• TABLE OF CONTENTS
HIDE
 Front Cover
 Title Page
 Table of Contents
 February 4, 1975
 February 26, 1975
 Wednesday, March 5, 1975
 Wednesday, March 12, 1975
 Thursday, March 13, 1975
 Wednesday, March 19, 1975
 Appendices






Title: Illegal aliens
CITATION THUMBNAILS PAGE IMAGE ZOOMABLE
Full Citation
STANDARD VIEW MARC VIEW
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UF00087176/00001
 Material Information
Title: Illegal aliens hearings before the Subcommittee on Immigration, Citizenship, and International Law of the Committee on the Judiciary, House of Representatives, Ninety-fourth Congress, first session, on H.R. 982 and related bills ..
Series Title: Illegal aliens
Physical Description: v, 450 p. : graphs ; 24 cm.
Language: English
Creator: United States -- Congress. -- House. -- Committee on the Judiciary. -- Subcommittee on Immigration, Citizenship, and International Law
Publisher: U.S. Govt. Print. Off.
Place of Publication: Washington
Publication Date: 1975
 Subjects
Subject: Illegal aliens -- United States   ( lcsh )
Alien labor -- Legal status, laws, etc -- United States   ( lcsh )
Emigration and immigration law -- United States   ( lcsh )
Genre: bibliography   ( marcgt )
federal government publication   ( marcgt )
non-fiction   ( marcgt )
Spatial Coverage: United States of America
 Notes
Bibliography: Includes bibliographical references.
General Note: Hearings held Feb. 4-Mar. 19, 1975.
General Note: "Serial no. 8."
 Record Information
Bibliographic ID: UF00087176
Volume ID: VID00001
Source Institution: University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier: oclc - 03018368
lccn - 75602511

Table of Contents
    Front Cover
        Front Cover 1
        Front Cover 2
    Title Page
        Page i
        Page ii
    Table of Contents
        Page iii
        Page iv
        Page v
        Page vi
    February 4, 1975
        Page 1
        Page 2
        Page 3
        Page 4
        Page 5
        Page 6
        Page 7
        Page 8
        Page 9
        Page 10
        Page 11
        Page 12
        Page 13
        Page 14
        Page 15
        Page 16
        Page 17
        Page 18
        Page 19
        Page 20
        Page 21
        Page 22
        Page 23
        Page 24
        Page 25
        Page 26
        Page 27
        Page 28
        Page 29
        Page 30
        Page 31
        Page 32
        Page 33
        Page 34
        Page 35
        Page 36
        Page 37
        Page 38
        Page 39
        Page 40
        Page 41
        Page 42
        Page 43
        Page 44
        Page 45
        Page 46
        Page 47
        Page 48
        Page 49
        Page 50
        Page 51
        Page 52
        Page 53
        Page 54
        Page 55
        Page 56
        Page 57
        Page 58
        Page 59
        Page 60
        Page 61
        Page 62
        Page 63
        Page 64
        Page 65
        Page 66
        Page 67
        Page 68
        Page 69
        Page 70
        Page 71
        Page 72
        Page 73
        Page 74
        Page 75
        Page 76
        Page 77
        Page 78
        Page 79
        Page 80
        Page 81
        Page 82
        Page 83
        Page 84
        Page 85
        Page 86
        Page 87
        Page 88
        Page 89
        Page 90
        Page 91
        Page 92
        Page 93
        Page 94
        Page 95
        Page 96
        Page 97
        Page 98
        Page 99
        Page 100
        Page 101
        Page 102
        Page 103
        Page 104
        Page 105
        Page 106
        Page 107
        Page 108
        Page 109
        Page 110
        Page 111
        Page 112
        Page 113
        Page 114
        Page 115
        Page 116
        Page 117
        Page 118
        Page 119
        Page 120
        Page 121
        Page 122
        Page 123
        Page 124
        Page 125
        Page 126
        Page 127
        Page 128
        Page 129
        Page 130
        Page 131
        Page 132
    February 26, 1975
        Page 133
        Page 134
        Page 135
        Page 136
        Page 137
        Page 138
        Page 139
        Page 140
        Page 141
        Page 142
        Page 143
        Page 144
        Page 145
        Page 146
        Page 147
        Page 148
        Page 149
        Page 150
        Page 151
        Page 152
        Page 153
        Page 154
        Page 155
        Page 156
        Page 157
        Page 158
        Page 159
        Page 160
        Page 161
        Page 162
        Page 163
        Page 164
        Page 165
        Page 166
        Page 167
        Page 168
        Page 169
        Page 170
        Page 171
        Page 172
        Page 173
        Page 174
        Page 175
        Page 176
        Page 177
        Page 178
        Page 179
        Page 180
        Page 181
        Page 182
        Page 183
        Page 184
        Page 185
        Page 186
        Page 187
        Page 188
        Page 189
        Page 190
    Wednesday, March 5, 1975
        Page 191
        Page 192
        Page 193
        Page 194
        Page 195
        Page 196
        Page 197
        Page 198
        Page 199
        Page 200
        Page 201
        Page 202
        Page 203
        Page 204
        Page 205
        Page 206
        Page 207
        Page 208
        Page 209
        Page 210
        Page 211
        Page 212
        Page 213
        Page 214
        Page 215
        Page 216
        Page 217
        Page 218
        Page 219
        Page 220
        Page 221
        Page 222
        Page 223
        Page 224
        Page 225
        Page 226
        Page 227
        Page 228
        Page 229
        Page 230
        Page 231
        Page 232
        Page 233
        Page 234
        Page 235
        Page 236
        Page 237
        Page 238
    Wednesday, March 12, 1975
        Page 239
        Page 240
        Page 241
        Page 242
        Page 243
        Page 244
        Page 245
        Page 246
        Page 247
        Page 248
        Page 249
        Page 250
        Page 251
        Page 252
        Page 253
        Page 254
        Page 255
        Page 256
        Page 257
        Page 258
        Page 259
        Page 260
        Page 261
        Page 262
        Page 263
        Page 264
        Page 265
        Page 266
        Page 267
        Page 268
        Page 269
        Page 270
        Page 271
        Page 272
        Page 273
        Page 274
        Page 275
        Page 276
        Page 277
        Page 278
        Page 279
        Page 280
        Page 281
        Page 282
        Page 283
        Page 284
        Page 285
        Page 286
        Page 287
        Page 288
        Page 289
        Page 290
        Page 291
        Page 292
        Page 293
        Page 294
        Page 295
        Page 296
    Thursday, March 13, 1975
        Page 297
        Page 298
        Page 299
        Page 300
        Page 301
        Page 302
        Page 303
        Page 304
        Page 305
        Page 306
        Page 307
        Page 308
        Page 309
        Page 310
        Page 311
        Page 312
        Page 313
        Page 314
        Page 315
        Page 316
        Page 317
        Page 318
        Page 319
        Page 320
        Page 321
        Page 322
        Page 323
        Page 324
        Page 325
        Page 326
        Page 327
        Page 328
        Page 329
        Page 330
    Wednesday, March 19, 1975
        Page 331
        Page 332
        Page 333
        Page 334
        Page 335
        Page 336
        Page 337
        Page 338
        Page 339
        Page 340
        Page 341
        Page 342
        Page 343
        Page 344
        Page 345
        Page 346
        Page 347
        Page 348
        Page 349
        Page 350
        Page 351
        Page 352
        Page 353
        Page 354
        Page 355
        Page 356
        Page 357
        Page 358
        Page 359
        Page 360
        Page 361
        Page 362
        Page 363
        Page 364
        Page 365
        Page 366
        Page 367
        Page 368
        Page 369
        Page 370
        Page 371
        Page 372
        Page 373
        Page 374
        Page 375
        Page 376
        Page 377
        Page 378
        Page 379
        Page 380
        Page 381
        Page 382
        Page 383
        Page 384
        Page 385
        Page 386
        Page 387
        Page 388
        Page 389
        Page 390
        Page 391
        Page 392
        Page 393
        Page 394
        Page 395
        Page 396
    Appendices
        Page 397
        Page 398
        Page 399
        Page 400
        Page 401
        Page 402
        Page 403
        Page 404
        Page 405
        Page 406
        Page 407
        Page 408
        Page 409
        Page 410
        Page 411
        Page 412
        Page 413
        Page 414
        Page 415
        Page 416
        Page 417
        Page 418
        Page 419
        Page 420
        Page 421
        Page 422
        Page 423
        Page 424
        Page 425
        Page 426
        Page 427
        Page 428
        Page 429
        Page 430
        Page 431
        Page 432
        Page 433
        Page 434
        Page 435
        Page 436
        Page 437
        Page 438
        Page 439
        Page 440
        Page 441
        Page 442
        Page 443
        Page 444
        Page 445
        Page 446
        Page 447
        Page 448
        Page 449
        Page 450
Full Text








51 *


, .' \' I .-9 I
gl; ;;P F








,.' -
ii
-rff





ao.Qh~.






ILLEGAL ALIENS


HEARINGS
BEFORE THE
SUBCOMMITTEE ON IMMIGRATION, CITIZENSHIP,
AND INTERNATIONAL LAW
OF THE
COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
NINETY-FOURTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
ON
H.R. 982 and Related Bills
ILLEGAL ALIENS

FEBRUARY 4, 26, MARCH 5, 12, 13, AND 19, 1975


Serial No. 8


49-769 O


Printed for the use of the Committee on the Judiciary

U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
WASHINGTON : 1975


















COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY
PETER W. RODINO, JR., New Jersey, Chairman


JACK BROOKS, Texas
ROBERT W. KASTENMEIER, Wisconsin
DON EDWARDS, California
WILLIAM L. HUNGATE, Missouri
JOHN CONYERS, JR., Michigan
JOSHUA EILBERG, Pennsylvania
WALTER FLOWERS, Alabama
JAMES R. MANN, South Carolina
PAUL S. SARBANES, Maryland
JOHN F. SEIBERLING, Ohio
GEORGE E. DANIELSON, California
ROBERT F. DRINAN, Massachusetts
BARBARA JORDAN, Texas
RAY THORNTON, Arkansas
ELIZABETH HOLTZMAN, New York
EDWARD MEZVINSKY, Iowa
HERMAN BADILLO, New York
ROMANO L. MAZZOLI, Kentucky
EDWARD W. PATTISON, New York
CHRISTOPHER J. DODD, Connecticut
WILLIAM J. HUGHES, New Jersey
MARTIN A. RUSSO, Illinois


EDWARD HUTCHINSON, Michigan
ROBERT McCLORY, Illinois
TOM RAILSBACK, Illinois
CHARLES E. WIGGINS, California
HAMILTON FISH, JR., New York
M. CALDWELL BUTLER, Virginia
WILLIAM S. COHEN, Maine
CARLOS J. MOORHEAD, California
JOHN M. ASHBROOK, Ohio
HENRY J. HYDE, Illinois
THOMAS N. KINDNESS, Ohio


EARL C. DUDLEY, Jr., General Counsel
GARNER J. CLINE, StaffDirector
HERBERT FUCHS, Counsel
WILLIAM P. SHATTUCK, Counsel
H. CHRISTOPHER NOLDE, Counsel
ALAN A. PARKER, Counsel
JAMES F. FALCO, Counsel
MAURICE A. BARBOZA, Counsel
THOMAS W. HUTCHISON, Counsel
ARTHUR P. ENDRES, Jr., Counsel
DANIEL L. COHEN, Counsel
FRANKLIN G. POLK, Counsel
THOMAS E. MOONEY, Counsel
MICHAEL W. BLOMMER, Counsel
ALEXANDER B. COOK, Counsel
CONSTANTINE J. GEKAS, Counsel
ALAN F. COFFEY, Jr., Counsel
KENNETH N. KLEE, Counsel


SUBCOMMITTEE ON IMMIGRATION, CITIZENSHIP, AND INTERNATIONAL LAW
JOSHUA EILBERG, Pennsylvania, Chairman
PAUL S. SARBANES, Maryland HAMILTON FISH, JR., New York
ELIZABETH HOLTZMAN, New York WILLIAM S. COHEN, Maine
CHRISTOPHER J. DODD, Connecticut
MARTIN A. RUSSO, Illinois
GARNER J. CLINE, Counsel
ARTHUR P. ENDRES, Jr., Counsel
JANICE A. ZARRO, Assistant Counsel
ALEXANDER B. COOK, Associate Counsel
(IT)















CONTENTS

Hearings held on- Page
February 4, 1975-------------------------------------------- 1
February 26, 1975-------------------------------------- 133
March 5, 1975--- ------------------------------------ 191
March 12, 1975 .-------------------------------.------------ 239
March 13, 1975-------------------------------------------- 297
March 19, 1975------------------------------------------- 331
Text of-
H.R. 257------------------------------------------------- 144
H.R. 982-------------------------------------------------- 3
H.R. 1276--------- ----------------------------------- 333
H.R. 3883------ --------------------------------------- 10
H.R. 6732------------------------------------------------- 17
Witnesses-
Albert, Alfred G., Deputy Solicitor, Department of Labor ---------- 112
Bernsen, Sam, General Counsel, Immigration and Naturalization
Service -------- ----------------------------------- 25, 335
Biaggi, Hon. Mario, a Representative in Congress from the State of
New York----------------------------------- 133
Prepared statement--- -----------------------------_ 140
Biemiller, Andrew J., director, AFL-CIO-------------------- 191
Prepared statement------- ---------------------- 192
Brannick, Richard, president, National Border Patrol Council,
American Federation of Government Employees---------------- 369
Carliner, David, American Civil Liberties Union -------------_ --- 282
Prepared statement------------------------------ 294
Chapman, Hon. Leonard F., Jr., Commissioner, Immigration and
Naturalization Service------------------------------ 25, 335
Prepared statement ------------------------ 32, 361
Danielson, Hon. George E., a Representative in Congress from the
State of California--- ------------------ ------- 239
Prepared statement_ -------- --------------------- 249
Fierro, Manuel, president, National Congress of Hispanic-American
Citizens --------------------------------------------- 315
Prepared statement------------------------- ---- 328
Greene, James, Deputy Commissioner, Immigration and Natural-
ization Service --------------------------------------- 335
Harpold, Michael, legislative representative, National Council of
Immigration and Naturalization Service Locals, American Fed-
eration of Government Employees-------------------------- 369
Prepared statement--- ------- ------ ------ ---- 389
Hess, Arthur E., Deputy Commissioner, Social Security Adminis-
tration _------------_------------------------------------- 220
Prepared statement------------------------------------- 223
Higgins, R. Rev. George G., secretary for research, U.S. Catholic
Conference _.-----------------. -------------------------- 279
Hohl, Donald G., associate director, migration and refugee services,
U.S. Catholic Conference---------------------------------- 279
Koczak, Stephen, director of research, American Federation of
Government Employees ---------------------------- 369
McCarthy, John E., director, U.S. Catholic Conference------------ 279
Meiklejohn, Kenneth A., legislative counsel, AFL-CIO------------ 191
Pellerzi, Lou M., General Counsel, American Federation of Govern-
ment Employees ----------------------------------------- 369
Rubenstein, Walter D., Deputy Assistant Director for Bureau of
Retirement and Survivors Insurance__----------------- 220
Ryan, Hon. Leo J., a Representative in Congress from the State of
California_ .----- .-------------------------------------- 181
(HI)









Witnesses-Continued
Sadler, Carl, legislative representative, American Federation of Page
Government Employees ------------------------------------ 369
Schubert, Hon. Richard F., Under Secretary of Labor -----------. 112
Prepared statement------ -------------_ 114
Scott, Edward W., Jr., Deputy Assistant Attorney General, De-
ment of Justice------------------------------------------ 366
Prepared statement ------------------------------------- 366
Silberman, Laurence H., Acting Attorney General, Department of
Justice------------------------- ------------------ 25
Prepared statement- -----------------------------------_ 29
Sisk, Hon. B. F., a Representative in Congress from the State of
California --------- ------------------------------ 147
Prepared statement------------------------------------- 156
Solis, Stephen, migrant specialist, secretariat for the Spanish-speak-
ing, U.S. Catholic Conference------------------------------- 279
Tanton, Dr. John H., chairman, Immigration Study Committee for
Zero Population Growth_----------------------------------- 253
Prepared statement ------------------------------------- 277
White, Hon. Richard C., a Representative in Congress from the
State of Texas ------------------------------------------- 167
Williams, David 0., Deputy Director, U.S. Employment Service,
Department of Labor -------------------- 112
Additional material-
"Battle Expected on Tighter Laws To Curb Illegal Aliens," by M. A.
Farber, New York Times, December 31, 1974----------- 94
"Carlos Didn't Last Long in the Promised Land," by Michael Satchell,
Washington Star-News, November 17, 1974---------------------- 72
"Detention Centers Last U.S. Stop for Thousands of Mexican Aliens,"
by Martin Waldron, New York Times, July 15, 1974-------------- 98
"Human Tide Cuts Deeply in America," by Michael Satchell, Wash-
ington Star-News, November 16, 1974 -------------------------- 63
"Illegal Aliens Target of Union Organizers," by Frank Del Olmo, Los
Angeles Times, January 30, 1975------------------------------- 150
"Illegal Entrants Flock to United States-A New Poverty Class,"
by Leroy F. Aarons, Washington Post, February 2, 1975 ------ 78
"Illegal Immigration: A Global Problem," Washington Post, November
13, 1974 ------_____---------- --_- 74
"Immigration Fraud Case Dropped in 1972," New York Times,
December 30, 1974.. -------_-_-__---- ---_ 89
"Life in Paradise Spent on the Run," Michael Satchell, Washington
Star-News, November 17, 1974------------------------------- 65
"Million Illegal Aliens in Metropolitan Area," by M. A. Farber,
New York Times, December 29, 1974 --------------------- 83
"Patrol Can't Keep Aliens Out," Leroy F. Aarons, Washington Post,
February 3, 1975------------------------------------------ 81
"Rising Flood of Illegal Aliens," U.S. News & World Report, February
3, 1975--------------------------------------- 100
"Solution 'Simple': Cut Off Jobs," by Michael Satchell, Washington
Star-News, November 19, 1974 ---------------------------- 70
"Statistics on Immigration," by Michael Satchell, Washington
Star-News, November 16, 1974-- ----_------------------------ 73
"The Biggest Hole in the Dike," by Michael Satchell, Washington
Star-News, November 18, 1974 ------------------ ---------- 67
"Unlawful Aliens Use Costly City Services," by M. A. Farber, New
York Times, December 30, 1974 ----_---__--_---------------- 90
"U.S. Illegal Immigration Problem Defies the Numbers Game," by
Lawrence Meyer, Washington Post, February 2, 1975_ ------------- 75
Correspondence-
Hess, Arthur E., Deputy Commissioner, Social Security Administra-
tion, letter dated March 28, 1975, to Subcommittee on Immigration,
Citizenship, and International Law_ -------------------------_ 237

APPENDIXES
Appendix 1: Additional statements-
American Farm Bureau Federation ----------------------------_ 405
Association of Immigration and Nationality Lawyers ---------- .. 406









Appendix 1: Additional statements-Continued Page
Association of the Bar of the city of New York.-----------------.- 408
Broomfield, Hon. William S., a Representative in Congress from the
State of Michigan...---------------------------------------- 397
Frain, George, secretary, Businessmen Affected Severely by the
Yearly Action Plans, Inc ....---..-------------.------------.. 414
Harpold, Michael, legislative representative, American Federation of
Government Employees------------------------------------ 419
Jamaica National Guild U.S.A ...-----------------------------. 421
Kazen, Hon. Abraham, Jr., a Representative in Congress from the
State of Texas-.------------------------------------------- 398
Kuszmaul, Fred T., director, National Americanism and Children and
Youth Division, American Legion---------------------------- 421
Lehman, Hon. William, a Representative in Congress from the State
of Florida ..--------------..------------------------------- 399
Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors------------------------ 414
National Border Patrol Council------------------------------- 423
"Restrictions Aren't the Answer-The Illegals," by Michael Piore,
associate professor of economics, Massachusetts Institute of Tech-
nology ----------------------------------------------------- 424
Roybal, Hon. Edward R., a Representative in Congress from the
State of California--------------------------------------- 399
Talcott, Hon. Burt L., a Representative in Congress from the State
of California__----------------------------------------- 401
The American Legion, Fifty-Sixth National Convention, August 20,
21, 22, 1974 ---------------- ----------------------------- 422
Van Deerlin, Hon. Lionel, a Representative in Congress from the
State of California--------------------------------------- 402
Webber, Clyde M., national president, American Federation of Gov-
ernment Employees:
March 12, 1975----------------------------------------- 370
July 22, 1974_----------------------------------------- 373
Wilson, Hon. Bob, a Representative in Congress from the State of
California ------_ ------------- --------------------- ---- 402
Wolff, Hon. Lester L., a Representative in Congress from the State
of New York-------------------------------------------- 404
Tanton, Dr. John H., chairman, Immigration Study Committee, Zero
Population Growth, letter dated March 27, 1975, to Hon. Joshua
Eilberg ------------------------------------------------- 267
Appendix 2-
Responses to questions submitted to the Department of Justice ------ 427
Appendix 3-
Additional comments of the Department of Justice on H.R. 982 ---_ 445
Appendix 4-
Responses to questions submitted to the Department of Health,
Education, and Welfare--------------------------- -------- 448












ILLEGAL ALIENS


FEBRUARY 4, 1975
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,
SUBCOMMITTEE ON IMMIGRATION,
CITIZENSHIP, AND INTERNATIONAL LAW
OF THE COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY,
Washington, D.C.
The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:10 a.m., in room
2141, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Joshua Eilberg [chairman
of the subcommittee] presiding.
Present: Representatives Eilberg, Sarbanes, Holtzman, Dodd,
Russo, Fish, and Cohen.
Also present: Garner J. Cline and Arthur P. Endres, Jr., counsels;
Janice A. Zarro, assistant counsel; and Alexander B. Cook, associate
counsel.
Mr. EILBERG. This hearing will come to order.
We are here today to receive an update on the facts concerning
proposed legislation which should have become law over 2 years ago.
This bill H.R. 982, the so-called illegal alien bill, was passed over-
whelmingly by the House of Representatives in the 92d and 93d
Congresses. Had the Senate acted and the President signed this
measure, it is entirely possible that 1 million Americans would be
working today instead of collecting unemployment compensation.
No one can argue that the plight of the aliens who come to this
country illegally is not tragic. In many cases these men and women are
separated from their families for long periods of time. They are
forced to live under the worst conditions and as a result of their
precarious status they must accept any form of abuse and mistreat-
ment their employers choose to hand out.
But, the fact is, they are here because they can or think they can
get jobs-jobs which should be held by citizens or aliens who are in
this country legally. If there were no jobs they would not come here.
There has been a good deal of misinformation circulated concerning
this legislation. H.R. 982 does not discriminate against ethnic and
minority groups. It does not impose penalties on the already victimized
illegal aliens.
It does not relate to the deportability of aliens and it does not
require any affirmative action by any employer-it merely requires
every employer to refrain from knowingly hiring illegal aliens.
At the same time, H.R. 982 does not encourage discrimination
against aliens; nor does it force the mass deportation of illegal aliens.
It does however, deal with the real culprit, the employer who
repeatedly and with impunity hires illegal aliens rather than giving
the jobs to citizens and legal residents who could demand a living
wage and decent working conditions.
(1)








This bill provides for three steps to be taken against the employer.
First, there is a warning or citation from the Attorney General. The
second offense will bring a fine of $500 per alien, and further repeti-
tions can be penalized by a $1,000 fine per alien and/or a year in
prison for each alien.
So it is clear our purpose is to prosecute the people who provide
the incentive for aliens to come into this country illegally.
There is no doubt that something must be done.
Hearings were held across the country on this subject. More than
200 witnesses whose testimony fills over 2,000 pages were heard.
The product of these hearings and countless hours of work by the
members of the subcommittee and the staff is the legislation now
before us.
H.R. 982 has been criticized for being too strong and for being too
weak, but no one has put forth a workable alternative which would
be as fair to the alien and to the employer who unwittingly hires one
or more illegal aliens.
The fact that this legislation presents a workable answer to the
problem is borne out by the support it has received in the past. In
the 92d Congress it was passed on a voice vote and in the last Con-
gress by a 297-63 margin. On those two occasions the country was
in much better shape economically than it is today.
Now we are on the verge of depression and this measure could help
to put the Nation back on the road to economic recovery. It would
eliminate the drain illegal aliens place on our economy by taking jobs,
collecting welfare and unemployment payments, putting their chil-
dren in our schools, and using all of the other services which citizens
and legal residents pay taxes to support. Additionally, illegal aliens
send millions of dollars back to their native lands annually, a practice
which further damages our economy.
I do not advocate a ban on immigration, for this country was
built and its greatness assured by the labor of immigrants. It remains
essential, however, that we have the orderly and fair entry of immi-
grants into the United States.
Back door immigration has no place in this country. We can best
serve the interests of lawful residents by a judicious immigration
policy.
Illegal immigration is a distortion of our heritage, for instead of
enhancing their opportunities it often brings misery and exploitation
to the aliens themselves and disadvantages our own lawful residents.
[The bills referred to, H.R. 982, H.R. 3883 and H.R. 6732, follow:]









94Ta CONGRESS H
1sT Sso Ho. 982




IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
JANUARY 14,1975
Mr. RODINO (for himself and Mr. EILBERG) introduced the following bill;
which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary




A BILL
To amend the Immigration and Nationality Act, and for other
purposes.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa-
2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
3 That, section 245 of the Immigration and Nationality Act
4 (8 U.S.C. 1255) is amended to read as follows:
5 "SEC. 245. (a) The status of an alien who was inspected
6 and admitted or paroled into the United States may be ad-
7 justed by the Attorney General, in his discretion and under
8 such regulations as he may prescribe, to that of an alien law-
9 fully admitted for permanent residence if (1) the alien makes
10 an application for such adjustment, (2) the alien is eligible
11 to receive an immigrant visa and is admissible to the United
I









2
1 States for permanent residence, and (3) an immigrant visa

2 is immediately available to him at the time his application
3 is filed.

4 "(b) Upon the approval of an application for adjust-
5 ment made under subsection (a), the Attorney General shall
6 record the alien's lawful admission for permanent residence
7 as of the date the order of the Attorney General approving
8 the application for the adjustment of status is made, and the
9 Secretary of State shall reduce by one the number of the

10 preference or nonpreference visas authorized to be issued
11 under section 203 (a) within the class to which the alien is

12 chargeable, or the number of visas authorized to be issued
13 pursuant to the provisions of section 21 (e) of the Act of
14 October 3, 1965, for the fiscal year then current.
15 "(c) The provisions of this section shall not be applica-
16 ble to: (1) an alien crewman; (2) an alien (other than an
17 immediate relative as defined in section 201 (b)) who here-
18 after continues in or accepts unauthorized employment prior

19 to filing an application for adjustment of status; or (3) any
20 alien admitted in transit without visa under section 238 (d) ."
21 SEC. 2. Section 274 of the Immigration and Nationality
22 Act (8 U.S.C. 1324) is amended by deleting the proviso in
23 paragraph 4 of subsection (a) and by redesignating subsec-
24 tion (b) as subsection (e) and adding new subsections (b),
25 (c), and (d) to read as follows:









3
1 "(b) (1) It shall be unlawful for any employer or any

2 person acting as an agent for such an employer, or any per-
3 son who for a fee, refers an alien for employment by such an
4 employer, knowingly to employ, continue to employ, or refer

5 for employment any alien in the United States who has not
6 been lawfully admitted to the United States for permanent
7 residence, unless the employment of such alien is authorized
8 by the Attorney General: Provided, That an employer, re-

9 ferrer, or agent shall not be deemed to have violated this sub-
10 section if he has made a bona fide inquiry whether a person
11 hereafter employed or referred by him is a citizen or an alien,
12 and if an alien, whether he is lawfully admitted to the United
13 States for permanent residence or is authorized by the Attor-
14 ney General to accept employment: Provided, further, That
15 evidence establishing that the employer, referrer, or agent
16 has obtained from the person employed or referred by him a
17 signed statement in writing in conformity with regulations

18 which shall be prescribed by the Attorney General that such
19 person is a citizen of the United States or that such person is
20 an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence or is an
21 alien authorized by the Attorney General to accept employ-
22 ment, shall be deemed prima facie proof that such employer,
23 agent, or referrer has made a bona fide inquiry as provided in
24 this paragraph. The Attorney General of the United States

25 shall prepare forms for the use of employers, agents, and re-









4
1 ferrers in obtaining such written statements and shall furnish
2 such forms to employers, agents, and referrers upon request.
3 "(2) If, on evidence or information he deems persua-
4 sive, the Attorney General concludes that an employer, agent,
5 or referrer has violated the provisionsof paragraph (1), the
6 Attorney General shall serve a citation on the employer,
7 agent, or referrer informing him of such apparent violation.
8 "(3) If, in a proceeding initiated within two years after
9 the service of such citation, the Attorney General finds that

10 any employer, agent, or referrer upon whom such citation
11 has been served has thereafter violated the provisions of
12 paragraph (1), the Attorney General shall assess a penalty
13 of not more than $500 for each alien in respect to whom
14 any violation of paragraph (1) is found to have occurred.
15 "(4) A civil penalty shall be assessed by the Attorney
16 General only after the person charged with a violation under
17 paragraph (3) has been given an opportunity for a hearing
18 and the Attorney General has determined that a violation did
19 occur, and the amount of the penalty which is warranted.
20 The hearing shall be of record and conducted before an immi-
21 gration officer designated by the Attorney General, individ-
22 ually or by regulation and the proceedings shall be conducted
23 in accordance with the requirements of title 5, section 554
24 of the United States Code.
25 "(5) If the person against whom a civil penalty is as-









5

1 sessed fails to pay the penalty within the time prescribed in
2 such order, the Attorney General shall file a suit to collect
3 the amount in any appropriate district court of the United
4 States. In any such suit or in any other suit seeking to review

5 the Attorney General's determination, the suit shall be deter-

6 mined solely upon the administrative record upon which the
7 civil penalty was assessed and the Attorney General's findings
8 of fact, if supported by substantial evidence on the record
9 considered as a whole, shall be conclusive.

10 "(c) Any employer or person who has been assessed a
11 civil penalty under subsection (b) (3) which has become
12 final and thereafter violates subsection (b) (1) shall be guilty
13 of a misdemeanor and upon conviction thereof shall be

14 punished by a fine not exceeding $1,000, or by imprisonment
15 not exceeding one year, or both, for each alien in respect to
16 whom any violation of this subsection occurs.
17 SEC. 3. The Immigration and Nationality Act is amended

18 by inserting immediately after section 274 the following new
19 section:

20 "DISCLOSURE OF ILLEGAL ALIENS WHO ARE RECEIVING
21 ASSISTANCE UNDER THE SOCIAL SECURITY ACT
22 "SEC. 274A. Any officer or employee of the Department
23 of Health, Education, and Welfare shall disclose to the Serv-
24 ice the name and most recent address of any alien who such
25 officer or employee knows is not lawfully in the United States









6

1 and who is receiving assistance under any State plan under

2 title I, X, XIV, XVI, XIX, or part A of title IV of the
3 Social Security Act."
4 SEC. 4. The first paragraph of section 1546 of title 18
5 of the United States Code is amended to read as follows:

6 "Whoever knowingly forges, counterfeits, alters, or

7 falsely makes any immigrant or nonimmigrant visa, permit,
8 border crossing card, alien registration receipt card, or other
9 document prescribed by statute or regulation for entry into
10 or as evidence of authorized stay in the United States, or

11 utters, uses, attempts to use, possesses, obtains, accepts, or

12 receives any such visa, permit, border crossing card, alien

13 registration receipt card, or other document prescribed by
14 statute or regulation for entry into or as evidence of author-
15 ized stay in the United States, knowing it to be forged, coun-

16 terfeited, altered, or falsely made, or to have been procured

17 by means of any false claim or statement, or to have been

18 otherwise procured by fraud or unlawfully obtained; or".

19 SEC. 5. Nothing contained in this Act, unless otherwise
20 specifically provided therein, shall be construed to affect the
21 validity of any document or proceeding which shall be valid

22 at the time this Act shall take effect, or to affect any prose-

23 oution, suit, action, or proceeding, civil or criminal, done or
24 existing, at the time this Act shall take effect; but as to all
25 such prosecutions, suits, actions, proceedings, statutes, con-






9


7
1 editions, rights, acts, things, liabilities, obligations, or matters,
2 the statutes or parts of statutes repealed by this Act are,
3 unless otherwise specifically provided therein, hereby con-
4 tinued in force and effect.
5 SEc. 6. This Act shall become effective on the first day
6 of the first month after expiration of ninety days following
7 the date of its enactment.









94TH CONGRESS H R
18T HR. 3883




IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
FEBRUARY 27,1975
Mr. RODIxo (for himself, Mr. BRooiK, Mr. HU-GATE, Mr. EILBERG, Mr. FLOWERS,
Mr. MANN, Mr. SARDANES, Mr. SEIBERLING, Mr. DANIELSON, MS. JORDAN,
Mr. MAZZOLI, Mr. HUGHES, Mr. HUTCHINSON, Mr. McCLORY, Mr. RAILS-
BACK, Mr. VIGGI s, Mr. FISH, Mr. COIEN, Mr. DINGELL, Mr. ST GERMAIN,
Mr. CLEVELAND, Mr. CARn, Mr. DowNXE, Ms. MEYNER, and Mr. ZEFERETTI)
introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on
the Judiciary



A BILL
To amend the Immigration and Nationality Act, and for other
purposes.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa-
2 ties of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
3 That, section 245 of the Immigration and Nationality Act
4 (8 U.S.C. 1255) is amended to read as follows:
5 "SEC. 245. (a) The status of an alien who was inspected

6 and admitted or paroled into the United States may be

7 adjusted by the Attorney General, in his discretion and under

8 such regulations as he may prescribe, to that of an alien
9 lawfully admitted for permanent residence if (1) the alien









2
1 makes an application for such adjustment, (2) the alien is
2 eligible to receive an immigrant visa and is admissible to the
3 United States for permanent residence, and (3) an immi-
4 grant visa is immediately available to him at the time his

5 application is filed.
6 "(b) Upon the approval of an application for adjust-
7 ment made under subsection (a), the Attorney General

8 shall record the alien's lawful admission for permanent resi-

9 dence as of the date the order of the Attorney General ap-
10 proving the application for the adjustment of status is made,
11 and the Secretary of State shall reduce by one the number of
12 the preference or nonpreference visas authorized to be issued
13 under section 203 (a) within the class to which the alien is
14 chargeable, or the number of visas authorized to be issued
15 pursuant to the provisions of section 21 (e) of the Act of
16 October 3, 1965, for the fiscal year then current.
17 (c) The provisions of this section shall not be applica-
18 ble to: (1) an alien crewman; (2) an alien (other than an

19 immediate relative as defined in section 201 (b)) who here-
20 after continues in or accepts unauthorized employment prior

21 to filing an application for adjustment of status; or (3) any
22 alien admitted in transit without visa under section 238 (d) ."
23 SEC. 2. Section 274 of the Immigration and Nationality

24 Act (8 U.S.C. 1324) is amended by deleting the proviso in
25 paragraph 4 of subsection (a) and by redesignating subsec-


49-769 0 7 2









3

1 tion (b) as subsection (d) and adding new subsections (b)

2 and (c) to read as follows:
3 (b) (1) It shall be unlawful for any employer or any
4 person acting as an agent for such an employer, or any per-

5 son who for a fee, refers an alien for employment by such an

6 employer, knowingly to employ, continue to employ, or refer
7 for employment any alien in the United States who has not
8 been lawfully admitted to the United States for permanent

9 residence, unless the employment of such alien is authorized
10 by the Attorney General: Provided, That an employer, re-
11 ferrer, or agent shall not be deemed to have violated this sub-

12 section if he has made a bona fide inquiry whether a person
13 hereafter employed or referred by him is a citizen or an alien,
14 and if an alien, whether he is lawfully admitted to the United
15 States for permanent residence or is authorized by the Attor-

16 ney General to accept employment: Provided, further, That
17 evidence establishing that the employer, referrer, or agent
18 has obtained from the person employed or referred by him a
19 signed statement in writing in conformity with regulations

20 which shall be prescribed by the Attorney General that such

21 person is a citizen of the United States or that such person is
22 an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence or is an
23 alien authorized by the Attorney General to accept employ-
24 ment, shall be deemed prima facie proof that such employer,
25 agent, or referrer has made a bona fide inquiry as provided in









4
1 this paragraph. The Attorney General of the United States
2 shall prepare forms for the use of employers, agents, and re-
3 ferrers in obtaining such written statements and shall furnish
4 such forms to employers, agents, and referrers upon request.

5 "(2) If, on evidence or information he deems persua-
6 sive, the Attorney General concludes that an employer, agent,
7 or referrer has violated the provisions of paragraph (1), the
8 Attorney General shall serve a citation on the employer,
9 agent, or referrer informing him of such apparent violation.

10 "(3) If, in a proceeding initiated within two years after
11 the service of such citation, the Attorney General finds that
12 any employer, agent, or referrer upon whom such citation
13 has been served has thereafter violated the provisions of
14 paragraph (1), the Attorney General shall assess a penalty
15 of not more than $500 for each alien in respect to whom
16 any violation of paragraph (1) is found to have occurred.
17 "(4) A civil penalty shall be assessed by the Attorney

18 General only after the person charged with a violation under

19 paragraph (3) has been given an opportunity for a hearing
20 and the Attorney General has determined that a violation did
21 occur, and the amount of the penalty which is warranted.

22 The hearing shall be of record and conducted before an immi-

23 gration officer designated by the Attorney General, individ-
24 ally or by regulation and the proceedings shall be conducted
25 in accordance with the requirements of title 5, section 554
26 of the United States Code.









5

1 "(5) If the person against whom a civil penalty is as-

2 sessed fails to pay the penalty within the time prescribed in

3 such order, the Attorney General shall file a suit to collect
4 the amount in any appropriate district court of the United

5 States. In any such suit or in any other suit seeking to review

6 the Attorney General's determination, the suit shall be deter-

7 mined solely upon the administrative record upon which the

8 civil penalty was assessed and the Attorney General's findings

9 of fact, if supported by substantial evidence on the record
10 considered as a whole, shall be conclusive.

11 (c) Any employer or person who has been assessed a

12 civil penalty under subsection (b) (3) which has become

13 final and thereafter violates subsection (b) (1) shall be guilty
14 of a misdemeanor and upon conviction thereof shall be
15 punished by a fine not exceeding $1,000, or by imprisonment

16 not exceeding one year, or both, for each alien in respect to

17 whom any violation of this subsection occurs.

18 SEC. 3. The Immigration and Nationality Act is amended

19 by inserting immediately after section 274 the following new
20 section:

21 "DISCLOSURE OF ILLEGAL ALIENS WHO ARE RECEIVING

22 ASSISTANCE UNDER THE SOCIAL SECURITY ACT

23 "SEc. 274A. Any officer or employee of the Department

24 of Health, Education, and Welfare shall disclose to the Serv-

25 ice the name and most recent address of any alien who such









6

1 officer or employee knows is not lawfully in the United States

2 and who is receiving assistance under any State plan under
3 title I, X, XIV, XVI, XIX, or part A .of title IV of the
4 Social Security Act."

5 SEC. 4. The first paragraph of section 1546 of title 18
6 of the United States Code is amended to read as follows:
7 "Whoever knowingly forges, counterfeits, alters, or
8 falsely makes any immigrant or nonimmigrant visa, permit,

9 border crossing card, alien registration receipt card, or other

10 document prescribed by statute or regulation for entry into
11 or as evidence of authorized stay in the United States, or

12 utters, uses, attempts to use, possesses, obtains, accepts, or
13 receives any such visa, permit, border crossing card, alien

14 registration receipt card, or other document prescribed by
15 statute or regulation for entry into or as evidence of author-
16 ized stay in the United States, knowing it to be forged, coun-
17 terfeited, altered, or falsely made, or to have been procured

18 by means of any false claim or statement, or to have been

19 otherwise procured by fraud or unlawfully obtained; or".

20 SEC. 5. Nothing contained in this Act, unless otherwise
21 specifically provided therein, shall be construed to affect the
22 validity of any document or proceeding which shall be valid
23 at the time this Act shall take effect, or to affect any prose-
24 caution, suit, action, or proceeding, civil or criminal, done or
25 existing, at the time this Act shall take effect; but as to all






16


7
1 such prosecutions, suits, actions, proceedings, statutes, con-

2 editions, rights, acts, things, liabilities, obligations, or matters

3 editions, rights, acts, things, liabilities, obligations, or matters,

4 the statutes or parts of statutes repealed by this Act are,

5 unless otherwise specifically provided therein, hereby con-
6 tinued in force and effect.

7 SEC. 6. This Act shall become effective on the first day

8 of the first month after expiration of ninety days following

9 the date of its enactment.









94TH CONGRESS T i v
IT SESSION H. 6732




IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
MAY 6,1975
Mr. RODINo (for himself, Mr. DRINAN, Mr. DODD, Mr. PATTISON of New York,
Mr. MOORHEAD Of California, Mr. BLANCHARD, and Mr. MINIsH) intro-
duced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on the
Judiciary



A BILL
To amend the Immigration and Nationality Act, and for other
purposes.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Reprcsenta-
2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
3 That, section 245 of the Immigration and Nationality Act
4 (8 U.S.C. 1255) is amended to read as follows:

5 "SEC. 245. (a) The status of an alien who was inspected
6 and admitted or paroled into the United States may be ad-
7 justed by the Attorney General, in his discretion and under
8 such regulations as he may prescribe, to that of an alien law-

9 fully admitted for permanent residence if (1) the alien makes
10 an application for such adjustment, (2) the alien is eligible
11 to receive an immigrant visa and is admissible to the United









2

1 States for permanent residence, and (3) an immigrant visa
2 is immediately available to him at the time his application
3 is filed.

4 "(b) Upon the approval of an application for adjust-

5 ment made under subsection (a), the Attorney General shall
6 record the alien's lawful admission for permanent residence
7 as of the date the order of the Attorney General approving
8 the application for the adjustment of status is made, and the
9 Secretary of State shall reduce by one the number of the

10 preference or nonpreference visas authorized to be issued
11 under section 203 (a) within the class to which the alien is

12 chargeable, or the number of visas authorized to be issued
13 pursuant to the provisions of section 21 (e) of the Act of
1t October 3, 1965, for the fiscal year then current.

15 (c) The provisions of this section shall not be applica-
16 ble to: (1) an alien crewman; (2) an alien (other than an
17 immediate relative as defined in section 201 (b)) who here-
18 after continues in or accepts unauthorized employment prior
19 to filing an application for adjustment of status; or (3) any
20 alien admitted in transit without visa under section 238 (d) ."
21 SEC. 2. Section 274 of the Immigration and Nationality

22 Act (8 U.S.C. 1324) is amended by deleting the proviso in
23 paragraph 4 of subsection (a) and by redesignating subsec-
24 tion (b) as subsection (e) and adding new subsections (b),
25 (c), and (d) to read as follows:









3

3 "(b) (1) It shall be unlawful for any employer or any
2 person acting as an agent for such an employer, or any per-
3 son who for a fee, refers an alien for employment by such an
4 employer, knowingly to employ, continue to employ, or refer

5 for employment any alien in the United States who has not

6 been lawfully admitted to the United States for permanent
7 residence, unless the employment of such alien is authorized
8 by the Attorney General: Provided, That an employer, re-

9 ferrer, or agent shall not be deemed to have violated this sub-
10 section if he has made a bona fide inquiry whether a person

11 hereafter employed or referred by him is a citizen or an alien,
12 and if an alien, whether he is lawfully admitted to the United
13 States for permanent residence or is authorized by the Attor-
14 ney General to accept employment: Provided, further, That

15 evidence establishing that the employer, referrer, or agent
16 has obtained from the person employed or referred by him a

17 signed statement in writing in conformity with regulations

18 which shall be prescribed by the Attorney General that such
19 person is a citizen of the United States or that such person is
20 an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence or is an
21 alien authorized by the Attorney General to accept employ-
22 ment, shall be deemed prima facie proof that such employer,
23 agent, or referrer has made a bona fide inquiry as provided in
24 this paragraph. The Attorney General of the United States
25 shall prepare forms for the use of employers, agents, and re-









4
3 ferrors in obtaining such written statements and shall furnish

2 such forms to employers, agents, and referrers upon request.
3 "(2) If, on evidence or information he deems persua-
4 sive, the Attorney General concludes that an employer, agent,
5 or referrer has violated the provisions of paragraph (1), the
6 Attorney General shall serve a citation on the employer,
7 agent, or referrer informing him of such apparent violation.
8 (3) If, in a proceeding initiated within two years after
9 the service of such citation, the Attorney General finds that
10 any employer, agent, or referrer upon whom such citation
11 has been served has thereafter violated the provisions of
12 paragraph (1), the Attorney General shall assess a penalty
13 of not more than $500 for each alien in respect to whom
14 any violation of paragraph (1) is found to have occurred.
15 "(4) A civil penalty shall be assessed by the Attorney
16 General only after the person charged with a violation under
17 paragraph (3) has been given an opportunity for a hearing

18 and the Attorney General has determined that a violation did
19 occur, and the amount of the penalty which is warranted.
20 The hearing shall be of record and conducted before an immi-
21 gration officer designated by the Attorney General, individ-
22 ually or by regulation and the proceedings shall be conducted
23 in accordance with the requirements of title 5, section 554
24 of the United States Code.
25 "(5) If the person against whom a civil penalty is as-









5

1 sessed fails to pay the penalty within the time prescribed in

2 such order, the Attorney General shall file a suit to collect
3 the amount in any appropriate district court of the United

4 States. In any such suit or in any other suit seeking to review
5 the Attorney General's determination, the suit shall be deter-

6 mined solely upon the administrative record upon which the
7 civil penalty was assessed and the Attorney General's findings
8 of fact, if supported by substantial evidence on the record
9 considered as a whole, siall be conclusive.

10 "(c) Any employer or person who has been assessed a
11 civil penalty under subsection (b) (3) which has become

12 final and thereafter violates subsection (b) (1) shall be guilty

13 of a misdemeanor and upon conviction thereof shall be

14 punished by a fine not exceeding $1,000, or by imprisonment
15 not exceeding one year, or both, for each alien in respect to

16 whom any violation of this subsection occurs.
17 SEC. 3. The Immigration and Nationality Act is amended

18 by inserting immediately after section 274 the following new
19 section:
20 "DISCLOSURE OF ILLEGAL ALIENS WHO ARE RECEIVING

21 ASSISTANCE UNDER THE SOCIAL SECURITY ACT
22 "SEc. 274A. Any officer or employee of the Department
23 of Health, Education, and Welfare shall disclose to the Serv-

24 ice the name and most recent address of any alien who such
25 officer or employee knows is not lawfully in the U united States









6

1 and who is receiving assistance under any State plan under

2 title I, X, XIV, XVI, XIX, or part A of title IV of the
3 Social Security Act."

4 SEC. 4. The first paragraph of section 1546 of title 18

5 of the United States Code is amended to read as follows:

6 "Whoever knowingly forges, counterfeits, alters, or
7 falsely makes any immigrant or nonimmigrant visa, permit,
8 border crossing card, alien registration receipt card, or other

9 document prescribed by statute or regulation for entry into

10 or as evidence of authorized stay in the United States, or

11 utters, uses, attempts to use, possesses, obtains, accepts, or

12 receives any such visa, permit, border crossing card, alien

13 registration receipt card, or other document prescribed by

14 statute or regulation for entry into or as evidence of author-

15 ized stay in the United States, knowing it to be forged, coun-

16 terfeited, altered, or falsely made, or to have been procured
17 by means of any false claim or statement, or to have been

18 otherwise procured by fraud or unlawfully obtained; or".

19 SEC. 5. Nothing contained in this Act, unless otherwise

20 specifically provided therein, shall be construed to affect the

21 validity of any document or proceeding which shall be valid

22 at the time this Act shall take effect, or to affect any prose-
23 cution, suit, action, or proceeding, civil or criminal, done or

24 existing, at the time this Act shall take effect; but as to all

25 such prosecutions, suits, actions, proceedings, statutes, con-






23


7

I editions, rights, acts, things, liabilities, obligations, or matters,

2 the statutes or parts of statutes repealed by this Act are,
3 unless otherwise specifically provided therein, hereby con-

4 tinued in force and effect.

5 SEC. 6. This Act shall become effective on the first day

6 of the first month after expiration of ninety days following

7 the date of its enactment.








Mr. EILBERG. At this time I will call on Mr. Fish, the ranking
member on the minority side.
Mr. FISH. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Could I at the outset introduce to you our latest addition to the
minority side as a member of this subcommittee which you chair,
Mr. Cohen from the State of Maine?
Mr. COHEN. Mr. Chairman.
Mr. FISH. Mr. Chairman, we meet here today to consider once
more the problem of the millions of illegal aliens in our country and
to resolve what to do about their presence here. There have been
prior occasions as you stated, when this subcommittee met to consider
this matter and twice bills have been reported out which went on to
be passed by the House, both in the 92d Congress and the 93d Con-
gress. Today, however, the problem of illegal aliens is much more
serious than during those prior Congresses.
The number of illegal aliens in our country appears to have increased
dramatically in recent years, and we have been told that many of
these illegal aliens are employed, often in well paying jobs. This is
at a time when our country is experiencing unemployment at a rate
of 7.1 percent of the total work force, the highest unemployment
figure in almost 14 years.
The Immigration Service has estimated that 1 million jobs could
be created in the near future by the removal of that many aliens who
now hold such jobs. Our economy needs those jobs and it needs them
now. I understand 2 to 3 million jobs may now be held by illegal
aliens.
It should be noted that these jobs and the presence of illegal aliens
are not confined to the area adjacent to our southwest border. In
New York City alone, the Immigration Service has estimated that
106,000 jobs are held by such aliens and could be made available to
U.S. citizens and legal resident aliens.
H.R. 982 makes it illegal to knowingly hire an illegal alien. Without
such a law, no penalty reaches an employer for employing persons who,
by law, cannot work in the United States. The companion effort of
this Congress must be to adequately fund the Immigration Service
to pay not only the salaries of agents, but the moving expenses, so
that those apprehended can be deported.
Mr. Chairman, we are not alone in our concern about this most
serious problem. It has received the attention recently in several series
of newspaper articles, in such papers as the Washington Star-News,
the New York Times, and just this week, in the Washington Post.
[See p. 63.] It was recently the subject of an hour-long documentary
broadcast by the ABC Television Network, and more importantly,
it has been the subject of a discussion between President Ford and
the President of Mexico at their recent meeting. As a result of that
meeting, President Ford established on January 6 of this year the
Domestic Council Committee on Illegal Aliens which is chaired by the
Attorney General.
We know our system is not working correctly when the number of
aliens who are arrested and deported from the United States annually
is double the number of aliens who are annually admitted legally.
Estimates of the illegal alien population in the United States range
from 4 to 12 million. I commend you and Chairman Rodino for making








this issue our first priority during this Congress, and I look forward
to working with you in trying to resolve this most serious problem for
our country at this time.
Mr. EILBERG. Before beginning with the testimony, I would like to
introduce a new member of the subcommittee, the gentleman from
Connecticut, Congressman Christopher Dodd.
And now if we may, I would like to welcome the Acting Attorney
General of the United States, Mr. Laurence H. Silberman. We are
happy to have you here, Mr. Silberman, and look forward to your
testimony.

TESTIMONY OF LAURENCE H. SILBERMAN, ACTING ATTORNEY GEN-
ERAL, DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, AND LEONARD F. CHAPMAN,
JR., COMMISSIONER, IMMIGRATION AND NATURALIZATION SERV-
ICE, ACCOMPANIED BY SAM BERNSEN, GENERAL COUNSEL
Mr. SILBERMAN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I would like to introduce on my left Leonard Chapman, Commis-
sioner of the Immigration and Naturalization Service, who will also
testify, and Sam Bernsen, INS General Counsel.
I shall be brief. I can summarize my testimony and read only those
portions which seem to me to go to the heart of the matter before
this committee.
I would like to also congratulate the chairman of this committee
for making this issue a first priority. It has been for the last year the
first priority of the Justice Department of all of the programs we have.
Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, I am pleased to
appear before you to discuss H.R. 982. H.R. 982 addresses a critical
national problem-the flood of illegal immigration. The principal
provision of H.R. 982 aims at the heart of this problem by prohibiting
persons from knowingly employing illegal aliens, thus reducing the
economic incentive for illegal immigration. The Department of Justice
has supported H.R. 982 in the past. We continue to believe that
employment of illegal aliens must be prohibited. We believe, however,
that Congress should consider enactment of stronger provisions than
are presently contained in H.R. 982 to assure that this prohibition is
observed and enforced.
Let me make myself quite clear. The Department has always
taken the position that we will support the strongest bill in this area
that can come out of the Congress, and we of course, defer to the
legislative expertise of men like yourself, Mr. Chairman, who have
worked on this problem. But we think that with the heightened
concern now, with the economic problems that we face, that both you
and Mr. Fish referred to, we have a chance of even strengthening
H.R. 982 now, and we would hope that you would consider that.
Congress has established a policy of controlled immigration. You
have set an annual limit on immigrating, 394,000 in fiscal year 1974.
Furthermore, Congress has wisely and humanely established guide-
lines for admitting immigrants; the reuniting of families and the
admission of needed workers are the principal purposes to be promoted.
Total immigration, however, bears no relation to the program you
have prescribed. Last year the Immigration and Naturalization Serv-








ice located 788,000 deportable aliens-twice the number of aliens
admitted as legal immigrants.
We cannot assess with certainty the number of illegal immigrants
entering this country each year. As Commissioner Chapman has
often said, "If we could count them, we could catch them." In 1973,
this subcommittee estimated that there were 1 to 2 million illegal
aliens in the United States. However, the dramatic growth of illegal
aliens apprehended in each year since 1965 suggests that the number
of illegal aliens in the United States is rapidly increasing. We now
estimate, and I emphasize, it is an estimate, that the number of illegal
aliens in this country may be between 4 and 12 million.
As the House Committee on the Judiciary has noted, the primary
reason for the illegal alien problem is the economic imbalance between
the United States and the countries from which illegal immigrants
come, most notably Mexico. As long as jobs are available for those
who enter this country illegally or for those who enter legally as non-
immigrants and illegally obtain employment, the influx of unauthorized
immigration will continue. Therefore, Mr. Chairman, this problem
must be perceived as a question of economic incentives and disincen-
tives. It is my personal view that we will only successfully deal with
this problem when the United States becomes an economic wasteland
for any illegal immigrant.
As witnesses have testified before this subcommittee in the past,
the adverse economic impact of the illegal alien is dramatic. Illegally
employed aliens:
One, take jobs normally filled by American workers; not only agri-
cultural jobs in the Southwest, but high-paying jobs in metropolitan
areas where the illegal alien is harder to apprehend;
Two, compete, as low-skilled laborers, most directly with unskilled
ethnic or minority group members, many of whom may be Mexican-
Americans or lawfully admitted permanent resident aliens;
Three, depress the wages of American workers;
Four, contribute to the balance-of-payments deficit by sending
money out of the United States; and
Five, impose costs on the American taxpayer by taking jobs which
would otherwise be performed by individuals on welfare.
With 7 percent unemployment, the United States can no longer
conceive of itself as a people of plenty with inexhaustible opportunity
for all who wish to come here. The congressionally prescribed limits
on immigration represent recognition of this reality. The question
today is whether we will take effective measures to enforce those
limits by prohibiting employment of illegal aliens and raising the
penalties for those illegal aliens who seek employment here. If we
do not act effectively, the tide of illegal aliens will abate only when
we have absorbed so many unauthorized immigrants that the United
States is no longer perceived as economically more inviting than the
countries from which they come.
This subcommittee has consistently recognized the need to prohibit
employment of illegal aliens without abetting job discrimination
against American citizens who resemble aliens. H.R. 982 attempts
to meet this goal.
Section 2 of H.R. 982 would amend section 274(b) of the Immigra-
tion and Nationality Act to make it to be unlawful for any employer,








agent, or person who for a fee refers an alien for employment know-
ingly to employ, continue, to employ, or refer for employment any
alien who has not been lawfully admitted for permanent residence,
unless such employment is authorized by the Attorney General.
The new section 274(b)(1) would stipulate that an employer, re-
ferrer, or agent shall not be deemed to have violated the subsection
if he has made a bona fide inquiry as to whether the applicant is a
citizen or an alien, and if an alien, whether he is lawfully admitted
for permanent residence. That section would also provide that an
employer, referrer, or agent can demonstrate prima facie proof of such
a bona fide inquiry by securing a signed statement frcm the person
employed or referred that such person is a citizen, a permanent resi-
dent alien, or an alien authorized by the Attorney General to accept
employment. The signed statement would be in writing and would have
to conform with regulations prescribed by the Attorney General.
The three-step penalty structure authorized by the amended
section 274 would begin with the Attorney General or his agent
serving a citation informing the offending employer, agent, or referrer
of an apparent violation. A second offense within 2 years of the service
of such a citation would authorize the Attorney General to assess a
civil penalty of not more than $500 for each alien with respect to
whom a violation occurs. A violation subsequent to the assessment of
a civil penalty would expose the offender to a criminal conviction
with a maximum punishment of $1,000 fine and 1 year imprisonment
for each violation.
The Department of Justice believes that H.R. 982 can and should
be strengthened to more effectively (1) prohibit employment of illegal
aliens, (2) protect American citizens against discrimination proscribed
by title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and (3) promote enforce-
ment of its provisions.
The Department recommends that in the future each employer,
agent, or referrer be required to take affirmative steps to determine
whether each applicant for employment is an American citizen or an
alien entitled to work. As witnesses have testified before, what
troubles us, Mr. Chairman, is under the present provision of the bill
an illegal alien is only required to certify that he is a legal alien, and
if he is already inclined to violate an American law to get here illegally,
we are concerned that his signing of a statement that he is a legal
alien will really provide very little deterrent.
Under our approach the Department would promulgate regulations
setting forth the steps an employer must take to ascertain if an
individual is entitled to work; inspection of a birth certificate or
appropriate INS document could be required. An employer of an
alien not authorized to work would be held liable if he failed to make
the required inquiry. These provisions would be consistent with
existing social security regulations which require that an applicant
for a social security card prove that he is a citizen or that he has
permission from INS to be employed.
Adoption of the Department's recommendation would improve
H.R. 982 in several ways. First, it would increase the detection of
illegal aliens. H.R. 982, as now drafted, does not require an employer
to take affirmative action to ascertain whether an applicant is an
American citizen or an alien illegally permitted to work; therefore,
many illegal aliens are likely to continue to go undetected.
49-769-75-- 3









In addition, the recommended approach would assure equal tleat-
ment for all Americans. I do not think there is any committee of
the Congress that is more concerned about that than this committee.
Under H.R. 982 as presently drafted, an American citizen with a
foreign surname or foreign accent might be required to execute an
affidavit regarding his citizenship in order to get a job, while other
Americans might not be asked for a similar statement. If the Depart-
ment's recommendation is adopted, all Americans would be subject
to the same inquiries in seeking employment.
More important, the Department's proposal would remove the
possibility that H.R. 982 will operate to encourage some employers
to discriminate against Americans who resemble aliens. H.R. 982 as
now drafted recognizes that the risk of hiring an illegal alien may
encourage some employers to "play it safe" by hiring only people
who clearly appear to be American citizens; thus H.R. 982 may
encourage, unwittingly of course, violations of title VII of the Civil
Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits discrimination against American
citizens on the basis of national origin. The provision now in H.R. 982
immunizing an employer who makes a bona fide inquiry, usually by
obtaining a signed statement, may reduce, but not eliminate, the risk
that the statute will abet discrimination against American citizens on
the basis of national origin. The Department's proposal, however,
would require steps to be taken to establish that all applicants are
eligible to work. It would eliminate the possibility that an employer
will reject American citizens who resemble aliens in order to avoid
taking steps to determine their eligibility to work.
The Department's proposal would also make H.R. 982 more
enforceable by establishing clear guidelines for employers and objective
tests to determine compliance with the law.
The Department supports the three-step penalty structure proposed
in H.R. 982. This penalty structure would provide fair and effective
sanctions against employers, agents, or referrers who violate this act.
May I parenthetically mention that when the Department originally
testified on this legislation some 3 or 4 years ago, the Department's
position was that it would be wiser to have a stiffer criminal penalty
for the first violation. If you really think about that, and I know you
have, the civil penalty, in our judgment, is more effective. A criminal
penalty carries with it all sorts of procedural steps, and often, at least
in the first instance, it would be less effective in deterring this than a
swift civil penalty which would carry with it less of the procedural
burden than a criminal process and, of course, for the repeated violator
the criminal process is available.
The Department also believes that H.R. 982 should include pro-
visions which increase the sanctions against an alien who illegally
finds employment in the United States. The Department is prepared
to work with the subcommittee to develop disincentives to influence
the illegal alien. Such disincentives could include, and now I am being
suggestive only:
One, authorization of summary seizure and forfeiture of vehicles
used for smuggling illegal aliens, a provision which was included in
H.R. 982 as reported by the House Judiciary Committee last year;
Two, administrative imposition of a substantial civil penalty against
illegal aliens who accept employment; such a penalty would be partic-









ularly effective with regard to the many illegal aliens who hold high
paying jobs on a permanent basis; and
Three, prohibition of payments of Federal funds to illegal aliens.
The Department of Justice continues to support section 1 of H.R.
982. But that goes on to other more technical amendments which I
will defer to Mr. Bernsen and Mr. Chapman in the event that you
should have questions on it.
I think that would conclude the thrust of our testimony and what
I regard as the crucial provisions of this bill. If you have any ques-
tions, Mr. Chairman, I shall be delighted to attempt to answer them.
Mr. EILBERG. Mr. Silberman, according to the schedule we had
planned to have Mr. Chapman testify separately. Do I understand
that his statement is included within yours?
Mr. SILBERMAN. He has a separate statement. We could submit
it for the record as well as the balance of my statement, and we will
both be available to answer questions.
Mr. EILBERG. All right. Your statement and Commissioner Chap-
man's statement then will be included in the record without objection.
[The prepared statements of Acting Attorney General Silberman
and Commissioner Chapman follow:]
STATEMENT OF LAURENCE H. SILBERMAN, ACTING ATTORNEY GENERAL
Mr. Chairman and members of the Subcommittee, I am pleased to appear
before you to discuss H.R. 982. H.R. 982 addresses a critical national problem-
the flood of illegal immigration. The principal provision of H.R. 982 aims at the
heart of this problem by prohibiting persons from knowingly employing illegal
aliens, thus reducing the economic incentive for illegal immigration. The Depart-
ment of Justice has supported H.R. 982 in the past. We continue to believe that
employment of illegal aliens must be prohibited. We believe, however, that
Congress must enact stronger provisions than are presently contained in H.R. 982
to assure that this prohibition is observed and enforced.
Congress has established a policy of controlled immigration. You have set an
annual limit on immigration, 394,000 in fiscal year 1974. Furthermore, Congress
has wisely and humanely established guidelines for admitting immigrants; the
reuniting of families and the admission of needed workers are the principal purposes
to be promoted. Total immigration, however, bears no relation to the program you
have prescribed. Last year the Immigration and Naturalization Service located
788,000 deportable aliens-twice the number of aliens admitted as legal
immigrants.
We cannot assess with certainty the number of illegal immigrants entering this
country each year. As Commissioner Chapman has often said, "If we could count
them, we could catch them." In 1973, this Subcommittee estimated that there
were one to two million illegal aliens in the United States. However, the dramatic
growth of illegal aliens apprehended in each year since 1965 suggests that the
number of illegal aliens in the U.S. is rapidly increasing. We now believe that the
number of illegal aliens in this country may be between four and twelve million.
As the House Committee on the Judiciary has noted, the primary reason for the
illegal alien problem is the economic imbalance between the U.S. and the countries
from which illegal immigrants come, most notably Mexico. As long as jobs are
available for those who enter this country illegally or for those who enter legally
as non-immigrants and illegally obtain employment, the influx of unauthorized
immigration will continue.
As witnesses have testified before this Subcommittee in the past, the adverse
economic impact of the illegal alien is dramatic. Illegally employed aliens:
(1) Take jobs normally filled by American workers; not only agricultural jobs
in the Southwest, but high paying jobs in metropolitan areas where the illegal
alien is harder to apprehend;
(2) Compete, as low skilled laborers, most directly with unskilled ethnic or
minority group members, many of whom may be Mexican-Americans or lawfully
admitted permanent resident aliens;
(3) Depress the wages of American workers;










(4) Contribute to the Balance of Payments deficit by sending money out of the
United States; and
(5) Impose costs on the American taxpayer by taking jobs which would other-
wise be performed by individuals on welfare.
With 7% unemployment, the United States can no longer conceive of itself as
a people of plenty with inexhaustible opportunity for all who wish to come here.
The Congressionally prescribed limits on immigration represent recognition of this
reality. The question today is whether we will take effective measures to enforce
those limits by prohibiting employment of illegal aliens and raising the penalties
for those illegal aliens who seek employment here. If we do not act effectively,
the tide of illegal aliens will abate only when we have absorbed so many un-
authorized immigrants that the U.S. is no longer perceived as economically
more inviting than the countries from which they come.
This Subcommittee has consistently recognized the need to prohibit employ-
ment of illegal aliens, without abetting job discrimination against American
citizens who resemble aliens. H.R. 982 attempts to meet this goal.
Section 2 of H.R. 982 would amend Section 274(b) of the Immigration and
Nationality Act to make it to be unlawful for any employer, agent, or person who
for a fee refers an alien for employment knowingly to employ, continue to employ,
or refer for employment any alien who has not been lawfully admitted for per-
manent residence, unless such employment is authorized by the Attorney General.
The new section 274(b) (1) would stipulate that an employer, referrer, or agent
shall not be deemed to have violated the subsection if he has made a bona fide
inquiry as to whether the applicant is a citizen or an alien, and if an alien, whether
he is lawfully admitted for permanent residence. That section would also provide
that an employer, referrer, or agent can demonstrate prima facie proof of such a
bona fide inquiry by securing a signed statement from the person employed or
referred that such person is a citizen, a permanent resident alien, or an alien
authorized by the Attorney General to accept employment. The signed statement
would be in writing and would have to conform with regulations prescribed by
the Attorney General.
The three-step penalty structure authorized by the amended section 274
would begin with the Attorney General or his agent serving a citation informing
the offending employer, agent, or referrer of an apparent violation. A second
offense within two years of the service of such a citation would authorize the
Attorney General to assess a civil penalty of not more than $500 for each alien
with respect to whom a violation occurs. A violation subsequent to the assessment
of a civil penalty would expose the offender to a criminal conviction with a maxi-
mum punishment of $1000 fine and one year imprisonment for each violation.
The Department of Justice believes that H.R. 982 can and should be
strengthened to more effectively (1) prohibit employment of illegal aliens, (2)
protect American citizens against discrimination proscribed by Title VII of the
Civil Rights Act of 1964 and (3) promote enforcement of its provisions.
The Department recommends that in the future each employer, agent or referrer
be required to take affirmative steps to determine whether each applicant for
emplcymcnt is an American citizen or an alien entitled to work. Under this
approach the Department would promulgate regulations setting forth the steps
an employer must take to ascertain if an individual is entitled to work; inspection
of a birth certificate or appropriate INS document could be required. An employer
of an alien not authorized to work would be held liable if he failed to make the
required inquiry. These provisions would be consistent with existing Social
Security regulations which require that an applicant for a Social Security card
prove that he is a citizen or that he has permission from INS to be employed.
Adoption of the Department's recommendation would improve H.R. 982 in
several ways. First, it would increase the detection of illegal aliens. H.R. 982 as
now drafted does not require an employer to take affirmative action to ascertain
whether an applicant is an American citizen or an alien legally permitted to work;
therefore, many illegal aliens are likely to continue to go undetected.
In addition, the recommended approach would assure equal treatment for all
Americans. Under H.R. 982 as presently drafted, an American citizen with a
foreign surname or foreign accent might be required to execute an affidavit re-
garding his citizenship in order to get a job, while other Americans might not
be asked for a similar statement. If the Department's recommendation is adopted,
all Americans would be subject to the same inquiries in seeking employment.
More important, the Department's proposal would remove the possibility that
H.R. 982 will operate to encourage some employers to discriminate against Ameri-









cans who resemble aliens. H.R. 982 as now drafted recognizes that the risk of hiring
an illegal alien may encourage some employers to "play it safe," by hiring only
people who clearly appear to be American citizens; thus H.R. 982 may encourage
violations of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits discrimina-
tion against American citizens on the basis of national origin. The provision now
in H.R. 982 immunizing an employer who makes a bona fide inquiry, usually by
obtaining a signed statement, may reduce, but not eliminate, the risk that the
statute will abet discrimination against American citizens on the basis of national
origin. The Department's proposal, however, would require steps to be taken to
establish that all applicants are eligible to work. It would eliminate the possibility
that an employer will reject American citizens who resemble aliens in order to
avoid taking steps to determine their eligibility to work.
The Department's proposal would also make H.R. 982 more enforceable by
establishing clear guidelines for employers and objective tests to determine
compliance with the law.
The Department supports the three-step penalty structure proposed
in H.R. 982. This penalty structure would provide fair and effective sanctions
against employers, agents or referrers who violate this Act.
The Department also believes that H.R. 982 should include provisions which
increase the sanctions against an alien who illegally finds employment in the
United States. The Department is prepared to work with the Subcommittee to
develop disincentives to influence the illegal alien. Such disincentives could
include:
(1) Authorization of summary seizure and forfeiture of vehicles used for
smuggling illegal aliens, a provision which was included in H.R. 982 as reported
by the House Judiciary Committee last year;
(2) Administrative imposition of a substantial civil penalty against illegal
aliens who accept employment; such a penalty would be particularly effective
with regard to the many illegal aliens who hold high paying jobs on a permanent
basis; and
(3) Prohibition of payments of Federal funds to illegal aliens.
This Department of Justice continues to support section 1 of H.R. 982. It
would make several amendments to section 245 of the Act which presently au-
thorizes an Eastern Hemisphere non-immigrant to adjust his status to that of a
permanent resident alien without leaving the United States to secure an immigrant
visa. The language of existing subsection (a) relating to the ineligibility of alien
crewmen would be transferred to subsection (c) which lists the other disqualifi-
cations. Subsection (a) would be amended to establish eligibility for an immigrant
visa at the time the application is filed rather than at the time it is approved.
The Department agrees that the applicant should not be penalized for administra-
tive delays not attributable to him.
Section 1 of the bill would make three amendments to subsection 245(c).
First, aliens who are not defined as immediate relatives and who accept
unauthorized employment prior to filing an application would be ineligible for
an adjustment of status. The Department supports this attempt to limit un-
authorized employment by nonimmigrants. The second change in subsection (c)
would disqualify from adjustment aliens admitted in transit without visa.
Although a Departmental regulation prescribing such ineligibility has been upheld
in the Second Circuit, Mak. v. INS., 435 F. 2d 728 (1970), the Department favors
legislative recognition of this disqualification.
The third major change to subsection 245(c) would restore adjustment of
status eligibility to Western Hemisphere aliens. The present disqualification,
enacted in 1965, has created many hardships and leads to unnecessary expense
by requiring the alien to return to his country of origin to apply for an immigrant
visa from a consular office. The number of Western Hemisphere aliens granted
adjustment would be charged against the Western Hemisphere numerical limi-
tation by subsection 245(b).
The Department continues to support Section 3 of the bill which would require
officers and employees of the Department of Health, Education and Welfare to
disclose to INS the name and most recent address of any alien not lawfully in
the United States who is receiving welfare benefits. However, as we pointed out
in 1973, we know of no present procedure under which HEW employees can
determine whether a welfare recipient is lawfully in the United States. Since the
need for denying social security cards to illegal aliens, and the identification of
such aliens through social security records, is a matter of wide-spread public
concern, the Department supports efforts in this direction. The Service has con-









tinued to work with the Social Security Administration to implement section 137
of the Social Security Amendments of 1972; P.L. 92-603, 86 Stat. 1329, which
requires, inter alia, that social security account applicants submit evidence of
their citizenship or alien status.
The Department also supports section 4 of H.R. 982 which would impose
criminal penalties for falsifying certain immigration documents, or for use of
such falsified documents. The amendment would expand the present language
to make it applicable to any "border crossing card, alien registration receipt
card, or other document prescribed by statute or regulation for entry into or as
evidence of authorized stay in the United States." This amendment is necessitated
by the restrictive reading of the present statute announced in United States v.
Campos-Serrano, 404 U.S. 293 (1971).
The Department also supports sections 5 and 6 of the bill which provide a
savings provision and prescribe a delayed effective date.
The Department of Justice believes that our laws must be both humane and
enforceable. At first glance some of the recommendations we have made today
may appear harsh. We are a nation of immigrants; but we must remember that
we are a nation of legal immigrants. You, the Congress, have determined that
immigration must be limited. We believe the limits you have established must be
enforced. H.R. 982 as now drafted attempts to move in the right direction. How-
ever, the Department believes that the recommendations it has made must be
adopted if H.R. 982 is to effectively assist us in moving toward our common goal.


STATEMENT BY LEONARD F. CHAPMAN, JR., COMMISSIONER, IMMIGRATION AND
NATURALIZATION SERVICE
Chairman Eilberg, members of the Subcommittee, it is a pleasure to appear
here today to present the views of the Immigration Service on H.R. 982-legisla-
tion that we consider to be extremely important.
This subcommittee, I know, is well aware of the serious problem that illegal
immigration poses to our nation and to our economy. Through hearings that
began in 1971, you have heard reams of testimony about the impact of illegal
aliens on jobs, on welfare, on taxes, and on public facilities such as schools and
hospitals. The problem was serious four years ago when you began looking into
it, it was worse in 1972, when this legislation was introduced for the first time, and
it has grown significantly since then, as lack of controls has allowed literally
millions of persons to pour across our borders almost unimpeded and take jobs.
Last year the Immigration Service apprehended nearly 800,000 illegal aliens-
equal to the entire population of the District of Columbia. Though this was 10
times the number we apprehended just a decade ago, it was probably no more
than one out of three or four who entered the country illegally-or entered legally
as a student or visitor, then simply found a job and stayed here illegally.
We really don't know how many illegal aliens there are in this country. The
estimates range from four million to 12 million; the actual number is probably
somewhere in between-perhaps about eight million or so. But the lack of an
absolute number does not challenge the existence of a problem of great magnitude.
We know how many we apprehended, we know how many visas were issued last
year, and we know approximately how many visitors failed to depart the country
when their visas expired. And it is painfully evident to our investigators and Border
Patrol Agents that they are catching only a small percentage of the violators
because of the limitations of funds and personnel.
Most aliens enter the United States illegally from Mexico, although there are
great numbers who come from Central and South America, the Caribbean, Asia,
the Far East and even Europe. Many enter with temporary visas, find a job, are
quickly absorbed into the ethnic population in the larger cities and simply dis-
appear from view. Our records fail to account for the departure of 10 percent of
the more than 6 million foreign visitors each year. Allowing for imperfections in
the system, we believe that five percent are actually overstays, who have remained
here to work and live.
That amounts to 300,000 per year, which may not seem like a large number.
However, their impact weighs more heavily than the numbers would suggest.
Many are students, or well-educated and skilled persons who obtain good paying
jobs. One example of this type of illegal alien is an East Indian national whom we
apprehended in Houston on January 22. He held a masters degree in electrical
engineering from Stanford University, had left the country after earning his








degree, then returned as a visitor in 1970. He had held various jobs since then,
and when apprehended he was employed at Texas Instruments as a product
development engineer earning over $17,000 per year.
A French baker whom we apprehended here in Washington in January is
another good example. His specialty allowed him to earn $8 an hour, which
amounts to over $1,400 per month.
We apprehend many in similar situations. The number of overstays and other
illegal aliens who are employed at above average pay is substantial. And the jobs
they are holding, often without paying adequate tax on their income, could and
should be occupied by an American or a legal resident alien.
I have brought documentary evidence of many similar examples with me.
For the sake of time, I will not go into each of these in detail, although I would
like to briefly mention some others. In Maine, we recently found a computer
technician earning $900 a month and a salesman making $30,000 a year; in Boston
we found a chemist earning $6 an hour and a welder earning $10 an hour; in Provi-
dence we found two painters earning $8.65 an hour; in New York we found a
plumber making $12 an hour, and last month here in Washington we apprehended
a foreman working on construction of the Metro making $8.44 an hour.
As you can see, the jobs we are talking about are good paying jobs, which thou-
sands of American and legal residents are seeking. They are not, as the old stereo-
type suggests, simply jobs as field hands toiling in the hot sun for a dollar a day
picking tomatoes or cotton.
In three months last fall, our Chicago district investigators apprehended 2,067
illegal aliens, of whom 1,913, or 93 percent, were employed. Of those working,
1,325, or 70 percent, were earning $2.50 to $4.50 per hour; 148 were earning
$4.50 to $6.50 per hour and 61 were earning over $6.50 per hour.
No job site is beyond the reach of an illegal alien. In mid-January we arrested
two illegal Greeks, one who had remained after his merchant ship called at the
port, and the other, his brother, was an overstay visitor. They were working on a
project, repainting the Statue of Liberty and earning $9.71 per hour.
The attraction of obtaining a job and earning money is so great that no risk is
too large, and seemingly no price is too high to gain entry into the United States.
Fees paid to smugglers to slip an alien from the border into cities such as Chicago,
Newark, Philadelphia or Washington range from $200 to $700 per alien.
Last fiscal year we apprehended 8,000 such smugglers in the act of bringing
in 83,000 aliens. The number of smuggled aliens doubled from the previous year,
while smugglers apprehended increased 27 percent. This is an indication, of course,
that larger vehicles carrying bigger loads of this human cargo are being employed.
In the past decade the number of aliens brought in by the average smuggler has
increased from just three to more than 10.
Immigration fraud continues rampant. Last year our limited force, investigated
nearly 17,000 fraud cases, triple the number of 10 years ago. The use of counter-
feit, altered and fraudulently obtained documents is increasing at an alarming
rate, especially in the Southwest Region. Last year we detected 8,400 fraudulent
border crossing cards in that area, nearly four times the number we found in 1967.
Sham marriage to gain status under the immigration laws is another common
fraudulent practice, which has grown well beyond our capability to control it.
Some 80 percent of the investigations in the Southwest border region involved
such marriages, and in some areas up to 95 percent of our investigative effort is
devoted to looking into these cases.
Organized marriage rings are uncovered regularly, with aliens paying $1,000 to
$1,500 to marriage arrangers. In Washington this past fall we exposed an operation
in which one U.S. citizen had married 15 Africans for the purpose of facilitating
their presence in the country.
Illegal aliens have impact upon our nation well beyond the employment market.
In 1973 the California State Social Welfare Board estimated the cost of welfare
payments to illegal aliens to be at least $100 million a year. We frequently discover
other ways in which illegal aliens drain our economy through the use of public
funds, to which they are not entitled.
We currently have under deportation proceedings in the state of Washington
an alien who claims to be a citizen of Guatemala. This man was building and
had nearly completed a home, which was federally financed under a low-interest
loan obtained through a self-help program.
I believe a substantial portion of the nation's more than $3 billion balance of
payments deficit could be eliminated if the money earned here and sent out of
the country by illegal aliens could be halted.







34

The loss to the country of unpaid taxes is undoubtedly substantial. We have
been working with the Internal Revenue Service, and are continuing discussions
with that service to determine how we can best work together to recover some of
this money. As an indication of how much may be involved, this past year we
cooperated with IRS in a pilot program with these results. Over a three month
period we referred to IRS 1,700 illegal aliens whom we had apprehended. From
this relatively small sample, taxes assessed were a quarter of a million dollars;
the amount actually collected was $168,000.
In the first 10 days of January our Dallas office apprehended 87 illegal aliens.
This group was fraudulently claiming a total of 429 dependents for tax with-
holding purposes. One 18-year-old boy was claiming a total of 18 dependents on
the W-4 form.
The influence of illegal aliens touches nearly every element of our society and
our economy. Over the past several years these have been brought to the attention
of the committee, so I won't dwell on this aspect. However, I do want to emphasize
that the problem, which has been studied and discussed for the past several years,
is continuing to worsen daily.
I believe there are three alternative courses of action in the face of this growing
flood.
One, we can continue to do what we have been doing. That is, as a nation,
to stand by, almost helplessly, and watch the flood grow into a torrent. The
Immigration Service can continue with its small force to apprehend the relatively
few illegals it can handle, and either transport them back to their own countries
and await their return, or turn them loose with a letter that tells them they must go
home. In the latter case, we have been having to do that with increasing fre-
quency, as funds have not been available to detain or to transport the aliens.
However, if the situation is allowed to continue unchecked there is no question
but what many more will come. Populations in Mexico, the Dominican Republic,
Colombia and other Latin American countries will double by 1990. Labor forces
are growing even more rapidly. Mexico's labor force, which totaled 16 million
in 1970, will be 28 million by 1985 and 40 million by 1995.
The push-pull forces of limited opportunity in their own countries and the
magnet of economic well being in the United States are driving these people
northward. Without an effective deterrent that will continue for the foreseeable
future.
The second alternative is to build a massive Immigration Service to deal with
the problem. I suppose that with an army of Border Patrolmen and several
thousand more investigators working in the cities, we might keep out most of the
illegals, and eventually sift through the millions of persons in this country and find
all those who don't belong here. But that is obviously not only impractical, it is
abhorrent to the American conscience. We are not a police state and no one in the
Immigration Service advocates such tactics.
That leaves a third alternative: to turn off the magnet that attracts these
millions of persons to our country. That magnet, of course, is jobs. Employment of
illegal aliens must be prohibited. H.R. 982 represents a real step in the right direc-
tion. I have, on many occasions, as the Committee knows, strongly supported the
need for a national policy prohibiting such employment. I believe it is mandatory if
we are to make any substantial progress in solving this severe national problem.
In addition, careful study should be given to any ways of strengthening the bill,
such as those proposed by Mr. Silberman, in order to assure that the prohibition
it would establish is observed and enforced.
We have seen some evidence that such legislation will work. When such a law
was in effect for a brief time in California, thousands of illegal aliens began leaving
the state, some heading north to Oregon and Washington, others returning to
Mexico. Our Immigration officers reported that many came in to our offices and
asked to be returned to their own countries, because they believed they could no
longer obtain employment. Employers also contacted us seeking advice and
assistance.
We have had laws on the Federal books for many years that call for harsh
penalties for illegally entering the United States. They have proven to be an in-
effective deterrent to illegal entry. With the numbers that we apprehend-800,000
last year-it is obviously impractical to prosecute. Our laws call for, and illegal
aliens do receive, all due process, which can stretch out for weeks, months or even
years. Most of those we apprehend agree to voluntarily return to their homeland,
thereby avoiding prosecution or lengthy formal deportation proceedings. And
many come back to this country within days or even hours.









Though the illegal alien is himself in violation of the law, we should not lose
sight of the fact that great numbers are the victims of wrong doing more than they
are the perpetrators. Living in the country illegally, they are outside the protec-
tion of our laws and subject to unfair, unjust and immoral treatment. The laws
which have been aimed at the alien, are in some cases used to keep him in virtual
bondage, while he works off the payment to a smuggler or the fraudulent marriage
arranger.
Yet the employer, who is the beneficiary of an employee who will work long
hours at less than the standard wage, is beyond the reach of the law.
This to me seems to be a large void in our Immigration law, and one which thou-
sands of employers are using to advantage to the detriment of our country and
our economy.
Some persons have voiced the opinion that passage of H.R. 982 would result in
discrimination against all brown-skinned persons, and especially persons of Mexi-
can-American ancestry. However, if H.R. 982 as now drafted, is enacted we will
issue regulation that will encourage and make it expedient for the employer to inquire
of everyone as to citizenship or alien status-not just those who appear to be
foreign born. And if the modifications recommended by Mr. Silberman are adopted
the employer will inquire of everyone as a matter of law. Every job applicant will be
treated equally, and the law will create no incentive for an employer to dis-
criminate.
Further, anyone attempting to use the law for discriminatory practices will be
subject to prosecution under the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
And finally, if the modifications to H.R. 982 recommended by Mr. Silberman
are adopted, an employer will inquire of everyone as a matter of law rather than
regulation-not just those who appear to be foreign born. Every job applicant
will be treated equally and the law will create no incentive for an employer to
discriminate.
I also believe that passage of effective legislation will aid Mexican-American
and other minorities in this country, by helping them to overcome one of the
major sources of competition for available jobs-the illegal alien. I believe all
American and legal resident labor will benefit from this bill becoming law, but I
believe that minorities will benefit more than anyone else.
Mr. Chairman, members of this subcommittee, I believe legislation is the only
answer to the problem of illegal immigration to this country. Not only will it fill a
void in our immigration law and discourage illegal entry of additional persons, it
will enable the Immigration Service to improve its current enforcement. Passage
of effective legislation would allow our officers to concentrate their efforts on
assisting the vast majority of employers who would observe the law and acting
against the relatively small number who would violate it. This would obviously
be a better use of manpower, and more productive, than pursuing millions of
illegal aliens.
I would be remiss if I did not point out that in order for the Immigration Service
to enforce a new law will require additional funds and personnel. As I have
pointed out in the past, we are currently inundated in nearly every area of responsi-
bility. And to imply that we can assume more responsibility without increases in
resources-both personnel and money-is to be less than honest with this
committee.
I am confident that with the additional resources and the passage of effective
legislation the Immigration Service can quickly make available at least one
million desirable jobs for Americans and legal resident aliens. I believe that with-
out such legislation the problem of illegal immigration is insoluble. I also fear that
we cannot delay much longer without seriously threatening the future of our
economy and our country.
Thank you for giving me the opportunity to present this statement. I will now
be pleased to answer your questions.
Mr. EILBERG. Mr. Silberman, the press and the public as well
continue to press us regarding the numbers of illegal aliens in this
country. And you and Commissioner Chapman use the figures cf 4 to
12 million. Would you care to elaborate on that first? How do you
arrive at those figures?
Mr. SILBERMAN. Well, as I indicated it is an estimate, and I told
General Chapman when we came down here if you asked that question
I was going to defer to him. Commissioner.









Mr. CHAPMAN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I.have often said that
we do not know how many illegal aliens there are here. We do make
estimates, and they are based on the experience of our investigators,
our Border Patrol agents in the field, and upon data that we do know
to be accurate. For instance, we know we apprehended about 800,000
illegal aliens the last fiscal year. We know there were more than
6 million visitors to the United States last year and between 5 and 10
percent are not shown to have departed. And we also know that our
Border Patrol is able to answer on the average about one-half of the
sensor alarms that they get that are set up along the border.
In addition, we have thousands of leads from the public, both
letters and phone calls, as to the presence of illegal aliens to which
we cannot follow up because of lack of money and manpower. Our
investigators are aware of the presence of concentrations of illegal
aliens in various areas. So our estimates are based on those factors,
and we do estimate that there is at least 4 or 5 million and perhaps
as many as 10 or 12 million illegal aliens in the country at this tim?.
I would like to draw attention also to the fact that I believe we are
seeing only the beginning of the tide of illegal aliens entering this
country. I believe that if the situation is allowed to continue unchecked
that there is no question but that many more will come. The popu-
lation in Mexico, the Dominican Republic. Colombia, and other Latin
American countries will double by 1990. The labor forces are growing
even more rapidly. Mexico's labor force totaled 16 million in 1970
and will be 28 million by 1985 and 40 million by 1995. It is interesting
to note that about 45 percent of the people in Mexico today are less
than 15 years old. And that is typical of many of the Latin American
countries.
Mr. EILBERG. Commissioner, for the benefit of the members of the
subcommittee perhaps who have not read your statement, and for
those in the room, it may be appropriate for you to, if you will, sum-
marize your statement at this point, and then I think it would be
more effective for us to ask questions and ask you gentlemen to
respond. You do not have to read the statement word for word, but
just so we have the basic thrust of your statement.
Mr. CHAPMAN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I, of course, will be
happy to do so.
And it is a pleasure to appear here today to present the views of
the service that I represent on H.R. 982, legislation that we believe
to be extremely important.
The subcommittee is, of course, aware of and has heard a great
amount of testimony through hearings that began in 1971 on the
impact of illegal aliens on jobs, welfare, taxes, public facilities such
as schools and hospitals. The problem was serious 4 years ago when
you first began to look into it, and we are certain that it has grown
significantly since.
Last year we did apprehend about 800,000 illegal aliens. That is
equal to the entire population of the District of Columbia. Although
it was 10 times more than we apprehended just 10 years ago, we
probably located only 1 out of 3 or 4 at the most of those who entered
illegally, or entered legally as tourists, or students, and then found a
job and went to work.








As I have said, we really do not know the totals that are here, but
we know, we are certain, it is a substantial number.
Most aliens enter the United States illegally from Mexico, but
great numbers come from Central and South America, the Caribbean,
Asia, the Far East, and Europe. Many enter with tourist visas, tem-
porary visas and simply never leave. Our records fail to account for
the departure for about 10 percent of the more than 6 million foreign
visitors that enter each year, and allowing for imperfections in our
system, and there are some there, we think that 5 percent is a real-
istic figure of the overstay. This amounts to about 300,000 a year
which may not seem like a large number, but is it significant because
these people are educated, skilled, and they obtain the good paying
jobs.
I include in my statement a number of examples of those we have
arrested in high paying jobs, and I am prepared to furnish for the
record a number of other anecdotes of that kind. The jobs we are
talking about here are good paying jobs which thousands of Americans
and legal residents are seeking. They are not, as the stereotype sug-
gests, simply jobs as field hands toiling in the hot sun for a dollar or
two a day. That may have been true a number of years ago. It is
not true today.
The attraction of obtaining a job and earning money is so great that
no risk is too large, and apparently no price is too high to get into the
United States. Fees paid to smugglers range from $200 to $700 per
alien. Last year we apprehended over 8,000 smugglers in the act of
smuggling over 83,000 aliens. That is an increase in smugglers of about
27 percent over the previous year.
Immigration fraud continues rampant as a means of getting into
the country illegally. Fraudulent marriages, fake birth certificates,
fraudulent border crossing cards, organized marriage rings are at
work, and we uncover them regularly.
Just this past fall we located one U.S. citizen who had married 15
Africans for the purpose of facilitating entry into the country.
These aliens have an impact on our Nation well beyond the em-
ployment market as has been said so many times. In my statement
there are a number of examples of impact on welfare payments, the
balance of payments abroad, the loss to the country of unpaid taxes
and the influence of illegal aliens touching every element of our
society. These have been brought many times to the attention of the
committee, so I will not dwell on this aspect. I just want to emphasize
that the situation is worsening daily.
I think there are three possible general courses of action. The first,
of course, would be to continue what we have been doing; that is, as
a nation, to stand by and allow the flood to continue, and watch the
flood grow into a torrent. We could continue to apprehend the num-
bers that we can with our limited resources, and the number we are
able to remove with our limited resources.
The second alternative would be to build a massive immigration
service. I suppose if we had an army of border patrolmen and thousands
of investigators, we probably could keep out most of the illegals and
sift through the 215 million or so Americans to find the few million
illegals, but I do not think that is a practical solution. And I think it is
abhorrent to our ethics in this country as well.








So that leaves a third alternative, which we advocate, and that is to
turn off the magnet that draws the people here, that attracts the
millions of people to our country, and that magnet, of course, is the
job, the opportunity to get a job. I believe that employment of illegal
aliens must be prohibited. I have on many occasions, as the committee
knows, strongly supported the need for a national policy prohibiting
such employment, and I believe it is mandatory if we are to make any
substantial progress in solving this severe national problem.
I also believe careful study should be given to any ways of strength-
ening the bill such as those proposed by Mr. Silberman in order to
assure the prohibition it would establish is observed and can be
enforced.
And in conclusion, Mr. Chairman, I believe that legislation is the
only answer to the problem of illegal aliens, and illegal immigration
into this country. Not only will it fill a void in our immigration law
and discourage illegal entry of additional persons, but it will enable
us to improve the current enforcement. Passage of effective legis-
lation would allow officers to concentrate their efforts in assisting
the vast majority of employers who would obey the law voluntarily,
and acting against the relatively small number who would violate
it. This would obviously be a better use of manpower and more
productive than what we are doing now, which is pursuing millions
of illegal aliens.
I would be remiss, however, if I did not point out that in order
for the Immigration Service to enforce the new law, it will require
additional funds and personnel. As I pointed out in the past, we
are currently inundated and overwhelmed in nearly every area we
are responsible for now, and we can do no more. And to fail to say
so would be less than honest with the committee.
I also am confident that with the additional resources and the
passage of effective legislation we can make available quickly at
least a million desirable jobs for unemployed Americans and legal
residents.
On the other hand, I believe without good legislation the problem
of the illegal immigration is currently insoluble, and I do not think
we can delay much longer without seriously threatening the future
of our economy and our country.
Mr. Chairman, I will be most happy to attempt to answer any
questions you may have.
Mr. EILBERG. Thank you, Commissioner Chapman.
For the benefit of the members of the subcommittee, the chairman
proposes to operate by the 5-minute rule so that each member will
be given approximately 5 minutes, and then we will continue with
that as long as we can. And at the conclusion of these hearings if
there are any questions that remain I would hope, Mr. Silberman,
that we may submit any questions, additional questions to you for
response in writing.
And with that I will just start the questioning.
On page 3 of your prepared statement you referred to raising the
penalties for those illegal aliens who seek employment here. There
is, of course, at present a criminal penalty for one who illegally enters
the country. How has that been working?
Mr. SILBERMAN. Not well. It is not, as a practical matter, as much
of a disincentive to the illegal alien as we wish it would be. For one








thing, if we really prosecute them all, it would clog our courts terribly,
so our own resources are limited in dealing with it. That is to say,
our prosecutorial resources.
Secondly, even a conviction, and indeed a short prison term, is not
as much as a disincentive to many illegal aliens as it might be for a
legal alien or an American citizen.
Mr. EILBERG. Mr. Silberman, perhaps when you say raising the
penalties you do not mean raising the penalty, you mean changing
the penalties. That is the meaning that I read into your language.
Mr. SILBERMAN. Yes. I am looking particularly at economic dis-
incentives. In other words, if an illegal alien comes here, works, as
General Chapman has described to me just the other day, two people
who were working on construction jobs, and who had bank accounts
in excess of $10,000 from wages earned as illegal aliens, if fines were
imposed, civil fines perhaps, and we can work with the committee on
developing that, it would touch directly the economic incentive by
creating a counterbalancing economic disincentive. You see, as it
stands now the illegal alien can come here, earn a great deal of money,
perhaps a tremendous amount of money compared to what his
economic position would be in the country he came from, and the
worst that happens to him is he is sent back.
Mr. EILBERG. Mr. Silberman, I think that we are somewhat
familiar with the general situation since this subcommittee has been
working with the question for some 6 years. Therefore, in the interest
of saving time, and I know you want to cooperate as much as you can,
I think there is little need to repeat the obvious. So if you will kind
of limit your answers, I would appreciate it very much.
Now, the thing that concerns me is that having worked on this
question for at least 6 years I find that the bulk of illegal aliens are
employed in relatively low wages. Now, I do not argue with the fact
or point that some go through the economic ladder and obtain good
jobs. But can you tell us, give us some idea or any idea of how high
up in the economic scale some of these illegal aliens go, and what are
the numbers in proportion to the total number of illegal aliens in the
country?
Mr. SILBERMAN. We cannot give you any really accurate figure
which would divide up the income ranges of illegal aliens because we
do not know enough about them. As we admitted at the start, it is
sort of an impossible kind of analytical problem, although one we are
working on in the new Cabinet Committee. But, it is very difficult
because it is also hard to get a fix on them. We do know, we have
anecdotes, for instance, and General Chapman informed me just several
weeks ago that we apprehended and deported somebody who had
been working as a foreman on the Metro construction project as an
illegal alien.
Mr. EILBERG. Mr. Silberman, I do not doubt your sincerity, I just
question whether this is going to do the job. The criminal penalty is
not practical and you are suggesting a civil penalty, and I suggest
to you that-
Mr. SILBERMAN. Combined.
Mr. EILBERG. That based upon this subcommittee's experience so
far that civil penalties would reach a very small number or percentage
of illegals in this country, or those presently employed, and this sub-
committee would have to be convinced that the civil penalty would









be useful. And you admit and we agree with you that there is no basis
determining how the civil penalty would work, what effect it would
have as a deterrent.
Mr. SILBERMAN. Oh, yes there is because we both agree that the
civil penalty against the employer in the first instance is a more effi-
cient method of enforcement than the criminal process and combined
with the criminal process, I see no reason why that cannot be com-
bined with a criminal penalty, giving the Government an option, so
to speak, against the illegal alien. Even the ones who are working in
low-paid jobs will often save a great deal of money. And if there is a
fine that can be levied, you reach that economic incentive.
Mr. EILBERG. I will be glad to work with your people on develop-
ing a civil-fine system, but this member for the present does not have
the slightest idea how we could effectively do that and reach the large
numbers of illegals that we believe to be employed. And I would like
to go to the next question and then give the other members a chance
to question you.
You would place affirmative duties on the employer, such as the
inspection of a birth certificate, or an appropriate INS document.
Mr. Silberman, I am wondering how practical that approach is. Do
you have any idea how many employers there are in this country?
Mr. SILBERMAN. I used to have that figure at my fingertips when
I was Under Secretary of Labor. It was 46,000. Do you have that?
Mr. CHAPMAN. No, sir.
Mr. SILBERMAN. I think it is 4.6 million. I can certainly get that
to you.
Mr. EILBERG. We would like to have the number of employers
if you will submit it for the record.
[The information referred to follows:]
According to the most recent information available from the Department of
Commerce, there were 3,246,831 employers in the United States in 1972. A
breakdown by category of these employers follows:
Agricultural services .--------.. ------------------------- --- -- 31, 250
Mining ------ ----------------------------------------- 16,239
Construction ----------------------------------------------- 302, 638
Manufacturing ----------------------------------------------- 243, 765
Transportation and public utilities ------------------------------ 105, 230
Wholesale------- ----------------------------------------- -- 219, 001
Retail- .. __.-.--------------------------------------- 956, 920
Finance, insurance, and real estate------------------------- --- 295, 702
Services ..-------------------- ------- 972, 025
Unclassified-------------------------------- -------104, 061
Total--------------------------------- ------ 3,246, 831
Labor Department estimates present a figure of 4.5 million employers in the
United States.
Mr. SILBERMAN. You know, it is a troubling problem. The Govern-
ment has imposed an awful lot of burdens on employers to effectuate
Government policies in the last 30 or 40 years. While some may be an
overextension of the demand on them. I am not sure this particular
one would be so difficult. Remember, I am proposing that we consider
imposing this affirmative duty prospectively for new employees. Now
many employers, particularly large employers, get an awful lot of
information about prospective applicants, and I do not see that it
would be too much of a burden to ask them to get one little bit more







of information; that is to say, whether the applicant is either a legal
alien or an American ,itizen.
Mr. EILBERc;. Nlr. Silberman, you suggest that, this operate
prospectively. Do I understand that you would do nothing about .the
illegal aliens in the country who are already employed?
Mr. SILBERMAN. No. After all, H.R. 982 purports to deal with the
employer who knowingly keeps illegal aliens on his payroll, and it is
the continuing obligation. But I am talking about the special affirma-
tive duty. I would apply that prospectively.
Mr. EILBERG. All right, let us take a small employer in the State
of Wyoming who has a problem of harvesting a crop which is ripe.
And I am just picking any State at random, and someone appears, and
he was born in South Carolina. Do you seriously suggest that that
employer, perhaps a small employer, small farmer, should just politely
tell this gentleman I cannot hire you because I have to wait until
you get a birth certificate from South Carolina or that he go to the
nearest district office of the Immigration Service, which may be 1,000
miles away. Should this farmer just do nothing while his crop deteri-
orates? Do you seriously suggest that, Mr. Silberman? I find this very
hard to understand.
Mr. SILBERMAN. I am very serious, and I have two responses. First
of all, your bill deals with the affirmative obligation but it suggests
that it can be satisfied simply by a piece of paper. The piece of
paper-
Mr. EILBERG. That is not so, Mr. Silberman. A prima facie case is
established by that piece of paper, but you would still have the power
to rebut that evidence by showing that the employer hired an illegal
alien with actual knowledge of the alien's status.
Mr. SILBERMAN. In any event you do approach the affirmative
obligation, you require that small farmer in Washington to ask for
the piece of paper. I am just asking that he ask for a different piece of
paper, and one that is more reliable.
The second point I would make with respect to that is this: I
believe that if such a scheme were put into effect, Americans, particu-
larly ones who travel around, would carry with them, like their
social security card, some indicia of their citizenship or legal alien
status.
Well you know, these are hard choices we have to make. Either
we are going to deal with the problem as effectively as we can or we
are not. And it is going to be at a price paid.
Mr. EILBERG. Are you suggesting, Mr. Silberman, that every
American or every permanent resident alien carry some such document
around with him? Is that what you are now suggesting?
Mr. SILBERMAN. No. If he wants to look for a job, I think we could
probably in this country, given the threat we are faced with, ask that
individual to carry some indicia of his legal status in this country.
Mr. EILBERG. Suppose this fellow from South Carolina is unable
to get a birth certificate and was born in this country, then you would
preclude his being hired?
Mr. SILBERMAN. No. I think that we ought to consider a provision
to expedite that process. We would have an obligation-
Mr. EILBERG. How would you do that? You do not say how you
would do it in your statement.








Mr. SILBERMAN. No. Part of the reason is that I want to work with
this committee in developing this, but I want to impress upon you
our views that I think we can take stronger steps. If you want a full
scale legislative proposal put before you, we can do that.
Mr. EILBERG. Mr. Silberman, that is exactly what the subcommittee
wants. We have been working with all kinds of programs over the
years, and you come in with a recommendation that is entirely different
from your predecessors, and you come in, as far as I am concerned, with
a purely general statement that has very little specific in it. We want
some specifics.
Mr. SILBERMAN. Well first of all, my response is that the general
principle could be enacted in legislation leaving regulations to the Jus-
tice Department to flesh out. Secondly, I do not think it is as difficult
a problem as you suggest.
Mr. EILBERG. Mr. Fish.
Mr. FISH. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Silberman, I am glad that you support the basic structure of
H.R. 982, and as I understand it, you really have two suggestions that
you think would improve the legislation, one directed at the employer
and one at the illegal alien.
Mr. SILBERMAN. Yes.
Mr. FISH. My disposition is to be very sympathetic with what the
chairman said in his opening remarks, that this in no way is legislation
designed to be punitive against the illegal aliens. That is, we have
other laws to reach that problem, and other efforts which this com-
mittee and the Congress can undertake. But I am sympathetic to
what you are suggesting that we put a greater burden on the employer
to ascertain that the person he is offering a job to is here for permanent
residence, legally admitted in the United States, or a born American
citizen. And I do not mind putting him to this effort except that I
have heard of aliens coming to this country who for a price could
purchase a social security card, and I expect to take this up with you,
Mr. Chairman, fairly soon because this just came to my attention.
And it seems to me this just really defeats the purpose and gives
another dimension to our problem.
I wonder if social security is the answer. It would be wonderful
if everybody carried a social security card, and it would meet your
initial problem.
Mr. SILBERMAN. I think that is a legitimate and important question.
After all, I believe under recent amendments, HEW is supposed to
issue a social security card only to a legal alien or to an American
citizen. And it may well be that the best way to deal with that is as
an enforcement of that obligation, because everyone has to have a
social security number in this country to get employed, and, therefore,
a social security card or access to it. I do not mean to be rigid about
it. There are several ways we could deal with this.
We have never regarded it as a burden inappropriate with our
way of life to require people to have a social security number and
card. There are ways to make such a card noncounterfeitable, there
are ways to make, to develop, a process in conjunction with the
Social Security Administration and the Immigration Service to make
it a more reliable indicia of citizenship or legal status.
Mr. EILBERG. Would the gentleman yield for just a moment?








Mr. FISH. Certainly.
Mr. EILBERG. Mr. Silberman, we are familiar with the social
security regulations, as I am sure your office is, and our latest in-
formation is that that system is not working very well. I wish that
you would look into that and give us your appraisal if you would
as to how that law is working out, because it is our understanding
that it has not been very effective.
Mr. SILBERMAN. It has not been effective. I agree with you, Mr.
Chairman, but I think it is part of the, as Congressman Fish men-
tioned, it is part of what we ought to look at to try to figure out what
would be effective, and least obtrusive to Americans.
[The following additional information was submitted:]
Since the basic purpose of the Social Security regulations is to ensure that
Social Security cards would not be issued to illegal aliens, we believe that our
joint program has been successful. As of January 10, 1975, a total of 39,554
applications for such cards were referred by the Social Security Administration
to the Immigration and Naturalization Service. After record checks were com-
pleted, 2,564 applications were returned to SSA marked "Employment Au-
thorized" and 25,831 (90 percent) were returned marked "Employment Not
Authorized". The balance are awaiting record checks. Also, when manpower
becomes available, the applications where employment is not authorized will
be referred to our field offices for investigation of the presumably illegal alien
applicants.
Mr. FISH. On the other side here, the sanctions against the alien,
you mentioned developing disincentives, and one of them is summary
seizure and forfeiture of vehicles used for smuggling illegal aliens. We
are not talking here about the likelihood of a vehicle belonging to an
illegal alien?
Mr. SILBERMAN. No, usually the smuggler.
Mr. FISH. Somebody profiting on the smuggling of illegal aliens into
this country?
Mr. SILBERMAN. That is right. We use seizure and forfeiture pro-
visions in the drug enforcement laws.
Mr. FISH. I certainly hope that you go after those fellows separate
and apart from any legislation that is yet to get on our books. You
mentioned prohibition of payments of Federal funds to illegal aliens.
Could you elaborate on that? What Federal funds?
Mr. SILBERMAN. The whole range of income transfer programs and
the most obvious is the one that we have just been discussing, social
security. But there are all sorts of welfare payments, unemployment
insurance payments and other payment programs which the Congress
could consider as part of a broad package to make this country not
an economic incentive to an illegal alien.
Mr. FISH. Well, I certainly would like to find out more about what
Federal funds are being paid to people that can be identified as illegal
aliens.
Mr. SILBERMAN. For example, we know that in California a lot of
welfare payments, which are partly funded through Federal funds,
are going to illegal aliens.
Mr. EILBERG. Mr. Silberman, you are aware, are you not, that
relief payments are being paid to illegal aliens, and illegal aliens are
getting all kinds of benefits? Would precluding Federal welfare bene-
fits to illegal aliens raise any serious constitutional questions?
Mr. SILBERMAN. I do not think there is a constitutional question
with respect to illegal aliens. There is a constitutional question with
respect to legal aliens, not illegal.
49-769-75- 4









Mr. EILBERG. All right. I will accept that. lBut there are some am-
biguities insofar as the law is concerned,
Mr. SILBERMAN. I am not sure there are ambiguities with respect
to the Federal Government prohibiting Federal transfer payments to
illegal aliens. I do not see a constitutional problem.
Mr. EILBERG. Would you supply the subcommittee with a sum-
mary of any legal questions or problems there are with regard to this?
Mr. SILBERMAN. I shall be delighted, Mr. Chairman.
[The information referred to follows:]
The Supreme Court has held that distinctions between citizens and aliens are
inherently suspect under the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amend-
ment. Graham v. Richardson, 403 U.S. 365 (1971). In holding that certain benefits
or licenses made available to citizens must also be made available to aliens, how-
ever, the Court has focused on aliens who are lawfully within the United States.
Cf. In re Griffiths, 413 U.S. 717 (1973).
While the Supreme Court has found that certain aliens lawfully within the
United States are entitled to certain benefits conferred on citizens, it has also
affirmed the plenary power of Congress to determine, in the first instance, who
will be admitted to the United States.
The power of congress to exclude aliens altogether from the United States, or
to prescribe the terms and conditions upon which they may come into this country,
and to have its declared policy in that regard enforced exclusively through execu-
tive officers, without judicial intervention, is settled by our previous adjudications.
Lem Moon Sing v. United States, 158 U.S. 538 at 547 (1895).
The congressional supremacy in this area has been reaffirmed in Kleindienst v.
Mandel, 408 U.S. 753 (1972).
Once in this country, aliens who have entered illegally are entitled to a minimum
of procedural due process, but we are not aware of any decision suggesting that
it would be a denial of equal protection to deny them government benefits.
Indeed, we have no doubt that a benefit statute distinguishing between those
who are in this country legally and those who have entered illegally would be
upheld as a valid legislative distinction. Congress has no obligation to provide
benefits from tax revenues to those it has elected to bar from admission to the
country in the exercise of its plenary power over immigration.
Although not constitutionally entitled to federal benefits, illegal aliens may be
entitled to particular benefits by statute. The basic social security benefit pro-
visions suggest that illegal aliens are entitled to old age insurance until such time
as they are deported. Under the provisions of 42 U.S.C. 402(n) monthly payments
are prohibited "for any month occurring (i) after the month in which the Secre-
tary is notified by the Attorney General that [an alien] has been * deported,
and (ii) before the month in which such individual is thereafter lawfully admitted
to the United States for permanent residence." This rather clearly indicates
that payments may be made up until the alien is deported either for illegal entry
or for some other reason. Eligibility of insured individuals under medicare is
governed by this same language. 42 U.S.C. 426(a).
In contrast, the provisions extending medicare to those who have not contrib-
uted sufficiently to the social security system to qualify for regular benefits
limit eligibility to citizens and "aliens lawfully admitted for permanent residence."
42 U.S.C. 426a, 428. Thus, Congress did not consistently apply a lawful residence
requirement to social security benefits. Rather, it distinguished between those
benefits that were conditioned upon contributions to the system and those that
were not. In the first category, illegal aliens as well as those lawfully admitted
may participate since they have contributed to the program; in the second they
may not.
A number of federal welfare statutes provide benefits through federal grants to
the States. States are required to submit plans meeting basic federal standards.
The programs for the disabled, 42 U.S.C. 1352(b) (2), blind, 42 U.S.C. 1202(b) (2),
and general medical assistance, 42 U.S.C. 1396a(b)(4), among others, prohibit
States from imposing citizenship requirements which exclude any citizen of the
United States. The Supreme Court has interpreted such provisions as prohibiting
discrimination between citizens and resident aliens as well as between native
born and naturalized citizens. Graham v. Richardson, supra. The Court, however,
has not discussed the question whether illegal aliens are entitled to the same








benefits. It is at least arguable that on the basis of the "citizenship" requirement
of the statute cited above State plans could be required to limit eligibility to
those who are in the country lawfully, even under the Graham interpretation.
Mr. FISH. Thank you. General, if I could ask you just three specific
brief questions. One is what can we do about the problem of Federal
Government of the United States being a willing employer of illegal
aliens?
Mr. CHAPMAN. We have apprehended and have knowledge of
illegal aliens being employed through contractors,- labor contractors
and other kinds of contractors on projects of various kinds and, of
course, I can provide a number of antecdotcs.
Mr. Silberman mentioned one, the foreman in the Metro. Another
example is provided by two illegal Greeks we arrested a week or two
ago that were working on a Federal contract making $9 an hour on
a repainting project.
Mr. FISH. Please let me interrupt. I have no criticism whatsoever
of the job that the Service is doing in apprehending illegal aliens
with the limited personnel and money you have, but it seems to me
that you should not have to apprehend illegal aliens who are working
for contractors working for the Federal Government. That should be
something that in our own family, we could check before it got to that
point in terms of the contract itself.
Mr. SILBERMAN. You mean by a Presidential executive order which
would impose some obligation? Well I think we really approach that
when we deal with the private employer through your bill. I do not
see that you would want to impose any greater obligation on an
employer who gets some funds.
Mr. FISH. I find it rather an irony that the Federal Government
would be paying taxpayers' money to a contractor who is hiring people
who are illegally working in this country.
Briefly another question here. Could you tell me of the million
illegal aliens holding jobs in the United States to whom you have
referred is that an estimate on your part, or are these a million in-
dividuals that you have identified?
Mr. CHAPMAN. It is an estimate on the part of my district directors,
and Border Patrol sector chiefs, each for his area.
Mr. FISH. Thank you very much.
Mr. CHAPMAN. It is a compilation.
Mr. FISH. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. EILBERG. Mr. Sarbanes.
Mr. SARBANES. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Silberman, I am interested in making sure I understand
exactly how what you are sketching out would function, both with
respect to the additional provisions you are going to impose on the
employer and on the aliens. How would you anticipate that the
provision that you have sketched out on page 5, I guess where the
Department would promulgate regulations, what is it you would
have every employer do in the United States with respect to any
applicant? I take it it would be every employer with respect to every
applicant for a job, is that correct?
Mr. SILBERMAN. That is right. I would require-
Mr. SARBANES. So that is a total application or coverage by the
provision you are suggesting?








Mr. SILBERMAN. Yes, as indeed your bill is.
Mr. SARBANES. Now, what would you suggest be done?
Mr. SILBERMAN. That he simply be required, instead of in effect
getting a statement from the applicant he is not an illegal alien, that
he actually 'look to some indicia and that can be worked out in con-
sultation with the committee and by regulation, some reliable indicia
that the individual is an American citizen or a legal alien.
Mr. SARBANES. You would impose that requirement with respect
to every employee?
Mr. SILBERMAN. I would impose it upon all new applicants which
would work itself through the system. The only reason I wouldn't
apply it across the board is that it just seems to me it would be an
awesome burden if you applied it to all existing employees. You
would require every employer to go through a process with employees
who may have been employed for 20 years. I think in terms of the
cost-benefit analysis, that goes too far. I am reaching for an appro-
priate compromise that will be effective, but which will not impose
too great a burden, so I would impose it with respect to all new appli-
cants after the date of the passage of the act.
Mr. SARBANES. What would the regulation provide for?
Mr. SILBERMAN. It would require the employer, when he hires the
employee, as well as getting the Social Security number and other
data to simply get some indicia of legal status in this country.
Mr. SARBANES. What would that be?
Mr. SILBERMAN. It could be a birth certificate, it could be some
document from the Immigration Service for those who were not born
in this country or it could be a number of things.
Mr. SARBANES. What else?
Mr. SILBERMAN. What else?
Mr. SARBANES. I want to get as clear a picture as I can here this
morning of what it is you are projecting in terms of this proposal.
M1Ir. SILBERMAN. A citizenship document or a certificate which is
issued by INS, I gather, or a U.S. passport. I am not-
Mr. SARBANES. Now, wait. This requirement is not limited to those
who deal with INS; it applies to every applicant for a job in the
United States? Is that right?
Mr. SILBERMAN. Of course.
Mr. SARBANES. So, in other words, every applicant would, at a
minimum under this proposal, have to produce a birth certificate?
Mr. SILBERMAN. No, because if you were an alien legally admitted
in this country, you would not have a birth certificate. You would
have to have some other document.
Mr. SARBANES. Let us set the alien category to one side for a
moment and take the millions of others who go looking for jobs. What
would they have to produce under the regulation that you propose?
Mr. SILBERMAN. A birth certificate, or indeed, if the social security
program worked properly, all they would have to do is have a social
security card since that in turn is supposed to be dependent on legal
status. Congress has passed a law on that already.
Mr. SARBANES. Now, with respect to the additional penalties you
would impose on the alien, would you sketch those out? They are set
forth on page 8, as I understand it; particularly points 2 and 3.








Mr. SILBERMAN. Yes. I would consider and I would ask you to
consider the prospect of civil penalties that would be imposed on an
illegal alien which could be collected, indeed, if the illegal alien had
sufficient money to satisfy that. We do that with respect to taxing
aliens and in a sense the illegal alien, when he comes here and deprives
Americans of work, and develops a pool of money, and many of them
do, this Government indeed legitimately, morally, has a claim against
that.
Mr. SARBANES. Now I take it point 2 suggests that this action could
be taken without any recourse at any point to the judicial system, is
that correct?
Mr. SILBERMAN. Oh, I doubt that. I do not mean to suggest that at
all. But I think a streamlined process could be developed under the
Constitution.
Mr. SARBANES. The use of the phrase administrative imposition of
substantial civil penalties is only applicable at the first stage of the
process, and you anticipate that at some point there would be some
recourse to the judicial system, or is that not the case?
Mr. SILBERMAN. No, that is of course true, that there would always
have to be some recourse to the judicial process. We do this, do we not
in the drug area where we impose administrative sanction and seizures
of cars and so forth, and there is review. I will turn to my General
Counsel.
Mr. BERNSEN. I am not familiar with the drug area, but we do pro-
vide for judicial review of immigration orders in exclusion proceedings
and deportation proceedings. A fine is imposed under the immigration
laws on carriers, subject to judicial review.
Mr. SABBANES. Mr. Silberman, in responding earlier to the chairman
in your discussion of these provisions you prefaced an answer with the
phrase, "given the threat we are faced with." And then you went on to
discuss something. I was not quite clear in my mind as to what that
threat was that you were referring to.
Mr. SILBERMAN. The threat is of massive illegal immigration into
the United States.
Mr. SARBANES. You did not connect that to the unemployment
situation in particular?
Mr. SILBERMAN. Of course I connect it, as my statement made
quite clear.
Mr. SARBANES. Why do you do that? I am interested in the question
why it would not be a problem regardless of whether there is high un-
employment or low unemployment?
Mr. SILBERMAN. I agree with you, and indeed I am glad you asked
that question. There are three parts to that. The first part is the direct
impact on employment, and at a time of high unemployment that is
obviously exacerbated. The second point is that, after all, the Congress
passed immigration laws which set the policy in the United States,
with respect to demographic factors, the amount of growth we can
accept into the country, a growth now through immigration. I do not
mean to suggest that Congress went beyond that. And finally, I think
of great importance, but a matter that has not really been focused on,
the fact that this law is violated in as widespread a fashion as it is
tends in my judgment to breed disrespect for law generally.








Mr. SARBANES. Mr. Chairman, I know ,my time is running out. I
want to ask General Chapman just one question if I might, and it
has to do with these figures that we constantly see used with respect
to the dimensions of this problem. I am interested in just how you
put those figures together. You indicated, I take it, that they are
based on estimates which you receive from your people in the field.
Well, what are those estimates based on? I mean, are there any ra-
tional or scientific principles governing the making of these estimates
so that one can at least identify the analytical framework or structure
on the basis of which these figures are put together; or are the figures
simply one result of intuition, or subjective estimates, or whatever
else you might wish on the part of your field people, that really have
no tie to any rational standard?
Mr. CHAPMAN. The estimates as to the total number of illegal
aliens here are based on the factors I have mentioned. That is, we
know how many we apprehended, we know how many sensor alarms
we are unable to answer, we know approximately how many tourists
and students have failed to go home at the time that their visas
expired.
Mr. SARBANES. But the total of those figures are a lot smaller than
the other numbers that are being bandied around in the discussion of
this question, are they not?
Mr. CHAPMAN. No, sir, Those estimates derive directly from those
factors. Now, with respect to the numbers that are working, each dis-
trict director, based on his knowledge of his area of responsibility,
knows how many he has arrested that were at work; he knows known
concentrations of illegal aliens. He has thousands of tips and leads
from the general public, from concerned citizens as to the location of
illegal aliens, and he compiles these factors and makes his estimates
as to the number that are in his area and the number that are working.
And that is where the million job estimate came from.
There is, however, no scientific census that can be taken.
Mr. SARBANES. Well, Mr. Chairman, could we ask the general to
furnish to the subcommittee the framework on the basis of which
these estimates are made so that we will have a clearer idea of how soft
or hard these estimates are in terms of being related to some scientific
factors. The figures that are being thrown around range all over the
lot, and either we ought to make them more precise or refrain from
using them, or make it very clear exactly what we are doing when we
use them.
Mr. EILBERG. Commissioner, can you do that?
Mr. SILBERMAN. We will, Mr. Sarbanes. If I may respond to that, I
think the third of the alternatives is the one-we will provide you with
the information, of course-but the third alternative is the one that I
would choose, and that is to make clear that these are estimates. We
do not know, nor do I believe there is any way that we could actually
know, how many illegal aliens are in the country.
[The information referred to follows:]
The Service does not have precise data on how many illegal aliens are here.
Estimates are based on the experience of Investigators and Border Patrol agents
in the field, and upon other data known to be accurate.
For instance, the Service apprehended nearly 800,000 illegal aliens last fiscal
year. There were more than six million visitors to the United States last year,







49

and between five and 10 'percent are not- shown to have departed. The Border
Patrol is able to answer on average about half of the sensor alarms that are set
off along the border.
In addition, there are thousands of leads from the public-both letters and
phone calls-as to the presence of illegal aliens, which cannot be followed up on
because of lack of money and manpower. And Service investigators are aware of
the presence of concentrations of illegals in various areas and places of employ-
ment.
Because of the lack of precise data, the Service has underway a design study for
obtaining a true picture of the illegal alien population, and OMB has approved the
funding of the full scale study in FY 1976.
Mr. EILBERG. Mr. Cohen.
Mr. COHEN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Silberman, this entire legislation is of particular importance to
me, because in my State we do have, as a border State, a number of
problems with immigration and customs. And last year there was
quite a controversy that was stirred by the Office of Management and
Budget when they sought to reorganize the Immigration Service and
Customs Service by having them combine their efforts in a cost-
efficiency move. You may or may not be familiar with that.
Mr. SILBERMAN. Intimately, sir.
Mr. COHEN. In addition to that, there seems to be a situation where
there is a reduction in personnel through attrition, the slots are simply
not filled, but they are transferred to the Southwest, which reduces the
amount of personnel in the northern part of this country, and particu-
larly my State. I notice that the Government Operations Committee
is recommending that you hire at least another 2,200 people, and they
recommended an additional $34 million for the appropriation. Do you
feel that would be sufficient to hire the personnel and equipment
necessary?
Mr. SILBERMAN. Well, you have noted, doubtlessly, Congressman
Cohen, that in the new budget there is a provision for a substantial
increase for the Immigration Service. I must say that I was dread-
fully disappointed last year when our appropriation was cut beyond
what we requested by the Appropriations Committee, and any support
that we can get from this committee to gain greater numbers of border
patrolmen when we go over to the Appropriations Committee would
be gratefully received.
Mr. COHEN. I would like to follow up on a line of questioning I
think by the Chairman in terms of the narrowness of the civil penalty
that you seek to either enhance or increase, as it would limit the group
of people that would be affected. And I happen to agree with the
Chairman. I think we are talking about a very limited group. But it
seems to me if we are talking about people who have $10,000 in a
savings account, if Congress were to pass such a law, those people are
bright enough to simply send their checks or their savings back to
whatever country they came from and thereby render themselves
judgment proof, so I question whether that would be particularly
effective.
Mr. SILBERMAN. I have thought about that and we have thought
about that, and you are right, some would. But by the same token,
many would not because many would plan to remain here permanently.
And those who plan to remain here permanently want their savings
with them.








Mr. EILBERG. Would the gentleman yield?
Mr. COHEN. I yield to the Chairman.
Mr. EILBERG. I would say to Mr. Silberman that after having
spent a great deal of time in the Rio Grande and after having inter-
viewed so many detainees, hundreds of detainees, very few of them
expressed any desire to remain in the United States. They come to
the United States simply to make money and go home. And I might
say also that the naturalization figures for permanent resident aliens
who are natives of Mexico indicate a very small number remain, to
become citizens of the United States. So I question the accuracy of
the last statement that Mr. Silberman made.
Mr. SILBERMAN. Well I think as General Chapman pointed out
earlier, a few years ago that might have been more true than it is
today. Many of the illegal aliens here appear to us to have every
intention to remain here permanently, as long as they are not ap-
prehended, and their risk of apprehension is relatively small. Beyond
that, even if they are apprehended, the potential cost of the apprehen-
sion does not serve to deter them from remaining here and earning
money. Perhaps General Chapman should elaborate on that. The
problem is not limited to the Southwest Border problem, Mr.
Chairman.
Mr. EILBERG. Mr. Cohen has the floor.
Mr. COHEN. I would like to ask a few more questions and perhaps
we could elaborate a bit later.
I was interested in Congressman Sarbanes' question concerning the
exact procedure you envision for employers to follow. As I understand,
you would require every person in the future who seeks employment
to produce a birth certificate, that does not mean just members of
minority groups, but every person?
Mr. SILBERMAN. That is right, a birth certificate or other indicia.
One of the things that troubles me about H.R. 982, is the principal
criticism which has been made, and it is a troubling criticism, that
as it will work it will discriminate against those who are ostensibly
of other nationality backgrounds.
Mr. COHEN. But let us assume a Spanish-speaking person in
New York were to apply for employment. Simply because he speaks
Spanish, would not warrant the employer to conclude that, indeed,
he is an alien as opposed to a resident, he could still insist upon some
sort of standard other than a birth certificate? Now, I have a birth
certificate here which designates my city and State of Maine as my
place of birth and so forth. I think that would be a very easy document
to duplicate, and I wonder in terms of the practicality of the thought
as to how you are going to standardize a birth certificate or something
not connected with the alien status? How would you do that?
Mr. SILBERMAN. Well, for one thing we could go back to Congress-
man Fish's suggestion. We could put the stress on the social security
card, and after all, Congress has already said a social security card
should not be issued to an illegal alien. We could focus our attention
back to that more workable system, and, indeed, the technology exists
to make social security cards that are noncounterfeitable.
Mr. COHEN. Has the Justice Department been doing anything
in the way of establishing a liaison with the Social Security
Administration?








Mr. SILBERMAN. That is the reason that we recommended the
Cabinet committee, a recommendation which the President accepted
in January, and we intend to move ahead on that as quickly as
possible.
Mr. COHEN. Perhaps in your opinion, if we effectively enforce the
social security laws which are currently on the books, that would
eliminate a need to go through a process which I seriously question
the validity of, the workability of.
One final question if I might, Mr. Chairman, and that concerns the
notion of seizing property.
Mr. SILBERMAN. Let me say, Mr. Cohen, if that is true there ought
to be some kind of cross-reference in your legislation to the Social
Security Administration indicating that that is the method that you
intend to use to enforce it rather than a document signed by the
illegal alien which says he is a legal alien.
Mr. COHEN. On the question of seizing vehicles, you recall last
year this provision was struck from the Judiciary Committee's
consideration, and I must say I have a considerable question in my
own mind that we adhere to the ancient philosophy that an asset
itself is culpable, an inherent evil. I can understand the forfeiture of
contraband articles, or of those articles which are designed specifically
to commit a particular type of crime. But it seems to me we get into
areas such as I might lend my car to a person, who in turn might use
that car to convey someone across the border, and then suddenly I
am deprived of my car, at least until the whole administrative process
is completed. I think this is an unnecessary burden, an encumbrance
upon my own liberties, so I have serious questions about that. I
would ask you, would you be in a position to accept a recommendation
or legislation which confined itself to vehicles which are designed
specifically to in some way enhance the opportunity to convey people
across borders?
Mr. SILBERMAN. I am troubled about the question you raise, and
there would have to be some procedure to in effect immunize Congress-
man Cohen if he lends his car to X, who in turn lends it to Y.
Mr. COHEN. I am not being facetious about it.
Mr. SILBERMAN. And I am not either. It is troubling.
Mr. COHEN. What about Hertz or Avis or some other rental
agency?
Mr. SILBERMAN. That is right. We would have to work on that. I
think it can be worked out, and I think that is an interesting suggestion
you make, that you would focus only on vehicles particularly designed
to transport aliens.
Mr. COHEN. That is all I have, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. EILBERG. Ms. Holtzman?
Ms. HOLTZMAN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I am concerned about the problem that Mr. Silberman raised of
possible discrimination in H.R. 982. In my congressional district I
have people who are recent immigrants from eastern Europe and who
speak English with an accent. I have people who have recently
immigrated from the West Indies, and in fact people who have
immigrated from all parts of the world. Many came here 40 years ago
and still speak English with an accent. I am terribly concerned that
these people, some of whom are naturalized U.S. citizens and somelof







whom are lawful residents, would be put to an intolerable burden
under this legislation. Moreover, it is not their fault that these illegal
aliens are here.
Mr. SILBERMAN. I agree.
Ms. HOLTZMAN. I am curious about what the Justice Department
and the Immigration Service are doing right now with respect to the
enforcement of our laws, in particular with respect to the issuance of
tourist visas to persons who actually intend to live in the United
States. Why can't that process be improved?
Mr. SILBERMAN. What is it specifically that troubles you about that
process, Ms. Holtzman?
Ms. HOLTZMAN. Well, I think you cited the figure that there were
6 million tourists who came to the United States and only 5 million
who left. What are you doing to prevent that from happening in the
next year? What do you do to improve your procedures?
Mr. SILBERMAN. That is, of course, one of the reasons why we have
this Cabinet Committee which, of course, it is obvious that greater
coordination among departments is necessary. But let me defer to
General Chapman, and the State Department is involved in this also
to a great extent.
Mr. CHAPMAN. Visas are issued by the State Department, Ms.
Holtzman.
Ms. HOLTZMAN. I know that. But I think something could be done
to improve the process. This is not the first year that we have had
more people come to the United States than leave it.
Mr. CHAPMAN. Our country invites and welcomes tourists from
every country in the world, and foreign students as well under certain
circumstances. And of the millions of tourists who enter the country
each year, at least 90 percent are bona fide tourists who come, stay
their allotted time and return. There are 5 or 10 percent who do not,
however. And they are the ones that concern us.
I might go on to say with respect to a previous question that-
Ms. HOLTZMAN. Well, I would really like an answer to this ques-
tion about what can be done to improve the screening process. Is there
anything we can learn from the mistakes that we have made in terms
of screening potential tourists who come to this country? I mean, for
you to say that we are going to enact a bill that is going to require
every American to carry a nationality card for the first time in our
history without at the same time saying we have done everything in
our power to enforce the laws and enforce them properly puzzles me,
frankly, because I can see, even under the approach you propose, that
an employer might be very nervous about hiring somebody who speaks
English with an accent, even though he has a social security card or
whatever kind of card you want, and that an employer will say, "Well,
I will hire somebody who speaks English without an accent."
Mr. SILBERMAN. No. I think we can protect against that. Your bill
seeks to protect against that.
Ms. HOLTZMAN. I understand, but I would like to know what you
people are doing to improve your enforcement procedures, whether it
involves the State Department, our southwest border guards, or the
like? The Immigration Service was the subject of a number of allega-
tions with respect to the southwest border a while ago.
Mr. SILBERMAN. Ms. Holtzman, I think we are trying to do the
best we can with limited resources and with an overwhelming problem








that we are faced with. Our honest belief is that without legislation
which increases the disincentives that we will really not have a chance.
Mr. EILBERG. Would the gentlelady yield for just a question?
Ms. HOLTZMAN. Yes, I will be delighted to yield to the Chairman.
Mr. EILBERG. Mr. Attorney General, you have repeatedly referred
to the Domestic Council Committee on Illegal Aliens appointed by the
President. I would like to know what it has done, and I am a little
bit concerned, particularly in view of the fact that your service may
be ending shortly.
Mr. SILBERMAN. Yes, that is fair.
Mr. EILBERG. And what has happened with this Presidential
Cabinet Committee?
Mr. SILBERMAN. It has only been set up in the last month, and it
contemplates a meeting in the very near future. But I confess to you,
Mr. Chairman, with the turnover in the Justice Department-
Mr. EILBERG. Nothing has been done really.
Mr. SILBERMAN. Wait a minute. Yes. An agenda has been prepared
and sent out, and a meeting is scheduled. But I would very much hope
that Ed Levy would be confirmed in time to chair that first meeting.
Mr. EILBERG. And is it expected that there will be recommendations
coming out of that Presidential Committee?
Mr. SILBERMAN. We are going to try to work on some of the prob-
lems which this committee has focused on. I do not mean to suggest
for a moment that I would recommend that this committee hold up
working on the legislation, which is very much needed, and I cannot
contemplate that anything that we would think of, beyond that which
we have said today, would be important to this committee's
consideration.
Mr. EILBERG. Thank you, Ms. Holtzman.
Ms. HOLTZMAN. Perhaps you can provide for the record some in-
formation about what efforts either you, Mr. Attorney General,
or you, Mr. Commissioner, are taking with respect to improving the
screening process and improving any followup procedures with respect
to the issuance of tourist visas to people who are not bona fide tour-
ists? If there is a problem in that area, I am sure it could stand some
correction, and I am surprised that I do not hear any concrete answers
as to what you are doing about it.
Second-
Mr. SILBERMAN. I am not sure I understand what your criticism is.
Ms. HOLTZMAN. I want to know why only 5 million tourists returned
to their home countries, and why there was this error in judgment
in the initial issuance of a million visas.
Mr. SILBERMAN. You assume a fact not in evidence, that there was
an error in judgment.
Ms. HOLTZMAN. I am just taking the figures that were given to me.
Mr. CHAPMAN. I can only say that those are judgments made by
the American consuls abroad with respect to each applicant for a
visa to enter this country as a tourist. I happen to know that they
are very conscientious about it, and they work very hard at it, but
it is a question of determining in advance the intention of the appli-
cant. If the applicant says I want to go to the United States and stay
6 weeks, and see all of the great sights, and I have $1,000 in my
pocket to pay my way, and the consul believes him, then the visa is
issued. If his intention is otherwise, it is difficult to determine.








[The following additional information was submitted:]
The programs listed below are indicative of the close liaison that I&NS mainly
tains with Visa Issuing Officers.
I&NS furnishes to the Visa Issuing Consular Officer information regarding al-
documented aliens who have been refused admission to the United States. This
assists him should the same applicant apply in the future.
I&NS furnishes information to the State Department regarding aliens who
have been deported on criminal, immoral, narcotic or subversive grounds.
I&NS checks its records at the request of consular officers where applicants
were previously in the United States.
In adjudicating for admission of relatives, I&NS furnishes to the appropriate
consular officer possible grounds of inadmissibility of the beneficiary.
There is a proposal to provide that all applicants for admission to Puerto Rico
or the Virgin Islands from the West Indies (except from the British Virgin Islandsl
must be in possession of visas. Presently they are exempted from nonimmigrant
visas.
Currently, only nonimmigrant overstay records relating to: (1) Iron Curtain
nationals; (2) Parolees; (3) Section 212(d)(3) waiver cases; and, (4) Bond cases
are being forwarded to field offices for investigation under a low priority pending
the receipt of additional investigative manpower. The efforts of the investigative
manpower available to locate all types of illegal aliens is being concentrated on
locating illegal aliens occupying high paying jobs that would be most attractive
the U.S. citizens and lawful permanent residents. When additional investigative
manpower is provided for this purpose, the Service will then forward all nonim-
migrant overstay records to field offices for investigation.
Ms. HOTTZMAN. I understand what that process involves, and
obviously somebody is making a judgment. But there is some error
that is being made, and maybe it is an unintentional error. I am not
saying that there is any criminal activity going on in the consulates,
but I want to know whether this process can be improved. And what I
understand from your testimony here is that you are saying, "Well, we
cannot do anything about making it better." I just find that a little bit
hard to believe.
M2r. SILBERMAN. I am not so sure there is nothing that can be done,
and it is one of the things that the Cabinet committee should focus on.
But there is an inherent problem. Short of giving a lie detector test to
somebody who wants to come to this country on a tourist visa, I can-
not give you any way in which that judgment at the time someone
applies for a tourist visa can be made without a subjective appraisal of
the intention of the individual, which is necessarily imprecise.
Mr. EILBERG. Mr. Dodd.
Mr. DoDD. Yes. First of all, I want to thank both of you gentlemen.
I am a new member, and if I ask questions that may have been asked
before, I hope I will not be boring to my fellow committee members, or
people who have followed these hearings throughout. But I am curious,
and I would like to know very briefly if you could tell me exactly what
the procedure is in apprehending an illegal alien today? How do you
determine who is an illegal alien? There have been several articles
written about patrols that have gone into the crop fields of Texas or
California. What is the procedure at that point?
MIr. SILBERMAN. Let me defer to the operating head.
Mr. CHAPMAN. Whether in the fields or in urban areas, our investiga-
tors and our border patrolmen operate mainly on the basis of intel-
ligence leads, on tips and suggestions or knowledge as to where illegal
aliens are working or known to concentrate. Our officers have au-
thority to inquire as to the citizenship of anyone whom they have
substantial reason to believe may not be a legal alien or an American








citizen. If the inquiry produces the answer that I am an American
citizen, that is it, or if he says I am an American citizen, then that ends
the interrogation by that officer. And if he says I am a legal alien, then
he must produce his alien identification card or authority to be here.
Mr. DODD. So the investigation ends at the point the person makes
the statement that I am an American citizen?
Mr. CHAPMAN. Unless the officer has a solid reason to.believe that
that may not be a correct statement.
Mr. DODD. All right. Then what happens?
Mr. CHAPMAN. He is entitled to interrogate if he has solid evidence
to support him in doing so.
Mr. DODD. What sort of documentation is required at that initial
point of investigation, presuming that the officer does not believe the
statement that "I am an American citizen?"
Mr. CHAPMAN. If he has solid evidence to support it, yes; he is
entitled to dig further, of course. If he is, in fact, an American citizen,
there is no requirement of documentation. It only requires the asser-
tion that he is so.
I might go on to point out that our capability to apprehend and
remove is only a fraction of the total number that we know of and
could apprehend and remove if we had the capability.
Mr. DODD. Maybe I am missing something. I presume that the
statement, "I am an American citizen," is enough unless the officer
has reason to believe that the person is not telling the truth.
Mr. CHAPMAN. That is correct.
Mr. DODD. And at that point what evidence, what does he use,
what documents, a driver's license, a social security card, or whatever?
What are they looking for? What do they ask for?
Mr. CHAPMAN. Sam, do you want to answer that?
Mr. BERNSEN. The officer would ask for identification possibly, or
the officer might simply be satisfied to drop the inquiry at that point
and simply make a separate investigation with regard to the person's
citizenship if he had reason to believe that this person falsely claimed
U.S. citizenship.
Mr. DODD. I wonder if you have any figures, and again I guess,
General Chapman, I would be addressing my remarks to you, of
how many false arrests have been made, say last year, of alleged
illegal aliens?
Mr. CHAPMAN. Who turned out to be citizens?
Mr. DODD. Do you have any figures on that?
Mr. CHAPMAN. Last year?
Mr. DODD. Just say last year, or over a period of 2 to 5 years.
Mr. CHAPMAN. I think the answer is zero.
Mr. DODD. There were no false arrests?
Mr. CHAPMAN. I will have to verify that for the record, but I
believe that is correct.
Mr. BERNSEN. I am told that there were two within the lastfewyears.
Mr. CHAPMAN. A total of two over several years. Last year I am
pretty confident that there were none.
Mr. DODD. I would like to get into one other area, and again I hope
I am not being ignorant with this, but what we have talked about,
the two-pronged effect aimed at the employee and the employer,








what sort of an arrangement at all do we have with, say, Mexico?
Is it illegal in Mexico to leave Mexico without a visa, and when we
send back a person, what happens in Mexico or what happens in the
Dominican Republic or any other nation that we have treaties with?
Mr. BERNSEN. Well, we are not experts on the laws of foreign coun-
tries. Various countries have various exit requirements, and we are
not familiar with them. We know that we have no difficulty returning
illegal Mexican aliens to Mexico. We have worked out an arrangement
with the Mexican Government, and they accept the illegal Mexicans
back without any problem.
Mr. DODD. Do you know what happens at that point in Mexico to
the returnee?
Mr. BERNSEN. As far as I know, the returnee is not subject to any
criminal penalties under the Mexican laws.
Mr. SILBERMAN. Not subject to any sanctions at all.
Mr. DODD. Any sanctions at all?
Mr. SILBERMAN. Not that we know of.
Mr. DODD. Earlier, in recent remarks, and I do not know whether
it was by Mr. Silberman, or Mr. Chapman, or maybe the chairman
made the remarks that really there are not that great a number of
returnees, particularly in the southwest area, or are there?
Mr. SILBERMAN. Oh, yes. Yes. There are a great number. What
was the number last year?
Mr. CHAPMAN. Nearly 700,000. Six hundred and some odd thousand
that we apprehended in the border areas and returned.
Mr. DODD. The 300,000 that were apprehended, more than two-
thirds were returnees?
Mr. CHAPMAN. Yes.
Mr. DODD. Is anything being done at all on the international scene
to try and work out some kind of a relation or relationship or whatever
with Mexico?
Mr. SILBERMAN. Congressman Dodd, that has been a very difficult,
tricky problem that the Government of the United States has been
dealing with for a number of years, with respect to the Government
of Mexico, and perhaps other governments. I cannot say that it
would be likely that the Government of Mexico would be agreeable
to imposing a sanction on its citizens who leave and come into the
United States unlawfully.
Mr. DODD. I have just one last question, Mr. Chairman. I have
many more, but I will save your time.
I am a resident of eastern Connecticut, and just recently there were
two illegal aliens apprehended at the U.S. Submarine Base where our
nuclear powerfleet is harbored. These people were actually employees
of a subcontractor on the base itself. Is there no existing system
wherein a person who is particularly involved or employed in a
security risk area, where the contractor or subcontractor would
require basic security checks which would include an immigration
check?
Mr. SILBERMAN. Wall, there are basic security checks required of
Government subcontractors engaged in defense work.
Mr. DODD. Well then, how did this happen?
Mr. SILBERMAN. I am not familiar with that incident. I cannot
tell you.









Mr. DODD. But it is required that an immigration check be done on
contractors?
Mr. SILBERMAN. No, a security check. A security check.
Mr. DODD. Does that include an immigration check?
Mr. SILBERMAN. Normally if we run a security check on someone
and, in fact, he or she is an illegal alien, it will turn up.
Mr. DODD. OK. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. EILBERG. It is my pleasure to introduce next a new Member
of the Congress and our colleague from Illinois, Congressman Martin
Russo.
Mr. Russo. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
In looking over Mr. Chapman's report, it is upsetting to me that in
3 months last fall the Chicago District investigator apprehended some
2,000 illegal aliens, 93 percent of which were employed. I would like
to know what type of procedure the Chicago office or the Department
of Justice is working on to make detection more rapid?
Mr. CHAPMAN. Well Mr. Russo, we are working to the maximum
of our capabilities now. It is very limited. Both the number of in-
vestigators that we have in Chicago as well as elsewhere is limited,
and the amount of money that we have to detain and deport those
that we do apprehend is limited. Pursuant to a directive that I put
out just at the beginning of this year, we concentrate our limited
capability on those that are working at good jobs, that we think an
unemployed American would be very happy to have, so that we are
selective through necessity.
Mr. Russo. Has the problem been money over the years? I notice
in the report since 1965 the number has steadily increased in great
numbers, and it seems to me something should have been done since
1965 to now to cut down on this. If it has been a money problem and
staff problem, it is something that should have been handled over the
years instead of at a crisis stage now where we really see the problem
because we have high unemployment now, and the welfare roles are
swelling, revenues to the Government are down, you know, and has
something been going on since 1965?
Mr. SILBERMAN. Well Mr. Russo, this committee has been working
on the problem for at least 4 or 5 years in conjunction with the Justice
Department, and by and large this committee and the Justice Depart-
ment have seen very much eye to eye. We do not agree on every
specific point, but we have certainly agreed that it is a long-range
problem for the country, and we have been doing all that we can to
get a bill through the Congress. And it is surely not the fault of this
committee.
Mr. CHAPMAN. Then the other half of the problem is the dramatic
increases in the number of illegal aliens. We apprehended 12 or 13
years ago 20 some thousand total for the year. Last year it was
800,000, and last year we apprehended only a fraction of those that
are here.
Mr. Russo. On the fraud matters, are we doing something to make
our documents counterfeit proof, or how far along have we come on
that?
Mr. CHAPMAN. In conjunction with the visa office and the passport
office we have completed the design and are ready for the final test
on a new alien documentation system for all. Of course, passports are








for U.S. citizens, and visas are for aliens, and the alien identification
card is for the permanent resident and for the various border crossers.
It is an excellent system, it is fully counterfeit proof, it is imposter
proof, it is tamper proof, and it is machine readable. And there is
included in the President's budget which was submitted to the Con-
gress yesterday the first year's funding to implement that new card.
Mr. Russo. Can that card in some way be used in the procedure
that the Justice Department is talking about, of having some kind
of an indicia?
Mr. CHAPMAN. Yes, sir. It would be the indicia for an alien. A
permanent resident is now required by law to carry an alien identifica-
tion card, and he does so. There are some 5 or 6 million of them out
now. Those old cards would be replaced by this new card, and the
new card would be issued to the new immigrants entering the country.
Mr. Russo. I do not have any further questions, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. EILBERG. Mr. Silberman, I would like to go back to something
that has been alluded to a couple of times, but I am still not clear on
this. The Department recommends that prospectively, when anyone
applies for a job, the employer should take an affirmative step to
obtain a birth certificate, INS document, or some other document.
Now, what about those already employed throughout the country?
Would those already employed have to provide some proof of their
entitlement to work in this country?
Mr. SILBERMAN. Well, how do you feel about that, Mr. Chairman?
Mr. EILBERG. Well, I think that would present a very chaotic
situation.
Mr. SILBERMAN. I guess I would agree with you, and that is why I
limited it to new employment.
Mr. EILBERG. You limit it to new employees-
Mr. SILBERMAN. New employment.
Mr. EILBERG. In limiting it to new employment, it seems to me
that you have totally ignored those illegal aliens who are presently
employed.
Mr. SILBERMAN. No, I would not ignore them. I would apply the
same provisions of your bill.
Mr. EILBERG. But you just said a moment ago that anyone who is
presently employed would not be checked on, as I understood your
answer.
4 Mr. SILBERMAN. No, No. I think that the conditions of your bill
would apply to people presently employed.
4 Mr.IEILBERG. So you are saying, if I understand, that there would
be'a different technique, a different measure of proof for those presently
employed. But for those who might be employed in the future, affirma-
tive steps would be required?
Mr. SILBERMAN. That is right. My theory, our theory is that over
time our procedure would prospectively be very effective as people
move to new jobs. Certainly over time we would deal with the problem.
I am balancing the wrench that would exist if you applied that to all
existing employment.
k Mr. EILBERG. The problem is, of course, now. We are also concerned
with those illegal aliens currently holding jobs.
Mr. SILBERMAN. Oh, but of course the problem is now. But my
suggestion is that the provision in your bill is not as effective as it








might be. I am asking that it at least be for new employment toughened
up. I am striking the balance slightly differently than you are.
Mr. EILBERG. Would you support a provision which would grant
some relief to illegal aliens who have resided in the United States for
some period of time?
Mr. SILBERMAN. What do you have in mind?
Mr. EILBERG. Well, I am talking about amnesty and how long an
illegal alien would be here before you would grant him any rights, if
at all?
Mr. SILBERMAN. That is a very troubling question. I will confess
that we have spent a lot of time thinking about that. There are some
people who-there is an amnesty provision in present legislation which
I think has a grandfather date of 1948. There are some who suggest
that that should be brought forward. I am troubled about that. I am
troubled about that because of our credibility in enforcing the law,
and I am troubled that people in the future will think there will be
another grandfather date somewhere further down the line, and thus
our efforts will be undercut.
On the other hand, I recognize the difficulty if we passed a bill that
was tremendously effective of deporting an individual who had spent
20 years in this country, raised children who are American citizens
because they were born here, and insisting that that individual, male
or female, would have to go back. I think probably my druthers on
that would be to have some flexible system which would build on the
present immigration system whereby some panel or board could make
equitable determinations rather than to have an arbitrary grandfather
clause.
Mr. EILBERG. As a matter of fact, do we not have a suspension of
deportation situation now for aliens who are here for 7 years?
Mr. SILBERMAN. Yes, we do, or more.
Mr. EILBERG. Or more.
Mr. SILBERMAN. Yes, we do have such a procedure.
Mr. EILBERG. So there would be that.
Mr. SILBERMAN. That would be available. That is what I meant
when I said build on that procedure.
Mr. EILBERG. Now, regarding the smuggling of aliens, we hear a
great deal about the increase in the smuggling of illegal aliens. That
is currently a felony with a penalty of a fine of $2,000 or 5 years or
both. Are stronger penalties required, or is the problem one of effec-
tively prosecuting those who smuggle illegal aliens?
Mr. SILBERMAN. I think it is more of an enforcement problem, a
detection and prosecution kind of problem, rather than the size of the
penalties, although as you note, I add the summary seizure of vehicles
used for smuggling, which I think is an incremental addition which
we could make.
Do you have anything to add to that, Sam?
Mr. BERNSEN. No. I think our problem has been that we cannot
prosecute all of the smugglers we find now. The courts are just jammed
with cases.
Mr. EILBERG. Well, how do you go about selecting? That is my
next question. Apparently you are uneven in your prosecution of
smugglers, and complaints have been made that you do not prosecute
sufficiently.


49-769-75---5








Mr. SILBERMAN. Well, if the Congress should give us more judges
as the President requested in his omnibus judge bill, which has been
pending before this Congress lo these many years, that might be a.
first step.
Mr. EILBERG. Mr. Silberman, I understand what you are saying,
but how do you determine which ones you are going to prosecute and
which ones you do not prosecute?
Mr. SILBERMAN. Prosecution is handled by the U.S. attorneys, as
I am sure you are aware of, Mr. Chairman. And I am sure the priorities
in various areas of the country depend on the number of cases that
they have and on the number of other cases. But I would be the first
to admit the U.S. attorneys are desperately overworked, and they do
not have sufficient judges to bring the cases to in the first place.
Mr. EILBERG. The Immigration Service has freqeuntly been criti-
cized for maintaining an ineffective alien documentation system.
What are you doing to correct this?
Mr. CHAPMAN. Are you speaking, sir, of the alien documentation
methods?
Mr. EILBERG. Yes.
Mr. CHAPMAN. We have designed, as I remarked a moment ago, a
new alien documentation system which I think embodies the very
latest of techniques and is, in fact, as I mentioned, both counterfeit
proof, imposter proof, and tamper proof. And the money to implement
that new card, as well as the new visa, and the new passport, which
will use the same principles, is contained in the President's budget
for 1976. We are very hopeful we get that money.
Mr. EILBERG. Mr. Silberman, I am also concerned with that part
of your statement which suggests that your approach provides better
protection against discrimination. I would yield to no one in my
feeling that I am for equal rights for everyone in this country. And
at the same time I feel that title VII of the Civil Rights Act and the
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission regulations are specifi-
cally designed to prevent employment discrimination based on national
origin. And I do not understand how you would suggest that under
the legislation that appears before us that there would be the possibility
of more discrimination under H.R. 982 than under the approach that
you are expressing.
Mr. SILBERMAN. All right. Let me put it to you directly. I am afraid
that under your bill, and I know it is not intended to do this, but I am
afraid under your bill there will be a greater obligation placed upon the
American citizen or legal alien who appears to be alien than there will
be upon the American citizen or legal alien who does not appear to be
an alien. That is to say, employers will be encouraged to disregard the
letter which the applicant would provide indicating his legal status if,
in fact, that individual does not appear to be a traditional American
citizen. Therefore, it is my concern that the obligation be placed on all.
Mr. EILBERG. In that case, is it not true a complaint could be filed
which would be handled by your office or the Commission?
Mr. SILBERMAN. The EEOC. We do not have any jurisdiction under
title VII any more. Yes, of course it would. But I am concerned how it
would work in practice, and I think that is something we have to be
very worried and troubled about.








Mr. EILBERG. And I might say, Mr. Silberman, that I am troubled
with your plan because it connotes to me the existence of an internal
American passport system.
Mr. SILBERMAN. No, I don't think so.
Mr. EILBERG. Something that might approach that which occurs in
Iron Curtain countries.
Mr. SILBERMAN. No. No. No.
Mr. EILBERG. I do not think that citizens should be obligated to be
carrying identification papers with them as they travel around the
country.
Mr. SILBERMAN. Well, Mr. Chairman, the Congress has already
required that of the social security cards.
Mr. EILBERG. But Mr. Silberman, again I ask you, how effective
that law is, sir?
Mr. SILBERMAN. You certainly would not suggest, Mr. Chairman,
it is justifiable because I have imposed an obligation but it is in-
effective?
Mr. EILBERG. I am suggesting that the idea in the social security
legislation is good, but apparently there have been problems. It is clear
to the staff of this committee, and this member of this committee that
the system suggested has not been working. We have got to look at it
and perhaps change it or find some other way.
Mr. SILBERMAN. I agree, and my suggestion-and I think we could
come together on this-is to cross-reference this bill and the obligations
we are imposing with the obligations you have already; you, the Con-
gress, have already imposed on the social security card. I am not sug-
gesting internal passports.
Mr. EILBERG. Finally, Mr. Silberman, it is apparent from this
colloquy at least, that you have had very little contact with the Social
Security Administration, because I do not'sense or feel that you have
been working with them. And why has there not been greater co-
operation between the Immigration Service and the Social Security
Administration?
Mr. SILBERMAN. Well, I think there has been cooperation.
Mr. CHAPMAN. Yes, sir. There has been a considerable amount of
cooperation, and it has greatly improved both with HEW, Social
Security, and IRS on all our parts.
Mr. EILBERG. Now Mr. Chapman, for at least 2 years or more we
have been trying to get information on IRS cooperation with you in
terms of this kind of information being supplied on the W-4 form.
Now, what is the status of that discussion?
Mr. CHAPMAN. The situation that you refer to has changed, Mr.
Chairman, and there is now very close cooperation both nationally
and locally. I might run through some of the measures that have been
taken. The criteria for an IRS interview with the aliens that we have
apprehended has also changed as the result of several tests that have
been run. During one 3-month period I referred I believe some 1,700
aliens to IRS, and they assessed about a quarter of a million in taxes,
and actually collected about $168,000.
The criteria, the new criteria that they were using, was based on
possession of $50 or more by the alien at the time that we arrested him-
Mr. EILBERG. Commissioner, I am asking the question regarding







62

the illegal alien, the subject we are talking about, what cooperation
are you getting from IRS in the area of identification of illegal aliens,
and my question specifically is when we last discussed this matter in
hearings, and we have done it at several hearings before not only you,
sir, but with your predecessor as well, and discussions were underway
between the Internal Revenue Service and INS so that the W-4 form
would be amended to include questions on citizenship and alien status.
Now, what has happened to that idea. Do you know, sir?
Mr. BERNSEN. The Internal Revenue Service has declined to amend
the W-4 form to include questions about alien status or citizenship.
They feel it would take legislation to authorize them to include such a
question on their form, and that is where the matter essentially rests.
Mr. EILBERG. So there is no cooperation in this area at this point,
and it is their opinion that legislation is necessary?
Mr. SILBERMAN. It is not a question of cooperation, but a question
of legal authority, as I understand Sam's response.
Mr. EILBERG. Commissioner, did you wish to proceed further? I
did not mean to cut you off.
Mr. CHAPMAN. I was going to refer to the cooperation between
social security and ourselves with respect to the record checks on those
who apply for a number. There has been some progress on that since
the Social Security Administration implemented the regulation that
Congress passed not too long ago last summer. They referred a number
of cases to us that had not been shown or proved to be U.S. citizens
or legal aliens. We searched our records, and we in effect have denied
about 90 or 95 percent of them, and confirmed 5 to 10 percent, so
that there is considerable cooperation, and some considerable progress
in that area.
Mr. EILBERG. Thank you.
Mr. Fish?
Mr. FISH. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Attorney General, could I ask you in support of your economic
analysis of the reason why there has been this large expansion of aliens
illegally trying to enter the United States, to supply this committee
with current unemployment figures in Mexico, in other Latin American
countries that are a source of large numbers of entries, and in Canada,
and in Western European nations that contribute to this supply?
'Mr. SILBERMAN. I might add for Mexico I think the figure is either
40 percent unemployed or underemployed.
[The following additional information was submitted:]
Most of the countries in Latin America, including Mexico, do not publish official
and comprehensive unemployment data on a regular basis. We have, however,
been able to obtain some estimates of unemployment developed by the World
Bank missions for Latin American countries. The following is a listing of these
estimates:

Country: packett)
Mexico ---------------------------------------------- ---- 1
Dominican Republic ---------------------------------- ---- 17+
El Salvador ---------------------------------------- 20+
Guatemala-------------------------------------------------- 15+
Colombia ...----------------------------------------- ------ 8-10
Ecuador ------------------------------------------------- 7
Peru---------------------------------------------------------- 7
1 Plus extensive underemployment.









Nationals of Great Britain and Italy represent the largest number of appre-
hensions from Western Europe. The Bureau of Labor Statistics estimates unem-
ployment in Great Britain at 3 percent and in Italy at 3.1 percent. According to
the New York Times International Economic Survey, published January 26,
1975, this represents a 30 percent increase in unemployment for Britain. The
survey further reports that 10 percent of Italians work outside Italy because of
lack of work in Italy. With increasing unemployment in the employing European
countries, the repatriation of these workers could have drastic effects for Italy.
The Canadian Statistical Review reports an unemployment rate for Canada.
in December 1974, of 6.1 percent (seasonally adjusted).
Mr. FISH. Could I ask unanimous consent that at the close of today's
hearings there be inserted in the record the newspaper articles, on the
problem of illegal aliens that have appeared in the last few weeks that
I alluded to in my opening remarks?
Mr. EILBERG. Without objection, they will be admitted in the
record.
[The articles referred to follow:]
[From the Washington Star-News, Nov. 16, 1974]
HUMAN TIDE CUTS DEEPLY IN AMERICA

(By Michael Satchell)
The golden door of immigration to America has nearly closed. The invitation
to the tired, the poor and the wretched refuse of the world, has been withdrawn.
The welcome mat that greeted waves of immigrants for more than a century has
been pulled. The Statue of Liberty stands mute.
But they still are pouring in. In greater numbers than ever before, millions of
illegal aliens sneak across the border each year, drawn by dreams of a better life
and dollars to buy it.
The U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) estimates that about
one in 26 persons now in the United States is here illegally, roughly eight million
people in a nation of 210 million. Legal immigrants number about 400,000 annually:
By contrast, close to 800,000 illegals were caught and booted out of America
in fiscal 1974, about one in three or four of those who entered illegally without
papers or who simply overstayed their visitor's visa.
General Leonard F. Chapman, Jr., close to completing his freshman year as
INS commissioner, warns that the country is experiencing the greatest unsanc-
tioned immigration in its history and chafes at public and official indifference.
"We have on our hands right now a serious national problem * that the
INS is wholly unable to cope with." Chapman told a House subcommittee recently,
"Unless adequate resources and legislation are forthcoming almost immediately,,
the flood of illegal entries will become a torrent."
The presence of about eight million people, most of them poorly educated
Latins from Mexico and Central America, who have no legal-and, some argue,
moral-right to be here, raises worrisome questions about the illegals' effect on
the future quality of life in the United States.
Can a nation that is sliding inexorably into a recession, is battling inflation
and rising unemployment, and is faced with shortages of energy, clean water and
air and possibly even food, afford to take in millions of extra residents, especially
when in this country, zero population growth is close?
Illegals hold jobs that could be filled by citizens. They invariably pay little
or no taxes. They send enormous amounts of money out of the country, aggravat-
ing the balance of payments problem.
Yet they use public services, including free or subsidized medical care. Their
children are educated at public schools, and they often get onto the welfare or,
unemployment rolls.
The Washington metropolitan area has between 35,000 and 50,000 aliens,
with a large Latin population in the Columbia Road area and people from other
parts of the world scattered throughout the District and the suburbs. Illegals
here work in a variety of service industries and are heavily employed by restau-
rants and taxi companies.
No agency, public or private, has yet undertaken a comprehensive review of
what illegals cost the country each year, but here are some random examples.







64

The INS recently completed an employment survey and estimated that one
million jobs in heavy and light industry, agriculture and services could be opened
lup for unemployed citizens with improved enforcement programs. Washington
D.C. could gain 11,500 jobs, New York, 106,000; Los Angeles, 135,000, and Chi-
cago, 79,500.
The survey shows clearly that the old "wetback" problem that plagued the
rural areas of the Southwest border states is now a full-fledged nationwide urban
problem because the illegals have drifted north away from stoop labor and into
better paying city jobs.
The AFL-CIO, which has thrown its weight behind tougher legislation aimed at
halting the flow of illegals, estimates the annual wage loss to U.S. workers at more
than $10 billion and fumes because illegals undermine union strength by working
for below-scale salaries. Yet the giant labor organization concedes that not only
are many of the illegals performing useful tasks within society and the economy,
they have become absolutely essential.
Most illegals mail sums of largely untaxed money home to support their fami-
lies. If eight million mailed home the nominal sum of $250 a year, this would add
up to $2 billion. Many illegals work in agriculture or service industries for small
companies or individuals who simply don't bother to deduct taxes or insurance.
Those on larger company payrolls claim six or seven dependents, thus avoiding
most income tax. Few if any file annual tax returns.
The Los Angeles County board of supervisors recently sued the federal govern-
ment to recover the $7 million it lost last year in providing free or subsidized
medical care to aliens. Two San Diego hospitals reported spending $1.9 million
last year between them on treating illegals.
Unauthorized aliens are undeniably having an adverse effect on the American
economy, but they also benefit it. They take menial, low-paying jobs that other
Americans often shun-migrant farm work, unskilled construction work, dish-
washing and busboy labor, domestic work, and dirty, dangerous jobs in industry.
Once here, they present few problems in the community. The vast majority
are law-abiding people who want nothing more than a job and salary. Those who
take a sympathetic view toward illegals-and there aren't very many-feel that
aliens don't sponge as heavily off the welfare, unemployment or charity rolls as
many critics believe, because they are afraid of contact with officialdom.
In fact, this fear of officialdom and their constant fugitive existence from the
"immigration man" leaves the illegals as vulnerable as shorn lambs, exploited and
ripped off by employers and others, such as unscrupulous lawyers and "immigra-
tion specialists," who prey on them.
Said Al Piliod, INS's associate commissioner for enforcement: "They're bled
by all kinds of people. Landlords overcharge them, knowing they're illegals.
Employers pay them low wages, make them work overtime without pay never
let them take vacations.
"In Chicago and Gary, Ind., where a lot of them work in small assembly plants
or other industries," Piliod said, "we've heard of many cases where illegals have
been maimed by electric hammers and saws. The employers simply give them two
weeks' wages and send them on their way."
INS investigators describe other abuses. There are employers who find them-
selves owing accumulated salaries to illegals and then simply call the local im-
migration office to report their own workers, get them picked up, and thus avoid-
ing paying them. It is not against the law to hire illegal aliens, although pending
legislation aims to change that.
Illegal farm workers still labor under atrocious conditions in the Southwest,
working long hours for minimal wages. Close to San Clemente, Calif. with the
panoply of Southern California wealth in tantalizing view, illegals literally are
living in the fields they work.
They exist at little more than subsistence level, eating poor food and living
without sanitation in packing-crate lean-to's clustered together on the edges of
razor-trim cultivated fields where they work from dawn to dusk for a few dollars.
Those who come north have it better, but not much. For lean-to's, substitute
a room in a villa demiserias probably shared with three or four others. For fields,
make it small factories, construction sites, restaurants, or even expensive homes.
Many illegals are women who find work as domestics and learn that the wealthy
suburban matron who hires them can be equally as exploitive as any other unscru-
pulous employer.
v Any community with a large number of illegal aliens attracts crooked lawyers
and "immigration specialists" who charge exorbitant fees for routine immigration
help.





65

A typical case:
Goziam Attoh of Washington, a Nigerian student who married an American
girl and needed only to fill out a simple form at the local INS office to petition for
.a change in status from student to permanent resident, thus allowing him to
remain in this country.
An alien "consultant" in suburban Maryland persuaded him, Attoh said, that
he would have a very difficult time getting his status changed, but with their
help, it might be arranged. Attoh paid the company $490, and they dutifully
helped him fill out a form that he could have done in a few minutes at the local
immigration office.
But Attoh, in a sense, is very lucky. Because he married an American woman,
he now has something that money can't buy, something coveted by eight million
people already here and uncounted millions overseas-status as a legal immigrant
to the United States.

[From the Washington Star-News, Nov. 17, 1974]
LIFE IN PARADISE SPENT ON THE RUN

(By Michael Satchell)
The pale green car glides onto Columbia Road NW, shortly before dawn, its
-driver and passenger scanning the sidewalks, slowing down at bus stops, peering
into shop doorways, looking for shabby clothes, brown skins and furtive eyes.
Watching them, perfectly aware of their mission, are the quarry, emerging
from crowded apartments, waiting in bus queues with brown lunch bags, avoiding
,direct eye contact with the car and its occupants, trying desperately to appear
nonchalant, to look as if they belong.
The car suddenly stops, two men leap out, a figure flees and a footrace begins.
Two minutes later a young man is under arrest. Eight hours later he's in the
D.C. jail. Three days later, carrying a small brown bag with all his worldly
:goods, he's stepping off a jetliner in Costa Rica, in Ecuador, in Ethiopia, in
Nigeria or wherever.
One more illegal immigrant to the United States, one of the estimated eight
million who now call America home, has been deported.
It is a process repeated daily in virtually every big city in the country and
.along the Southwestern border states as the vastly outnumbered Immigration
.and Naturalization Service pits its 3,800 investigators, inspectors and naturalizers
.against eight million hidden fugitives.
It is no contest.
"To put it mildly, it's terribly frustrating, very disheartening and mostly
hopeless," bemoans Harry Heard, an investigator with the INS field office in
Washington.
"For every one we pick up," he said, "it seems like there are 10 more coming
into the city and 100 more already here. But, you just go out and do your best
.and hope that somebody out there or up on the Hill knows what's happening and
what we're trying to do."
The Washington area has between 35,000 and 50,000 illegals, David Drum-
mond, the local INS chief, estimates. Unlike other major urban areas, it has a
hodgepodge of peoples.
New York, for example, has mostly Latin Americans among its million illegals
.and they melt easily into the Puerto Rican and Latino barrios. New England
attracts Portuguese. Half of Chicago's estimated 500,000 illegals are Polish
nationals. The West Coast cities have a preponderance of Mexicans and Central
Americans as illegals.
But cosmopolitan Washington has them all, and a few more besides. The
Latins are clustered in the Columbia Road and Mount Pleasant areas, Nigerians
,on upper 14th Street NW; Koreans in Arlington; Ethiopians, Greeks, Italians,
Iraqis, Britons, everywhere.
It is not against the law to hire illegals, although bills before Congress would
-change that.
In Washington, illegals work in a host of service industries. They drive cabs,
work as busboys and waiters, hotel chambermaids and porters, domestics and
construction laborers.
Investigators have picked them up typing in Capitol Hill offices, laboring as
stewards at the Ft. Myer officers club, preparing food at the Kennedy Center,







wearing hardhats on Metro construction sites, checking baggage at National
Airport, parking cars at downtown lots.
Much to the embarrassment of the Immigration Service, four were arrested
while working as janitors in the INS headquarters here. But nobody at INS
laughed when a study last month concluded that better enforcement, meaning
more investigators to pick up illegals, could release one million jobs held by aliens
nationwide to the growing ranks of unemployed Americans.
A popular INS joke, probably with more truth than humor, is that if every
illegal in Washington was caught and deported, half the city's restaurants would
be forced to close and half the cabs would stop running.
"I'm almost afraid to go out to dinner," Gen. Leonard F. Chapman Jr., INS
commissioner, said. "I'm a law enforcement officer and I'd be surrounded by
illegal aliens."
In early October, this reporter took a Virginia cab from his North Arlington
home to National Airport, bound for California to report on illegal aliens along the
Mexican border. The cab driver, who spoke broken English, had no idea how to
find National Airport from Arlington Boulevard, had to be directed right to the
terminal building, and had difficulty figuring out the change when it came time to
pay the fare.
"Are you an illegal?" he was asked.
"Don't understand," he muttered.
Unlike the Southwest border states that harbor practically all wetbackss,"
those who have slipped into the country without papers, Northern cities also have
a share of illegals who come here on tourist or student visas and then remain after
their visas expire. The tourists simply scrape up the plane fare, get their visa and
disappear from official view as soon as they reach American soil. Students from the
Third World countries tend to come with every intention of returning but learn to
like the American lifestyle and decide to stay on.
INS officers grumble that consular officials abroad are far too lax in handing out
tourist visas. The American officials shudder at the mention of the American
Bicentennial celebration two years hence. In June 1973, President Nixon issued a
"Bicentennial Invitation to the World," and consular officials were urged to
encourage travel to the United States.
"They'll all head for here," groaned an INS official.
Picking up illegals once they are established in the community is a sometimes
ticklish, occasionally distasteful task, and INS methods have been criticized by
several rights groups, particularly the American Civil Liberties Union.
The New York ACLU has filed suit to try to force INS into halting its so called
"street sweeps"-the practice of stopping likely looking suspects on the street
and asking for identification, simply because they may be shabbily dressed,
ethnic appearing and walking in an area where illegals are known to live.
INS argues that this is an effective way to catch illegals, although investigators
sometimes find that even the most tactful approach in asking a man's birthplace
and identify can backfire. Recently, the INS's Heard and a rookie investigator
named Harry Montville were cruising the Columbia Road area and Heard, who
prides himself on being able to call a man's nationality nine times out of ten
simply on visual appearance, told Montville to get out and check a young man
on the street.
"He's probably a Persian," Heard said confidently.
Montville stepped out and very politely asked the man for some identification.
"What the hell is this?" the man asked. "You can't do anything to me. r
haven't done anything. I'll complain to the Justice Department. I'll sue you.
I'll . "
Montville, much chagrined, jumped back into the car.
"Persian, eh?" he said. "How about hostile U.S.C.?"
A U.S.C. is a U.S. citizen.
The occasionally distasteful part occurs when a father or mother, picked up-
on the street or at work, refuses to reveal the home address to protect the spouse
and children. He or she is deported and it may be weeks, months before the person
can return to the country. Meanwhile, the family members are left wondering
whether a parent has been caught and deported, has come to harm, or simply
deserted them.
The other method of catching illegals is to check places where they are regularly
employed or follow up on tips. A number of Washington restaurants regularly
hire aliens as busboys or kitchen workers, and investigators know they can go to
a given restaurant on any day and be assured of picking up four or five illegals.







67

When the immigration men hit a restaurant-never during the luncheon or
*dinner rush, by tacit agreement with restaurant managers-there is always a
mad scramble for exits or hiding places.
"They'll go out of second floor windows like birds," investigator Joe Reissig
said. "They'll dive into the meat coolers, the bathroom, the boiler room. They'll
throw off their uniforms and sit dowh at a table like they're eating. They'll split
like rabbits."
Once arrested, an alien can elect to leave the country voluntarily if he has
the funds and gets official approval. Investigators have the option of keeping
the person in custody and formally deporting him, which usually is done if the
alien appears unlikely to go home on his own.
Those given voluntary departure, are not liable for criminal penalties if they
re-enter the United States and are caught again. Aliens formally deported can be
prosecuted if they return and are caught.
There is a sense of futility apparent among investigators. They are so under-
staffed and funds run so short that they find themselves going out each day,
picking up a handful of illegals, and then driving by others walking the streets.
Processing a deportee requires a lot of paperwork, and the alien is allowed to
go home escorted if he wishes and gather his things. Investigators who display
remarkable tolerance and sometimes affection for those they chase usually try
to make sure an alien receives any back wages or benefits before he is put on the
plane.
The district office has 17 investigators responsible for the city, Virginia and
parts of North Carolina.
Here, as elsewhere, investigators will no longer bother to drive a long distance
to bring back one or two illegals who may have been picked up by authorities in
-downstate Virginia, unless the aliens have committed crimes. The rationale is:
Why bother spending half a day driving, plus gasoline, when the officer knows
he can drive a few blocks from the downtown office and be assured of picking up
up six or eight in an hour.
Given the arithmetic of alien-chasing, most illegals simply lie low and watch
out for the tell-tale green INS car as it makes its morning sweep. The odds on not
getting caught are overwhelmingly in their favor.
"Getting picked up by the immigration man," Heard said, "is like getting hit
by lightning. The odds are about equal."
Tomorrow: The thin green line: stopping aliens crossing the border.


[From the Washington Star-News, Nov. 18, 1974]
THE BIGGEST HOLE IN THE DIKE

(By Michael Satchell)
San Ysidro, Calif.-The first wave gathers at dusk. Along a short strip of
border separating suburban San Diego and downtown Tijuana, Mex., groups of
raggedly dressed men and women begin forming by the jagged holes in the 12-foot
cyclone fence that divides Them from Us.
The human tide, which has receded during the daylight hours, has turned.
When darkness falls the first waves will crash through the fence and disperse like
breakers on a beach, to be followed by more and more in the same relentless cycle.
On this night, as on any, between 1,000 and, 1,500 campesinos will pour across
this five-mile stretch of border, some carrying clothing and a little money,, most
with nothing but dust in their pockets.
Three or four hundred will quickly be caught within sight of the border. In a
couple of hours they will have been processed, driven back to the border check-
point crossing and released. But many will be back in the United States before
the bus that deported them has returned the two miles to the U.S. Border Patrol
headquarters to pick up the next load.
It is a futile, almost ludicrous exercise.
To fly along the border at dusk watching the hordes gather or to view them
snaking along well worn trails in the eerie green light of a night vision scope, is
startling.
This is the Border Patrol's Chula Vista sector, the biggest hole in the porous
dike that passes for a controlled and guarded U.S.-Mexican border.
The border is 1,945 miles long and Chula Vista covers the first 66 miles inland
from the Pacific Ocean. Across this stretch comes about one-third of the "wet-
backs," illegally entering the U.S.









This year, if the current arrest rate continues, about 200,000 illegals will be
captured in the Chula Vista sector-about one in four of those who cross this
section of the border. Most of the 800,000 aliens will choose routes that funnel
directly out of Tijuana, crossing in an 18-mile section from the ocean to Otay
Mountain.
On paper, it should seem easy to stop most of them, but consider:
The Immigration and Naturalization Service has been understaffed for years
in trying to stanch the ever increasing flow of illegals into the country. Today, the
Chula Vista sector has fewer Border Patrol officers than it had three years ago.
Over the last 10 years, while patrol strength in Chula Vista has increased 20
percent, the number of illegals captured has zoomed 2,000 percent, from 4,377
in 1963 to 156,886 last year.
On an average night, the 18-mile strip of border across from Tijuana will have
only 16 patrolmen in the field during an eight-hour shift and some nights will be
down to 10 or 12. The usual practice is to station the men along the five-mile
stretch bearing the heaviest traffic, and leave the other 13 miles unguarded.
The second principal line of defense along the border consists of highway
checkpoints in the Chula Vista sector at San Clemente on Interstate 5 and at
Temecula on U.S. 395. But recent California court decisions have severely
restricted the Border Patrol's powers to check cars for smuggled aliens, and
recently the Temecula checkpoints was forced to close due to an adverse court
decision.
Most of the U.S.-Mexican border is open land, although close to population
centers. The U.S. has erected fences that in some places are 12 feet high and topped
with concertina barbed wire.
The fences are virtually useless. Smugglers cut holes in the wire with clippers
and sometimes drive cars or trucks through. An electrified fence might be a more
effective deterrent, but a sensitive Mexican government complains even about
the barbed wire, stressing that Mexico is a friendly neighbor.
"The border patrol is a very thin green line," complained Richard Batchelor,
deputy chief patrol officer at Chula Vista. "The problem is just too big. There are
too many coming through the wire. Hell, we're not functioning as policemen or
law enforcement officers. We're just picking up bodies and shipping them back."
The old hands like Batchelor in the Border Patrol recall almost wistfully the
old methods of dealing with aliens, especially "Operation Wetback" that the
Immigration Service conducted in 1954-55.
It was a tough program aimed at discouraging illegals from returning, and it
worked like this. An alien, after being picked up, would be held in jail until an
FBI check could be run. If he was a returnee or had committed any crimes, he
was prosecuted. If not, he was given a slow ride to Brownsville, Tex., held in jail
for a week or two, then loaded aboard a steamer operated by a Mexican ship
owner who wasn't concerned with the physical comfort of his passengers.
After a long, slow and uncomfortable voyage, the alien was turned loose in
Vera Cruz deep in southeast Mexico, and a long way from the American border.
Today, given the sheer number of aliens involved and the advent of cheap, speedy
bus travel within Mexico, such a program isn't feasible.
The Mexican government's cooperation has been lukewarm at best, knowledge-
able sources say, because the flood of poorly educated and underemployed
workers into the U.S. is a safety valve for a country whose population is expected
to triple in the next 20 years.
The problem was discussed by Presidents Ford and Echeveria recently when they
met at the border to discuss the recent Mexican oil discovery. The Mexican gov-
ernment is anxious to get a form of the old Bracero program instituted in which
controlled numbers of Mexicans were allowed into the U.S. to work as fieldhands.
This idea has several stumbling blocks, though. Mechanization has sharply cut
into the need for stoop labor, and union organizers, particularly Cesar Chavez,
see the flood of Mexican nationals into the fields as some sort of farm owners plot
inspired by the government to undercut union strength.
The AFL-CIO has also expressed concern at the massive impact illegal aliens
are having on jobs, wage losses and other economic consequences that affect
American workers already hard hit by rising unemployment and inflation.
With Mexican authorities unwilling to tighten up on their side of the border,
it becomes a problem of catching the intruders once they cross the line.
One method is by the sensors, which are Vietnam war surplus devices planted
in the major foot trails to detect movement. When the sensor is activated, the
operator sees a black ink mark on a graph and can then dispatch an officer to
check the particular trail.










At Chula Vista, foot traffic along the trails gets so heavy at night that there
aren't enough officers to check out all the warnings. Said Gary Reece, a sensor
operator:
"At night, the graphs are solid black. And the hills are solid brown."
Viewed from the air, the dun-colored hills east of Tijuana on the U.S. side
are an amazing sight. Scores upon scores of narrow trails worn into the scrub over
the years by thousands of aliens twist and turn and intertwine, forming a giant
mosaic as intricate as a piece of Belgian lace.
Along them during the day, but mostly at night, come the illegals who are wise
to the Border Patrol's rules and regulations and know how to play the "wetback"
game to win. For example, a group of maybe a dozen will form up and make the
run across.
If they run into a patrolman, a couple will "sacrifice" themselves and be caught.
Their companions will scatter, aware that a Border Patrolman is not allowed to
use his gun unless his life is threatened.
Those who get by simply head for the International Border crossing and pick
up a cab or bus, or thumb a ride north to San Diego or beyond. The one or two
caught by the patrolman are simply returned over the border and make another
crossing attempt before dawn.
Most of the aliens, in fact, have no choice but to make another try. They usually
have traveled long distances to reach Tijuana, and even if they wish to return
to the Mexican interior, there is little chance of earning the fare in the Tijuana
area. So they are forced to cross the border again and to look for work-if it is
only to finance their return home.
An interesting-trend is the smuggling of aliens. This traffic in human flesh has
turned into a highly profitable business. Smugglers take small risk of being caught
and even less of being prosecuted due to clogged courts, harried prosecutors and
adverse court decisions.
One of the biggest stumbling blocks to prosecuting alien smugglers was a recent
federal court ruling that all of the smuggled aliens involved in a case had to be
held and be available as witnesses.
Said Robin Clack, who runs the Border Patrol from the Immigration and
Naturalization Service's Washington headquarters: "Oh smuggling cases we'd
keep four or five aliens to testify and send the others back. Now, we have to keep
30 or 40, and it becomes impossible because there just isn't jail space available
to hold them.
"Plus the aliens," he continued, "are very, very reluctant to testify against the
smuggler, which means the prosecutors are reluctant to try the cases. And when
they do and win, the courts let them off lightly. The courts will jump on narcotics
traffickers, but not those who deal in aliens."
The smuggling is big business. Just how profitable can be gauged by the action
last November of Arcela Robles, a woman with permanent resident status in the
U.S. and the ringleader of a smuggling ring believed to be transporting about 1,500
aliens a month across the border and charging each one $225.
She was charged with smuggling aliens and posted a $175,000 cash bond, which
she immediately forfeited by skipping across the border.
Said Robert Hodge, head of the Border Patrol's anti-smuggling unit in Chula
Vista: "We've always had a certain amount of smuggling, but nothing on the
scale or sophistication we see today. It used to be truck drivers-Sunday smugglers-
bringing a few "wets" in for $25 a time.
"Now," he said, "there are about 40 highly organized smuggling rings in Tijuana
alone, with an average price of $250 a head to get them across the border and to
Los Angeles. The bigger ones even will get people from Central or South American
and take them all the way to Chicago or New York for $1,000 or thereabouts.
"They have representatives in each city," he explained, "who often guarantee
them jobs on arrival, and the usual practice is to collect the fees later when the
alien is earning money. They rarely have the money to pay in advance."
The aliens, who initially make contact with smuggling ring representatives in
Tijuana bars or street corners, are first taken through the wire by border-wise
teen-aged guides, 13 or 14-year-old Mexican boys who themselves have sometimes
been caught half a dozen times by the Border Patrol.
Once over, the aliens are picked up and driven to drop houses close to the San
Clemente or Temecula checkpoints. When the checkpoints are opened up-in
cases of bad weather, fog, smog or heavy traffic-the smugglers simply load up
their human cargo and drive north unhindered.
Although the Immigration Service doesn't keep hard statistics on such inci-
dents, their files are packed with stories of brutality.








70

Aliens have been driven across in cars lying in the engine compartment, tied
beneath the chassis or packed like sardines in trunks. Some have suffered burns,
and suffocated from carbon monoxide fumes. Their bodies have been found
dumped on the side of the highway.
In McAllen, Tex., 22 aliens were found inside a tanker trailer with four inches
of flammable fuel oil sloshing around.
Some have been frostbitten in blizzards while being guided across the Canadian
border. Others have nearly died after spending days traveling across country in
unheated trucks, and with virtually no food or water.
Last August, 58 Ecuadorians were discovered-shivering and hungry-in the
hold of a banana ship after it docked in New York. They had spent a week nearly
freezing in the 50 degree hold, living on water and green bananas.
After several days, the 58 Ecuadorians were loaded aboard a jetliner to be
returned home at a cost of between $60,000 and $70,000 to the U.S. taxpayer.
But as they were being deported, thousands more were coming; slipping through
the wire, wading the Rio Grande, marching boldly through border checkpoints
with false documents, stepping off commercial jetliners masquerading as tourists,
part of the floodtide of desperate humanity seeking a better life here, joining the
eight million illegals who are already looking for it.
Tomorrow: Some thoughts on dealing with problems of illegal aliens.


[From the Washington Star-News, Nov. 19, 1974]
SOLUTION 'SIMPLE': CUT OFF JOBS

(By Michael Satchell)
To the casual observer, the revelation that America is now the unwilling host
to an estimated eight million illegal aliens usually comes as a surprise. The prob-
lem seems to have crept up without warning, a sudden lightning invasion of brown-
skinned hordes flocking across the U.S.-Mexican border in the last few months.
Just the opposite is true.
The hordes of popular imagination pouring through the fences are doing just
that, but it's been happening with increasing intensity since the old Bracero
migrant farm worker program was halted in 1964.
The trickle has turned into a flood. '
In a country preoccupied since the middle 1960s with civil disorders, Vietnam,
Watergate, the energy crisis and economic woes, illegal aliens have ranked low
on the list of national concern.
So low, in fact, that virtually no one outside the U.S. Immigration and Naturali-
zation Service knew what was happening, and those who ran INS during these
crucial years did little or nothing to warn Congress, the White House or the
public of just how serious things were.
Conversations with deeply frustrated and often angry staffers at INS head-
quarters, in the Washington field office and in the U.S. Border Patrol in California
make it apparent that they knew the extent of the problem and fretted at being
unable to do anything about it. The word from the top was: Don't rock the boat
and don't talk to the press.
While alien arrest rates zoomed higher than a wetback clearing the barbed
wire atop the border fence-2,000 percent in the case of the Border Patrol since
1960-budgets and staff allocations lagged far behind.
INS topsiaers universally blame the two men who controlled INS during
this period for the current alien problem-Commissioner Raymond Farrell and
his management chief Edward A. Loughran, who is widely acknowledged to have
been the power behind Farrell's figurehead role.
SFarrell retired last year amic' criticism from Congress, and Gen. Leonard F.
Chapman Jr., former commandant of the Marine Corps and a man identified
more with management skills than the martial arts, replaced him with orders to
shape up an Immigration Service dispirited and in disarray.
Chapman quickly eased out Loughran, who is now the staff director of the
Senate immigration subcommittee. Repeated calls to Loughran by the Star-
News seeking an interview on criticism against him went unanswered.
Chapman, diplomatically, will say only that "INS in the past has not reacted
vigorously enough to the problem of illegal immigration." Other INS officials were
'not so kind.







71

"They went trotting to Congress each year, asking for minimal appropriations
telling everyone that there was no real alien problem, that INS has everything
under control," one official said. "But we knew different."
Fumed another: "We were always under strict orders never to talk to the news
media. They didn't want to rock the boat. The country was facing this massive
invasion of illegals and all they were interested in was looking good before Con-
gress. They hid the problem and ignored it and now look at the situation we're in.
"How the hell can we catch and deport eight or ten million aliens or stop them
coming in now?" the official asked.
Modest as budget requests were during these years when the alien problem was
compounding, Congress and various administrations still chopped heavily into
them. An analysis of INS budget requests and appropriations since 1970 shows a
clear pattern of moderate trimming by Congress, and some heavy-handed slashing
by the White House.
The combined effect of these subsistence, cap-in-hand budget requests since the
mid-1960s, coupled with the paring knives of the politicians, have left an obvious
legacy: an Immigration Service that today is woefully undermanned.
On September 30, for example, Chapman announced cutbacks on all except
high priority programs within the service. He switched 450 agents from their jobs
of alien-catching in the interior to help plug the gaping holes in security along
the thinly patrolled border.
"Our resources have increased only slightly while our tasks have increased
enormously," Chapman said in announcing the moves.
But massive infusions of money and equipment to double or triple the INS
force of Border Patrolmen or investigators isn't the solution to the problem.
With six, eight, ten or 12 millions already here-take your pick on the estimate-
and a projected three or four million entering the country in the 12-month period
that began July 1, no amount of INS personnel will be sufficient to halt the flow
or scoop up those y~ho.get, Qfross,
If the flow isn't halted, pessimistic officials say gloomily that the adverse impact
on the American economy will continue to worsen. Already, the estimated eight
million illegals here were responsible for a $10 billion wage loss to American
workers. They hold millions of jobs at a time of rising unemployment. They
mail out billions of dollars in untaxed money to their homelands, aggravating the
country's balance of payments. And they make use of a wide variety of public
services from schools to medical care.
Aliens come to the United States for one reason-jobs. Cut off the lure and ergo:
The problem is solved. It sounds simple, but it isn't.
Chapman and others concerned with illegal immigration are banking on passage
of a bill introduced by Rep. Peter Rodino, D-N.J., that would make it illegal for
any employer to hire an illegal alien.
The Rodino bill has passed the House twice but has been killed once in the
Senate Judiciary Committee, a victim of the business lobby anxious to preserve a
cheap labor supply. Once again it languishes in the Senate, its toughest provisions
already deleted.
To complicate matters, Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass., has introduced a bill
with stiffer penalties for employers of illegal aliens but which would grant amnesty
to illegals who have lived in the United States for longer than three years.
And Sen. James O. Eastland, D-Miss., chairman of the Senate Judiciary Com-
mittee, has draft legislation that would soften still further the proposed penalties
against employers that already amount to little more than a rap on the knuckles in
the watered-down Rodino version.
Additionally, the Eastland and Rodino proposals contain no amnesty provision
as Kennedy wants and observers are not optimistic for any compromise in time for
a bill to emerge from the current session of Congress.
INS believes an employment bill is the answer. The California legislature recently
passed a state law prohibiting employers from hiring illegals and arrests dropped
almost immediately as it quickly took effect. The law was overturned, however, by
an appellate court, which ruled that the federal and not state government had
jurisdiction over the matter.
Whatever form any future employment bill takes, many feel it faces enforce-
ment problems.
The American Civil Liberties Union worries that employers will simply turn
down all Spanish-speaking, Chicano or other ethnic minorities seeking jobs and
thus worsen already existing employment discrimination.
The Rev. Sean O'Malley, a priest who deals with illegal aliens in his work as
head of the District of Columbia's Spanish Catholic Center, believes it will have
even worse results.







72

SSaid O'Malley, who favors blanket amnesty: "These people will not turn around
and go home. Decent employers will comply with the new law, and the illegals
will be forced to go and work for the unscrupulous ones. The Simon Legrees will
continue to hire aliens and will exploit them even more. You will have wide-
spread persecution of a lot of innocent people who are simply economic refugees."
There are even skeptics in the immigration service who feel that the Rodino
bill as it stands is too weak for effective enforcement.
There are still others convinced that the only lasting solution to the problem of
illegals flocking here for jobs is massive economic aid to Mexico, the principal
source of the vast human migration.
"If we're smart we'll help industrialize them and raise their standard of living,"
one INS official said. "I'm just praying that the Mexican oil discovery is big
enough to really get them on their way."
A higher standard of living in the adjoining Latin countries may be a long-
term answer, but there is the immediate problem of awakening an ambivalent
Congress and public to the consequences of millions of unauthorized residents in
the United States and their effect on the quality of life here.
"This country is sleeping," said Immigration Court Judge Grace Beatrice
Davis, who views the problem from the deportation bench each day. "I think
-there are 12 million here, not six or eight, and people just don't realize
the ramifications.
"We are suffering socially, economically and politically from this problem and
:it's time to stop," she said. "This country isn't being settled by immigrants any-
more, but these people think they have squatters' rights. We've got to start
.thinking about the people who have a legitimate stake in the United States."


[From the Washingtoin star-News, Nov. 17, 1974]
CARLOS DIDN'T LAST LONG IN THE PROMISED LAND

(By Michael Satchell)
As soon as the cruising car slowed down, Carlos knew they were after him. And
he ran like he had never run before, racing north up Connecticut Avenue at
7 o'clock on a golden summer morning, the inbound drivers wondering perhaps
who this fleet young sprinter was and why the man in the double-knit blazer
was puffing after him.
SCarlos Rodis Modesto Hernandez, 24, is married and the provider for his wife,
three children, his three brothers and his two sisters. By trade, he is a chauffeur;
by necessity, an illegal alien, and now, by bad luck, a hunted fugitive.
Carlos left his home last January, a shy young nobody from San Miguel, El
Salvador, the tiniest and most densely populated country in the Central American
umbilical joining North and South America.
He had about $200 in his wallet, the money scraped together mostly by his
in-laws as a high-risk investment and an expensive gamble on the family's future.
Like hundreds of thousands of other campesinos or threadbare refugees from rural
poverty who are jamming urban areas throughout Latin American, Carlos joined
the migration north to the United States, where a man can earn the princely sum
of $10 a day, maybe $15 if he is lucky.
In San Miguel, Carlos drove a wealthy businessman around for $2 a day. But
it wasn't enough to provide for so many. So on foot and by bus he made his
way to Tijuana, Mex., and paid a smuggler $100 to guide him across the border
and deliver him to Oceanside, Calif.
There Carlos became one of eight million illegal immigrants now estimated to
be living in the United States.
The illegality of his act never entered his thoughts.
"I had to do it," he said, wondering why anyone would ask such an obvious
question. "I want a better life for my family. Here I can earn it. There I cannot.
We are a poor country."
Carlos quickly melted into the barrios of Los Angeles, comfortable among other
Spanish speaking people. He washed dishes for two months and earned enough
to buy a one-way ticket to New York, where once again he was quickly swallowed
up in a latino community.







73

In New York, he worked as a carpenter's helper earning $10 a day and lived
with a friend in a $25 a week room. He did not drink or smoke, he ate sparingly,
spent nothing on hirhself. Every spare dollar was mailed to El Salvador toward
his goal of saving $2,000. When he reached that sum, he would return and begin
a small business, maybe a shop.
Carlos paid no taxes, and his employer, probably aware that he was an illegal
.alien-there are about one million in New York-certainly wasn't going to the
trouble to deduct taxes. Even if he had, there would have been no problem.
Like other illegals, Carlos would simply have invented a Social Security number
and claimed six or seven dependents. By the time the computer caught up with
him he would have drifted to another job that paid a dollar or two more for a
day's work.
In August, Carlos did just that. He moved to Washington and shared a room
with two or three other aliens in the Columbia Road area, joining them with the
understanding that if caught, none would reveal their address and thus protect
the others. It is a common bond between illegals, and many who are deported
board the plane with only the clothes they were wearing when captured.
Carlos quickly found work as a bricklayer's helper on a small construction site
and at a 50 percent boost in salary-$15 a day. On about the 10th day after
arriving in Washington, Carlos was waiting on Connecticut Avenue to be picked
up for a ride to work.
He was wearing old clothes and holding a brown paper bag containing his lunch,
three tortillas. The green car carrying two immigration investigators spotted him,
slowed down to check his identity, and away he went-running to escape his
pursuer, running to protect his precious investment, running to assure his fam-
ily's future.
He was caught and deported.

[From the Washington Star-News, Nov. 16, 1974]
STATISTICS ON IMMIGRATION
(By Michael Satchell)
The arithmetic of illegal immigration illustrates the scope and magnitude of
the problem.
In the 12-month period that ended June 30, the Immigration and Naturalization
Service caught 788,185 illegal aliens. Eighty-eight percent, or, 693,084 of them,
crossed the border without papers. They were wetbackss," although the term is
a misnomer because most simply walked across and never came near the Rio
Grande.
The remaining 12 percent-95,061 people-were tourists or students who
,overstayed their visas and just tried to blend into the community.
The Mexican border is 1, 945 miles long, and there are about 1,100 border
patrolmen guarding it.
Once the aliens get past the border and find work, the force of INS investigators
is much thinner. In the San Joaquin Valley of California, for example, INS
,estimates that about 120,000 illegals work in the farms, which cover 81,000
square miles. During any given 24 hours, not more than 46 officers are on duty in
this area to catch aliens, which means that one investigator has nearly 2,000
square miles to cover.
New York City, which has more than 1 million illegals, many from the Carib-
bean countries, has a force of 200 investigators. Only 25 men are assigned full
time to catching illegals. The 175 others are also involved in various routine tasks
connected with legal immigrant applications.
Mexico accounts for about 90 percent of the wetbackss," and INS officials
point with alarm at Mexican population projections that suggest why even more
people from the country will sneak into the United States.
Mexico had an estimated population of 56 million in 1973, about half of which
live in rural areas. Half of these rural dwellers have no reportable income. The
remainder earn about $400 a year. It is estimated that 40 percent of all Mexicans
of working age are jobless, underemployed or do only seasonal labor.
At current growth rates, the population will reach 85 million by 1985 and 120
million in 20 years.
"It's a frightening prospect," said Gen. Leonard F. Chapman, commissioner of
the INS. '"Twenty years is not that far off."









Other countries with sizable numbers of illegal immigrants here are the Central
American and Caribbean nations, the Philippines, Greece, Italy, Ethiopia, Great
Britain, Nigeria and Poland. There are an estimated 250,000 illegal Poles living
in the Chicago area, who enter through Canada to join friends and relatives.
INS budget requests in the last five years have been severely cut by Congress
and the White House. The 1975 request for $280,715,000 has been pared down by
the Office of Management and Budget and Congress to a pending appropriation
of $175,350,000 in the House and $1 million more in the Senate.
As the United States nears zero population growth, the total of illegal immi-
grants accounts for an estimated 60 to 70 percent of the remaining growth.
In the 81-year period between 1892, when the first regular deportations began,
and 1973, the INS caught just over 8 million illegal aliens. Next year alone, it
expects to catch 1 million.

[From the Washington Post, Nov. 13, 1974]
ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION: A GLOBAL PROBLEM

It was about a century ago that Emma Lazarus wrote her inscription for the
Statute of Liberty, calling on the nations of the world to send "your tired, your
poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free' and the "wretched refuse of
your teeming shore . ." More recently, Attorney General William Saxbe stated
the contemporary reality: "With the manifold problems the nation faces-energy
shortages, inflation, scarcity of some foodstuffs, rising unemployment-it is
apparent that we are not a limitless horn of plenty." He went on to call for a
redoubling of the effort to keep illegal aliens from entering this country in search of
work and social services unavailable in many countries of the world.
As the shortages of food and the price of energy continue to exacerbate the
plight of the underdeveloped countries, the problem of America's accessibility to
the hungry of the world will create an increasing moral and legal dilemma. During
the active development of this continent, almost all the people of the world were
welcome to pass through "the golden door," as Emma Lazarus chose to call New
York harbor. Now, there are at least 8 million illegal immigrants in the United
States-the equal of New York City-and more are entering each day. Some come
with legal visitor's visas and then, as Mr. Saxbe put it, they "go underground and
vanish when their visits officially expire." Others enter with forged documents, are
smuggled in at hundreds of points along the Canadian and Mexican borders or
just walk across undetected. They come from Mexico and the Philippines, Italy,
India and Korea, Greece, Portugal and the Caribbean.
, They come, as they always have, in search of a better life. And where once
America proudly held that welcome light aloft, the times have changed and no one
knows what to do about the "illegals" who now turn up in the cities, although
once they were principally seeking work in the fields and on farms. They are said
to hold hundreds of thousands of jobs that might otherwise go to the American
unemployed or the legally admitted alien. They are estimated to have an annual
payroll of $10 billion. Social services that are already overstrained must absorb the
added burden. Some "illegals" return to their native lands and collect Social
Security on jobs they never legally held.
The problems could be catalogued indefinitely. Only the solutions are scarce.
Mr. Saxbe wants to strengthen the Border Patrol and obtain better coordination
among federal agencies assigned to cope with various aspects of the problen-. The
AFL-CIO wants the Senate to pass a bill the House already has passed that makes
it illegal for anyone "knowingly" to employ an illegal alien. The AFL-CIO wants
the word "knowingly" dropped and thus to place the burden on the employer to
establish an alien's credentials before giving him a job. Colleges and universities
have agreed with a new regulation that permits the admission of only those
students who can prove they have enough money to keep them during their first
year and who can demonstrate their ability to finance their educations without
additional assistance.
The problem is not unique to the United States. Switzerland recently held a
referendum on whether to eject all the southern Europeans in that country as alien
labor. Great Britain's political parties are in constant debate about what is the
best way to deal with immigrants from the former colonies in Asia and the Carib-
bean. Germany's guest labor is a matter of constant internal debate and a source
of occasional unrest. But those countries have no easy solutions either. If the Swiss
were to eject their Italian menial workers, many Swiss wondered who would







75

handle the garbage, clean the streets and factories and clean off restaurant tables.
And so, for those and other reasons, the referendum was defeated.
And there's the rub. The alien workers in the wealthy Western lands are there
because they once were needed badly-to till the soil of the American West or to
build a railroad that spanned a continent. After World War II, the recovery of the
Ruhr Valley industries depended heavily on the labor of Portuguese and Italians,
who did work that the Germans either could not provide manpower to do or that
Germans did not wish to do. Now the Western countries are facing a different
problem. The railroads have been built, the fields have become largely mechanized
and much less "labor intensive" and the unemployment figures are climbing. The
alien worker is not as badly needed as he once was. But just as the Western coun-
tries need alien labor less-and indeed can afford it less-shortages of food and
resources are becoming more acute around the world.
And so this problem gets stood on its head: Mr. Saxbe chooses to focus, as does
the AFL-CIO, on the problem of the illegal alien; but the real problem is how
the countries of the world are going to work out the problem of redistributing
the wealth in general and of stabilizing the food supply in particular. The "Green
Revolution" showed early promise of assisting with one important aspect of the
problem. But the energy shortages have meant a sharp reduction in the availability
of cheap chemical fertilizers-something the Green Revolution depended on for
its success in raising new and plentiful forms of corn and rice. As long as there are
hungry, jobless people in the world, they are bound to head across frontiers in
search of better lives. There is no practical way of sealing the Mexican and
Canadian borders against illegal entry. And it is hard to get the message back
to the "teeming shore" that those who were once welcome are now an intolerable
burden.
The legislation to punish those who hire illegal aliens-almost always at de-
pressed wages-should be passed. The legislation against smuggling people and
trafficking in human flesh should be strengthened. Those steps will have some
effect, but not much. The real solutions, to the extent that there are any, lie
with the government of the United States and those nations in a position to help
the less developed countries, with economic development and aid and with
measures to improve the distribution of food and the means of producing food.
That is where the problem of "illegal immigration" begins and is probably the
only place it can be solved.

[From the Washington Post, Feb. 2, 19751
U.S. ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION PROBLEM DEFIES THE NUMBERS GAME

ALIENS HARD TO COUNT

(By Lawrence Meyer)
On Jan. 9, Georgios and Athanasios Plessias were plying their trade, painting
the Statue of Liberty at the union rate of $9.71 an hour, when they were arrested
by federal officials. The Plessias brothers, laboring so diligently under the lamp
beside the golden door, were illegal immigrants.
The previous day, Jesus Herrera-Saucedo, a Metro subway construction crew
foreman, was picked uo by federal immigration officials in downtown Washington.
Herrera-Saucedo, a Mexican who earned $8.44 an hour, was also an illegal
immigrant.
Every day, somewhere in the United States, thousands of illegal immigrants
are apprehended by investigators from the Immigration and Naturalization
Service-more than 800,000 last year. But at least that number and perhaps two
to three times more slip into the United States without being caught, according
to immigration officials.
Although when pressed immigration officials concede that no one can say with
any certainty how many illegal immigrants go unapprehended or how many are
living in the United States now, they estimate that 4 million to 12 million illegal
immigrants already are here.
Immigration officials and members of Congress concerned about the problem
variously characterize the influx of illegal immigrants as a "torrent" or a "flood".
and express alarm that unless ne legislation is passed and the immigration
service's budget is increased, the situation will get worse.


49-769-75--6







76

SLocal public officials across the country already are complaining that illegal
immigrants are straining public services, swelling welfare rolls and taking jobs
away from American citizens. Neither federal law nor the laws of most states
require that an individual be a citizen or a legal resident in order to receive public
assistance.
The problem is so acute and resources so limited, according to immigration of-
ficials, that they lack the personnel to respond to all the tips they get concerning
the location of illegal immigrants. In some instances, officials said, even when the
immigrants are caught, they sometimes have to be released because the immigra-
tion service lacks the funds to send them back to their homes.
The problem, according to immigration officials, is simply out of hand. The New
York metropolitan area alone, they say, harbors more than 1 million illegal im-
migrants. In the Los Angeles area, according to estimates, there are at least an-
other 1 million illegal immigrants.
But these estimates are estimates only. When pressed, immigration officials
concede that they really do not know how many illegal immigrants are in the
United States now, how many enter each year without being apprehended, how
much money in federal income taxes goes uncollected, or how much money leaves
the country each year to support the families of illegal aliens working here.
SDuring hearings conducted by a House Judiciary subcommittee in July, 1971,
the Immigration Service director for the El Paso district testified that possibly a
"tremendous amount of money" was being sent to Mexico. Pressed to be more
specific, he said the amount was "at least several million dollars."
That same day, the Southwest regional director testified, "I feel that it is in
the area of a billion dollars, not millions * "
Leonard F. Chapman Jr., commissioner of the Immigration and Naturalization
Service, uses a variety of figures on different occasions to describe the problem.
During a recent interview in his office, Chapman said that 1.5 million to 2 mil-
lion illegal immigrants are not apprehended annually. The figure could be as high
as 4 million, C'h:]i.."lin said. He also estimated "conservatively" that about
$12 million a day, or about $2.88 billion annually, is leaving the United States.
In a speech in Houston last week, Chapman used a different figure. "Last year,"
he said, "the Immigration Service apprehended nearly 800,000 illegal aliens-
equal to more than half the population of the city of Houston. Though this was
10 times the number we apprehended just a decade earlier, it was probably no
more than one out of four who entered the country illegally * Thus, ac-
cording to Chapman's figures in Houston, the minimum number of illegal im-
migrants was not 1.5 million to 2 million, but more likely 2.4 million.
These figures, which Chapman conceded are only estimates, have been cited
repeatedly in several news stories within the last year on the problem. Last summer
U.S. News and World Report carried a four-page interview with Chapman on
"How Millions of Illegal Aliens Sneak Into U.S."
The Washington Star-News ran a series last November on the issue. The maga-
zine of the American Legion in December, 1974, carried an article on "Our Illegal
Alien Problem." Also in December The New York Times ran a three-part series
on illegal aliens in the New York area. ABC News "Closeup" telecast a one-hour
program on "Illegal Aliens: the Gate Crashers" Jan. 3.
When asked how the immigration service determines how many illegal aliens
are in the United States and how many come in annually, Chapman said in an
interview with The Washington Post that these statistics come from estimates
for each of the 32 districts in the United States submitted by the district direc-
tors. Asked how the district directors get their estimates. Chapman responded
that they have a formula, and directed a reporter to call the director for
Washington.
The district director,.David L. Drummond, said in a telephone interview that
he knew of no formula. Drummond later referred his caller to the regional office
in Richmond, were more information was available.
Edward T. Sweeney, associate regional commissioner for operations for the
Southeast region, said in a telephone interview: "We just went through trying to
make an estimate. * I don't think any formula existed. I'm'at a loss."
S. LaVerne Jervis, public information officer for the Immigration Service, said,
"There are formulas and there are formulas. But it sure isn't scientific." The es-
timates are based on "leads" that immigration investigators are unable to follow
up, monitoring of electronic sensors used along the Southwest border with Mexico,
where 80 to 90 per cent of the illegal immigration comes from, local police esti-
mates, economic conditions in the countries were the immigrants come from and
"street wisdom," according to Jervis and other officials.









"It's based on the base estimates of our people in the field," Jervis said. "It's
based on judgment, and how the Miami director decides how many people are in
his district and how the Houston director decides just are not the same thing.
"This certainly isn't an attempt to make it seem that it's a much worse problem
than it is, because that isn't the commissioner's way of doing things and it wouldn't
work," Jervis said.
One source, who has had occasion to examine the immigration service's ways of
measuring illegal immigration, said, "I don't think they have any plausible method
for gathering statistics."
But, this source continued, "I think there's a problem." He cited the immigra-
tion service's statistics on apprehensions, which reflect a steadily and rapidly
rising increase, from 201,000 in 1969 to 277,000 in 1970, to 348,000 in 1971 to
430,000 in 1972 to 576,000 in 1973 to 800,000 in 1974. "I suspect that the rise of
those apprehension figures is a very real set of statistics and that it reflects some-
thing," this source said.
The Law Enforcement Assistance Administration has awarded a $48,000 con-
tract to a private consultant to create a design to study methods that could be
used for counting illegal immigrants and to measure their impact. The Immigra-
tion Service asked for $2 million in its budget request for the next fiscal year for
the study.
SDespite the lack of any reliable statistics, Chapman and members of Congress
,concerned about the problem insist that it is serious. Rep. Peter W. Rodino Jr.
(D-N.J.) has introduced legislation, which has passed the House of Representa-
tives twice since it was first introduced in 1972.
The Senate has never had an opportunity to vote on the bill.
Rodino's bill, which would amend present federal law to make it a crime for an
*employer knowingly to hire an illegal alien, has been referred to the Senate Judici-
ary Subcommittee on Immigration and Naturalization. The committee's chairman,
Sen. James O. Eastland (D-Miss.), has not had a meeting of the subcommittee to
,consider the Rodino bill.
According to Chapman, Rodino's bill, although not a panacea, is a necessary
item to handling the immigration problem. If the legislation passes, Chapman
said, "it will result in a majority of American employers faithfully carrying out
its provisions. And that will narrow it down to the small percentage of employers
who act illegally. * It will dramatically reduce the magnitude of the effort
required."
In addition to the Rodino bill, Chapman said he needed about $50 million in
.additional-money for the Immigration Service. With that much added to the $180
million authorized, in fiscal 1975, Chapman said, 1 million jobs could be opened
,up for Americans, "attractive jobs, the kind you could get an American to do."
Rodino and Rep. Joshua Eilberg (D-Pa.), chairman of the House Judiciary
Subcommittee on Immigration and Nationality, which is to hold hearings on
the bill, both cited the 1 million jobs that could be opened up during a press con-
ference called last week to dramatize the need for legislation.
With millions of Americans unemployed, they argued, the need for the legisla-
tion, serious in past years, had become critical.
When Eilberg was asked by a reporter after the press conference if he was confi-
dent of the statistics supplied by the Immigration Service, he replied, "No one
knows for sure." The Immigration Service, he said, "gives us a rule of thumb that
for every one that gets caught, five or six get through."
By that calculation, the number of illegal immigrants who came into the
United. States last year was not the 1.5 million to 2 million or the 2.4 million
variously estimated by Chapman but rather 4 million to 4.8 million.
When Eilberg was asked if he was not troubled that the statistics seemed to be
soft, he replied, "It doesn't matter whether it's 4 million or 6 or 8 or 12 million"
if it is conceded that illegal immigration is a problem.
Then, pointing to the estimates supplied by the Immigration Service, Eilberg
again asserted that 1 million jobs could be made quickly available to Americans if
the Rodino bill were passed.
In any case, the prospects for the Rodino bill do not seem markedly better in
this session of Congress than before. Eastland, who owns a large plantation in
Mississippi and who reportedly has close ties with Southern agricultural interests,
Was not available for an interview. An administration source who has watched
the Rodino bill in Congress discounted the prospect that Eastland would act on it.
Rodino, when asked at his press conference about Eastland, said he intended
"to take this up with the senator and impress upon him the urgency of this kind
of legislation."









In addition to the doubtful prospects for Rodino's bill in the Senate, the
Ianmigration Service's budget request to be submitted to Congress by President.
Ford will seek only about a $30 million increase and not the $50'million Chapman
had hoped for, an informed source said.


[From the Washington Post, Feb. 2, 1975]
ILLEGAL ENTRANTS FLOCK TO U.S.-A NEW POVERTY CLASS

(By Leroy F.. Aarons):

Los Angeles-No one knows how many. But they are here. Tens of tens of
thousands. Downtown on Los Angeles Street, thousands of women pedaling away
at sewing machines in hundreds of fly-by-night garment sweatshops, no air condi-
tioning, no coffee breaks, usually at less than $2 an hour, the non-farm minimum
wage.
In the restaurants, hidden in the kitchens or in unobtrusive presence as bus-
boys; in the washrooms, parking cars, cleaning hotel rooms, washing cars, assem-
bling electronic gear, by the colors, in light industries; in the homes of the well-to-
do,. minding the children.
They are a new urban poverty class: the illegal immigrants,. most of them
Mexicans, who, in the last decade, have swarmed in ever-increasing numbers
across 2,000 miles of border, through- holes in barbed wire, hiding in secret com-
partments of vans, riding the rails, or flashing counterfeit credentials at border
stations.
Mexican immigration-legal or illegal-is not an unknown phenomenon to the
Southwest. This land once was part of Mexico, and the ebb and flow of millions
of Latins across the new border has been part of American social and economic
history.
: Mexicans, braceros and wetbacks, helped build the Western railroads, dig the
mines, construct the dams and, most important,, provided a seemingly endless
source of cheap labors. Many stayed, to form the foundation of America's Mexican-
American. population of about 6.5 million.
The migrants, legal and illegal, continue to work the fields and vineyards from
McAllen, Tex., to Sonoma, Calif., increasingly an irritant in the struggle between
Cesar Chavez' United Farm Workers Union and the growers, with Chavez
charging that the illegals are used as strikebreakers.
SBut more and more, the illegals are turning from backbreaking stoop labor in
the fields to the cities. They have flocked to Los Angeles, peopling the barrios
of East Los Angeles and the small suburban communities to the southeast and
north.
Constantly fearful of exposure and deportation, the illegal Mexican lives a
shadow existence-unserved by most social institutions that help the poor,
threatened and exploited by landlords and employers, unprotected by constitu-
tional civil rights.
On the rim of the runway at a regional airport, separated only by a metal fence,
sits a collection of old motel rooms and shacks that has become an illegal alien
colony. Its white American owners get $45 a week for a typical rundown five-room
house and $100 month for each motel unit consisting of a bare bedroom, a kitchen
and a shared bathroom.
Amid the frequent scream of jet takeoffs, Isabel lives with her seven children.
At 36, she looks 45. She came to the United States two-years ago, then sent for her
children, one by one, as she was able to raise the money to pay the smugglers,
disdainfully known as "coyotes," who make millions of dollars annually trafficking
in illegals. All told, it cost her $950.
"My husband came here first, and he persuaded me to come. After I got here,
my husband left me five months later," she said through an interpreter. "I got a
job in this garment factory at $1.65 an hour. It has gone up to $2 now, but we do
not work every day. I make $75 after taxes, and sometimes my oldest daughter,
who is 18, helps out I..I..:-.T 1;,. We are overworked in the garment factory. He is
always pressuring us to do more each hour. He threatens to expose us or lay us off
if we don't put out enough work."
Food is expensive. Isabel (not her real name) is afraid to appy for welfare be-
cause she might be arrested. But an Anglo volunteer worker is trying to arrange
to get her food stamps.









SIn the old refrigerator is some lard, a dozen and a half eggs, ketchup, butter,
tortillas, one or two bags of vegetables. "I buy less now. The children who go to
school have a free lunch. The rest only have dinner. The kids will normally eat
'cornflakes when they come home from school, and at night beans and meat, if we
have any.
"Sometimes I think I'd be better off back home. But I feel there's more ways of
feeding your kids here. And medication is free. I'm still much better here."
Take the guesstimated sum of about 1 million illegals in the Los Angeles area,
area, add the number of legal Mexican residents,-nearly 250,000,-place it
against the total population of the Los Angeles area-8 million-and you get a
measure of the dimensions of the issue.
Until the last few years, the illegals problem was largely ignored in the cities.
The illegals are generally good workers; if they were taking work from anyone it
was from the least powerful or vocal. Spanish-speaking, with a common cultural
history, they blended easily into the urban American Chicano environment.
But now, with the deepening recession, rising unemployment and the increasing
numbers, this is changing.
INS has begun to keep job statistics on aliens it picks up or who are picked up
by local police.
Of 842 illegal aliens who reported holding jobs in the Los Angeles area in the
first three weeks of January, 60 per cent were making $2.50 an hour or less. A total
*of 96 percent were making roughly $3 an hour or less. About 250 of the total were
working in service industries, such as dishwashing, and 375 were in light industry,
such as garment work. Only a handful reported jobs in heavy industry or
-construction.
Fully 85 percent of the illegal aliens apprehended .in fiscal 1974 (ended last
.June 30) were nabbed in or coming into the Southwest (basically Texas, Arizona
and California), and nearly 50 percent were in California.
(For the frustrated, undermanned U.S, Immigration and Nationalization
Service staff the deportation process is more like a conveyor belt: they run the
aliens out, and they turn around and come back in again as soon as they raise the
$250 to $350 it takes to pay the coyotes.)
There are perhaps as many as a million illegal aliens.in the greater Los Angeles
area. For them $2 an hour in a sweatshop is preferable to $4 a day and 50 percent
-unemployment in their homeland.
If all the aliens were deported, say some employers who hire them, the economy
would suffer.
David Tallichet, a restaurant entrepreneur from Texas who runs 40 restaurants
nationally, half of them in -California, hires Mexicans as dishwashers. Many of
them, he admits, are illegal aliens.
"In our industries we get the immigrant mainly because he's the only guy
:reporting to work," he said.
"These immigrants come here, they work very hard and we're pleased with
them. A dishwasher gets $2 an hour less. meals It feels kind of ,good to see these
"boys come in and work hard for you."
If the government makes it illegal to hire these aliens, Tallichet says, "we're
going to end up having to go down to the missions, or else raise the price of dish-.
washers to $5 ah hour and raise the price to the customers."
On the other side of the coin, the labor unions argue that alien workers are
easily exploited, depress wage rates, serve as strikebreakers and take jobs from
other workers. At the same time, the unions sign up those aliens who want to join,
use them as voters in National Labor Relations Board elections, and as picketers.
The Los Angeles Laborers local, for example, dissident workers have alleged, has
had as many as 3,000 illegals among its 10,000 members. (The dissident group of
workers complained to the NLRB that illegals were getting preference in hiring-
hall assignments and paying kickbacks to union officials.)
Cornelius Wall, western regional director of the International Ladies Garment
workers Union, who admits that his union organizes illegal aliens, said: "This
union is not going to say pick 'em all up and throw 'em out of the country. Those
with roots here, let's put them in a different category. Those who don't, let's ship
'em back. And no new arrivals! Close up the border with machine guns if we have
to, and shoot every son-of-a-bitch that puts a foot across the border, and you'll
kill less than those that come across in the trunk of a car or in a tank truck."
Los Angeles Street, nine blocks .south of city hall, is the Southwest's Seventh
Avenue. State industrial welfare agent Salvatore Andriola is showing a reporter
around the streets, past rows of monotonously similar lots, office spaces and
basements that make up his beat, where he and a handful of others try to enforce
state wage and work condition codes within the garment contractor industry.







80

"Los Angeles County probably has 60,000 people working sewing machines
for these contractors," Andriola said. "Most of them are women, and at least half
are illegals.
"Union representation is low, maybe 12 per cent. Most of these are marginal
operators, undercapitalized. In order to survive they've got to pay less than legal
wages. They farm work out to homeworkers (women who sew at home, against
state law), who in turn farm it out to friends and relatives. They got 'em over a
barrel. They say, 'I'll give you 10 cents a dress, 25 cents a dress, or nothing.'
There's always the threat of sending 'em back to Mexico. Usually the bulk are
getting $1.50 to $2 an hour . They pay in cash, no statement, no deductions.
You fight 'em [the contractors] and the next week they're gone. They don't own
the lots, they just rent them, so they can split easily.
"At the wages they are working, the illegals are not American citizens out of
jobs. Why should an unwed mother with four kids work for 50 cents an hour if she
qualifies for welfare? What it does do, is that these people develop a toehold. It
provides encouragement for sisters and brothers and cousins to come. They all
gather in the rats' nest in the barrio, and eventually these people begin drawing
on the economy for welfare and health benefits. It creates a large pool, ready,
willing and eager to be exploited."
Inside a basement shop, 40 women are working at 40 sewing machines turning
out identical cheap halterskirt combinations. It is grimy and hot, unrelieved
by the whirl of a few electric fans. "This place has improved," Andriola said. "In
many: places you see rats and cockroaches running around tihe rctohes. I find
machines blocking exits, elevators not' running.- The sweatshop concept is very
much.alive today."
The owner, a Mexican-American, went into business two years ago. He is
trying to eke out a living from the $1.25 to $2 an item the manufacturer pays for
clothes that will sell for five times as much in the stores.
"If the illegals stopped, I'd go dead," said the contractor. "Because 90 percent
of the operators are illegals. They're very hard workers, they'll work extra hours,
Saturday, even Sundays. The ones that do have papers they just don't want to do
the work unless they get paid more. If you don't pay, right away they threaten you
with Immigration. I'm very wary of legals. They cause me problems."
In the city of San Fernando, for the first time last week, the Chamber of Com-
merce acknowledged that a large part of the city's population of 18,000 consists of
illegal aliens. The chamber agreed to set up a committee with community leaders
to find a way to educate the aliens on how to legalize their status.
Short of a huge military-type operations to weed out illegals by house-to-house
or factory-to-factory searches, it is clear that many thousands of aliens are here to
stay. (An effort to do this occurred in the summer of 1973, during which 11,000
persons were ejected in 25 days. The siege produced a great outcry.inthe Chicano
community about indiscriminate, harassment of the Spahish-surnamed and led
to a spate of lawsuits.)
Some illegals pay income tax because it is deducted from employer payrolls.
However, many claim so many dependents that the deduction is very little.
Illegals are not entitled to food stamps, welfare, unemployment insurance or
Social Security. Some receive some benefits, however, either through use of false
identification or because their American-born children are eligible. Illegals are
given health care by county hospitals, and the schools are technically not supposed
to ask students for origin of birth.
The Los Angeles County Health Department recently tried to estimate the cost
of treating illegals. But the figure-$8 million for one year-was based on a hodge-
podge of assumptions and guesses.
A more accurate figure was provided by the County Welfare Department: of
13,000 welfare applications checked by INS in 1974, 645 were ineligible aliens.
Projected, that would mean one in every 200 suspected applications turns out to be
ineligible.
But here again, that doesn't account for human error, records lost by INS and
the number of applications INS failed to report back on.
But what is to be done? One labor leader offered this observation:
"There are millions in here. How are you going to literally throw what amounts
to millions of people out of the country? There's going to have to be an amnesty of
some kind for those who are established."
He does not, however, want to see any more illegal aliens allowed into the
country.









[From the Washington Post, Feb. 3, 1975]
PATROL CAN'T KEEP ALIENS OUT
(By Leroy F. Aarons)
Yuma, Ariz.-It is a mildly warm winter afternoon in this desert border town,
just 15 miles from Mexico, and the U.S. Border Patrol is making what it calls
'ranch checks."
Translated, that means stalking illegal aliens-"wetbacks" or "Mojados"-
in the lemon groves.
It is extra sensitive right now.since Cesar Chavez's United Farm Workers union
has been striking the lemon groves since the harvest began three months ago, and
the Chavez people consistently have. complained that illegals were being used as
strikebreakers.
The border patrolmen-four of them divided into teams of two, each driving a
medium-sized van with steel-mesh windows-pull up to one of the groves.
Except for the pistols at their hips, they could be forest rangers: the broad-brim
hats, the deep green fatigue shirts and trousers, the waist-length jackets.
They hop out and race stealthily into long rows of lemon trees so dense that
they conceal any evidence of human life within. Inside, the trees hide the sun,
creating a cathedral-like archway and apse, strangely dark, quiet and cool, thick
with,the pungent-stweet smll of ripened lemons.
The pickrrs are there. on luiders, amid theleaves and branches,. stripping lemons
and dropping them into shoulder bags. Some ignore the patrol-"La Migra" or
"immigration" as it is known-with feigned indifference. Others break and run.
But there seems to be no hunter-hunted antagonism on either side. They're all
doing their jobs. Besides, the illegals know they will be back on the U.S. side of
the border soon enough.
Within 20 minutes the patrol has rounded up a dozen illegals and packed them
into the back of one of the vans. It is all very civilized: the patrol sometimes allows
workers to collect part of their day's pay from the foreman.
The vanload will be brought back to Border Patrol headquarters in Yuma.
The aliens will be held in a grimy detention cell, processessed swiftly (most choose
voluntary departure rather than deportation proceedings), and bused to Mexico
to San Luis, the border station that abuts the Mexican city of San Luis on the
other side.
At San Luis the border separation is a 10-foot high metal fence with rolls of
barbed wire along the top. A mile to the east and west the fence shrinks to a few
strands of barbed wire, and at long intervals along the 2,000-mile border from Cali-
fornia to Texas there is no fence at all.
To guard this vast stretch, the Immigration and Naturalization Service now has
1,545 patrol officers-augmented by 1,445 a few months ago, when INS Director
Leonard Chapman' oi&dreda a shift of emphasis from apprehendiing illegals in the
interior to blocking them at the border.
This represents one patrol agent for every 1.3 miles of border-not counting, of
course, different shifts, sickness, vacation and the high turnover rate. Despite
all that, the border guards in the Southwest Region managed to catch 611,000,
illegals in fiscal 1974, about 400 per agent.
Notwithstanding that effort, the alien shuffle is like pitting a water bucket
against a tidal wave.
Funding is part of the problem. The Office of Management and Budget has
shaved INS budget requests sharply in recent years. Thus, in Los Angeles and
Houston, alien hunting has slowed nearly to a halt. Police in Las Vegas are told
to release aliens they apprehend-it is too expensive to come and get them.
But the roots of the issue go deeper, as talks with a number of people in and out.
of the Immigration Service indicate. It has to do, these sources say, with an en-
trenched and complacent bureaucracy within the INS who either refused to see
or admit there was a problem until the problem was out of control. Estimates of
illegal aliens range in the millions.
Austin Fragomen, a New York immigration lawyer who was staff counsel
to the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Immigration in the late 1960s, recalls a
1969 committee hearing on the growing illegal traffic across the Mexican border.
"The immigration service told us at the time there was at the most 100,000
illegal aliens in the U.S., not a substantial problem," said Fragomen. "I think
they really believed it, and only recently came to grips with the reality of the
situation. They never complained about insufficient funds. [Raymond] Farrell
[previous INS administrator] used to get what he asked for, and what he asked
for was always modest."










According to long-time INS employees in the West, ore factor which slowed
INS pursuit of illegal aliens was lobbying pressure by Western agribusiness,
which, when the "bracero" program of allowing Mexican nationals to commute
to work in this country ended 10 years ago, sought to protect its supply of cheap
field labor.
"Historically, the agricultural groups have had an impact on the government,"
said Joseph Sureck, chief of the INS Los Angeles office. "For example, in the
federal law against harboring and concealing aliens, hiring an illegal is excepted.
That was known as 'The Texas proviso' and it reflects the power of the agriculture-
farm bloc in Texas."
The illegal alien influx has spawned another phenomenon-the million-dollar
alien smuggling and counterfeit rackets.
The smuggler-or "coyote"-arranges the passage of illegals across the border
and provides transportation to the cities or agricultural fields where they find
work. For years the system thrived as a group of small businesses. Now, accord-
ing to federal officials, it has blossomed into sophisticated smuggling syndicates
on both sides of the border.
A year ago for example, federal agents broke up a ring of 25 alien smugglers
they said had been netting $9,000 a day over several years. One defendant ab-
-sconded, leaving behind $175,000 bail-$133,000 of it in cash.
"Probably more deaths occur as a result of alien smuggling than all other
federal crimes combined." Assistant U.S. Attorney Harry Kissane of San Diego
has said. Aliens are thrown from speeding vehicles and robbed, beaten and raped,
said Kissane, and they are suffocated while being smuggled in tiny airtight
vehicle compartments.
A trip from Mexico costs about $350 each at the going rate. A counterfeit
visa or the treasured green card (the credit-card-size pass denoting legal residency
which is actually blue in color) can cost $1,000.
The sordid world of border'activity and the prospect of easy money has had
its impact within the Immigration Service. In 1972, an immigration inspector
named Frank Paul Castro was convicted for selling border-crossing papers at
the Tijuana station for $250,000.
The Castro case led to a massive Justice Department probe of the INS called
Operation Clean Sweep, which allegedly turned up evidence of corruption at
various levels of the INS. At one point, the chief investigator, Alfred Hartman,
deputy chief of the Justice Department's general crimes section, told a congres-
sional committee, "There is a liaison of sorts between our American officials and
the s6-called coyotes . ." Few others were indicted, however, and the investiga-
tion fizzled out.
As for the illegals, every one has his own coyote story.
Revna is a Central American who'made her way to Los Angeles via Mexico.
"Five of us traveled by car into Mexico with this man, who lives in New York,"
*she said. "It cost us $90 each for the trip. But when we arrived in Tijuana, he
robbed me. He told us to give him all our money and clothes until he was safely
across the border. So, we gave it to him, $360 each, me and my friend. And we
never saw him again.
"I stayed a month in Tijuana until I put part of the money together to pay
another coyote. I needed $250, but I paid $75 and agreed to pay the rest later.
We came across in a car." The coyote was an American citizen.
For the Revnas and hundreds of thousands like her, the promise of America
seems worth running the gauntlet of the border patrol, the coyote, the exploita-
tion and the subterfuge.
"I constantly live in fear I may be expelled. I try not to go out of the house,"
she said. "I always carry my baby for fear that. they may send me back and put
my baby in a home."
She has lost her job and is living on $300 she managed to save. Still, back in her
home country things are worse.
"I want to stay here," she said. "It's a better chance for me."


CHAVEZ SHIFTS VIEW OF ILLEGALS
Cesar Chavez, leader of the embattled United Farm Workers union, had long
opposed admission of illegal aliens to the United States. He claimed to have proof
that the agricultural industries he has attempted to organize used illegal aliens
to break strikes and resist union pressure.









Recently, however, he has modified his position on illegals, reportedly under
pressure from urban Hispanic activist groups, who apparently convinced him that
he was acting against the best interests of Spanish-speaking and Spanish-surnamed
people of both countries.
Chavez now says his union does not oppose aliens coming to this country so
long as they are not used as strikebreakers. He favors laws punishing employers
who hide strikebreakers and increasing quotas of legal admission of Mexicans and
others in the Western Hemisphere.

24 ILLEGAL ALIENS FOUND HIDING IN TRUCK IN L.A.
Los Angeles, Feb. 2 (UPI)-A routine check of a large truck today led to the
arrest of 24 illegal aliens who had been huddled together without food or water
in the bay of the truck for two days.
The driver, Arthur Nusoen, 48, of San Diego, was arrested and charged with
suspicion of smuggling aliens.
Officers said when they opened the rear doors of the truck, they found some of
the aliens unconscious from lack of food and water. The group included a woman,
and a 16-year-old youth and 22 male adults.
Members of the group had paid $200 each for the ride across tlfe border from
Mexico and into Los Angeles, police said.
The two officers who made the arrests said they stopped the truck because-
there have been several hijackings in the area.


[From the New York Times, Dec. 29, 1974]
MILLION ILLEGAL ALIENS IN METROPOLITAN AREA
SILENT INVASION PARALYZES IMMIGRATION-LAW ENFORCERS
(By M. A. Farber)
A wave of illegal aliens into the metropolitan region-officially estimated at
more than one million-has overwhelmed the Federal Immigration and Naturali-
zation Service here, virtually paralyzing the enforcement of immigration laws.
A 10-week investigation by The New York Times shows that, through individual
and organized fraud, counterfeiting, falsification of travel and identification
papers and smuggling, illegal aliens have mounted what immigration authorities
call a "silent invasion" of New York and northern New Jersey.
Thousands of these mobile aliens-mostly poor, young, marginally skilled
Latin Americans who could not qualify for legal immigration-arrive each month,
and now seem to outnumber legal resident aliens here.
The illegal aliens come to work illicitly and save money and decide whether to
stay permanently. And the vast majority of these men and women, blending into
polyglot communities on the Upper West Side and in Queens, Brooklyn and other
areas, are going undetected.
"We're at a standstill in terms of our ability to go out and remove aliens who are
not entitled to be here," said Henry E. Wagner, investigations chief of District 3
of the immigration service, which includes the city, Long Island and seven other
counties in southern New York.

SHORT OF FUNDS AND STAFF
"But I'm coming to the conclusion that nobody except us gives a damn," Mr.
Wagner said, "and we don't have the money or the men to carry out the law."
Some church, ethnic and civil liberties organizations view illegal aliens as
exploited, even persecuted, "economic refugees"-essentially law-abiding people
with the same hopes for prosperity and security as regular immigrants. Others,
however, argue that illegal aliens are "squatters" who usurp jobs that can be filled
by American citizens, engage in crime, including drug trafficking, and sponge on
public services while paying little, if any, taxes.
Most of the aliens come here from the Caribbean and elsewhere in Latin
America on tourist visas valid for two weeks to six months, having lied about their
real intentions to American consuls in such places as BogotA, Colombia, or Guay-
aquil, Ecuador, or Santo Domingo, the Dominican Republic.







84

Interviews with more than 100 people here and in the Caribbean, also reveal a
fluorishing, extensive, well-established pattern of organized fraud, illicit dealings
in genuine and fake visas and other documents and smuggling of aliens through
Puerto Rico, the Bahamas and Canada.

SEEKING GREENER FIELDS
Nothing, it appears, is sufficient to deter the illegal aliens from coming. Not the
forms that require tourist visa applicants to certify that they will not work or
overstay their visit. Not the expense of buying documents on the black market in
Latin America for up to $1,500, or the fear of exposure. Not the clandestine
crossings of the Mona channel between the Dominican Republic and Puerto Rico
in cramped fishing boats, or the random inspections of crowded flights from San
Juan to New York.
They're seeking greener fields, greener pastures," said a leading Jamaican lawyer
in his office two blocks from the American Embassy in Kingston. "They know
the risk and they're willing to take it because they know it has paid off for many.
In this day, you can't tell a young man with good grades or an adventurous
spirit to go back to the land and plant bananas."
The weakness of the immigration service here and the impunity with which
most illegal aliens are able to flout the laws against them once they arrive are
illustrated by the statistics.
There are now one million to 1.5 million illegal aliens in District 3 of the im-
migration service, with two-thirds of them in the city, according to Maurice F.
Kiley, the district director.
To detect this number of aliens-on their jobs, at their homes and elsewhere-in
what is known as "area control," the district now has 28 agents. And as the
number of agents has dwindled from 50 in recent months with a shift in national
work priorities imposed by Leonard F. Chapman Jr., the Commissioner of the
Immigration and Naturalization Service the number of illegal aliens seized here
has declined by 30 to 50 per cent.
5,300 DEPORTED IN 5 YEARS
In the last five years, District 3 officials have deported about 5,300 persons and
verified the departure of 55,000 aliens who were allowed to leave voluntarily
after their illegal status was discovered. But the service does not know whether
another 48,000 illegal aliens who were ordered to leave actually went home. It
has no record of their departure, and it is not trying to find them.
More than 18,000 complaints from the public about persons suspected of being
illegal aliens here are piled up awaiting investigation-the figure was 44,000
before "unpromising" leads were pulled from the file in the last two years.
Hundreds of new leads, including letters from scorned lovers and from employers
who want to reduce their work forces without firings, arrive each week.
Lying dormant in bulging file cabinets at the service's headquarters at 20 West
Broadway are thousands of cases of persons who entered the district on student
visas but who did not attend their designated schools or who dropped out without
,an indication of their having gone home.
Hundreds, perhaps thousands, of cases of fraudulent or criminal activity by
aliens, ranging from drug trafficking to prostitution to driving without a license,
are also unassigned. And "active" caseloads are often enormous. In the criminal
unit alone, 13 agents and two supervisors are currently handling more than 800
cases that might result in deportation or voluntary departure of aliens.
CONFLICT OVER REPORTS
According to agents who asked not to be identified, thousands of Police De-
partment reports of arrests of aliens-not all of them illegals-have been thrown
out by the service without investigation. Mr. Wagner denied the assertion. He
said that many reports of minor crimes by aliens had simply been "laid aside"
for lack of agents to review them.
The United States, often described as "a nation of immigrants," has no Federal
laws governing the admission of aliens for almost 100 years after its founding.
Immigration was first regulated in 1875, when Congress passed a law preventing
the entry of prostitutes and convicts. In 1882, Chinese laborers were excluded and
-other laws in the next 25 years barred physical detectivess," mental incompetents,
polygamists, anarchists, paupers and other special categories of aliens.







85

A general immigration act in 1917 also excluded aliens from most of Asia and
the Pacific islands and required immigrants to be able to read and write in any
language.
In 1921, Congress passed a temporary immigration quota act, and a "perma-
nent" act followed in 1924. The laws, the first to place a numerical limit on
immigration, had a "national origins" basis, typing the number of immigrants of
any nationality who might be admitted in any year to the percentage of foreign-
born persons bf that-nationality in this country according to the 1890-and later
the 1920-census. The 1924 law also established a class of nonquota immigrants,
including persons born in the Western Hemisphere and close relatives of United
States citizens.
Legislation in 1952 eliminated race as a complete barrier to immigration, but
continued to favor aliens from northwestern Europe and to discourage immigration
by Asians and blacks.
In 1965, in the last general immigration act, the national origins principle was
abolished. A ceiling of 170,000 immigrants annually from the Eastern Hemisphere
was set and the first numerical limit on emigration from the Western Hemisphere,
120,000 a year, was imposed.
The plight of the immigration service here in enforcing the law is matched by
the problems confronting the American Foreign Service in its efforts to stem the
flow of illegal aliens, especially in the last decade.
To persuade American consuls that they have ample reason to return home on
time-the critical test in obtaining a non-immigrant visa-many aliens pad bank
accounts, forge letters of employment locally, have houses and other property
listed under their names temporarily and rent "show" money and clothing to
appear affluent. In Kingston, a tailor turned out suits for visa applicants even as
they stood in pre-dawn queues at the consulate.
Some applicants attempt to bribe consuls with money or sex-at least two
consuls who were mentioned in connection with bribes in recent years in Cali,
Colombia, and Santo Domingo are "no longer on the rolls of the Foreign Service,"
a State Department official confirmed. Other applicants apply pressure by local
government officials, including senior ministers, or through friends and relatives
here, enlist the aid of American legislators at all levels.

SENATOR'S LETTER SOUGHT
Last month, in a car parked at dusk in front of the casino in Port-au-Prince,
a Haitian "entrepreneur" offered an American $500 for every name the American
could arrange to have included in a letter from any United States Senator to the
consulate, requesting expedition of visas.
"We would never run out of names," said the Haitian, who took from his
pockets the passports of 32 persons who had been denied visas. "This would be
a start and, with a Senator's letter, it's a sure thing."
In Haiti, anxious applicants for visas may call on the powers of voodoo. In
the Dominican Republic self-styled "papa-bocos," or witches, offer to win over
the "five senses of the American consul" by blowing cigar.smoke'in the face of an
applicant and anointing him with a sticky mixture of oils, herbs, cologne, white
sugar and "holy" water. The cost is $13.13.
Many applicants who cannot obtain visas turn to local travel agents or "con-
sultants" whose package deals often include counterfeit visas or American
resident alien cards or genuine documents cut out of passports or otherwise
stolen or bought for illegitimate use. In one Caribbean country, a travel agent
hired a runner from the foreign ministry who, on official stationery and in the name
of the nation's president, requested 100 tourist visas over a period of months.
But, for thousands of aliens, smuggling may be cheaper.

ACROSS CANADIAN BORDER
An increasing number of Latin Americans are flying to Toronto and Montreal
and, among Canadians and persons of their own nationalities, finding smugglers
who will drive them at night down unguarded back roads into Vermont or New
York State-at times to a waiting "guide" near Lake Champlain or to the bus
station in Plattsburgh, N.Y., or Burlington, Vt.
Many aliens come through the border checkpoints-hidden in the trunks of
cars or jammed in the back seat between smugglers with valid entry papers,
or carrying some "proof" of residence in the United States, such as a Social
Security or voter registration card. Only last spring the immigration service









arrested a Jamaican who was going from one Board of Elections office to another
here, acquiring registration cards and selling them to aliens in Canada for up to
$250 apiece.
Edward Wildblood, deputy commissioner for operations of the immigration
service's northeast regional office in Burlington, estimated that at least 50 per
cent of the 6,012 persons apprehended by the Border Patrol in that region last
year were destined for New York.
Until recently, he said, 90 percent of apprehensions involved Canadians who
were ineligible to enter the United States because of prior deportations, criminal
convictions or other reasons. But more and more citizens of other countries, par-
ticularly from the Caribbean, "are using Canada as a stepping stone into the U.S.,"
he said, and the proportion of Canadians apprehended has dropped to 70 percent.
In the Caribbean itself, a major smuggling route runs between the coves of
northern Haiti and Nassau in the Bahamas, where aliens then try to set off for
Miami or New York. An even more popular route, however, is the "Puerto
Rico Run" from northern and eastern Dominican Republic where, on a clear
day, the commonwealth can be sighted 75 miles across the Mona channel.
In the Dominican Republic, it is said that a person who cannot qualify for a
visa to the United States should go to see the American consul in Miches.
There is no consul in Miches, a small, ramshackle town on the north coast full
of pigs and mud and men on horseback with machetes dangling from their waist-
bands. But there are beaches shaded by palms and almond trees and, for the emi-
grant with $150 and no papers, there are fishermen who will make the rough,
day-long crossing to the unwatched inlets and villages of Puerto Rico.
The common view in Miches is that Dominican officials will never stop this
traffic, and may not even want to. "There is a law of nature that you can't go-
against the people's will," a wiry, old resident explained.
In a hill-top fort above Miches, the local army commander agreed that it was
nearly impossible to halt the smuggling. "Muy dificil, muy dificil," muttered the
commander, who was lying in his underwear on a gray iron cot, his pistol under
his pillow and a dozen of his men gathered round. "We try to catch them at sea
because if we surprise them on land," he said, "the judge lets them go."

JUMBO JETS A PROBLEM
After they arrive in the commonwealth, many of them borrow, buy or make up
Puerto Rican birth or baptismal certificates for use at San Juan airport or, later,
in the United States. Posing as Puerto Ricans, they book a flight for New York,
where passengers of any nationality from the commonwealth are not inspected by
immigration.
"We get the last crack at them," said James H. Walker, a senior immigration
official in San Juan. Passengers bound for New York, or elsewhere in the United
States, are stopped and interrogated on an "as needed" basis at San Juan airport
but, Mr. Walker said, "we had better control" before the jumbo jets. "It's be-
come an impossible task now, with our limited manpower," he added.
Nor is it easy for immigrati on inspectors at Kennedy Airport in Queens.
On Nov. 16, Gloria Moreta-Cueto, a 34-year-old Dominican arriving on a noon
flight from Santo Domingo attempted to pass through inspection with a passport
in which her photograph and identification had been substituted on two pages.
Earlier in the week, three other Dominicans who had purchased tickets from the
same travel agency in Santo Domingo as Mrs. Moreta-Cueto were prevented
from entering with similarly fraudulent documents.

FIRST CURBS IN 1875
Mrs. Moreta-Cueto toyed with her lacquered black hair and knitted shawl and
told immigration officials that she was unaware of the passport having been
dummied. But she withdrew her application for admission and left on the next
plane for Santo Domingo. She was one of 750 persons who withdrew from Kennedy
Airport in the last year (another 125 were barred from entering after hearings
before immigration judges), but immigration inspectors have no idea how many
fraudulent documents escaped their scrutiny.
However they get here today, illegal aliens are nothing new to New York.
This area has had illegal aliens, nearly all of whom were from the Eastern Hemi-
sphere, since Congress began regulating immigration in 1875 and especially since
the adoption in 1924 of a controversial national origins quota system for the
Eastern Hemisphere.










SBut only since 1965, when the immigration laws affecting both hemispheres
were changed and the first restrictions were placed on the number and kind of
emigrants from the Western Hemisphere, has the size of the illegal alien population
here grown to the point where it now dwarfs the capacity of the immigration
service to enforce the laws.
Before 1965, a citizen of a country in the Western Hemisphere could emigrate
to the United States by demonstrating to a consul that he could support himself
in this country. But the conditions for emigration now, particularly from the
Western Hemisphere, are much more severe and complicated and, it is generally
agreed, serve as a stimulus for illegal immigration.

THE LIMITS TODAY
In both hemispheres there is a labor certification requirement in which an ap-
plicant for immigration must satisfy the United States Department of Labor
that his employment will not adversely affect the job market in the area where he
will work. And nearly 50 categories of workers, from bartenders to taxicab drivers,
from farm laborers to maids and sales clerks, are automatically disqualified from
,certification.
In the Eastern Hemisphere there is a ceiling of 170,000 immigrants annually,
a per country limit of 20,000 that is rarely filled except for the Philippines, and a
preference system based primarily on relationship to United States citizens and
resident aliens.
SIn the Western Hemisphere, there is a ceiling of 120,000 immigrants each year,
with no per country limit. However, children and spouses of United States citizens
and parents of adult citizens are exempt from both the 120,000 limit and labor
certification. Spouses and parents of resident aliens and parents of minor United
States citizens are exempt from labor certification, but not from the numerical
restriction.
A result of these changes in the laws has been a 22-year waiting period for
emigration from anywhere in the Western Hemisphere and a waiting line that is
loaded with persons exempt from labor certification, including Cubans who are
"paroled" into this country without initial numerical limit are here and probably
work-come resident aliens after two years, when they are counted against the
120,000.
For the non-Cuban citizen in the Western Hemisphere who cannot obtain labor
certification and who does not have immediate relatives living legally in the United
States, there is virtually no hope of legally emigrating-even if he were willing
to wait more than two years.

JOB OFFER NEEDED
It is also very difficult to arrange for labor certification without coming to the
United States because an applicant must have a specific job offer, and few employ-
ers will offer a position to an alien who is living abroad and whose work they have
not seen.
On the other hand, it is possible for an alien to come here on a tourist visa, take
a job illegally, obtain labor certification on the basis of that employment, apply
by mail for an immigrant visa, continue working until the visa is available in
two years, return to his home country for a day to be issued the visa by a consul,
and come back as a legal resident entitled to hold any job available to him.
In fact, more than half the 20,000 annual requests for labor certification in the
metropolitan area involve aliens who and who are permitted to being illegally,
according to the United States Labor Department. And the Labor Department
informs the immigration service of that employment only when certification is
denied. The approval rate is about 70 per cent.
"Under these conditions you'd have to be some kind of a fool to stay in another
country and give up," a prominent immigration lawyer here said. "At worst, if
you're caught, they'll send you back."
Yet no one really knows how many aliens are working here illegally, just as no
one-not the immigration service or the State Department-is certain of the
total number of illegal aliens in this region or elsewhere in the United States.
A CENSUS PROBLEM
John C. Culinane, regional director of the Census Bureau, said the bureau
"would have no way of knowing" whether illegal aliens were counted in the
1970 census, when the city's population was officially put at close to 8 million.
Blacks and Hispanics are often said to be undercounted in censuses.









Mr. Kiley, the director of District 3 of the immigration service in southern
New York, said his estimate of 1.5 million illegal aliens in the district was based
on "what we see in areas and what community leaders and other sources tell us."
As much as 80 per cent of the illegal aliens here are from South America and
Central America and the Caribbean, he said, with Chinese, Greeks (mostly crew
members who have jumped ship), Filipinos and Italians also represented.
Some ethnic organizations assert that Mr. Kiley's 1.5 million figure is grossly
inflated, but some priests and community workers who have considerable contact
with aliens say the figure is realistic.

NO LIMIT ON SOME VISAS
More than 630,000 legal resident aliens-immigrants who are not naturalized
citizens-are registered in the district, of whom 40 per cent are from the Western
Hemisphere. And an unknown number of legal aliens are not registered, although
it is required by law.
As a measure of the large number of illegal aliens here, Mr. Wagner, the immi-
gration investigations chief here, noted that, while 50,553 Dominicans were
registered as legal aliens in the district, most sources placed the number of Domini-
cans living in the city alone at 200,000 or more. "Illegals make up the difference,"
he said. "They are not legal aliens who didn't bother to register."
Between 1964 and 1973, the State Department issued 3,190,000 non-immigrant
visas in the Western Hemisphere, excluding Canada and Mexico. There is no
ceiling on non-immigrant visas.
In the same years, according to the immigration service, 1,464,000 visitors for
pleasure or business, excluding students and Mexicans and Canadians, entered
ew York by air. Immigration officials said they did not know how many of
these visitors were en route to other states or how many of the more than 1.7
million Latin Americans who entered the United States through San Juan,
Miami or other airports were destined for this area.
Whatever their differences on numbers, almost everyone concerned with illegal
aliens agrees that the motivation for this exodus from Latin America is economic.
The aliens are coming mainly from countries where per capital income ranges
from $100 to $900; where unemployment hovers between 20 and 30 per cent of
the labor force; where populations are doubling at current rates, every 25 to 35
years.
Many government officials in Latin America do not want to talk about the
subject of illegal aliens, and more than a few regard the emigration as a con-
venient, if not crucial, "safety value" for their countries. Some even lobby in
Washington against tougher laws affecting illegal aliens.

'A MIGRATORY PEOPLE'
"We try to insure that Jamaicans follow scrupulously the laws of other
governments," said Hugh Bonnick, a top aide to Prime Minister Michael Manley,
"but ours is a migratory people, and we would have a severe domestic problem
if we tried to restrict their leaving. The United States, as we all know, has the
machinery and the means for tracking down people who don't belong there and
seeing they return."
Rarely do Latin American governments prosecute their citizens for attempting
to subvert American immigration laws.
For example, on Sept. 6, 1973, a 43-year-old Haitian with an altered visa was
refused entry at Kennedy Airport. The Haitian said he bought the visa for $500
from a particular travel agent in Port-au-Prince. Immigration authorities notified
the American consulate and the consulate informed the Haitian police and
Foreign Ministry.
But the travel agent is still very much in business. The other day he leaned
over a desk in the back room of his agency near the National Palace, brushed
aside a drawing of the Last Supper mounted on a wooden stand engraved with
"New York City" and offered, for $1,000, to help a Haitian come here illegally.
Fraud is not all, however. Many tourists honor the terms of their visas and
return home on time. And some illegal aliens obtained their visas with good
intentions and decided to overstay and work in this area, if only for a year or
two, after they arrived.







89

ONE CONSUL'S VIEW
Yet in the three or four minutes in which they determine whether to grant
a non-immigrant visa, American consuls are having an increasingly hard time
distinguishing the bona fide applicant from what they call the "mala fide" and the
first-time visa refusal rate-less than one per cent in such cities as Brussels and
Osaka-is approaching 50 per cent in some Latin-American cities.
And while some consuls say they are being hustled and are stern with question-
able applicants, others are not happy about turning away so many people, even
if they might become illegal aliens here.
"I know the illegals make a mockery of the immigration law and put a lot of
pressure on the schools and hospitals and other services in the states," a consul
in the Caribbean said. "But their lives are miserable down here. Who are we to
deny them a chance to better themselves?"


[From the New York Times, Dec. 30, 1974]
IMMIGRATION FRAUD CASE DROPPED IN 1972
Partly because "unfavorable publicity" might have resulted from an indict-
ment the United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York dropped
in 1972 an immigration-fraud case against a former commissioner of the John V.
Lindsay administration.
The case involved Earl A. Rawlins, who was the city's Commissionmr of Re-
location from September 1969, to July 1970.
In a previous case, Mr. Rawlins and seven other persons were indicted on
June 10, 1970, by a Federal grand jury in Albany-the Northern District of
New York-on a charge of conspiring to bring three Uruguayans into this country
illegally from Canada. A month later, when City Investigation Commissioner
Robert M. Ruskin learned of the indictment from law-enforcement sources,
Mr. Rawlins was suspended from his $35,000-a-year post.
CHARGE DISMISSED IN 1971
Mr. Rawlins, a 39-year-old former assistant city corporation counsel who was
working part-time as an immigration lawyer while he was commissioner, said he
was innocent of the charge in Albany and, when the Government failed to pro-
duce a bill of particulars against him, the charge in the Northern District was
dismissed in June 1971. Mr. Rawlins was offered another job in the Housing
Development Administration but rejected it.
Nothing more was said publicly about Mr. Rawlins and aliens.
Between 1970 and 1972, however, the Immigration Service here investigated
Mr. Rawlins and concluded that while he was a City Commissioner and while
he was not, he had helped more than 100 aliens submit fraudulent applications
for extensions of their tourist visas and for labor certifications that would allow
them to stay here.
In some instances, according to immigration officials, the applicants did not
have the job skills they purported to have; in others, they were working in viola-
tion of their tourist visas.
The case against Mr. Rawlins was submitted by the United States Attorney
for the Southern District to a Federal grand jury, and at least 30 witnesses,
including Mr. Rawlins, testified. But on Sept. 26, 1972, the Immigration Service
was called by William Gray, an assistant United States attorney, and told that
Federal prosecutors would no longer pursue the case.
Mr. Gray, immigration records show, indicated that the "substantial evidence
that was gathered would normally suffice to proceed with prosecution," but he
cited five reasons why the matter was being dropped. They were as follows:
1. Mr. Rawlins no longer held a position with the city administration.
2. Mr. Rawlins was no longer engaged in an immigration practice.
3. There was a question as to the "credibility" of an important witness.
4. The expense of bringing witnesses from abroad was "prohibitive."
The indictment in Albany, although subsequently dismissed, had cost Mr. Raw-
lins his city post. "If an indictment is again returned against Mr. Rawlins, un-
favorable publicity may result because of his claim that he is being persecuted."
Mr. Rawlins said last week that he had sometimes handled immigration cases
in his city office at 100 Gold Street but "never on city time." And he said he had
been unaware that any of the information in the aliens' applications was false.
The United States Attorney's office declined to comment on the case last week.









[From the New York Times, Dec. 30, 1974]
UNLAWFUL ALIENS USE COSTLY CITY SERVICES

THOUSANDS COMPETE FOR JOBS AND GET SCHOOL, HOSPITAL AND WELFARE BENEFITS
(By M. A. Farber)
Thousands of illegal aliens here are sending their children to public schools,
-using municipal hospitals and receiving welfare benefits while often paying
minimal taxes and sending large amounts of money abroad. A 10-week investiga-
tion by the New York Times also shows that many of the estimated total of 1.5
million illegal aliens in the region, most of whom are young, marginally skilled
Latin Americans, are far less exploited at work than is widely believed.
But the full social and economic impact of illegal aliens-who also include
Chinese, Greeks, Filipinos, Italians and others-is open to dispute, as is illustrated
in the area of employment.
In one recent month, the Immigration and Naturalization Service here appre-
hended more than 140 illegal aliens who were working in jobs ranging from dish-
washer to beautician to accountant. At the same time, the State Employment
Service had in its files the names of hundreds, and in some cases thousands, of
people seeking identical jobs.
Some people dismiss this sort of comparison, arguing that most illegal aliens do
menial, necessary work that citizens and legal resident aliens shun. But to immigra-
tion officials, and a growing number of other people, the figures prove only that
illegal aliens are taking jobs from legal residents.
"Get these illegals out of this country," one man bellowed at a community
board meeting on illegal aliens last month in Queens.
"It's time to protect the Americans," another man shouted to the 300 people
in attendance. Before he could go on, applause was wafting across the school
auditorium in Elmhurst. Scant attention was given a woman who warned against
making illegal aliens "a scapegoat, like in Nazi Germany."
Among the findings of The Times's investigation of illegal aliens are the
following:
TSome illegal aliens are victimized because of their status by employers, land-
lords, lawyers, merchants and creditors. Some are afraid to call the police when
needed or to appear in court, and some continually dread capture by the immigra-
tion service. But most who are working earn at least the minimum wage, and
many enjoy union benefits. Increasingly surrounded here by thousands of their
countrymen and aware that the net of the immigration service is small and
.erratic, many illegal aliens are leading relatively stable lives.
"What we might define as exploitation, many illegals regard as the greatest
opportunities of their lives," said Austin T. Fragomen Jr., an immigration lawyer
whose firm sees thousands of illegal aliens a year. "Generally the illegals have
become part of the community and are a lot more secure than is commonly
thought. They are basically law-abiding people trying to climb out of poverty
and, in the truest sense of the American dream, they are willing to work for it."
$Some illegal aliens are engaged in crime, especially drug trafficking that
originates in Latin America and the Far East. For example, half of the 210
persons who were arrested last October in connection with an international
cocaine-smuggling operation were officially identified as illegal aliens living and
working in this area. And officials of the city's jail system estimate that 6 to 10
percent of the 7,300 inmates in the jails are illegal aliens, many of them posing as
Puerto Ricans or Cubans. But there is no evidence that illegal aliens who come
here to work commit more crime, proportionally, than other people.
Many illegal aliens rarely, if ever, file Federal, state or city tax returns. And
many, including a number who come here alone and expect to go home eventually,
reduce the amount of taxes withheld from their wages by claiming more de-
pendents than they are entitled to. An Internal Revenue Service spokesman said
illegal aliens could usually claim dependents living in this country, however
illegally, but were not entitled to claim dependents residing abroad.
An unknown number of illegal aliens are receiving welfare and Medicaid
benefits. According to the immigration service the number is "undoubtedly in
the thousands." But others say that most illegal aliens do not seek welfare for
fear that their illegal status will be uncovered.
Until last August, the city was not required to ask the legal status of welfare
applicants who were aliens, and it seldom did so. Now illegal aliens are barred by
Federal and state laws from receiving aid except for 30 days of "emergency"







91

assistance. Although some senior welfare officials apparently do not understand
the new laws, the city says it is trying to remove illegal aliens from the welfare
rolls and prevent others from registering.
One couple dropped from the rolls were Caro and John Roberts (the names of
illegal aliens in this article have been changed). They came here from Antigua,
Leeward Islands, on tourist visas in mid-1972, with their four children, and
Mr. Roberts took a job as a security guard.
On July 17, 1974, after a complaint about Mr. Roberts was lodged with immi-
gration officials, the Roberts family was allowed to leave the country voluntarily.
Mrs. Roberts attempted to prove with a baptismal certificate that she was born
in the Virgin Islands. However, after a batch of blank certificates were found in
the Roberts apartment in the Bronx, she conceded that she had bought the
document in Harlem, officials said.
While they were here, according to the city's Department of Social Services,
the Robertses received an estimated total of $7,140 in welfare payments; welfare
officials did not know Mr. Roberts was working. In addition, Mr. Roberts used
his public-assistance card to arrange Medicaid payment for a $328.46 bill at
Morrisania Hospital, which he entered on July 12, 1974, with a stab wound.
Illegal aliens, including their children born abroad, use schools, hospitals and
other public services at will or with little difficulty, at times avoiding the payment
of bills or submitting fraudulent documents to establish eligibility for services.
Although the city's Board of Education, according to a spokesman, has no policy
that would deny public education to illegal alien children, some schools insist
that aliens show "green cards"-proof of legal residency-and turn away those
who lack the cards. These children return to their native countries to live with
relatives, or remain out of school, or enroll in a school that makes no special de-
mands on aliens.
SCHOOL CITATIONS
On the pink living-room walls of the Sanchez family's fifth-floor walk-up
apartment in Washington Heights are three framed certificates from public schools
here, citing the model attendance, scholarship and work habits of the three
Sanchez boys.
Mrs. Sanchez arrived here from Santo Domingo in the Dominican Republic
on a tourist visa in August, 1970. With the help of other Dominicans in Washington
Heights, she soon found a job making plastic dolls in a factory in New Jersey.
She still works there, rising at 6 A.M. to meet a car pool.
Mr. Sanchez, who was a Dominican soldier, works for a curtain manufacturer
in New Jersey. He and the Sanchez children arrived here on tourist visas in
April, 1971, and, as he said the other day with a slight smile, "just stayed."
The Sanchezes are "totally delighted" to be living here and want to become
citizens. Nothing pleases them more than the educational opportunities opened
to their sons. Mr. Sanchez said he had to produce only birth certificates and vac-
cination records to register the children at Public School 115, 586 West 177th
Street.
MOST STUDENTS HISPANIC
Ninety-three per cent of the students at P.S. 115 are Hispanic, with Dominicans
accounting for the largest number, then South and Central Americans, then
Puerto Ricans.
"I have to assume we have some illegal aliens, but we have no way of knowing
how many," Abraham Gross, the school's principal, said in an interview. "If a
child lives in this district and wants an education, I have to give it to him. We're
not in the immigration business."
Nor are municipal hospitals initially concerned with aliens' status. State law,
according to officials of the Health and Hospitals Corporation requires general
hospitals to admit any person in need of treatment, whether or not the person is a
legal resident.
One person who availed herself of that circumstance was Therese Claire, a
42-year-old Haitian who overstayed her tourist visa and worked as a domestic
on the East Side. Between May, 1973, and last February, Mrs. Claire made six
"billable" visits to Metropolitan Hospital.
Officials at the municipal hospital said that Mrs. Claire did not pay her bill
for $30, that several reminders were sent to her address on the Upper West Side
and that the letters were not returned as undeliverable. If Mrs. Claire does not
respond, a spokesman for the hospital corporation said, the bill will be "written
off as a bad debt."
49-769-75--7







92

It will probably be written off.
Unknown to the hospital, Mrs. Claire gave up here 12-foot-square, $25-a-week
room some months ago and went back to Haiti with her husband, who was work-
ing here illegally as a tailor. She has been denied a visa to return to the United
States because she violated the terms of her earlier visa.
There are other debts, of other illegal aliens, and the sums are substantially
larger.
Last June a Congressional subcommittee examining the immigration service
estimated that the yearly loss of income-tax revenue to the Federal Government
from illegal aliens throughout the country was $100 million.
In a pilot project here last spring, the Internal Revenue Service collected
$21,456 from a small number of aliens who were apprehended by the immigration
service and who had cash reserves. Many of the aliens, a Federal tax official said,
had not only failed to file tax returns but also said they were unaware of the
need to do so.
"The $21,000 shouldn't be taken as an indication of what could be collected on
a regular basis," the tax official said. "We haven't got a solid idea of the com-
pliance gap among illegal aliens in New York, but it's obviously more than
$21,000."
$40,000 SENT HOME
However much they pay in taxes, illegal aliens routinely line up at registered-
mail windows in the region on Saturday mornings to send money home to rela-
tives, or for safe-keeping in the event of their exposure here. No one knows how
much money is "exported" in this fashion but, in the Caribbean, it is said that,
next to sugar, American visas generate the most foreign exchange. One ice-cream
vender here, immigration officials said, sent home $40,000 and filed only one tax
return during the six years he overstayed his tourist visa.
Representative Peter W. Rodino, the New Jersey Democrat who heads the
House subcommittee on immigration, has estimated that more than $1-billion is
"removed from our economy" yearly by illegal aliens.
Yet Mr. Fragomen, the immigration lawyer, who was formerly a staff counsel
of the subcommittee, said that any drain was more than offset by taxation of
illegal aliens and by their spending. And the aliens themselves, like Jaime Llorca,
tend to share that view.
Mr. Llorca was 55 years old when he arrived here from Buenos Aires on a
tourist visa in September, 1970. He quickly got a job as a bicycle builder, rented
a room from friends in Queens and was soon sending his family $250 a month.
By 1972, his wife and several children had joined him, on tourist visas, and they
are now living in a comfortable, well-furnished apartment in the Flatbush section
of Brooklyn.
Over a cup of thick, sweet coffee, Mr. Llorca recalled some trying times here.
He was once robbed of "everything." A man introduced by a priest took $1,500
to help him obtain a "green card" and did nothing. Mr. Llorca carried a map of
the city to avoid asking directions from strangers who might discover his status.
He lost weight. For long periods he would "jump" at the sight of a police officer.
But Mr. Llorca gradually concluded that the immigration service "does not
bother you if you just go to work and come home." And he found a lawyer who
arranged for his entire family to become legal permanent residents. Today,
Mr. Llorca said, his son has a car and he has a car and he is saving to buy a house
in Queens.
"Who could want more?" he asked, setting down his gold-rimmed glasses near
a souvenir plate inscribed with "New York City-City of Wonders."
"Here you do a job and people appreciate it," he said. "It's a great satisfaction
to me."
Not everyone, however, is satisfied, especially in middle-class neighborhoods,
black or white or mixed, where the Hispanic bodega has become as commonplace
in recent years as the delicatessen or the pub or the spaghetti house.

RACISM SEEN
Some supporters of illegal aliens, who prefer to call them "aliens without docu-
ments" or "aliens without status," see a racist or bigoted attitude in the critics m
of the aliens, not unlike the criticism of American blacks in many predominantly y
white communities. A ranking immigration official said that, if the population
change had been made up of western Europeans, "you wouldn't see all these neigh-
borhoods up in arms-I know, from the remarks made to me."




University of Florida Home Page
© 2004 - 2010 University of Florida George A. Smathers Libraries.
All rights reserved.

Acceptable Use, Copyright, and Disclaimer Statement
Last updated October 10, 2010 - - mvs