S. HRG.

109118

THE NEED FOR COMPREHENSIVE IMMIGRATION

REFORM: SECURING THE COOPERATION OF
PARTICIPATING COUNTRIES

HEARING
BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON IMMIGRATION, BORDER

SECURITY AND CITIZENSHIP
OF THE

COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY

UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED NINTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION

JUNE 30, 2005

Serial No. J10923A

Printed for the use of the Committee on the Judiciary

(
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
WASHINGTON

23250 PDF

2005

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 5121800; DC area (202) 5121800
Fax: (202) 5122250 Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 204020001

VerDate 0ct 09 2002

14:37 Oct 28, 2005

Jkt 023250

PO 00000

Frm 00001

Fmt 5011

Sfmt 5011

S:\GPO\HEARINGS\23250.TXT

SJUD4

PsN: CMORC

COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY

ARLEN SPECTER, Pennsylvania, Chairman
ORRIN G. HATCH, Utah
PATRICK J. LEAHY, Vermont
CHARLES E. GRASSLEY, Iowa
EDWARD M. KENNEDY, Massachusetts
JON KYL, Arizona
JOSEPH R. BIDEN, JR., Delaware
HERBERT KOHL, Wisconsin
MIKE DEWINE, Ohio
JEFF SESSIONS, Alabama
DIANNE FEINSTEIN, California
LINDSEY O. GRAHAM, South Carolina
RUSSELL D. FEINGOLD, Wisconsin
JOHN CORNYN, Texas
CHARLES E. SCHUMER, New York
SAM BROWNBACK, Kansas
RICHARD J. DURBIN, Illinois
TOM COBURN, Oklahoma
DAVID BROG, Staff Director
MICHAEL ONEILL, Chief Counsel
BRUCE A. COHEN, Democratic Chief Counsel and Staff Director

SUBCOMMITTEE

ON

IMMIGRATION, BORDER SECURITY

AND

CITIZENSHIP

JOHN CORNYN, Texas, Chairman

CHARLES E. GRASSLEY, Iowa
EDWARD M. KENNEDY, Massachusetts
JON KYL, Arizona
JOSEPH R. BIDEN, JR., Delaware
DIANNE FEINSTEIN, California
MIKE DEWINE, Ohio
JEFF SESSIONS, Alabama
RUSSELL D. FEINGOLD, Wisconsin
SAM BROWNBACK, Kansas
CHARLES E. SCHUMER, New York
TOM COBURN, Oklahoma
RICHARD J. DURBIN, Illinois
JAMES HO, Majority Chief Counsel
JIM FLUG, Democratic Chief Counsel

(II)

VerDate 0ct 09 2002

14:37 Oct 28, 2005

Jkt 023250

PO 00000

Frm 00002

Fmt 5904

Sfmt 5904

S:\GPO\HEARINGS\23250.TXT

SJUD4

PsN: CMORC

CONTENTS
STATEMENTS OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS
Page

Cornyn, Hon. John, a U.S. Senator from the State of Texas ...............................
prepared statement ..........................................................................................
Kennedy, Hon. Edward M., a U.S. Senator from the State of Massachusetts ...

1
27
3

WITNESSES
Clariond, Roberta, Professor of International Relations, Technological Autonomous Institute of Mexico, Mexico City, Mexico .................................................
Rozental, Hon. Andres, former Mexican Ambassador at Large, and President,
Rozental and Associates, Mexico City, Mexico ..................................................

7
5

SUBMISSIONS FOR THE RECORD

Clariond, Roberta, Professor of International Relations, Technological Autonomous Institute of Mexico, Mexico City, Mexico .................................................
Rozental, Hon. Andres, former Mexican Ambassador at Large, and President,
Rozental and Associates, Mexico City, Mexico ..................................................

21
29

(III)

VerDate 0ct 09 2002

14:37 Oct 28, 2005

Jkt 023250

PO 00000

Frm 00003

Fmt 5904

Sfmt 5904

S:\GPO\HEARINGS\23250.TXT

SJUD4

PsN: CMORC

VerDate 0ct 09 2002

14:37 Oct 28, 2005

Jkt 023250

PO 00000

Frm 00004

Fmt 5904

Sfmt 5904

S:\GPO\HEARINGS\23250.TXT

SJUD4

PsN: CMORC

THE NEED FOR COMPREHENSIVE IMMIGRATION REFORM: SECURING THE COOPERATION OF PARTICIPATING COUNTRIES
THURSDAY, JUNE 30, 2005

UNITED STATES SENATE,

SUBCOMMITTEE ON IMMIGRATION, BORDER SECURITY AND
CITIZENSHIP, OF THE COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY,
Washington, DC.
The Subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:30 p.m., in Room
SD226, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. John Cornyn [Chairman of the Subcommittee] presiding.
Present: Senators Cornyn, Kyl, Coburn, and Kennedy.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN CORNYN, A U.S.
SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF TEXAS

Chairman CORNYN. This hearing of the Senate Subcommittee on

Immigration, Border Security and Citizenship will come to order.
I want to thank Chairman Specter for scheduling todays hearing
and thank Senator Kennedy and his staff for working with us on
this important hearing.
Today, we will continue a series of hearings examining the need
for comprehensive reform of our immigration system. These hearings have shown that our Nations immigration and border security
system are broken and leaves our borders unprotected, threatens
our National security, and makes a mockery of the rule of law.
The system has suffered from years of neglect, and in a post-9/
11 world, we cannot tolerate the situation any longer. National security demands a comprehensive solution to our immigration system and that means both stronger enforcement and reasonable reform of our immigration laws.
For too long, the immigration debate has divided Americans of
good will into two camps, those who are angry and frustrated by
our failure to enforce the law and those who are angry and frustrated that our immigration laws do not reflect reality. Both camps
are right. This is not an either/or proposition. We need both stronger enforcement and reasonable reform of our immigration laws.
First, we must recognize that in the past, we simply have not devoted the funds, the resources, and the manpower to enforce our
immigration laws and protect our borders. As history demonstrates, reform without enforcement is doomed to failure. No discussion of comprehensive immigration reform is possible without a
clear commitment to and substantial escalation of our efforts to enforce the law.
(1)

VerDate 0ct 09 2002

14:37 Oct 28, 2005

Jkt 023250

PO 00000

Frm 00005

Fmt 6633

Sfmt 6633

S:\GPO\HEARINGS\23250.TXT

SJUD4

PsN: CMORC

2
Recognizing this necessity, on May 26, 2005, Senator Kyl and I
released the border enforcement portion of our legislation which
addresses those areas of border security which we believe are most
in need of reinforcement.
But, increased enforcement alone will not solve the problem. Any
proposal must serve both our National security and our National
economy. It must capable of both securing our country and being
compatible with our growing economy. Our current broken system
provides badly-needed sources of labor, but through illegal channels.
As an example, Border Patrol Commissioner Robert Bonner has
previously testified before this Subcommittee that the vast majority
of those the Border Patrol apprehends are migrant workers simply
coming here to work. He testified that the Border Patrol is still
dealing with a literal flood of people on a daily basis, most of whom
are attempting to enter the country in order to work.
While the situation we face at the borders represents a substantial and unacceptable risk to our National security, it also demonstrates why we cannot simply close our borders or round up and
remove millions of people from within our midst. We simply dont
have the resources, the facilities, or even the ability to identify, locate, and apprehend ten to 12 million undocumented workers and
their families. In addition, securing our Nations borders at the expense of weakening our economy and killing off American jobs is
simply not an acceptable alternative.
Any comprehensive solution must address both concerns so that
law enforcement and border security officials can concentrate their
greatest energies on those who wish to do us harm, not those who
wish to work and support their families.
Our economy would suffer if we removed millions of workers
from our National workforce, just as it would suffer if we removed
entire stocks of our natural resources from our National inventory.
Our economy would be strengthened if all workers could simply
come out of the shadows, register, pay taxes, and participate fully
in our economy.
Todays hearing will focus on the fundamental issue of the level
of cooperation the United States can expect from countries that will
benefit from comprehensive immigration reform. Workers in this
country come from many diverse countries. Essential to immigration reform will be increased cooperation on border security, efforts
to combat human trafficking and alien smuggling, and stepped up
crime prevention from any country that sends workers to our Nation.
We are addressing these types of issues with Mexico and Canada. The United States, Mexico, and Canada have entered the Security and Prosperity Partnership Agreement designed to develop
a common security strategy and promote economic development.
According to this weeks announcement, border security remains
the central theme of that partnership. I hope that the partnership
continues to identify additional security initiatives that our countries can jointly pursue and that this initiative can serve as a
model to address security concerns that relate to other countries as
well.

VerDate 0ct 09 2002

14:37 Oct 28, 2005

Jkt 023250

PO 00000

Frm 00006

Fmt 6633

Sfmt 6633

S:\GPO\HEARINGS\23250.TXT

SJUD4

PsN: CMORC

3
In addition to assisting with border security, sending countries
should further develop strategies that will bridge the development
gap between our country and theirs so that citizens will not want
to leave the country of their birth. For example, Mexicos leaders
have made clear that it is in the best interest of their country to
keep their citizens in their country, if possible. Foreign Minister
Derbez has said the Mexican government has to be able to give
Mexicans the opportunity to generate wealth that today they
produce in other places. And, President Fox has stated, Every person has the right to find in his own country the economic, political,
and social opportunities that allow him to reach a full and dignified
life.
I couldnt agree more with these statements. Other countries
need for their young, energetic risk-takers and hard-workers ultimately to be able to come back home, and particularly to come back
home with the capital and the savings and the skills they have acquired while working temporarily in the United States. They need
these people to come back to their home country, buy a house, start
a business so that these small business owners, these potential entrepreneurs can help strengthen and build a middle class.
Todays hearings will explore the relationship of these issues to
implementing successful immigration reform. Ultimately, comprehensive immigration reform will require the active cooperation
of participating countries, because we will have to have better management, communication, and coordination between our governments to achieve our goals of protecting our National security and
strengthening our National economy.
[The prepared statement of Senator Cornyn appears as a submission for the record.]
With that, I would turn the floor over to Senator Kennedy, our
Ranking Member on this Subcommittee, for any statement he cares
to make.
STATEMENT OF HON. EDWARD M. KENNEDY, A U.S. SENATOR
FROM THE STATE OF MASSACHUSETTS

Senator KENNEDY. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, and

thank you for calling the hearing on the importance of the cooperation with other governments to help mend our immigration system.
Without the help and cooperation from neighboring countries, immigration reforms adopted unilaterally by the United States are
less likely to succeed. So we need to work with Mexico, Central
America, Canada on migration problems and enforcement. It is in
the best interests of all of our countries to improve security, too.
Bilateral and multilateral agreements provide a framework and incentives for safe and legal immigration.
Every year, thousands of Mexicans and Central Americans come
to the U.S. legally or illegally to work and join their families. Illegal immigration continues to increase annually. To deal with the
growing numbers of undocumented workers, we have to modernize
our laws to meet the challenges of the 21st century. As Mexican
officials understand, a guest worker program and a path towards
earned legalization are two essential components of any effective
proposal for reform. We need fair steps to respond to family needs,

VerDate 0ct 09 2002

14:37 Oct 28, 2005

Jkt 023250

PO 00000

Frm 00007

Fmt 6633

Sfmt 6633

S:\GPO\HEARINGS\23250.TXT

SJUD4

PsN: CMORC

4
economic needs, and basic migration patterns between the U.S.,
Mexico, and Central America.
Another critical component of comprehensive immigration reform
is border security and control of illegal immigration. One of the
mistakes we continue to make is throwing money at border enforcement as our primary means for reducing illegal immigration. By
making it more difficult for many Mexican citizens to cross the border to work and reunite with their families living in the United
States, we are essentially trapping them inside the United States.
It is an incentive for desperate families to do whatever it takes to
be together. A more sound policy is realistic immigration laws that
provide legal avenues for qualified immigrants and strong enforcement of those laws. This plan will restore control of our borders,
improve national security, and strengthen our economy.
Another mistake of past immigration bills is to assume that we
can control illegal immigration on our own. America needs to do its
part, but Mexico and other countries must do their part, too, to replace illegal immigration flows with regulated legal immigration.
We need a framework for negotiating an agreement with Mexico to
prevent Mexico from being used as a transit corridor for third-country nationals attempting to enter the U.S. illegally. We need to
work with Canada and Mexico to help Guatemala and Belize maintain the security of their borders. We need a framework for the
U.S. to work with all countries of central America to set up a database on the activities of criminal gangs, to control alien smuggling
and trafficking, prevent the use and manufacturing of fraudulent
travel documents, and share relevant information.
Under the leadership of President Fox, significant efforts have
been made to address Mexicos economic problems. Remittances
from the United States continue to be a principal source of income
for many Mexican families. Tapping into these funds, the Fox administration has adopted promising initiatives, such as the Threefor-One Program to match these funds with federal, state, and local
money. The pool funding is then used to build schools, clinics, establish other programs to help economically depressed areas of
Mexico.
John McCain and I have included all of these proposals in our
bill. We know that effective enforcement of our immigration laws
depends heavily upon the participation and the commitment of
neighboring governments, and I thank our witnesses at todays
hearing and look forward to working with them to address these
important challenges ahead of us.
Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman CORNYN. Thank you, Senator Kennedy, and I appreciate your hard work on this effort. I know we will have a lot of
tough work ahead of us, but hopefully this year, we will be able to
achieve some success that we will all be able to be proud of.
We are pleased today to have a distinguished panel, and I will
introduce the panel and ask each of you to give opening statements.
Andres Rozental is President of the Mexican Council on Foreign
Relations. He has also been Mexicos Ambassador to various countries, including the United Kingdom, Sweden, and its representative to the United Nations. He has also served as Ambassador at

VerDate 0ct 09 2002

14:37 Oct 28, 2005

Jkt 023250

PO 00000

Frm 00008

Fmt 6633

Sfmt 6633

S:\GPO\HEARINGS\23250.TXT

SJUD4

PsN: CMORC

5
Large in a special envoy for President Vincente Fox. Ambassador
Rozental is now President of Rozental and Associates, an international consulting firm specializing in providing political and economic advisory services to both Mexican and foreign companies.
Joining Ambassador Rozental on our first panel, and only panel,
is Roberta Clariond. I hope I am pronouncing that correctly, Professor. Professor Clariond is a Professor of International Relations
at the Technological Autonomous Institute of Mexico. She holds
Masters degrees in Latin American studies and international relations from UCLA and the University of Chicago. She has been involved in numerous seminars and projects on migration.
We welcome both of you to the hearing, and Professor, we want
to thank you for agreeing to fill in when your predecessor fell ill,
but we know you have been working on these issues a long time
and appreciate your expertise.
Why dont we begin with the Ambassador, and then we will turn
to the Professor. Let me ask you please to remember to push the
button on the microphone in front of you so the light shows. That
means your microphone is on. We ask you to keep your opening
statement to around 5 minutes, and then we will be able to engage
with some questions with the rest of the panel. Thank you. Ambassador?
STATEMENT OF HON. ANDRES ROZENTAL, FORMER MEXICAN
AMBASSADOR AT LARGE, AND PRESIDENT, ROZENTAL AND
ASSOCIATES, MEXICO CITY, MEXICO

Ambassador ROZENTAL. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Senators

Kennedy and Coburn. Thank you for having me. I have prepared
a written statement, which I leave with you. I wont read through
it. I think you will probably find it interesting.
Chairman CORNYN. We will make it a part of the record.
Ambassador ROZENTAL. But I wanted to take the opportunity of
these few minutes to go over two or three points that are contained
in that statement.
The first is that in February of 2001, just after President Fox
was elected and took office as President of Mexico and President
Bush began his first administration, the two governments agreed
to work together, guided by a principle of shared responsibility, in
establishing new mechanisms to allow for legal, orderly, safe, and
humane migration between both countries.
The working agenda that was set at the time included five basic
components: Improving border security and safety; fighting the root
causes of immigration from Mexico through economic development
initiatives; modernizing and expanding the existing temporary
worker mechanisms; addressing the status of undocumented Mexican nationals currently residing in the United States; and reviewing the backlogs of immigration visas and also looking at the possibility of taking Mexico and Canada as NAFTA partners and neighbors out of the country quota system under which the immigration
law currently operates.
These five points, which took up about a year of discussions between the two governments, came fairly abruptly to a halt after 9/
11. It is very satisfying to me, because I have been involved in immigration issues between Mexico and the United States for about

VerDate 0ct 09 2002

14:37 Oct 28, 2005

Jkt 023250

PO 00000

Frm 00009

Fmt 6633

Sfmt 6633

S:\GPO\HEARINGS\23250.TXT

SJUD4

PsN: CMORC

6
30-some years now, to see that this is now again back on the agenda, both in each of our two countries as well as bilaterally.
The point that I would like to make to you Senators is that, and
I agree very much with what Senator Kennedy just said in his
statement, there is no way that this is going to work unless it is
done together with the source countries. Unilateral immigration reform has been tried before in the United States. There are lots of
precedents for it. Mexico engaged to share in the responsibility of
an immigration reform and an immigration agreement with the
United States and it would be very important for Mexico to be engaged once again in a bilateral fashion on this. There doesnt seem
to be any way that I can think of that the United States can administer a temporary worker program or an earned legalization
program or any other type of immigration reform of substance if it
doesnt have the source countries working with it, and this is particularly the case with Mexico.
Now, Mexico has done quite a few things. As you mentioned, the
Fox administration began a series of programs to make it more attractive for Mexicans to remain in Mexico and not come to the
United States. But it occurs to me that the way the social networks
have now been formed between the communities of Mexicans living
in the United States and their families and their home country, it
is probably unrealistic to think that, over the long term, there will
not be any incentives for Mexicans to come to work in the United
States or to live in the United States, and I feel very strongly that
there should be ample ways for them to do it when they do it legally, in an orderly fashion, and according to the laws of both countries.
I also believe that the only way to engage Mexico to cooperate
in that is through a series of bilateral agreements. I think that
that is the hook with which you will be able to get a Mexican government to cooperate and the Mexican government to help implement whatever decisions you take in immigration reform.
We also are about to go through a political process in Mexico.
There will be Presidential elections in July. And I think that it is
very important that this engagement take place as soon as possible
so that through the transition of a new Mexican administration,
there be the ability to continue to work together as the case has
been.
Perhaps in the questions, I will be able to further expand on
some of the areas in which the Mexican government has been
working and areas in which it hasnt been working yet but could
be working if a program were designed to engage the Mexican side
equally with the U.S. on this and also to find ways to undertake
enforcement in a way in which both sides work together, because
border security, enforcement of the law, rule of law in general requires both to be able to function.
I will just finalize with an issue which I have talked about a
great deal over the years, the circularity of the immigration phenomenon between Mexico and the United States is an extremely
important part of how it worked and how it functioned, and the
interruption of circularity probably is one of the reasons why it is
broken today. Thank you.
Chairman CORNYN. Thank you very much, Ambassador.

VerDate 0ct 09 2002

14:37 Oct 28, 2005

Jkt 023250

PO 00000

Frm 00010

Fmt 6633

Sfmt 6633

S:\GPO\HEARINGS\23250.TXT

SJUD4

PsN: CMORC

7
[The prepared statement of Ambassador Rozental appears as a
submission for the record.]
Chairman CORNYN. Professor Clariond, please proceed with your
opening statement.
STATEMENT OF ROBERTA CLARIOND, PROFESSOR OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS, TECHNOLOGICAL AUTONOMOUS INSTITUTE OF MEXICO, MEXICO CITY, MEXICO

Ms. CLARIOND. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Senator Kennedy,

for this opportunity to speak to you today.
We firmly believe that the status quo on immigration between
Mexico and the U.S. is no longer acceptable. Moreover, since the
infamous attacks of 9/11, the conditions have only been aggravated.
Because of the current situation, we appreciate the opportunity to
share our ideas with the Senate Subcommittee on Immigration,
Border Security, and Citizenship.
It is necessary to act promptly to develop a new migration paradigm on Mexican and Central American immigration to the U.S.
Almost 75 percent of the current migration flow to the U.S. comes
from Mexico and Central America. Therefore, I will focus the majority of my testimony on these areas.
In Mexico and Central America, we fully appreciate the efforts
of this Committee to promote immigration reform. This testimony
consists of five elements that we believe should be considered in
the immigration debate that is taking place in this legislative
chamber.
The first element is shared responsibility. The new migration
status quo should be based on shared responsibility between the receiving countrythe U.S.and the countries with intense rates of
migrationMexico, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, and Nicaraguaas the only way to manage a bilateral and sub-regional
phenomenon.
There is an urgency to change the paradigm in which Mexico and
the U.S. operate on migration matters. Traditionally, U.S. migration policy has been considered a domestic issue. Thus, U.S. authorities have unilaterally managed migration efforts. For its part,
Mexico for many years had a policy of not having a policy. During
the Fox and Bush administrations, there have been similar steps
to engage in a new migration dialogue and cooperation. Still, much
more has to be done. Mexico and the U.S. must increase their level
of cooperation in both managing the flow of migrants as well as in
creating a more secure and efficient border.
It is also necessary to revise the U.S.-Mexico institutional framework for dealing with the border and migration. A summit involving all agencies in the U.S. and Mexico dealing with security, borders, and migration should take place. The summit will not only
foster a dialogue on policies and actions, but it will also create a
new binational mechanism for security, migration, and border cooperation.
The second element is comprehensive reform. For security matters and given the complicated nature of the migration phenomenon, a comprehensive migration reform is necessary. This reform cannot only partially address the different challenges and
problems posed by the high levels of Mexican and Central Amer-

VerDate 0ct 09 2002

14:37 Oct 28, 2005

Jkt 023250

PO 00000

Frm 00011

Fmt 6633

Sfmt 6633

S:\GPO\HEARINGS\23250.TXT

SJUD4

PsN: CMORC

8
ican migration to the U.S., it must deal with needs of both sending
and receiving countries.
In addressing five major issues, the Kennedy-McCain initiative,
Secure America and Orderly Immigration Act, represents a substantial change to the current status quo addressing the reality of
the regional labor market. Mexican analysts and advocacy groups,
such as the National Migration Institute Citizen Council, have
urged the Mexican government as well as Congress to engage in
the Kennedy-McCain effort for comprehensive reform.
The third element is the creation of an efficient and secure Mexican Southern border. The border between Mexico, Guatemala, and
Belize is not simply porous, it is wide open. For many decades, an
open Mexican Southern border didnt represent a major problem,
but this is no longer the case in the post-9/11 security-oriented atmosphere.
In the year 2002, Mexican migration officials deported 138,000
persons, mostly from Guatemala, El Salvador, Honduras, and Nicaragua. Last year, the number of deportations increased to 215,000.
Mexico cannot replicate the California experience of the late 1990s
of trying to stop the entry of migrants by building walls and fences
and highly increasing the number of border patrol agents. After a
decade, it is quite clear that those policies only generated negative
consequences without reducing illegal immigration.
Besides entering into a dialogue with Central America and U.S.
authorities, the Mexican government has to implement a major effort to strengthen the National Migration Institute and organize
the different police corps and military operating at the Southern
border. Corruption among Mexican officers must be stopped, both
for humanitarian and security reasons.
The fourth element is to formalize a sub-regional dialogue on migration issues. The immigration patterns of the last two decades
have formed a new hemispheric sub-region composed of Mexico, the
U.S., and four Central American countriesNicaragua, El Salvador, Honduras, and Guatemala. These accelerated rates of migration explain some new dynamics that are specific to this region.
The emergence of transnational young criminal gangs, such as the
Mara Salvatrucha and the Barrio 18, which social ties extend from
L.A. to Honduras, is one example. In this case, as in many others,
it is necessary to develop sub-regional approaches to cope effectively with the specific challenges of the region.
The fifth and last element is the areas in which Mexico should
engage to strengthen the possibilities of a successful migration reform in the U.S. As Ambassador Rozental was just saying, it is important to return to the circularity of the immigration pattern, improve the health and education coverage of the Mexican nationals,
including those who migrate to the U.S., and improving security
and border safety, and one example could be by cooperating with
the U.S. on fighting the criminal organizations that smuggle immigrants and operate on both sides of the border. Thank you.
Chairman CORNYN. Thank you very much, Professor.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Clariond appears as a submission for the record.]
Chairman CORNYN. We will start now with a round of questions.
Let me start perhaps, Professor, with the subject that you were

VerDate 0ct 09 2002

14:37 Oct 28, 2005

Jkt 023250

PO 00000

Frm 00012

Fmt 6633

Sfmt 6633

S:\GPO\HEARINGS\23250.TXT

SJUD4

PsN: CMORC

9
just addressing. Some have called Mexicos Southern border Americas third border because the transiting of criminals, human smugglers, and other activities through that border into the United
States is a security concern. What is Mexico doing to provide greater security along its Southern border and to stop Mexico from being
a transit point for terrorists, drug dealers, violent gangs, and the
like?
Ms. CLARIOND. Well, as I was just saying, the National Institute
of Migration of Mexico has increased the number of arrests and deportations of immigrants, illegal immigrants, especially from Central America into Mexico. I think that to address, to really address
the problem of the transnational gangs as the Mara Salvatrucha
and even criminal drug networks, we really need to form a sub-regional dialogue to work together. We cannot try to address unilaterally these challenges because there is not going to be any forum
to do it.
As we said in the report that we handed in before this hearing,
in Salvador, they tried to implement a zero-tolerance policy towards the Maras. The only thing that happened was that the
Maras, they started to going to Honduras, Nicaragua, Guatemala,
Belize, and Mexico, and even into the U.S.
So Mexico cannot develop a unilateral policy, a zero-tolerance
policy. It has to work together with Central America and the U.S.
in order to really try to approach this challenge.
Chairman CORNYN. I do know that Mexico has been a good partner with the United States in developing strategies for security in
many respects and we very much appreciate that partnership. At
the same time, the United States cannot intervene in a sovereign
nations affairs. Regarding the violence, for example, we see happening in Nuevo Laredo and places like thatAmbassador, I would
appreciate your observations on thiswhat can the United States
do to help Mexico further secure law and order within its own borders in addition to participating in these partnerships and other efforts that we have been engaged in for some time now?
Ambassador ROZENTAL. My own feeling, Mr. Chairman, is that
thereand we have just concluded a tri-national task force report
on the future of North America in which we have proposed, in effect, the creation of a security perimeter around North America
whereby all three countriesCanada, the United States, and Mexicoundertake a joint and shared responsibility for creating a zone
within North America where issues such as those that you have
mentioned are looked at and dealt with insofar as possible trilaterally.
I agree with you that sovereignty issues always play a role in
how countries see what goes on within their own territories. But
I think that it is clear, and from a survey that the Council that I
chair undertook last year in Mexico of public opinion attitudes towards international relations and relations with the United States
specifically, that Mexicans, by and large, understand that these
issues need to be addressed jointly and that because they need to
be addressed jointly, they require us to understand that we can
have things which perhaps in principle look like sovereignty issues
but that at the end of the day make our own region and our own

VerDate 0ct 09 2002

14:37 Oct 28, 2005

Jkt 023250

PO 00000

Frm 00013

Fmt 6633

Sfmt 6633

S:\GPO\HEARINGS\23250.TXT

SJUD4

PsN: CMORC

10
countries, individually and jointly, more secure and safer for the
citizens within them.
It was interesting to see that Mexicans by a majority, a fairly
large majority, agreed to have the stationing of U.S. law enforcement personnel within Mexican territory if it meant that they
would be safer from external threats to North America by doing so.
Chairman CORNYN. Let me ask you about this concept of circularity of migration that both, Mr. Ambassador, you and the Professor both emphasized. This seems to be a subject that comes up
repeatedly in our conversations with our friends in Mexico. And, it
seems to be very consistent with Americas national interests and
the national interests of Mexico, in particular, but also with those
of other countries in Central and South America. People who would
come to work in the United States for a time would have the ability
to cross the border during the period of their work visa. Ultimately,
to the success of economies like Mexico and those of countries in
Central America, people would actually return home at some point
with savings and skills, not permanently emigrate to the United
States.
Could you please comment on your view of that issue, Ambassador?
Ambassador ROZENTAL. Certainly, Senator. The history of migration patterns between Mexico and the United States, and I take
that particular example because it is the one I know best, show
that, at timesat the times when there were less, fewer obstacles
to circularity, that is, to coming and going, the numbers of people
who came and went, especially the ones who stayed in the United
States, were much lower.
It is my understanding, and I certainlythere is no way to prove
it until we try it, but the fact is that the erection of all the barriers
that have been put up at the border, the fences and the operations
and the enforcement measures that have been taken, have really
only served to ensure that the people who do make it across, and
they always do make it across, stay in the United States because
it is much more difficult to come and go.
I feel that if there were sufficient opportunities for Mexicans and
others to work in the United States legitimately, in an orderly
fashion, according to United States laws, and to come here fairly
easily, that is, to obtain visas without a 10-year waiting period or
whatever it is, that there would be much less, one, illegality, and
two, many fewer people who would want to remain in the United
States permanently. Again, it is difficult to prove it, but I think
that the history shows that that is the way it worked before the
beginning of all of these programs to stop people from crossing.
Chairman CORNYN. Thank you very much.
Senator Kennedy?
Senator KENNEDY. Thank you both. Let me ask, Ambassador,
why do you think all five of these points are necessary to reform
the immigration laws and the sort of chaos lawlessness that now
exists?
Ambassador ROZENTAL. Senator, thank you. I believe that all five
are necessary because they all form part of the phenomenon. They
all have to do with the issue of immigration. I mean, the first, of
course, is what do you do about all the people who have yet to come

VerDate 0ct 09 2002

14:37 Oct 28, 2005

Jkt 023250

PO 00000

Frm 00014

Fmt 6633

Sfmt 6633

S:\GPO\HEARINGS\23250.TXT

SJUD4

PsN: CMORC

11
to the United States to work, who are being demanded for work
here, who have job offers and who have the ability to be employed?
The second part is, of course, the several million people who are
already in the United States without proper authorization, and you
cant, I think, solve the first issue without addressing the second
issue, among other reasons, because of the constituencies involved
within the internal domestic political system of the United States
and the various groups that deal with the issue.
Border security and safety not only after 9/11, but even before 9/
11 was a very big issue, and what has happened in these recent
weeks and months at the border with the United States on the
Mexican side, although perhaps today more evident from media
coverage, is not new. There has always been a degree of criminal
element in the border, at the border, because of the illegality of the
issues that cross the border, whether it is arms smuggling or people smuggling or illegal immigration or contraband or anything
else.
The efforts that Mexico needs to make, and these are efforts
which I think the United States should participate in, perhaps together even with Canada, to enhance the opportunities for its own
citizens within the country, for a developing country that has so
many other requirements to deal with in its social and economic
structure is an issue which needs to be addressed, as well, because
as long as there are areas and pockets of poverty in Mexico and
states that dont give opportunity to their people, then those people
will be looking for ways to move forward.
And finally, the country quota system, although on the books, in
practice is not being observed. There are many more Mexicans who
get legal and proper visas to come to the United States under all
of the different programs that are offered for them to do that,
whether it is family reunification or whatever, that if all of this
was put in an orderly system and Mexicans knew that if they had
a job offer here and they could come and that the visa would be
available within, I dont know, 30 days if they could prove that
they had a job offer and that they could come back and forward at
the end of that job offer or move to another job, that there would
be much less of an illegality to the system.
So from my perspectivea former Foreign Minister of Mexico
called it a whole enchilada. I wouldnt call it that, but I would
say that these are very much entwined as issues in the immigration phenomenon and, therefore, need to be looked at together, including the border security and enforcement issue, which I think
is very much a matter of consideration of this Subcommittee.
Senator KENNEDY. Maybe you have answered this question with
the first one, but what would happen if our Congress only addressed the border security and didnt address the need for legal
status of the undocumented or a legal avenue of new temporary
workers? What do you think the result would be?
Ambassador ROZENTAL. Senator, I think the result would be exactly the same as we have had for the last 50 years. You would
continue to have the same phenomenon of Mexicans crossing over
to the United States to work. Americans, by the way, staying in
Mexico to work, as well, without proper authorization. I should
point out that this is not just a pure one-way street. There are

VerDate 0ct 09 2002

14:37 Oct 28, 2005

Jkt 023250

PO 00000

Frm 00015

Fmt 6633

Sfmt 6633

S:\GPO\HEARINGS\23250.TXT

SJUD4

PsN: CMORC

12
many fewer, but there are Americans who live in Mexico and work
in Mexico without proper documentation.
And I think that the only way that you can address this issue
and get to the root causes of it is to deal with those points in addition to enforcement. The U.S. has done nothing but to try to enforce the border up until now, and over successive immigration reform acts and all of the money and resources, human and financial,
that have been put in enforcement, it has not made the slightest
dent in the actual numerical issue of the migration phenomenon.
Senator KENNEDY. Professor Clariond, let me ask you, how can
we best guard against the corruption, the fraud, the other illegal
activities by the sort of unscrupulous recruiters and make sure the
visas are available to qualified workers?
Ms. CLARIOND. We are going to start right now cities. The H2A
and H2B visas that almost were allocated to Mexican workers, almost in the number of 70,000 visas last year, there is no involvement of the Mexican or the U.S. Government in allocating these
visas. So they are in hands of recruiters which can lead to an increase in the possibilities of corruption and fraud. So I think that
the best way to guard against this kind of illegal activities will be
not to let it go in the hands of the recruiters and to form an intergovernmental task force in Mexico with the participation of labor,
foreign affairs, interior, and social development ministers in order
to be able to manage the demand for visas in the U.S.
Senator KENNEDY. I think that is a good suggestion. My time is
up, but I would be interested in following up.
Also, Ambassador, as I mentioned, my time is up, but I hope that
sometime you might be able to supplement about your reactions to
that Three-to-One Program, which I would be interested in your
ideas. Perhaps the Professor could give us a little summary about
your own impressions on that, what you think its strengths are, its
possibilities for expansion.
Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman CORNYN. Thank you, Senator Kennedy.
Senator Coburn has graciously allowed Senator Kyl to go first because I know you have a short amount of time to be here, Senator
Kyl, so please go ahead.
Senator KYL. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I very much appreciate
that. Senator Coburn, I need to apologize to both of you. I am the
Chairman of another Committee that is meeting right now just
down the hall. Fortunately, it is on the same floor of the same
building, but I do need to return to that.
So rather than take the time of my colleagues here, I wonder if
you would be willing if I submitted a couple of questions for the
record. It would give you time to think about the response to that,
and I will just tell you a couple of the subject matters.
One of the things, Ms. Clariond, that you mentioned was that
perhaps Mexico could do more to help the United States with interdiction and removal of the third-country nationals, sometimes
known as OTMs. I am very interested in how that might be helpful.
Mr. Ambassador, I am interested in what Mexico might do to realistically work with the United States, cooperate with the United

VerDate 0ct 09 2002

14:37 Oct 28, 2005

Jkt 023250

PO 00000

Frm 00016

Fmt 6633

Sfmt 6633

S:\GPO\HEARINGS\23250.TXT

SJUD4

PsN: CMORC

13
States in a temporary worker program. The last suggestion might
be part of that, and perhaps that could be expanded on.
And then, finally, the third area would deal with what recommendations you would have with respect to people who are already here illegally as contrasted with those who might participate
in a guest worker program prospectively and how we would make
that work.
But again, let me ask you to submit that for the record so that
I dont use my colleagues time here. I again apologize to you.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you, Senator Coburn.
Chairman CORNYN. Thank you, Senator Kyl.
Senator Coburn?
Senator COBURN. Thank you, and thank you for your testimony.
Ambassador, a couple of questions I have. The Mexican government, I guess it was last year, stopped requiring visas for Brazilians, and since that time, we have seen a tremendously increased
number of Brazilians, not necessarily the poorest but some from
the lower-middle economic classes coming through Mexico as a
transit. Can you explain the logic behind elimination of the visa requirement for Mexico for Brazilians who are coming in and
transiting through?
Ambassador ROZENTAL. Thank you, Senator. Well, I, of course,
dont represent the government and I with difficulty would be able
to tell you why certain policies are government policy. I suspect
that because Brazil is a sister Latin American country and because
we generally have a suppression of visa regime with most of the
countries in Latin America that this was not an issue.
I know that the United States government has been in discussions with the Mexican government about requiring visas for Brazilians. One of the things that has been done recently, and I think
it is a harbinger of the type of cooperation that I think a North
American security perimeter would require, is harmonization of
third-country visa policies. We have done it to some extent already,
but not fully, and I think that the only way to consider it in a
wider scheme of things would be precisely to have an overall cooperation.
In the Ottawa meeting of the ministerial groups that reported to
Presidents Bush, Fox, and Prime Minister Martin of Canada just
this last Monday, one of the issues which is covered in the report
is third-country national visa harmonization, and it is certainly, I
think, one of the issues that needs to be looked at.
One of the things I would like to remind people that I talk to
about immigration matters in North America is that Canada does
not require visas from Mexicans. It is a country that Mexicans can
visit freely for the amount of time that the Canadian authorities
allow Mexicans to go there, and we have no undocumented or illegal immigration issue with Canada whatsoever. We have a guest
worker program for agricultural sector that covers several of the
provinces. There are about 10,000 Mexicans that go every year.
They all come home. They are all rehired the following year. They
now have a longstanding presence among their employers. Their
employers want the same people to keep coming and it works very
well.

VerDate 0ct 09 2002

14:37 Oct 28, 2005

Jkt 023250

PO 00000

Frm 00017

Fmt 6633

Sfmt 6633

S:\GPO\HEARINGS\23250.TXT

SJUD4

PsN: CMORC

14
That, although the numbers are obviously very different from
those that could be involved in a U.S.-Mexican temporary worker
program, it is certainly a possibility and it is a bilateral program.
That is, both governments administer it jointly.
Senator COBURN. Would you care to guess for us the number of
visas, H1 and H2 visas, that might be required to fully meet the
needs that we have on our side as well as the demands coming
from Mexicans and other than Mexicans on a visa program if, in
fact, we had an ideal program, much like Canada has? Would you
have any idea of the number of visas We have had discussions on
the floor in the Senate. There has been a lot of discussion bandied
around in terms of the guest worker program. Do you have any
ideas as to those numbers?
Ambassador ROZENTAL. The only number that I can give you
with any authority is the one that, bilaterally, Mexico and the
United States have been looking at from the time that we did our
binational study, and that is that it has fluctuated yearly between
300,000 and 400,000 people. We dont know how many of those people return, so that whether the universe isare all individuals who
are different or whether they come and go. But presumably, if you
were to cover, from the Mexican point of view, the total amount,
you would be talking about somewhere in that ballpark figure.
If you were to add the Central Americans and other countries,
OTMs, as they are called, other-than-Mexican nationals, it would
probably be an additional amount, although I think that, statistically, Mexicans cover about 60 percent of the numbers.
Senator COBURN. Professor Clariond, would you have an answer
to that question or an estimate?
Ms. CLARIOND. I agree with Ambassador Rozental. He usedI
mean, Jeffrey Pascal from the Pew Hispanic Center, his last estimates indicate that around Mexican migration to the U.S. fluctuates between 420,000 and 480,000, so if you really want to have
access, give legal channels to this migration, it will have to be
around that number.
Senator COBURN. Thank you very much. My time has about expired and I will yield back.
Chairman CORNYN. Thank you, Senator Coburn.
Professor, one of the burdens that illegal immigration places on
taxpayers at the local level is the cost of health care. We know that
it is the most expensive, least efficient form of delivery because it
is in emergency rooms. The Federal Government requires an emergency room to see any patient without regard to their citizenship
status, without regard to whether they have insurance or not.
In my State, Texas, 25 percent of the population is without
health insurance, which means that an awful lot of people end up
going to the emergency room, and many emergency rooms in large
cities, like Dallas, for example, at Parkland Hospital, have to go on
divert status. That is, they cant take any emergencies because
they are full of people who are not emergencies, who dont have
health care, who have nowhere else to go.
What kind of obligation would you see that Mexico and any other
country that would benefit from an authorized worker program,
what sort of obligations could the United States expect them to accept in terms of the health care of their own people and relieving

VerDate 0ct 09 2002

14:37 Oct 28, 2005

Jkt 023250

PO 00000

Frm 00018

Fmt 6633

Sfmt 6633

S:\GPO\HEARINGS\23250.TXT

SJUD4

PsN: CMORC

15
some of that burden off of the local taxpayers in Texas and places
like that?
Ms. CLARIOND. Well, the Mexican government clearly needs to
strengthen its health coverage programs. It just implemented a
new program called Seguro Popular, that it is a public health program for low-income families. These are the families that do not
have access to any other kind of health system, Social Security system in Mexico. The idea is to see if the Seguro Popular could be
extended to migrants, Mexican migrants in the U.S.
Another idea can be to establish a bilateral or binational health
coverage system with private enterprises joining in and seeing that
some of these migrants can receive health care attention in Mexico,
not only in the U.S.
Chairman CORNYN. Ambassador, I would be interested in your
comments in that regard, as well. I think virtually every country
in the world, as a condition to issuing visas or allowing people from
other countries to enter that country for any extended period of
time, require proof of health insurance. Would that be one of the
alternatives that you think would be a reasonable requirement of
temporary workers who would be admitted to the United States
under such a program were it adopted?
Ambassador ROZENTAL. Senator, it works that way with our Canadian program, the Mexican-Canadian program. They are insured
while they are in the United States. Mexican undocumented workers usually pay fairly large amounts to the smugglers who put
them across. If you didnt have to pay that and you used that
money to partially pay for health insurance while you are in the
United States, I would suspect that many of them would prefer to
have health insurance and prefer to have access not only to emergency room care, but to general health care.
The other possibility, and this ties in with the issue of incentives,
I think Mexico and the U.S. need to find together, but Mexico
needs to do its part, of course, to find incentives to keep Mexicans
at home, but it also needs to find incentives for Mexicans to use
Mexican educational, Mexican health, Mexican other services that
are available.
Under the understanding that there would be a program which
the Mexican side would be involved with or shared responsibility
for, things like a binational health insurance scheme, issues relating to the Seguro Popular that Roberta mentioned, the possibility
which we even discussed back when I was Deputy Foreign Minister
in the prehistoric times of this centuryof last century, actually
was to allow for emergency health care at the border to be provided
on the Mexican side rather than on the U.S. side. Now, there is a
time problem and you cant expect people to make a big trip, but
at least along the border, and this specifically referred to the State
of Texas, the idea that Mexicans who needed emergency health
care could get it on the Mexican side rather than on the U.S. side
in order to alleviate the cost to the U.S. taxpayer.
Chairman CORNYN. Thank you. Let me ask again, we talked a
little bit about the circularity of migration issue and this sort of
counterintuitive ideaI mean, I understand what you are saying,
and I have seen this written up in a number of places, that by enhancing border security in the United States, we have actually

VerDate 0ct 09 2002

14:37 Oct 28, 2005

Jkt 023250

PO 00000

Frm 00019

Fmt 6633

Sfmt 6633

S:\GPO\HEARINGS\23250.TXT

SJUD4

PsN: CMORC

16
locked people into our country, in a sense, rather than allowed
them to go back and forth.
But, we all know that we simply cant have an open border and
we all know that the United States and any country has to know
who is coming into their country and why. And finally, I would say
we have to be able to place some reasonable limits on immigration.
Any nation in its own interest has to be able to limit immigration
to some rational level, recognizing that there is a tremendous demand for the labor provided by immigrants.
I want to press you maybe a little bit, Mr. Ambassador, on the
security issue again because I dont know how we deal with the terrorist who wants to come across if we regard the security perimeter
as only covering the three countries of the United States, Canada,
and Mexico. I mean, I wouldnt expect you to want American law
enforcement to go to Nuevo Laredo and intervene in those violent
episodes.
I guess I am wondering a little bit, do you see a difference between the way that Americans view sovereignty in terms of what
our borders mean as opposed to the way Mexicans view our border?
I sense there would be some difference in perception and approach
because so many of my friends from Mexico seem to view us as a
North American continent, not as separate nations with sovereign
borders.
Ambassador ROZENTAL. Thank you, Senator. No, I am not one of
those that feels very strongly either way. I think we have a North
American sub-region. We have set up a North American Free Trade
Agreement. We have free movement of goods. We have a fair
amount of free moment of services. I think that, eventually, as a
long-term goal, an open border or a free movement of people should
be a long-term goal.
I think it is obviously unrealistic to expect that to happen today
or even in the next 15 or 20 years, but hopefully when Mexico is
a developed country, when the economy and the social structure of
Mexico are such that they are more in line with the U.S. and Canada, there is no reason why we couldnt have a similar situation
as to what the Europeans have, and that is a fair amount of freedom of movement both for jobs as well as for other legitimate activities.
The issue of stopping terrorists and undesirables, if you like,
from my perspective, would work better if it were done on the other
perimeters of our region than if it is done at the land borders,
which are already extremely congested, saturated, where you have
the issue of the trade and the commercial traffic that goes through.
You mentioned Nuevo Laredo. Sixty percent of our bilateral trade
goes through truck traffic in Nuevo Laredo, as you well know.
If you concentrate all of the resources that you are today concentrating on the fight against terrorism and securing the U.S. homeland and you dont worry about what is going on on the Southern
border of Mexico or the Northern borders of Canada or the
entranceways, gateways into the airports and seaports, you are, in
effect, only doing half of the job.
And my point is that you work in looking at North America as
a region and then you transfer partnot all, but part of the security mechanism to the outer perimeter through third-country na-

VerDate 0ct 09 2002

14:37 Oct 28, 2005

Jkt 023250

PO 00000

Frm 00020

Fmt 6633

Sfmt 6633

S:\GPO\HEARINGS\23250.TXT

SJUD4

PsN: CMORC

17
tional visa harmonization, watch lists, sharing of databases, for example, deciding that before you issue a visa to come into North
America in the U.S. Consulate in Paris or in Tehran, you consult
the Mexicans and the Canadians as to whether they have any information on that individual, things of that sort which can increase
security and increase the protection that you give to the region.
That doesnt address the issue within the region, but it does address part of the issue outside.
Chairman CORNYN. Thank you.
Senator Coburn?
Senator COBURN. I just had one question. It is kind of a personal
note and it is to ask motivation rather than anything, in your opinion. As an obstetrician, I have delivered lots of foreign babies in my
practice in Oklahoma, most of which are Hispanic, but not all
Mexican. Is there part, because of our citizenship requirements of
birth, if you are born in this country, does that play a role at all
in motivation for coming across the border? You know, this is a
more frequent occurrence in this country, and, of course, there is
chain migration associated with that in that if you are born here
to an illegal alien, you are still a U.S. citizen.
Is that part of the motivation? Is that ever in the thinking, or
is that just a happenstance of those that are here, in your opinion?
Ambassador ROZENTAL. Senator, I think it certainly is a phenomenon that exists. I think it exists much more along the Mexican border, in Mexican border cities, especially Tijuana and some
other places, where more well-to-do Mexican women go to have
their deliveries in the United States for that reason. But I do not
think that it plays a very dramatic or important role in the general
migration phenomena.
Senator COBURN. If my daughter were pregnant and delivered in
Mexico, would she be a Mexican citizen?
Ambassador ROZENTAL. Yes, she would.
Senator COBURN. The child would? Thank you.
Chairman CORNYN. Ambassador Rozental and Professor, I read
with interest about a mortgage program for Mexican migrants
where Mexican migrants living in the U.S. can obtain mortgages to
buy homes in Mexico. Supporters of the program argue that it will
increase the standard of living of the families of migrants in Mexico and it will reinforce migrants roots in their native country.
What steps do you think Mexico and other countries can take to
increase economic opportunity at home to maintain ties to ones
homeland in a way that promotes the circularity of migration you
are talking about and prevents the severance of ties on a permanent basis with their home country such that they are more likely
to permanently emigrate to the United States? Professor, would
you like to take a stab at that first, please?
Ms. CLARIOND. Yes. Thank you, Senator. The Mexican government recently has implemented a program on transnational mortgage, as you were saying, to make housing available for low-income
families. So I think it will, as part of any temporary worker program between Mexicothat Mexico cooperates with the U.S., it
will bethe Mexican government can broaden this program and
make it accessible for Mexican immigrants to come back, as an incentive to come back and be able to own their own house and their

VerDate 0ct 09 2002

14:37 Oct 28, 2005

Jkt 023250

PO 00000

Frm 00021

Fmt 6633

Sfmt 6633

S:\GPO\HEARINGS\23250.TXT

SJUD4

PsN: CMORC

18
familyfor their family. This really, as we all know, owning a
home is part of strengthening your ties to your community of origin. So I think this will provide to be an important economic incentive for migrants, Mexican migrants in the U.S. to go back.
Chairman CORNYN. Ambassador, one proposal that I am familiar
withthat I learned about from Senator Phil Gramm, my predecessorI embraced in a bill I sponsored last year. It would allow
the withholding from a workers pay (someone who works on a temporary basis in the United States and would not be eligible for Social Security through the United States or Medicare) sums that
would ordinarily be withheld, and it would put them in a separate
account for the worker. The sums would only be made available to
the worker upon return to his/her country of origin. The belief is
that this would provide yet another incentive for the worker to return home by providing him/her with some capitalsavings that
would be beneficial to the worker and to the country of origin because it could be used to buy a home, start a small business, or
otherwise contribute to the economic development of that country.
Do you see that as one potential approach that we could use, or are
there positives or negatives associated with that?
Ambassador ROZENTAL. Thank you, Senator. The Social Security
Administration in this country and the Mexican Social Security Institute signed an agreement back in June of last year, a so-called
totalization agreement, which allows Mexicans who work both in
the United States and in Mexico to be able to retire and get Social
Security benefits from both under this agreement. It works also for
Americans who work in Mexico. It also avoids dual Social Security
taxation, which is an issue that people who work in both countries
have to deal with.
That agreement, which was negotiated and signed by both governments, is still pending submission to this Senate and also pending submission to the Mexican Congress for ratification. Once it is
ratified, it will go a long way towards doing exactly what you mentioned.
Whether you could also add to that the possibility of a withholding for a savings account, an IRA-type system where you would
have something for when you went back home, I think is certainly
a feasibility. The number one use in Mexico of remittances sent by
Mexican migrant workers home is for the purchase of a home.
Chairman CORNYN. I know occasionally, I hear people say that
one reason why Mexico and other countries are not committed to
immigration reform in the United States is because these countries
depend on the remittances sent from workers here in the United
States. I think that is wrong. I disagree with those who argue that
because if you would estimate that the remittances, the amount of
money actually sent, let us say from the United States to Mexico,
which I think is in the $16 to $17 billion range per year, represents
the savings rate by immigrants, let us say it is ten percent of ones
earnings, Mexico might be the beneficiary from an economic standpoint of that $16 or $17 billion, but it represents an additional 90
percent of economic activity which is taking place in the United
States and not in Mexico. So, I have a little difficulty with the argument.

VerDate 0ct 09 2002

14:37 Oct 28, 2005

Jkt 023250

PO 00000

Frm 00022

Fmt 6633

Sfmt 6633

S:\GPO\HEARINGS\23250.TXT

SJUD4

PsN: CMORC

19
Thus, I might just ask, Ambassador, this question. What other
steps do you believe that Mexico can take on its own or with help
from the United States to develop its economy and create jobs and
opportunities in that country so that, as both President Fox and
Secretary Derbez have said, Mexicans can achieve their lifes
dreams in their country of origin?
Ambassador ROZENTAL. I think there are two aspects to the question, Senator. The first aspect is the question of the incentives that
the Mexican government as such can put on the table for Mexicans
to stay in Mexico or return to Mexico if they are not in Mexico or
if they travel or take jobs elsewhere.
And the other aspect, of course, has to do with how Mexicans
themselves see this phenomenon of circularity. I mentioned earlier
that the way it used to work, before all of the obstacles came about,
was that most Mexicans would go seasonally into the United States
and work in the agricultural sector to do seasonal work and then
go home and have jobs the rest of the year. Today, the category of
migrants that come from Mexico has changed considerably. They
are no longer predominately agricultural workers. Today, they
work in the service sector, they work in a whole series of areas of
the U.S. economy that are not limited to agriculture.
And they also probably would be better off if they were able to
deal with their skills in both countries, and many of them do, and
many of them risk the travail of crossing the border and risking
being caught and deported and going back again because the number of reincidences that the Border Patrol and the U.S. Immigration Service documents is rather high, which, in effect, again indicates that they are looking at this as almost a bilateral labor market in which they would like to be able to work a certain period
of time, whether it is a few months of a year or a few years of a
decade in the United States and then be able to go home, because
that is where their families are, that is where their ties are, in
some cases that is where they own property.
Again, the circularity issue, the interruption of circularity, I
think to a great extent has led to the fact that the system doesnt
work the way it used to.
On the incentive issue, there are incentives of a financial nature.
Senator Kennedy and yourself, you mentioned the Three-for-One
Program. This is a program that President Fox put into place to
match remittances with federal, state, and localwhich is why it
is called three-to-onedollars with investment in infrastructure,
infrastructure being job creating on the one hand and also giving
development opportunities to these regions of Mexico that generally
are poorer.
Employment incentivesyou will be able, presumably, under an
agreement that those who came back to Mexico would have some
sort of a fast track into the job market, to be able to get employment in an easier way and through a government-sponsored
scheme where they would be able to enter the job market in Mexico
in a better system.
Educational incentivesMexicans who came to the United States
and worked here and picked up skills while they were here could
then go back to Mexico with educational incentives to be able to either continue their training and their skill building or go into the

VerDate 0ct 09 2002

14:37 Oct 28, 2005

Jkt 023250

PO 00000

Frm 00023

Fmt 6633

Sfmt 6633

S:\GPO\HEARINGS\23250.TXT

SJUD4

PsN: CMORC

20
educational system beyond high school and beyond what the average Mexican goes through.
And then there are the pension and Social Security incentives.
There is the mortgage incentive that we talked about for homebuilding. There are a whole series of issues that could be on the
table.
Again, all of these, I think, are conditioned on the bilateral nature of the discussion. As I said at the outset, the bilateral part of
the discussion was interrupted fundamentally at 9/11 and has not
really resumed as far as immigration is concerned since then.
Chairman CORNYN. Well, thank you very much, Mr. Ambassador
and Professor. Thank you for your time and testimony on this important subject.
We will leave the record open until 5:00 p.m. next Thursday,
July 7, for members to submit additional questions in writing or
additional documents for the record.
With that, and with my thanks, this hearing is adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 3:35 p.m., the Subcommittee was adjourned.]
[Submissions for the record follow.]

VerDate 0ct 09 2002

14:37 Oct 28, 2005

Jkt 023250

PO 00000

Frm 00024

Fmt 6633

Sfmt 6633

S:\GPO\HEARINGS\23250.TXT

SJUD4

PsN: CMORC

VerDate 0ct 09 2002

14:37 Oct 28, 2005

Jkt 023250

PO 00000

Frm 00025

Fmt 6633

Sfmt 6633

S:\GPO\HEARINGS\23250.TXT

SJUD4

PsN: CMORC

23250.001

21

VerDate 0ct 09 2002

14:37 Oct 28, 2005

Jkt 023250

PO 00000

Frm 00026

Fmt 6633

Sfmt 6633

S:\GPO\HEARINGS\23250.TXT

SJUD4

PsN: CMORC

23250.002

22

VerDate 0ct 09 2002

14:37 Oct 28, 2005

Jkt 023250

PO 00000

Frm 00027

Fmt 6633

Sfmt 6633

S:\GPO\HEARINGS\23250.TXT

SJUD4

PsN: CMORC

23250.003

23

VerDate 0ct 09 2002

14:37 Oct 28, 2005

Jkt 023250

PO 00000

Frm 00028

Fmt 6633

Sfmt 6633

S:\GPO\HEARINGS\23250.TXT

SJUD4

PsN: CMORC

23250.004

24

VerDate 0ct 09 2002

14:37 Oct 28, 2005

Jkt 023250

PO 00000

Frm 00029

Fmt 6633

Sfmt 6633

S:\GPO\HEARINGS\23250.TXT

SJUD4

PsN: CMORC

23250.005

25

VerDate 0ct 09 2002

14:37 Oct 28, 2005

Jkt 023250

PO 00000

Frm 00030

Fmt 6633

Sfmt 6633

S:\GPO\HEARINGS\23250.TXT

SJUD4

PsN: CMORC

23250.006

26

VerDate 0ct 09 2002

14:37 Oct 28, 2005

Jkt 023250

PO 00000

Frm 00031

Fmt 6633

Sfmt 6633

S:\GPO\HEARINGS\23250.TXT

SJUD4

PsN: CMORC

23250.007

27

VerDate 0ct 09 2002

14:37 Oct 28, 2005

Jkt 023250

PO 00000

Frm 00032

Fmt 6633

Sfmt 6633

S:\GPO\HEARINGS\23250.TXT

SJUD4

PsN: CMORC

23250.008

28

VerDate 0ct 09 2002

14:37 Oct 28, 2005

Jkt 023250

PO 00000

Frm 00033

Fmt 6633

Sfmt 6633

S:\GPO\HEARINGS\23250.TXT

SJUD4

PsN: CMORC

23250.009

29

VerDate 0ct 09 2002

14:37 Oct 28, 2005

Jkt 023250

PO 00000

Frm 00034

Fmt 6633

Sfmt 6633

S:\GPO\HEARINGS\23250.TXT

SJUD4

PsN: CMORC

23250.010

30

VerDate 0ct 09 2002

14:37 Oct 28, 2005

Jkt 023250

PO 00000

Frm 00035

Fmt 6633

Sfmt 6633

S:\GPO\HEARINGS\23250.TXT

SJUD4

PsN: CMORC

23250.011

31

32

VerDate 0ct 09 2002

14:37 Oct 28, 2005

Jkt 023250

PO 00000

Frm 00036

Fmt 6633

Sfmt 6011

S:\GPO\HEARINGS\23250.TXT

SJUD4

PsN: CMORC

23250.012