109TH CONGRESS REPORT " ! HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 2d Session 109–576 

PROUD TO BE AN AMERICAN CITIZEN ACT 

JULY 17, 2006.—Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State of 

the Union and ordered to be printed 

Mr. SENSENBRENNER, from the Committee on the Judiciary, 

submitted the following 

R E P O R T 

[To accompany H.R. 5323] 

[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office] 

The Committee on the Judiciary, to whom was referred the bill 

(H.R. 5323) to require the Secretary of Homeland Security to provide for ceremonies on or near Independence Day for administering 

oaths of allegiance to legal immigrants whose applications for naturalization have been approved, having considered the same, report 

favorably thereon without amendment and recommend that the bill 

do pass. 

CONTENTS 

Page 

Purpose and Summary ............................................................................................ 1 

Background and Need for the Legislation ............................................................. 2 

Hearings ................................................................................................................... 2 

Committee Consideration ........................................................................................ 2 

Vote of the Committee ............................................................................................. 2 

Committee Oversight Findings ............................................................................... 2 

New Budget Authority and Tax Expenditures ...................................................... 2 

Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate .......................................................... 2 

Performance Goals and Objectives ......................................................................... 3 

Constitutional Authority Statement ...................................................................... 3 

Section-by-Section Analysis and Discussion .......................................................... 4 

Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported ..................................... 4 

Markup Transcript .................................................................................................. 4 

PURPOSE AND SUMMARY

H.R. 5323, the ‘‘Proud to be an American Citizen Act,’’ would require U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services to provide for 

ceremonies on or near Independence Day for administering oaths 

hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARING

2 

of allegiance to legal immigrants whose applications for naturalization have been approved. 

BACKGROUND AND NEED FOR THE LEGISLATION

H.R. 5323, the ‘‘Proud to Be an American Citizen Act,’’ enables 

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services or non-profit entities to 

conduct naturalization ceremonies on or near Independence Day 

each year. It directs the Department of Homeland Security to make 

available up to $5,000 per ceremony from funds already available 

to the Department, thus not authorizing the expenditure of new 

funds for the ceremonies. 

The funds (up to $5,000) may be used only for the cost of government personnel needed to administer the Oath of Allegiance (including travel), facilities rental, brochures, and other logistics such 

as sanitation. The bill requires that any non-government entity 

seeking to organize a naturalization ceremony receive approval 

under an application process prescribed by the Department of 

Homeland Security. 

HEARINGS

The Committee on the Judiciary held no hearings on H.R. 5323. 

COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION

On June 29, 2006, the Committee met in open session and ordered favorably reported the bill H.R. 5323 by a voice vote, a 

quorum being present. 

VOTE OF THE COMMITTEE

In compliance with clause 3(b) of Rule XIII of the Rules of the 

House of Representatives, the Committee notes that there were no 

recorded votes during the committee consideration of H.R. 5323. 

COMMITTEE OVERSIGHT FINDINGS

In compliance with clause 3(c)(1) of Rule XIII of the Rules of the 

House of Representatives, the Committee reports that the findings 

and recommendations of the Committee, based on oversight activities under clause 2(b)(1) of Rule X of the Rules of the House of Representatives, are incorporated in the descriptive portions of this report. 

NEW BUDGET AUTHORITY AND TAX EXPENDITURES

Clause 3(c)(2) of Rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives is inapplicable because this legislation does not provide new budgetary authority or increased tax expenditures. 

CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE COST ESTIMATE

In compliance with clause 3(c)(3) of Rule XIII of the Rules of the 

House of Representatives, the Committee sets forth, with respect to 

the bill, H.R. 5323, the following estimate and comparison prepared 

by the Director of the Congressional Budget Office under section 

402 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974: 

hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARING

3 

U.S. CONGRESS, CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE, Washington, DC, July 10, 2006. 

Hon. F. JAMES SENSENBRENNER, Jr., Chairman, 

Committee on the Judiciary, 

House of Representatives, Washington, DC. 

DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: The Congressional Budget Office has prepared the enclosed cost estimate for H.R. 5323, the ‘‘Proud to Be 

an American Citizen Act.’’ 

If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be pleased 

to provide them. The CBO staff contact is Mark Grabowicz, who 

can be reached at 226–2860. 

Sincerely, 

DONALD B. MARRON, 

ACTING DIRECTOR. 

Enclosure 

cc: Honorable John Conyers, Jr. 

Ranking Member 

H.R. 5323—Proud to Be an American Citizen Act. 

H.R. 5323 would authorize the Department of Homeland Security 

(DHS) to provide funding to nonprofit entities to organize ceremonies for administering oaths of allegiance to persons whose applications for naturalization have been approved. The bill would require these ceremonies to be held on or near July 4 each year and 

would limit funding for each ceremony to $5,000. 

Based on information from DHS, CBO expects that the department would support less than 100 such ceremonies annually. Thus, 

we estimate that implementing H.R. 5323 would increase direct 

spending by less than $500,000 annually, from adjudication fees 

currently collected by DHS. Such fees are recorded as offsetting receipts (a credit against direct spending). Enacting this legislation 

would not affect revenues. 

H.R. 5323 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act and would 

impose no costs on State, local, or tribal governments. 

The CBO staff contact for this estimate is Mark Grabowicz, who 

can be reached at 226–2860. This estimate was approved by Peter 

H. Fontaine, Deputy Assistant Director for Budget Analysis. 

PERFORMANCE GOALS AND OBJECTIVES

The Committee states that pursuant to clause 3(c)(4) of Rule XIII 

of the Rules of the House of Representatives, H.R. 5323 would require U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services to provide for 

ceremonies on or near Independence Day for administering oaths 

of allegiance to legal immigrants whose applications for naturalization have been approved. 

CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY STATEMENT

Pursuant to clause 3(d)(1) of Rule XIII of the Rules of the House 

of Representatives, the Committee finds the authority for this legislation in article I, § 8, cl. 4 of the Constitution. 

hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARING

4 

SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION

The following discussion describes the bill as reported by the 

Committee. 

Sec 1. Short Title. 

This section designates the title of the bill as the ‘‘Proud to Be 

an American Citizen Act.’’ 

Sec 2. Findings. 

This section outlines the congressional findings that legal immigrants play a vital role in enriching the United States of America. 

It also describes the importance of the naturalization process. 

Sec. 3. Independence Day Ceremonies for Oaths of Allegiance. 

This section directs the Secretary of Homeland Security to make 

funds available to public and private nonprofit entities to support 

ceremonies on or around Independence Day to administer the oath 

to applicants for naturalization. Up to $5,000 is available for each 

such ceremony, and the funds may only be used for the cost of U.S. 

Citizenship and Immigration Services (‘‘USCIS’’) personnel, site 

rental, logistical requirements, and printing brochures. All funding 

must be made available from funds already available to USCIS. 

CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW MADE BY THE BILL, AS REPORTED

In compliance with clause 3(e) of Rule XIII of the Rules of the 

House of Representatives, the Committee notes H.R. 5323 makes 

no changes to existing law. 

MARKUP TRANSCRIPT

BUSINESS MEETING 

WEDNESDAY, JUNE 28, 2006 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, 

COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY, 

Washington, DC. 

The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:07 a.m., in Room 

2141, Rayburn House Office Building, the Honorable F. James Sensenbrenner, Jr. (Chairman of the Committee) presiding. 

[Intervening business.] 

Chairman SENSENBRENNER. Pursuant to notice, I now call up the 

bill H.R. 5323, the ‘‘Proud to be an American Citizen Act,’’ for purposes of markup and move its favorable recommendation to the 

House. 

Without objection, the bill will be considered as read and open 

for amendment at any point. 

[The bill, H.R. 5323, follows:] 

hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARING

5 

hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARING


I5323A.eps
6 

hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARING


I5323B.eps
7 

hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARING


I5323C.eps
8 

hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARING


I5323D.eps
9 

hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARING


I5323E.eps
10 

Chairman SENSENBRENNER. And the Chair recognizes himself for 

5 minutes to explain the bill. 

Today we have an opportunity to consider legislation that underscores the importance and privilege of U.S. citizenship. H.R. 5323, 

the ‘‘Proud to be an American Citizen Act,’’ would enable U.S. citizen, immigration services or nonprofit entities to conduct naturalization ceremonies on or near Independence Day each year. 

The legislation does not authorize new funds, but would provide 

up to $5,000 for each ceremony organized on Independence Day out 

of funds already available to the Department of Homeland Security. 

The bill revives a program that was originally part of the 1996 

immigration reform, but which expired in 2001. The moneys provided under this bill would be sufficient to cover the basics for a 

ceremony to honor those who have worked hard and met the legal 

requirements to become a United States citizen. 

The funds may be used only for the cost of Government personnel needed to administer the oath of allegiance, facilities rental, 

brochures and other logistics. 

The bill requires any non-Government entity seeking to organize 

a naturalization ceremony to receive approval through the Department of Homeland Security. 

The bill also allows new Americans to celebrate their naturalization in conjunction with celebrating America on Independence Day. 

I believe it is important that we support those who wish to take 

the final step toward becoming Americans and those who have legally moved through the immigration system to obtain citizenship, 

most often with great patience, I might add. 

I urge Members to support this bill. 

Yield back the balance of my time and recognize the gentleman 

from Virginia, Mr. Conyers. 

Mr. CONYERS. Michigan, sir. 

Chairman SENSENBRENNER. I am sorry. 

Mr. CONYERS. That is quite all right. They are pretty close together. 

I rise only to insert my statement in the record. Ask unanimous 

consent. I support the measure and return the balance of my time. 

Chairman SENSENBRENNER. Without objection, so ordered. And 

without objection, all Members may include opening statements in 

the record at this point. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Conyers follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE JOHN CONYERS, JR., A REPRESENTATIVE

IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, AND RANKING MEMBER, COMMITTEE

ON THE JUDICIARY

I rise in support of this legislation. I believe that immigration is one of the basic 

foundations of this nation, and the contributions of immigrants are too many to be 

counted. This legislation recognizes these principles. The bill also authorizes the 

Homeland Security Secretary to dispense $5,000 to public and private non-profit entities to host naturalization ceremonies. This purpose originally was authorized as 

part of the 1996 immigration law, and I believe it deserves reauthorization. 

I urge my colleagues to vote ‘‘Yes’’ on this bill. 

Are there any amendments? 

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chairman? 

Chairman SENSENBRENNER. For what purpose does the gentlewoman from Texas seek recognition? 

hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARING

11 

Ms. JACKSON LEE. To strike the last word. 

Chairman SENSENBRENNER. The gentlewoman is recognized for 5 

minutes to strike the last word. 

Ms. JACKSON LEE. To thank them for and to add my statement 

into the record. Thank you very much. I yield back. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Jackson Lee follows:] 

hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARING

12 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE SHEILA JACKSON LEE, A REPRESENTATIVE

IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF TEXAS

hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARING


5323Lee1.eps
13 

hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARING


5323Lee2.eps
14 

hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARING


5323Lee3.eps
15 

Chairman SENSENBRENNER. Are there any amendments? 

Mr. KING. Mr. Chairman? 

Chairman SENSENBRENNER. The gentleman from Iowa, Mr. King. 

Mr. KING. I move to strike the last word. 

Chairman SENSENBRENNER. The gentleman is recognized for 5 

minutes. 

Mr. KING. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

I just read through this bill and the concept of it, I want to go 

on record that I support the concept of this. 

I just was looking for some clarification, if I might, and that 

would deal with the language under section 3 that has—it includes 

in there, ‘‘Along with the U.S. citizenship and immigration services 

conducting these ceremonies or public or private nonprofit entities.’’ 

That is the second line under section 3. 

I understand, as I read that, that it is possible that it might 

allow some other entities that could be involved in our immigration 

process and I would wonder if the Chairman would yield for a clarification question as to whether that might potentially include La 

Raza or MULDEF or CARE or any of those organizations. 

Chairman SENSENBRENNER. Those type of organizations would be 

able to qualify, but there would have to be approval by the secretary of homeland security and the people who would be naturalized would have had to have followed all of the qualifications. 

This legislation does not empower someone who is not currently 

authorized to administer the oath of allegiance to administer that 

oath. So they would have to get an officiant who is authorized to 

administer the oath of allegiance. 

Mr. KING. And I thank the Chairman. And as I read through 

there, the part that I gather—and this is an assumption on the intent—would be that the intent is to allow for entities to provide 

some of the support services that are there rather than to open this 

up and they have an intent to reach out to not-for-profits. 

Would that be a clarification or is that a misunderstanding? 

Chairman SENSENBRENNER. If the gentleman would yield. That 

would be correct. 

The not-for-profits could make the arrangements for the site, to 

print up brochures, I would guess, with their own money, sponsor 

a reception for the newly naturalized citizens. 

But, again, it would not change the requirements for naturalization or make anybody who did not go through the naturalization 

process according to current law eligible to take the oath of allegiance. 

Mr. KING. And I thank the Chairman. My understanding would 

be more in the line of refreshments or facilities rather than the actual process. 

I appreciate that and I appreciate the intent of this language and 

I would just simply go on record that I am not asking to bring an 

amendment to this. For me, when we declare the United States of 

America to be a democracy, I don’t believe we are. I believe we are 

a constitutional republic. That is my personal suggestion here. 

But I appreciate the philosophy that has brought this to the floor 

and I will support the bill. 

And I thank the Chairman and yield back the balance of my 

time. 

hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARING

16 

Chairman SENSENBRENNER. Okay, the Chair has received a number of requests to be able to adjourn for lunch so that Members can 

fulfill previous engagements. 

Looking at the clock, without objection, the Committee is recessed until 1:30, and I would ask the Members to be back promptly, so we can have a reporting quorum to report the bill out. 

Mr. CONYERS. Parliamentary inquiry. 

Chairman SENSENBRENNER. State your parliamentary inquiry. 

Mr. CONYERS. Is there a motion pending to report the bill to the 

Senate? 

Chairman SENSENBRENNER. Yes, there is a motion pending to report the bill favorably. 

Without objection, the Committee is adjourned. 

Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Chairman, parliamentary inquiry. 

Chairman SENSENBRENNER. State your parliamentary inquiry. 

Mr. CONYERS. Thank you. Since we have had a request to report 

the bill, we have a reporting quorum, and I do not expect a recorded vote, can’t we just take care of this? 

Chairman SENSENBRENNER. The Chair will say he has—— 

Mr. CONYERS. I call the question, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman SENSENBRENNER. —received requests to recess the 

Committee for lunch. The Chair, under the rules, has the authority 

to recess the Committee for lunch. 

And the Committee is recessed. 

Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Chairman, I object to the recess. 

[Recess.] 

Chairman SENSENBRENNER. The Committee will be in order. And 

the Chair notes that there is not a working quorum present. 

For what purpose does the gentleman from North Carolina seek 

recognition? 

Mr. COBLE. To make a motion, Mr. Chairman. I move we adjourn. 

Chairman SENSENBRENNER. The gentleman from North Carolina 

makes a motion to adjourn. The question is on the motion to adjourn. 

Those in favor will say, ‘‘Aye.’’ 

Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Chairman? 

Chairman SENSENBRENNER. Opposed, ‘‘No.’’ 

Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Chairman, I would like to raise a point of 

order about the last ruling before we left. 

Chairman SENSENBRENNER. Well, the motion to adjourn is nondebatable. It has to be disposed of. 

Mr. CONYERS. A parliamentary inquiry. 

Chairman SENSENBRENNER. State your parliamentary inquiry. 

Mr. CONYERS. It is not about the motion to adjourn. It is about 

the circumstances under which we recessed. 

Chairman SENSENBRENNER. State your parliamentary inquiry. 

Mr. FEENEY. Mr. Chairman? A point of order, Mr. Chairman. 

My understanding was that a motion to adjourn had the highest 

priority and—— 

Mr. CONYERS. Well, if I might state my parliamentary inquiry. 

Chairman SENSENBRENNER. On the point of order, the motion to 

adjourn has the highest priority, but as a matter of comity, the 

Chair would like to recognize the gentleman from Michigan for his 

parliamentary inquiry. 

hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARING

17 

Mr. FEENEY. Mr. Chairman, I will withdraw my point. 

Chairman SENSENBRENNER. Point of order is withdrawn. 

The gentleman from Michigan will speak to his parliamentary inquiry. 

Mr. CONYERS. I thank the courtesy. 

Yes, we have checked with the parliamentarian, and the fact of 

the matter appears to be that a recess is subject to an objection 

and can be objected to. And I refer you to Rule 14 of the rules of 

the House—— 

Chairman SENSENBRENNER. The Chair will State that the gentleman from Michigan was correct, but the Chair did not hear an 

objection because of all the people who were talking on both sides 

of the Chair’s dais. 

The question is now on the motion by the gentleman from North 

Carolina to adjourn. 

Those in favor will say, ‘‘Aye.’’ 

Opposed, ‘‘No.’’ 

The ayes appear to have it. The ayes have it, and the Committee 

stands adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 1:40 p.m., the Committee was adjourned.] 

BUSINESS MEETING 

(continued) 

THURSDAY, JUNE 29, 2006 

The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:59 p.m., in Room 

2141, Rayburn House Office Building, the Honorable F. James Sensenbrenner, Jr. (Chairman of the Committee) presiding. 

Chairman SENSENBRENNER. The Committee will be in order. 

Pursuant to notice, I now call up the bill H.R. 5323, the ‘‘Proud 

to be an American Citizen Act,’’ for purposes of markup. 

When the Committee considered the bill yesterday, the Chair 

had moved that the Committee favorably recommend H.R. 5323 to 

the full House and the bill was considered as read and opened for 

amendment at any point. 

The Chair notes the presence of a working quorum, and the Committee will now resume consideration of amendments. 

Are there any amendments? 

If there are no amendments, a reporting quorum is not present. 

Without objection, the previous question on the motion to report 

the bill is ordered. And, without objection, the Committee will 

stand informal, subject to the call of the Chair, to resume immediately when a reporting quorum appears. 

Without objection, the Committee stands in recess. 

[Recess.] 

Chairman SENSENBRENNER. The Committee will be in order. A 

reporting quorum is now present. 

The question occurs on the motion to report the bill H.R. 5323 

favorably. 

All those in favor will say, ‘‘Aye.’’ 

Opposed, ‘‘No.’’ 

The ayes appear to have it. The ayes have it, and the motion will 

report favorably, as agreed to. 

hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARING

18 

Without objection, the staff is directed to make any technical and 

conforming changes. And all Members will be given 2 days, as provided by the House rules, in which to submit additional, dissenting, 

supplemental or minority views. 

[Intervening business.] 

[Whereupon, at 3:11 p.m., the Committee was adjourned.] 

Æ 

hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with HEARING