Date: 1984-06-12
Speaker: SAM B. HALL (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Chairman. before entering into an explanation of the telephone verification amendment. I will first voice my strong objections to employer sanctions. Getting right down to brass tacks. I do not believe that employer sanctions are proper. Employers of this country should not be placed in the law enforcement business. I know that proponents of the employer sanctions provisions of this bill argue that the availability of Jobs in the United States is the magnet that draws people here. To that. I counter that if we had a border that was patroled adequately by the United States and Mexican Governments. we would go a long way to solving many of the problems of illegal immigration. Prevention of entry should remain the foremost enforcement goal of our immigration policy. Under the terms of this bill we are going to put U.S. employers under the gun of employer sanctions. In doing so. we are subjecting employers across the country to civil and criminal liabilities. Though the committee bill provides an affirmative defense for employees who show good faith compliance with the recordkeeping requirements of the bill. the Government could rebut that presumption of good faith compliance by offering evidence that the documents did not reasonably appear on their face to be genuine. Mr. Chairman. now we arrive at the crux of the matter. What standard of reasonableness will be applied by the Government in reviewing employer compliance? This bill establishes a paperivork requirement that for 3 years uses an existing documents system under which employers would examfide certain documents presented by a job applicant in an effort to screen out those who cannot obtain the necessary papers. Under this system employers will be required to examine various documents. which may include birth certificates. drivers licenses. INS documents.. passports. or Selective Service documents. The problem hereand our colleague from Illinois . spelled it out clearly in his testimony before the committeeis that existing documents are easily forged. The art of forgery has advaniced to the point that employers cannot be expected to readily tell forgeries from genuine documents. Employers are not generally trained to detect counterfeit documents. and this presents a problem in keeping the verification program effective while. at the same time. assuring employers that they will not be prosecuted for inadvertent mistakes. A callin system such as I propose in this amendment. however. relieves employers of a verification role. Major credit card systems use precisely this type of system to verify some 70 million credit. card transactions each month. The telephone validation system that I offer is made possible by Inexpensive. modern technology and should be used for work eligibility verIfication. The telephone validation amendment provides employers with a means by which they may comply with the re(guirements of this bill. while offering them a complete defense in doing This amendimnent requires the employer to take but one additional step in determiniing Job eligibility. In addition to re(uiring employer compliance with the paperwork provisions already in the bill. my amendment would require the employer t.o call in the social security number of the prospective employce to a tollfree Government nenriry tvelenphone number. A computer would examine the number and verify it aigainst it. records. If the number is valid. the agency informs the employ er. A I ransa ion code is used to make a record of the verification transaction. much the same way as credit card purc hass are verified. If the number is inaccurate. defunct. or otherwise invalid. the employer Is Informed. The ent ii etransaction is completed in a maticr of seconds. Compliance writh this telephone valldat ion process would give the employcr a complete defenseabsent fraudto any action under this section. Mr. Chairman. telephone verification alleviates some difficulties associated with the existing documents verification system contained in the bill. A G.overnmient agency. rather than the employer. is responsible for verifying the job applicants eligibility to work. The telephone verification system also provides the best record of the verification transaction. both protecting the employer from inadvertent Government prosecution. and providing important evidence to prove or rebut charges of discrimination in hiring. should the employer check some Job applicants who look or sound foreign. but not others. rhis amendment creates nc new national I) or worker identification card. and thereby avoids the pitfalls associated with those systems. Indeed. I arn opposed to a national employment card concept both on philosophical and practical grounds. Under this amendment. the Attorney General. in cooperation with the Secretaries of Labor and Health and Human Services. must establish a method to validate the social security account numbers of individuals applying to be hired. recruited. or referred for employment. The Attorney General must publish notice in the Federal Register of the establishment of the validation system. and procedures for its use not later than 2 years after the date of enactment of this section. The telephone verification amendment provides a fair and simple test of worker eligibility. It does not lend Itself to discrimination against foreignlooking Job applicants. it does not intrude on individual freedoms any more than is strictly necessary. and it is cost effective. I urge adoption of this amendment.