. And to be able to prove it, there are government-held records or employer-held records, not the petitioner's records, not his stubs, but government-held records.

We have tried to craft this in a way which is going to be fair. We are not interested in people trying to ``jimmy'' the system. We have had too much of that in the past.

I get back to the final theme. This legislation tries to learn from past experience. In 1986, we had amnesty but there was supposed to be tough employer sanctions if they hired unemployed. We had vast industries that produced fake identification cards. The system never functioned. It never worked.

What we have tried to do is avoid that. We have a tamper-proof card. We will have vigorous employment. But, also, to learn the lessons of the Bracero Program, we are not going to have the exploitation of these workers by their employers. That is what we do when we deny the opportunity of an employee ever to be able to make a petition. We say you have to be in there for 4 years, with solid record of employment, solid record of achievement, solid record of commitment to work. Then you can make your petition. You have to meet that requirement.

What time is left?

I yield that time to the Senator from Arizona.

Mr. President, I have tried to point out this will be a judgment decision that will be made by the Secretary of Labor as to whether there is an American fit, willing, and able. And if there is, they cannot petition.

Now, the Senator says: Well, it is all then up to the employee. But the idea of the whole guest worker is the employer. Why is it good for the employer, who is going to go out and petition and say: Look, I need someone to come work for me. They advertise for 45 days. Then they find out they have someone from overseas who will do that. So the employer is the one who is petitioning there. Didn't have any problem with that.

Now, when we get into the situation after 4 years, they can make the petition on this, if there is a vacancy, according to this proposal, but if there is not a green card available, they do not get it. They might have to wait a year. They might have to indicate 2 years. This is not automatic. There are only a certain number of green cards that are available under this category. They may wait 1 year. They may have to wait 2 years. So it is much more difficult. This is still weighted far against the worker than the employer.

What we were always trying to do in the development of the legislation is to have balance and fairness in terms of the authority and responsibility and the legality on this. I think what we have offered addresses what I understood to be the Senator's concern; that is, that there are going to be American workers out there when this person is getting a green card. Therefore, it is going to be adverse to the American workers. We say, if there is one, they don't get it. That is decided by the Secretary of Labor. And they have to be able to prove their work history through documents and records that are either held by the Government or by the employer. It seems to me that is about as lock safe and secure as you can have in this business. I would hope we would accept this amendment.

Mr. President, I think my time has expired.

Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays.

Madam President, I move to reconsider the vote, and I move to lay that motion on the table.

Madam President, we are trying to move along. I see my colleague and friend behind me, the Senator from West Virginia, Mr. Byrd, who has been here patiently waiting to address the Senate on this issue generally. That might work, as we are just trying to reaffirm the language on this Inhofe amendment.

Madam President, the Inhofe amendment is enormously important. It is complicated. Members on both sides, including the author of the amendment, are working in good faith to try to work this out. To my knowledge, it has not been worked out. Hopefully, after 25 minutes we will be able to tell the Senate whether it is worked out, whether we will have to have side-by-side amendments. But at this time, we will not enter into a short time agreement.

Hopefully, as we have been making progress in other areas, we will have a chance to do that in this area as well.

Mr. President, I want to cooperate and have cooperated with the Senator. I think it is premature to establish a time on the Ensign amendment. I don't think it will be an undue period of time. But it would be difficult now to agree to a specific time. I hope we would be able to agree after a while. I welcome the chance to continue this. I think this discussion has been enormously valuable and helpful. We can proceed in whatever way the leader wants to proceed. Right now, we would not be in a position to agree to a 1-hour time limitation on the Ensign amendment, half an hour on each side. But we will well work to try to get a reasonable time, if that is the decision.

Mr. President, identity fraud is a major problem, a major issue in this country, and it ought to be dealt with. We ought to do whatever is necessary to make sure we are going to deal with this issue. I think most of us have seen the various national publications and magazines talking about identity fraud. It is there with the use of credit cards. We have it on telephone calling. We have it for purchasing over the Internet, obtaining access of financial records, and with individuals making illegal withdrawals.

All of that is bad and wrong and violates the law, and we ought to deal with that. But we are talking about individuals who are not involved in identity fraud and have paid into the Social Security fund. Should they have that payment they have made into the fund denied to them? So I am with the Senator from Nevada in trying to deal with identity fraud, but I separate myself from him when he says all illegal immigrants are involved in the identity fraud and, therefore, they should not get credit for what they have paid in in terms of Social Security.

Now, who are we talking about? Basically, we are talking about individuals who have the opportunity to try to earn their position, the opportunity to be an American citizen, who have to pay a fine, have to go to the end of the line for those who are coming into the United States currently, who have to demonstrate they have paid all of their taxes, who have to demonstrate they have been free from violating the law. There are all of those conditions that are set up. But once they have achieved all of those conditions, then they have the possibility of citizenship 11 years from now.

So the issue is, should they be denied the credits they have paid into Social Security? The Senator from Nevada thinks they should.

Well, first of all, who are these people? First of all, his proposal would deprive, for example, widows and surviving children of needed Social Security benefits, even if the widows and children are U.S. born. We will have circumstances where the children are American citizens. The widows might be American citizens.

Now, let's say this individual regularizes their position and has paid into Social Security. If that person dies, their survivors would be eligible for survivor benefits, but not under the Ensign amendment. It is interesting, some 85 percent of immigrant-headed households include at least one U.S. citizen. Under the Ensign proposal, citizen children may not be eligible for survivor benefits if their parents had gained legal status or even citizenship but die before they gained the 40 hours of coverage.

The Ensign amendment effectively would deprive the immigrants who have become legal residents of the right to receive Social Security credits for the payroll tax payments they made on the work they performed when they were undocumented. Some do now.

The 1986 act permitted 3 million people--they received the amnesty. That was amnesty. We did not move ahead in terms of the enforcement against the undocumented afterwards. But that was amnesty. Now they are able to receive the benefits today. We are going to say to them, we are evidently going to cut you off from being able to get any credit because I don't see in the Ensign amendment where they are going to respect their position.

It is important to focus on who would be hurt by this highly punitive proposal. Only immigrants who have attained legal status are eligible to receive Social Security. So everyone this amendment would affect will be legal residents under the terms of the bill. Many of them will even be citizens by the time they apply for Social Security. Those are the hard-working men and women this amendment seeks to penalize.

Those are the individuals who really want to be Americans, be part of the American family. They are going to have to pay the penalty, pay their back taxes, abide by all of the laws, continue to believe in their faith. And then they will have the opportunity to go to the end of the line. And then, in 11 years, they will be able to achieve citizenship. They will be working during this period of time.

They are paying into Social Security. And, finally, when they become citizens--11 years from now--the Ensign amendment is going to say: Well, all right, you paid. You have waited your turn. You paid the penalties all the way along. But you are not going to be able to benefit from paying into Social Security because of identity fraud. Well, I have difficulty assuming that all of those who have paid into Social Security have been a part of identity fraud.

Before this bill passed, these workers were undocumented. But once in the country, they complied with the rules of the workplace and paid Social Security taxes on their earnings. Their payroll tax payments and the matching contributions of their employers were paid to the Social Security Administration on a timely basis. Those dollars are sitting in an account at the Social Security Administration today. Social Security has a record of receiving these payments. There is no dispute about that.

The issue raised by this amendment is whether these workers should be given credit in Social Security for the hard-earned dollars they paid into the system. Shouldn't the payroll tax payments they made count toward determining the level of retirement benefits and disability benefits they have earned when they reach retirement age or become disabled?

Now, the amount of benefits a worker receives depends on how many years the individual worked and how much payroll tax he or she paid in. I believe it would be terribly wrong to arbitrarily deny these hard- working men and women credit for all the payroll tax dollars they paid into Social Security on the wages they earned. But that is exactly what the Ensign amendment would do.

Most undocumented workers do pay Social Security taxes. Stephen Goss, Social Security's chief actuary, estimates that ``about three-quarters of other-than-legal immigrants pay payroll taxes''--three-quarters of them.

The amounts paid in by them are substantial. Payments into the Social Security system by undocumented workers total $7 billion a year. Unfortunately, most of these workers do not have genuine Social Security numbers, so the money goes into what they call the Social Security Administration's earnings suspense file. This money is identified by the employer who submitted it but not by the individual worker it belongs to.

Each year, Social Security identifies approximately 130,000 employers who submitted W-2s that cannot be matched to a worker. So the undocumented immigrants account for the vast majority of the funds in the suspense file. The unidentified W-2s closely track their geographic distribution and types of employment to that which undocumented workers typically hold. According to an analysis by the GAO, three of the categories of business with the largest numbers of inaccurate W-2s were restaurants, construction companies, and farm operations.

In order to get credit for the payroll taxes he paid in when he was undocumented, a worker would have to prove how much he paid in while working for a particular employer and when it was paid. The burden of proof would be on the worker, and the worker would only receive credit for payments that the Social Security Administration could verify.

Whatever rules and regulations Social Security established, we are for. They ought to be accurate. They ought to be tough. They ought to be fair. But we are not prepared to say that every individual who paid in, who is now in the process, over this 11 years--here, they are paying in. I want to be a citizen. I am paying my fine. I paid my back taxes. My sons have joined the military serving in Afghanistan. We are going to church every single week. And I am paying into Social Security. I wait 11 years, and I finally become a citizen. Under the Ensign amendment, no, no, you are not going to receive any of that. You are not going to receive a cent of that.

So we are all for Social Security establishing whatever requirements are necessary to ensure the integrity of the fund and the accuracy of the work effort by individuals. But I think the only reason for the Ensign amendment is to deny the legal residents the Social Security benefits they have earned and paid for. Their money sits in the Social Security Administration waiting to be matched with an eligible beneficiary. Once those workers establish eligibility, how, in all fairness, can we deny them credit for their past contributions?

This legislation before the Senate sets out a difficult process for undocumented workers seeking to become legal residents. Most of them have very little money. Yet the legislation will require them to pay thousands in fines and fees. It would be wrong to deny them credit for the Social Security tax dollars they have paid from their often meager wages.

Once these workers are legal residents, if they become disabled, shouldn't they be entitled to receive disability benefits based on the payroll taxes they contributed to Social Security? And if they die prematurely, leaving minor children, shouldn't those children--who in many instances are American children--shouldn't those American children be eligible to receive survivor benefits based on the payroll taxes they contributed to Social Security? And when, after a lifetime of hard work, they reach retirement age, shouldn't they be able to receive a retirement benefit based on all the years of payroll tax payments they contributed to Social Security?

This is not a handout. This is not welfare. Social Security is an earned benefit. If these immigrant workers earned it, they should receive it like everyone else. The Ensign amendment would take their hard-earned money and give them nothing in return. That is not the way America operates.

Allowing these workers to receive the Social Security benefits they have earned not only helps them, it serves the interests of the larger American community. They are living amongst us. As I say, many of the children were born here. If they cannot rely on the Social Security benefits they have earned when they become elderly or disabled, on what source of support will they rely? Certainly, the people of this great Nation would not leave them destitute. We all benefit when the earned benefits of Social Security are there for those in need.

So I urge my colleagues to reject this amendment.

Mr. President, I have been here on the floor since the Senator started, and in response, I would be glad to inquire of those who are interested. I think there are some members of the Finance Committee who are interested in this amendment and want to be heard since it deals with the Finance Committee jurisdiction. So I will inquire and report back to the floor manager.

Several Senators addressed the Chair.

Mr. President, if the Senator will yield, if there is offered side-by-side, that would be voted on after the Inhofe amendment at 4 o'clock. So there is an hour and a half allocated time for debate on the Inhofe amendment, and as I understand, there would be approximately 45 minutes evenly divided.

I thought Senator Akaka's amendment was agreeable or acceptable.

Senator Akaka would like 25 minutes.

If I could suggest, why don't we vote at 4:15. That gives 45 minutes to Vitter.

Mr. President, will the Senator withhold for a moment.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to recognize the gentleman from Texas, Congressman Al Green.

I want to thank the gentleman from Texas for his wonderful words, and we shall be there.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to bring up now the gentlewoman from California, Congresswoman Juanita Millender-McDonald.

I thank my gracious colleague from California for your wonderful words.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to rise today to recognize the Asian and Pacific Islander community and to commemorate Asian Pacific American Heritage Month.

As Chair of the Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus we call CAPAC, I feel privileged to be here tonight to speak of the Asian and Pacific Islander history and accomplishments. Additionally, I will be highlighting those issues affecting our communities and the priorities for CAPAC.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to take a moment to acknowledge and remember extraordinary community leaders, long-time friends of the APIA community that we have lost this year, Judge Delbert Wong and journalist Sam Chu Lin.

Sam Chu Lin, who began reporting in the 1960s, worked as a correspondent for CBS and Fox. Sam Chu Lin was also a respected print journalist, writing columns and articles on Asian Pacific affairs for Asian Week, Rafu Shimpo and the San Francisco Examiner.

Judge Delbert Wong was the first Chinese American judge in the continental United States. Delbert Wong was a fourth generation American of Chinese heritage. After earning his undergraduate degree in business at U.C. Berkeley, Wong served in World War II as a B-17 navigator and was awarded numerous medals.

After the war, Judge Wong faced a choice between joining his family's grocery business or entering law school. This was not met with much support from his parents, who would say, Who would hire you, a Chinese, they would constantly say. Undeterred, Wong completed his law degree in 1948, becoming the first Chinese American graduate of Stanford Law School.

After graduation, he was appointed deputy legislative counsel, serving the California State legislature in Sacramento and later appointed deputy attorney general, becoming the first Asian American to hold those positions.

In 1992, Congress passed a law that officially designated May of each year as

Asian Pacific American Heritage Month.

I want to thank the following people who have worked to designate May as Asian Pacific Heritage Month: the late Congressman Frank Horton from New York; my good friend, Secretary of Transportation, Norman Mineta; Senators Daniel Inouye and the late Senator Spark, or Sparky, Matsunaga.

Some important dates include the first 10 days of May, which coincide with two important anniversaries, the arrival of Japanese American immigrants on May 7, 1843 to California, settling in El Dorado County; and the completion of the transcontinental railroad on May 10, 1869, by the Chinese laborers.

The first APIA settlement in this country dates to 1763 when Filipinos escaped imprisonment aboard Spanish galleons and established a community near New Orleans.

Today, the APIA community is one of the fastest-growing populations in the country, with over 13 million APIAs living in the U.S. and representing 4.5 percent of the total U.S. population.

My home State of California has both the largest APIA population, approximately 4.6 million, and the largest numerical increase of APIAs since April of 2000.

Mr. Speaker, this year's theme for Asian Pacific American Heritage Month, Dreams and Challenges for Asian Pacific Americans, reflects hardships overcome by the APIA community while highlighting the hope we maintain as we contribute to the prosperity of this great Nation.

This year, I would like to particularly honor the centennial celebration of Filipinos in Hawaii and the 50th year since Dalip Singh Saund became the first Asian American Sikh to be elected to the U.S. Congress.

On December 20, 1906, a group of Filipino plantation workers arrived in Hawaii aboard the Doric, leading the first wave of Filipinos to migrate to Hawaii. The first group of Filipinos was followed by subsequent waves of Filipino immigrants who came to settle in Hawaii and, also, other parts of the United States, contributing to a migration pattern that continues up to this day.

Today, Filipinos with their rich culture and heritage have become a positive influence on mainstream life in Hawaii, with many of them succeeding prominently in their respected professions, in business, politics, government, the academe and the arts.

2006 also marks the 50th year since Dalip Singh Saund became the first Asian American to be elected to the U.S. Congress. While in office, Dalip Singh Saund forged a measure that allowed South Asians to become U.S. citizens.

As our community expands, we must also continue to educate our fellow citizens about the uniqueness of our experiences.

The APIA community is often misperceived as monolithic. Our community is extremely diverse in our languages, ethnicities and culture. Aggregating such a large and diverse group makes it difficult to understand the unique problems faced by the individual and subgroups, such as the Southeast Asian Americans, who are refugees that fled their home countries in the late 1970s and the early 1980s.

As a country, we need to better address the needs of the APIA community when we discuss disaster preparedness, comprehensive immigration reform, voting rights, education, health issues and veterans.

National disasters such as the September 11th terrorist attacks, Hurricane Rita and Hurricane Katrina, exposed serious gaps in the delivery of public services to limited-English-proficient communities, or LEP communities. In fact, the lack of linguistic and culturally competent services within FEMA and related Federal agencies prevented many LEP individuals from accessing critical disaster-relief services such as cash assistance, health care, mental health care, housing and small business loans.

As a result, at least 15,000 families from the gulf coast suffered unnecessary hardships. Many of the Asian Americans in the gulf coast region, hit by Katrina, were shrimpers and fishermen and were significant contributors to the local economy and fishing industry for years.

Plaquemines Parish in southern Louisiana is one of the locations of the main fishing and shrimp sites. Plaquemines Parish commercial landings average $441,181,891 in retail annually. Plaquemines Parish has an average annual landing of 28.8 million pounds of shrimp, valued at $238.3 million in retail value.

Extensive reports from FEMA community relations and local fishermen determined that all but 20 percent of the fishing boats were destroyed in the hurricanes. In order for these families to go back to their old way of life, approximately 430 boats must be repaired and in the water before shrimp season begins May 15.

Many of the fishermen, due to cultural and linguistic barriers, were not accustomed to the American way of accessing public assistance, navigating the intricacies and bureaucracies of public agencies and commercial transactions. The fishermen have been denied Small Business Administration loans, which would help them rebuild their boats, due to the fact that they need to buy insurance prior to getting a loan. But one cannot buy insurance for a boat until it is in a working order.

Fishermen must also prove that they can pay back the loan. But without income, SBA is reluctant to give loans. Due to the complications of the system and of the linguistic and cultural barriers that are posed to them, the Asian Pacific community faces an even bigger struggle.

This month, I will introduce legislation to improve disaster relief and preparedness services for individuals with limited English proficiency by requiring the Federal Emergency Management Agency to bolster Federal resources and outreach to community organizations that serve the limited-English population.

Mr. Speaker, our Nation was founded by immigrants who valued freedom and liberty, who sought to be free from persecution, from a tyrant government. Families fled their home countries to seek refuge in this great Nation, because they too believed in liberty, justice and freedom for all.

APIA families who seek to be reunited with their family members overseas have not seen their dreams come true because of our broken immigration system. Over 1.5 million Asians are caught in the family immigration backlog, and immediate family members from overseas wait as long as 10 years to reunite with their families in the U.S.

Mothers and fathers wait to reunite with their children. But due to the long years of waiting, their children may have already reached the age of 18, and their families will have to start the process all over again.

As we honor the 41st anniversary of the Immigration Nationality Act of 1965 and the 31st anniversary of the Refugee Act of 1975, we need to remember that our country was founded and created to protect our freedom and civil liberties.

I believe we need comprehensive immigration reform to fix our broken immigration system.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to take a break in my presentation to offer the microphone and the floor to our Democratic leader, a great leader from the State of California, from the great City of San Francisco, someplace where you always leave your heart, our leader, Nancy Pelosi.

Thank you, madam leader.

Mr. Speaker, if I may just suspend my remarks and invite my colleague from American Samoa to share his comments with us, the great Congressman who has been here for quite a few years, Congressman Eni Faleomavaega.

(Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from American Samoa for adding so much information to this presentation, because I think that when people listen and hear what it is that we are sharing with this country, there may be many, many people out there that say, I did not know that.

Although we talk about many firsts, accomplishments from members of our communities, I am sure also, that those who are first expect never to be last, that they would continue, that we would continue to contribute to this country. And in order to contribute to our country, we have to also defend the Constitution.

Defending the Constitution and defending the rights of our people also entails the voting rights. This past week, H.R. 9, the Voting Rights Act reauthorization was introduced.

The right to vote is keenly felt by the Asian and Pacific Islander American community. Chinese Americans could not vote until the Chinese Exclusion Acts of 1882 and 1892 were repealed in 1943. First-generation Japanese Americans could not vote until 1952 because of the racial restrictions contained in the 1790 naturalization law.

With the markup in Judiciary Committee tomorrow, we need to ensure that important provisions such as section 203, which has been very vital to the API community's ability to participate in the electoral process, gets reauthorized in this Congress.

Language-minority citizens were often denied needed assistance at the polls. In the 1975 amendments to the Voting Rights Act, such assistance became required in certain situations, and we need to ensure that these provisions continue to remain in current law.

Mr. Speaker, as Americans, we need to ensure that our children receive a quality education, but also provide adequate teacher training, funds for after-school and extracurricular activities and ensuring that college is affordable for every student that deserves to receive a higher education.

According to the U.S. Census, 50 percent of Asians age 25 and over have a Bachelor's degree or higher level of education. However, I would like to emphasize that when we disaggregate the data, when we tease apart the information for the API subgroups, we find that the model minority stereotype is in fact a myth.

Only 9.1 percent of Cambodian Americans, 7.4 percent Hmong Americans, 7.6 Lao Americans, 19.5 percent Vietnamese Americans and 16 percent of native Hawaiians and Pacific Islanders who are 25 years and older have a Bachelor's degree.

These numbers show that we must do a better job of disaggregating data and information about our communities to assess the needs of those hard-working Americans who still falter behind. To address the disparities between subgroups of the larger APIA community, we need Congress to pass the Asian American and Pacific Islander Serving Institutions bill, which my colleague from Oregon, Congressman David Wu, will be introducing later this month.

This legislation will provide Federal grants to colleges and universities that have an enrollment of undergraduate students that is at least 10 percent APIA and at least 50 percent of its degree-seeking students receive financial assistance.

As a caucus, we will work to increase the availability of loan assistance, scholarships and programs to allow APIA students to attend a higher education institution; to ensure full funding for teachers and bilingual education programs under the No Child Left Behind law; to support English language learners; and to support full funding of minority outreach programs for access to higher education, such as the TRIO programs to expand services to serve APIA students.

Mr. Speaker, a common misperception of APIAs is that, as a group, we face fewer health problems than other racial and ethnic groups. In fact, APIAs as a group and specific populations within this group do experience disparities in health and health care.

For example, APIAs have the highest hepatitis B rates of any racial group in the United States. APIAs are also five times more likely to develop cervical and liver cancer than any other ethnic and racial group.

According to the Census Bureau, 18 percent of APIAs went without insurance for the entire year in 2000. This means that the uninsured are not only more likely to go without care for serious medical conditions, they are also more likely to go without routine care, less likely to have a regular source of care, less likely to use preventive services and have fewer visits per year.

At the same time, without appropriate language translation services or properly translated materials, limited-English-proficient immigrants cannot receive adequate care, as well as State and Federal benefits for which they may be eligible.

In the APIA community, 76 percent of Hmong Americans, 61 percent of Vietnamese Americans, 52 percent of Korean Americans and 39 percent of Tongans speak limited English. Therefore, eliminating health care disparities in the APIA community must include data collection, linguistically appropriate and culturally competent services, and access to health insurance.

CAPAC has been working with both the Congressional Hispanic and Black Caucuses on the Health Care Equality and Accountability Act to eliminate ethnic and racial health disparities for all of our communities.

I have introduced the Health Care Equality and Accountability Act, which will address expanding the health care safety net by diversifying the health care workforce, combating diseases that disproportionately affect racial and ethnic minorities, emphasizing prevention and behavioral health and promoting the collection and dissemination of data and enhanced medical research.

Mr. Speaker, I would also like to extend my gratitude to the patriotic men and women serving our country in the military, including the 60,813 APIAs serving on active duty in the U.S. armed services, as well as the 28,066 in the Reserves and the National Guard.

I also commend and thank the 351,000 APIA veterans who fought for this country. I would like to highlight and honor the Filipino veterans as my colleague had done who have not been compensated and recognized for their service, which I believe is a national disservice to these brave veterans.

As a country, it is our duty to ensure that these veterans have equal access to all the benefits and treatment that other veterans receive. We believe that our troops should be taken care of when we send them into battle and that they should be given the respect when they return home. Therefore, I stand with my colleagues, Congressman Issa and Congressman Filner, to support their bipartisan legislation, H.R. 4574, to restore full benefits to

these veterans who fought for our Nation during World War II. With Congressman Issa taking the lead and Congressman Filner in a leadership position in the Veterans' Affairs Committee, we have a great chance to get this bill to the floor in honor of the centennial celebration of Filipinos in Hawaii and to keep the word of Congress that we gave to these brave veterans of World War II.

I am proud of our community's accomplishment, Mr. Speaker, and I would like to recognize many of the APIA firsts in areas of art, film, sports, sciences, academia, and politics. In each effort, these folks, who were first, expect that they are not the last:

In 1847, Yung Wing, the first Chinese American graduated from Yale University and the first APIA to graduate from a U.S. college;

In 1863, William Ah Hang, who was Chinese American, became the first APIA to enlist in the U.S. Navy during the Civil War;

In 1944, An Wang, a Chinese American who invented the magnetic core memory revolutionized computing and served as a standard method for memory retrieval and storage;

In 1946, Wing F. Ong, a Chinese American from Arizona, became the first APIA to be elected to State office;

In 1948, Victoria Manalo Draves, a Filipino American diver, became the first woman to win Olympic gold medals in both the 10 meter platform and the 3 meter spring board events;

In 1956, Dalip Singh Saud, the first Indian American to be elected to Congress;

In 1965, Patsy Takemoto Mink, the first Japanese woman and woman of color elected to Congress who championed title IX;

In 1985, Haing Ngor, a Cambodian American, became the first APIA to win an Academy Award for his role in the movie ``Killing Fields'';

In 1985, Ellison Onizuka, a Japanese American, became the first APIA astronaut whose life was lost in a launching tragedy.

In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, the Asian American Pacific Islander American community continues to fight for our civil liberties and our civil rights as Americans.

Even after the internment of the Japanese Americans during World War II, we as a community did not grow embittered or cowed by discrimination; instead, we progressed and moved forward. I am proud to be a member of the APIA community because we continue to serve as positive contributors to our many communities by investing in education, business, and cultural opportunities for all Americans.

In closing, this Asian Pacific American Heritage Month we take pride in our history, accomplishments, and the promise of our future as we continue to pave the way for a better tomorrow in the name of dreams and challenges of Asian Pacific Americans.

Mr. Speaker, the 6 years I have served here I learned that Asian Americans have a unique contribution to make to this body and to this country, and that we because of our history in this country uniquely understand and recognize that our Constitution is never tested in times of tranquility. Our Constitution is always tested in times of trauma, terror, tension and tragedy. And to the point where we can internalize the principles of our Bill of Rights and our Constitution, and to the point where we understand that defending this Constitution and its people will we be able to face as Members of this body, face overwhelming public approval which could be wrong and stand up to them, say it is wrong because it does not follow the Constitution.

These are the kinds of heritage and contributions Asian Americans have made, will make and continue to make in this country so that we may fulfill the phrase in the preamble of our Constitution that says ``to form a more perfect union.''

In the words of Congressman Al Green, ``There will be a tomorrow.''

Mr. Speaker, I yield to my friend.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent the reading of the amendment be dispensed with.

Mr. President, I ask that Senators Murray and Cantwell be added as cosponsors to my amendment.

Mr. President, it has long been evident that our immigration system needs reform. The debate on immigration has been a long time in coming, and I am pleased that this body is moving forward on this important topic in such a comprehensive fashion. For our work on immigration to be truly comprehensive, however, we must address those issues that have received less attention in the debate as well as the front page issues.

My amendment is regarding one of those issues that has not received widespread attention but is of great importance. As a World War II veteran, this amendment is important to me personally, to Filipino- Americans, and to veterans. My amendment would grant the children of Filipino World War II veterans special immigrant status for the purpose of family reunification. Making this small change to our nation's immigration policy would go a long way toward making our immigration laws more just, and I am hopeful that my colleagues on both sides of the aisle will join me in supporting this amendment.

Before I begin a discussion on the specifics of my amendment, I would first like to thank my dear friend and colleague, the senior Senator from Hawaii, Daniel Inouye, for cosponsoring this amendment. In the 101st Congress, Senator Inouye authored section 405 of the Immigration Act of 1990, which provided for the naturalization of Filipino World War II veterans. Senator Inouye has a long history of being involved in this important effort and it is an honor to have his support on my amendment today. In addition, Representative Ed Case has introduced a similar bill, H.R. 901, in the House of Representatives.

To understand the significance of this amendment, it is important to first provide some background about the historical circumstances that got us where we are today.

On the basis of 1934 legislation enacted prior to Philippine independence, President Franklin Delano Roosevelt issued a 1941 executive order. Through this order, President Roosevelt invoked his authority to ``call and order into the service of the Armed Forces of the

United States, . . . all of the organized military forces of the Government of the Commonwealth of the Philippines.'' This order drafted over 200,000 Filipino citizens into the United States military. Under the command of General Douglas MacArthur, Filipino soldiers fought alongside American soldiers in the defense of our country.

Throughout the course of World War II, these Filipino soldiers proved themselves to be courageous and honorable as they helped the United States fulfill its mission. There was no question when they were fighting that they would be treated the same as American troops. For example, Filipino soldiers fought side-by-side with American soldiers in the Battle of Bataan and the Battle of Corregidor. When Bataan fell and the Bataan Death March began, Filipino soldiers were forced to march more than a hundred kilometers from Bataan to Tarlac along with their American comrades. Filipino soldiers faced hardships in concentration camps, and they endured 4 years of occupation by the Japanese. In every sense, Filipino soldiers proved their allegiance to our country through thick and thin.

These Filipino soldiers are war heroes, and they deserve to be honored as such. They served active duty service on behalf of the U.S. military, which should qualify them for the same benefits as other veterans of active duty. Congress betrayed these veterans by enacting the First Supplemental Surplus Appropriation Rescission Act in 1946, which included a rider that conditioned an appropriation of $200 million, for the benefit of the postwar Philippine Army, on the basis that service in the Commonwealth Army should not be deemed to have been service in the Armed Forces of the United States.

Commonwealth Army members were those called into the service of the U.S. Armed Forces for the Far East. These members served between July 26, 1941, and June 30, 1946. Similarly, Congress enacted the Second Supplemental Surplus Appropriation Rescission Act, which provided that service in the New Philippine Scouts was not deemed service in the U.S. military.

New Philippine Scouts were Filipino citizens who served with the U.S. Armed Forces with the consent of the Philippine Government. They served between October 6, 1945, and June 30, 1947.

This generation of veterans is predominantly in their eighties. Of the 200,000 Filipino veterans that served in WWII, there are close to 49,000 left. Some of these veterans receive U.S. benefits, some do not. By 2010, it is estimated that the population will have dwindled to 20,000.

With the passage of the Immigration Act of 1990, the courage of the many Filipino soldiers who fought alongside our troops during World War II was finally recognized by our Government, and Filipino veterans were offered the opportunity to obtain U.S. citizenship. According to the former Immigration and Naturalization Service, about 15,000 Filipino veterans live in the U.S. and became citizens between 1991 and 1995 under the authority of the Immigration Act of 1990. Between that time, about 11,000 veterans who live in the Philippines were successfully naturalized. These thousands of Filipino veterans clearly wished to spend their golden years in the United States, and I am pleased that the 1990 Immigration reform efforts offered them the opportunity to do so.

Unfortunately, the offer did not extend to the adult sons and daughters of these veterans. As a result, the brave Filipino veterans who fought on behalf of America, and who now live in America and continue to contribute to America, must do so alone. Due to a backlog in the issuing of visas, many of the children of these veterans have waited more than 20 years before they were able to obtain an immigrant visa. Unfortunately, many more are still waiting.

It is no secret that U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services in the Department of Homeland Security is facing significant backlogs. However, it is not as widely known that prospective family-sponsored immigrants from the Philippines have the most substantial waiting times in the world before a visa is scheduled to become available to them. What this means, is that these honorable Filipino veterans who faced numerous dangers to defend this Nation now face the prospect of spending the last years of their lives without the comfort and care of their families.

It is a shameful disgrace that the sons and daughters of these brave soldiers are now last in line to become citizens of our country. This is no way to honor Filipino soldiers who bravely fought on the front lines with American soldiers during World War II.

As a World War II veteran myself, I am proud to have answered my nation's call to active duty. During my time of active service, I was driven by a love for my country, and I was comforted by the love of my family. The support that a soldier's family offers during military service is an invaluable buoy to a soldier's spirit.

A family's role in caring and supporting for a soldier becomes even more important after active military service is completed. I was lucky to be surrounded by my family after my service. My heart goes out to those who were separated from their family for years and years due to bureaucratic backlogs.

As the ranking member on the U.S. Senate Committee on Veterans' Affairs, I have seen firsthand the difficulties that veterans can face when readjusting to civilian life after serving in a war. For many veterans, the difficulty of returning to a home that has changed while at war is eased by being surrounded by the familiar faces of loved ones. While that window of opportunity has unfortunately passed for our World War II Filipino veterans, there are still many important ways that families enrich the lives of veterans after the initial readjustment phase. Being surrounded by the love and care of family, especially for World War II veterans facing their twilight years, offers a special source of support.

Action on this issue is long overdue, and it would be very meaningful for the Senate to pass my amendment during debate on the immigration bill. As you may know, Filipino Americans are celebrating their centennial this year. Late last year, the Senate accepted by UC S. Res. 333, a resolution to recognize the centennial of sustained immigration from the Philippines to the United States, and acknowledge the contributions of the Filipino-American community to our country over the last century.

The Filipino-American community has grown and thrived over the last hundred years. Today, Filipino-Americans are the third largest ethnic group in the State of Hawaii and represent one of the fastest growing immigration groups in the country. Filipinos have made contributions to every segment of our community, ranging from politics and sports, to medicine, the military and business. One of the foremost issues for Filipino Americans is our Nation's commitment to Filipino veterans, and passing my amendment would be a significant way to honor Filipino veterans during a historic year for the Filipino American community.

Over the years, I have listened to the stories of countless Filipino World War II veterans who have been separated from their families and who are patiently waiting in line. Every veteran has a unique story to tell, but those Filipino World War II veterans who have not yet been reunited with their family members share a universal bond of heartache.

Another important commonality among Filipino World War II veterans is hope. Those Filipino World War II veterans still separated from their families are hopeful that we will use this opportunity to rectify the unjust oversight in current law. The poignant truth behind this matter is that if we don't act now, we may not have another opportunity.

This weekend I am participating in the first annual ``A Time of Remembrance'' event, which honors the families of the American fallen. Family members from all 50 States will come to the National Mall at noon this Sunday, May 21, 2006, to recognize the important contributions our fallen heroes have made on behalf of America. I am proud to take part in this event, which points out the very real ways that families are impacted when soldiers courageously leave their family and fight to defend freedom. For those World War II veterans who are still with us, this event points to the importance of honoring them now, before it is too late.

Let us prove those wrong who say that we are waiting until enough veterans die before we right this injustice. These veterans have been waiting for 60 years to have their benefits reinstated. Unfortunately, our efforts to provide them with the benefits they were promised, the benefits they fought for, have been unsuccessful because opponents have cited the payment of such benefits as too costly.

The Filipino Veterans from World War II have already made extreme sacrifices. They should not be forced to endure the further sacrifice of life without their loved ones. It is time that the United States fulfill its responsibility to these veterans. The least we could do is help to unite these aging veterans with their families. We are a nation that keeps its word . . . not a nation that uses people for our own purposes and then casts them aside.

Ensuring that our World War II Filipino Veterans can enjoy and be supported by their family members in their twilight years is a simple yet profound way of honoring these war heroes.

My amendment has received strong support from Filipino veterans, the Filipino-American community, and the Asian-American community. The Japanese American Citizens League, the Organization of Chinese Americans, and the Asian Pacific American Legal Center have all endorsed my amendment. In addition, the American Coalition for Filipino Veterans, which represents over 4,000 Filipino Veterans across the country, has wholeheartedly endorsed my amendment with a letter of support that states:

S. Amdt. 2049 will be a timely benefit to address the

veterans' loneliness and will provide them with a partial

measure of U.S. veterans recognition that they were unjustly

denied in 1946.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the full text of the letter of support be printed in the Record.

My amendment has received a letter of support from the Asian American Justice Center. I ask unanimous consent that the full text of the letter from the Asian American Justice Center to be printed in the Record.

Mr. President, I urge my colleagues to honor their valiant contributions to our Nation by supporting my amendment.

Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays.