school teachers about children who are actively upset in class having to do with tears and fear that it casts on classroom performance among a lot of these kids. you know, it's not really a teachers capacity to say the fine points of the new immigration policy and how it is or isn't going to effect you and your family, programs like lunch programs or signing up for health tests or visits with the nurse, anything that involves that child signaling themselves have gone down groups that deal with illness prevention has gone down.

there is fear reported from me about what has happened. it may seem like political fun and games in this room but back in rhode island there are classrooms with kids who are really frightened. a frightened kid is not anybody should take any satisfaction in my view. i guess my time is out. >> the statement indicating maybe daca caused terrorism. i want to ask you if this would be a quote from his record

making clear that he doesn't sign this to daca. he said failures to support the laws in the past has put our nation at violence and even terrorism. >> that's correct. >> i want to be clear that when we are talking about daca we are talking about completely up ending the lives of over 800,000 young people. people came here as children to work hard and play by the rules

all for a chance to take part in the american dream. this is 800,000 young people who are working. that's who we are talking about. this is really shooting ourselves in the foot. we are talking about people like marlin servanes. this remarkable young woman was an intern in my office last

summer. >> her mother worked multiple jobs and marlin hit the books and also worked. she was the second person to graduate with honors. she sees the opportunity despite the risk of exposing herself and her family, that's what he was talking about. she won an academic scholarship but still had to work two jobs to cover all of her costs because she is ineligible for federal aid. marlin was a stand out as an

intern in my office. while working nights at target. she told me how vulnerable she felt. i promised her we will not give up the fight. it is a disgrace to our moral principals without providing a legislative replacement risked pulling the rug from investments dreamers have made in our

country, paying taxes, biuying homes, serving in the military for goodness sake. it pushes people back into the shadows, tearing apart families and devastating our communities, turning our backs on dreamers but i'm hopeful we can work together to protect the futures of people like marlin who worked so hard to build one. i am a strong supporter of the bipartisan dream act which would allow them to earn legal status and eventually citizenship. i just want to urge all of my colleagues to vote for it. when dreamers first applied for daca they voluntarily gave a lot of their information, their personal information and

everything from fingerprints to home address and phone numbers. senator durbin was asking about this. in my view and his view if the government were to use the information that they voluntarily turned over i think it would represent a shocking betrayal of the trust they put in us. now, so far the administration has said generally they will proactively turn dreamers information over to ice. will you commit to me that it will never proactively expose information obtained through daca applications? will you commit to fully identifying the circumstances under which us cis would

respontd for that information? >> thank you, senator, for that question. with respect to just setting out clearly the guidelines for which information would be disclosed since the beginning of the daca information and daca policy we have noted that information would not be turned over for immigration enforcement proceedings but could be turned over if it fit the guidelines for the notice to appear abdond will always make sure it is very clear and placed. with respect to the policy as far as a change to the policy it has not changed since 2012. the information provided it could be subject to change. we would continue with that. >> will you -- >> i'm sorry, mr. chairman. >> thank you.

we have knowledged the presence of members of the congressional hispanic caucus and i would like to knowledge members of the asian pacific american congress.

>> didn't you say that could change? >> it is correct. from the beginning we noted it could be subject to change. it is not changed to date. >> yes. that is the concern we have. would you like to respond also? >> the department's job is to protect public safety and national security. if the department understands that an individual is a threat to national security the department is going do everything in its power, as it should, as a law enforcement organization to neutralize that particular concern. if we know that somebody is a public safety threat -- >> yes. >> it is becoming -- >> my time is running ouchltt. i think if someone is a risk there are ways that information can be used. so but the bottom line, right now you do not have a concern

that the dreamers provided this information to the government. right now you do not have a concern that this information is going to be used to find the dreamers upon theics pir rati e when they no longer -- >> we don't have any plans to target any dreamers based on any information that we received or i should say daca recipients. >> are you saying 800,000 have nothing to fear regarding deportation? if that is so you should put that out there. there is a lot of fear in the community not among -- not just among the dreamers but their families and their friends. if they have nothing to fear from deportation why do you not put that out? >> ma'am, i don't have an answer to that particular question. to kind of get back to my prior point, if someone is an enforcement priority for us, regardless of the status,

whether they are daca or no we will pursue those. >> you have made that very plain. 800,000 are not a risk to our national security. so i would say since you both knowledged that policy to not use this information could change -- if they don't have anything to fear today from deportation and the use of this information but two, this policy or this position can change very quickly. for both of you, again, if the supreme court -- okay. the attorney general says daca is illegal and unconstitutional. why even allow daca extensions? >> senator, we had a practical problem on our hands. we had a very large number of applications that had been received at the department where individuals had put their money towards that. they had also included their ead

payment with that. sending everyone back their application and their money was an administratively difficult thing for them to do. plus we are that this body can go about creating a solution to this problem. that was part of our wind down as well. >> my time is running out. i don't think you're answering my questions directly.

>> and there are due process issues for what the administration the doing. thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you. i think we are ready to go to the second panel. before we do that i hope all of our government could say yes to that. >> okay. the concerns he had -- >> ready to work with you on new legislation if you want to do that. >> and senator, we also look forward to providing technical operation assistance. >> good answers.

>> okay. you folks, thank you very much for your testimony. you may go. while we are setting up for the other panel i want to save time by reading their introductions. we have outside experts, a ben fish jarea -- a beneficiary. i want to thank them for testifying today especially bill whose 93-year-old grandmother was brutally raped and murdered. his story represents many victims who have lost loved ones due to poor immigration. he is also a constituents of mine. i look forward to testimony today and to the dialogue of this hearing. we'll inevitably produce -- and

we have miss vaughn as immigration studies. she has been with the center since 1992 developing immigration policy and operations. she recently concluded a can want of justice project where she zud died l-- studied. she senior law enforcement officers at northwest earn for public safety. ms. vaughn was employed as a foreign service officer with the state department where she served in belgium, trinidad and debago. mr. is 64 years old and iowa is his residence.

he has a -- his granddaughter that was brutally raped and murdered by an undocumented immigrant. they have five children and grand children. denise is a medical student at icon school of medicine in new york city and cofounder of prehealth dreamers, an organization that focuses on undocumented immigrants gains careers to health care services. we'll start with you ms. vaughn. >> thank you very much for the invitation to testify today. id like to address the impact of the daca program and offer a few comments on how congress might move forward now that it has

been terminated. the educational institutions they attended have benefitted too. we cannot ignore that there have been some adverse side effects for communities and for our immigration system. the daca policy was an abuse of and was carelessly implemented. it displaced u.s. workers added to the cost of public welfare and assistance programs, provided protection to criminals in some cases, diverted benefits for legal immigrants, invited fraudulent applications. members of congress again are being confronted by advocates but constant increases have consequences for americans and continued tolerance damages the integrity of the illegal

immigration system and erodes public support. clearly there is support for people with daca. i think there are legitimate reasons to do it. if congress takes this step though it must be limited to the 700,000 people approximately who have daca benefits and only if it is accompanied by other provisions to mitigate the fiscal costs, offset the inevitable increases in chain migration and prevent the likely surge in illegal immigration. now, we have heard a lot this morning about the fear that people with daca have about their future in this country and what is going to happen to the benefits that they have been extended. i do sympathize with that. i can understand that. it must be difficult, but i think that we also need to have a similar sympathy for people who are effected by our

tolerance of illegal immigration, people who fear they will not be able to get a job because their employers are bypassing legal workers in favor of illegal workers. people who live on the border live in fear every day in parts of it because the border is not secure and because they can't even travel around their own property without fear for what may happen to them at the hands of the smuggling cartels. i have a friend in providence, rhode island, who lives in fear because she was raped in a public park by a criminal alien who had been released by the city of providence's sanctuary policies and was allowed to keep employment because his employer did not have to use e-verify. parents i have talked to in brentwood, new york, are afraid because their children have to go to high schools where the

ms-13 gang has proliferated and expanded because that gang and its members took advantage of lenient policies at our border and are now wreaking havoc in their communities. i talked to people who live in sanctuary cities who live in fear because these local policies result in the release of hundreds of criminal aliens that i.c.e. is trying to deport every single week. these are fears that we need to take seriously also. now, i do think that there should be an amnesty for people with daca, and i think it should offer lawful, permanent residency status, a green card and a path to citizenship. but congress also needs to -- if it takes that step, slow down other parts of our immigration system. i estimate that, if 700,000 daca beneficiaries receive green cards, then we can expect this

they would be able -- if no other changes are made to our immigration system they would be able to sponsor an additional 1.4 million relatives in -- through our legal immigration system. so that amounts to more than 2 million permanent residents who would be added to our country because of a daca amnesty. so, to compensate, congress should down-size the family migration categories, specifically by terminating the categories that exist for married adult sons and daughters and siblings of u.s. citizens and also by terminating the visa lottery, which is obsolete, and which brings in people who have no ties to this country, unlike the people with daca. again, thank you for the opportunity to testify, and i look forward to your questions. >> chairman grassley, ranking member feinstein, members of the

senate judiciary committee, good afternoon. i am honored and greatly appreciate the opportunity to testify. america is at a crossroads. illegal alien crimes are the result of congress' lax treatment of border security and law enforcement. we stand here as the rule of law intersects lawlessness and ask, is congress willing to tell the american people that it has decided to reward lawlessness over lawfulness. today i would like to tell you about my wife's late grandmother, louise solomon. she was the child of parents who emigrated from italy in the early 1900s. they were america's true dreamers. her family settled in nebraska where her father worked as a carpenter. she and her family learned english, worked hard and loved america. she was a proud u.s. citizen and contributed to america's unique culture. she respected our nation and its citizens by obeying our laws.

these same laws, if they had been enforced, might have saved louise, or as we call her, gram, and she might still be with us here today. on july 21st, 2013, one year after obama's unconstitutional deferred action for childhood arrivals, or daca, which gave millions of illegal aliens a guarantee that they would not be subject to u.s. law gram's life was ripped from her. she was 93 and had been sleeping peacefully in her bed until she was violently awakened by an 18-year-old illegal mexican national by the name of sergio pérez. with the entire weight of his body straddling her and pinning her down, pérez brutally beat gram. in actuality brutality or brutal, is not adequate to describe what he did to gram. he shattered both her orbital sockets, broke her nose in three places and broke several of her

ribs. in pummelling gram's face, pérez forced her teeth to push through her tongue and lip and the blood from that injury began filling her lungs. pérez then brutally raped and s soddo mized her. leaving pools of blood coagulating on the carpet beneath her. t the attack was so severe that in in her bedroom that was not one square foot on any of the walls or ceiling that did not contain a moderate amount of blood spatter. at 93, our family's matriarch's transition team dream was crushed by a monster. four days later with the pooling of blood in her lungs suffocating her gram succumbed to her injuries. according to the douglas county, nebraska, district attorney we were told that not only was pérez an illegal alien but he

had also been deported twice, yet here he was in omaha, nebraska, working as a contract worker for a roofing company. caught and deported twice, he was still given special privileges to live and work where most -- where our most vulnerable citizens live. we also learned that he was a member of the los heronos gang. he was here illegally. he killed gram and our dreams became nightmares. one of responsibilities given to our government by the constitution is the protection of its citizens. in gram's case, government not only failed, it failed miserably. but this tragedy doesn't begin or end with gram's life being stolen by an illegal alien. sadly, the story is repeated countless times across this nation. there are thousands of americans who have suffered at the hands of illegal aliens in this country, and now the government asks us not only to welcome them

with open arms but to also reward them and give them the same rights and liberties that we have as citizens. u.s. is a nation governed by the rule of law. when our government decides to condone and reward those who have broken the law, we cease to be a nation of laws and, instead, race down a slippery slope called tyranny and chaos. it will not stop with daca which experts say will reach over 3.2 million work permits and jobs americans want but will not have. the next question will be what will congress do with the parents of illegals. behind that will be those who will be labeled as law-abiding illegals. certainly these ten-plus million will expect special status to stay and live out their dreams also. why should they be penalized, and what about those who have only committed minor crimes? must we be so cruel as to ask them to return to their countries of origin?

what if those countries don't want them or refuse to take them? what will we do then? you see, the list of exceptions is endless, as will be the flow of undocumented aliens pouring across the border, which you refuse to secure. i remind all the members of congress that you work for we the people. there are some members of congress who understand this and have dedicated their lives to the people. unfortunately, there are far too many others who are dedicated to furthering their own agendas. america first no longer matters to them. i stand here today for we the people. our fellow citizens are dying at the hands of those who should not be here in the first place while congress fails to respond to adequately, who instead bickers like children on the playground at recess. all the while the consequences of their deadly actions or inactions are ignored. american families are bereft in suffering, our families are permanently separated from our loved ones while you fret over

the plight of the daca children brought here illegally who, by the way, are up to 35 years old. isn't it time that you stopped and just did the job that you were hired for? in closing, when you go home tonight, or this weekend, and you gather with your families around the dining room table, why don't you go ahead and decide what child, parent or grand parent are you willing to sacrifice so that others here illegally can realize their dreams. thank you and i am happy to take your questions. >> miss marquez. >> thank you chairman. i would like to thank ranking member feinstein and the members of this committee for giving me the opportunity to testify today. it is great honor. my name is denise rojas marquez.

i am 28 years old and i am a recipient of the deferred action for childhood arrivals program and among the 800,000 individuals approved for this program. the united states has been my home for 27 years. i consider myself an undocumented american, a proud californian and most recently a new yorker. i am currently studying medicine at the icon school of medicine as mount sinai in new york city. and after graduation, i intend to work in underserved communities as a doctor here in the united states. my family and i settled in fremont, california, from mexico in 1990. i was less than a year old. i took my first steps in a two-bedroom apartment where i lived most of my childhood. my mother tells me that before i started school i was so eager to speak in english that i would call my relatives over the

phone, declare i had learned english and proceed to speak in gibberish. from volunteering as an altar server at my church to tutoring second grade students in how to read i spent my teenage summers serving and giving back to my community. while attending college at uc berkeley my situation grew difficult. commuting over an hour each way to school and lacking proper documents to participate in most academic programs were just some of the obstacles i faced. my family and i also feared being detained by immigration officials. and because of these fears, we lived in a nondescript apartment complex which was tucked away in the furthest corner from the street. i was terrified of leaving home most days, looking over my shoulder to see if someone was following me. and i also constantly worried about my future. when daca arrived in 2012, it was a relief to me and so many.

it was a hope that we could continue our educational endeavors, resume our careers, and for people to simply let themselves dream of a better future. i diligently filled out my application which included a background check. it felt surreal when my daca approval came in the mail. my sister and i held each other in tears. daca was the answer that lifted the ceiling to my educational and career ambitions. daca was the key to securing a driver's license, obtaining employment, and gaining acceptance to medical school. because of daca, it lifted me out of the shadows and i no longer lived in fear. in the years since the daca announcement i have been able to finish college, publish in a top academic journal and co-founded a national organization called prehelp d.r.e.a.m.ers which

serves undocumented youth like myself with aspirations in pursuing a career in health. my success is rooted in the lessons my family taught me growing up. leaving mexico with less than a high school american my mother in america learned english. she obtained a high school equivalency diploma and nursing degree. watching her study chemistry into the night while providing for my siblings and me taught me hard work and diresiliency. my father taught me hue milt and creativity. president trump announced he was ending daca. to me, this means that i will not be able to practice as a doctor. i don't know how i'll survive after graduation. how will i pay my rent? how will i pay off my loans?

how will i have income for food and other basic necessities? in the past five years, 800,000 have submitted applications, undergone extensive background checks and completed other requirements. because of daca, people have been able to find employment, start families, buy homes, go to school, even start small businesses. daca has allowed us to lead almost normal lives and give back to our communities. now the fates of 800,000 individuals rests in your hands, and we desperately need your help. if congress doesn't act soon and daca expires on march 5th, 2018, an estimated 1400 people like me will lose their daca every day. people will lose their jobs, their homes, and all those who depend on them will suffer too. i implore the president to continue the daca program and protect daca recipients until

congress acts to pass a permanent solution. and i am asking you to pass the d.r.e.a.m. act. legislation that provides a long-term solution for all undocumented youth and young adults. my name is denise rojas marquez, i am 28 years old, a proud undocumented american and soon to be doctor. i have loved this country for as long as i can remember. for me and for so many others, this is the only country we know and the only place that we belong. the clock is ticking, so i ask you this. will you fight to defend our dreams? thank you. >> we'll have five-minute rounds. miss vaughn, businesses across the country have opted to use the e-verify system to help comply with our immigration laws. in 2016 e-verify reached about half of the new hireees

nationwide. it's a proven tool for employers, including myself, hiring people for the office here in washington. that helps reduce incentives for illegal immigration and safeguards job opportunities for americans and other workers, clearly e-verify works. do you agree that e-verify is the most effective, cost-effective way to reduce illegal immigration? >> i do agree with that strongly. we know through our research that the main reason people come here, attempt to settle here illegally, is because they believe that they can get a job. and that's why they come here. and this is the most effective tool we have. the people who use it -- my organization uses it. like many other employers, we find it easy to use and effective in avoiding hiring people who lack work authorization. i think that would probably be

the single most effective improvement that we could make to immigration enforcement. and it's not really enforcement. it's compliance. it works to deter illegal immigration and will help change the equation that people are thinking of when they're deciding whether or not to come here illegally, that if we take away that job magnet or at least reduce it, that will make the job of i.c.e. and the border patrol and everyone else involved in enforcing our immigration laws that much easier because fewer people will try to come here. >> i think you partly answered the second and third parts of my question. but would you be able to quantify how much the unauthorized immigrant population would be reduced if mandatory e-verify was required? >> there has been some research on this. and some other scholars who have

studied this modelled it out and found that, by adopting mandatory work-site verification like e-verify, that over five years the illegal, unauthorized work -- illegal workers could be reduced by probably about 50%. i mean, we estimate that half of the estimated 8 million illegal workers are working on the books for an employer, usually using a stolen or fake social security number. and that is the exact problem that e-verify gets to is making sure that we have a system of identifiers that has some integrity and protects the identity of americans. >> if we had enhanced interior enforcement and border security, would it be effective without

e-verify? >> i think it would -- i think that this prospect of being able to work here is what motivates people to pay a smuggler to try to get here illegally. i think that, as long as we fail to address the attraction of the job market here and the fact that employers are bypassing legal workers and can get away with illegal hiring, that just creates an incentive for people to keep trying to come here. i don't think we ever will solve the border problem and the visa overstay problem unless we adopt e-verify and address illegal employment. >> also, for you, we hear a lot of estimates about the educational economic attainment of beneficiaries, but as far as i can tell, there isn't backed up by much research. we have robert gonzalez, 2,000

daca survey, these eligible respondents produced some results that would go something like 74% of the respondents live in low-income households, 22% graduated from college, and 20% dropped out of high school. now, of course, this is only a survey. the results are telling. if we consider some type of fix for daca recipients, is it important to have more precise information? in your research have you been able to verify mr. gonzalez's survey results? does your research suggest that daca population as a whole mirrors the breakdowns of that survey? >> it does seem to. you're right, there is not a lot of research out there. i thought dr. gonzalez's survey results were very interesting, and while he acknowledges that there are some problems with his methodology, it also, interestingly enough, is corroborated by some of the

other research that's been done using census bureau data. specifically a report by the migration policy institution where they also found that they thought about one in five of the daca eligible population were adults who had not finished high school, and some of the other aspects -- again, the -- the income levels and access to public assistance findings have been corroborated with these other census-based research. but i mean, the big problem is we don't know much -- people speculate and come up with proxies and try to use census bureau and take surveys and so on, but u.s. cis has some information that would be interesting and i think helpful to congress moving forward to find out about actual recipients of daca. and i think that they should be asked to disclose some of that information to help you decide, you know, what the impacts are

going to be and how to move forward and should be encouraged to do that. they know where people live, they know their educational status, they know their english attainment. criminal histories. all of these questions that we have, you know, there are some answers there within our own government that would be helpful. they could do a survey, too, that would be more robust with the randomly selected group of respondents. >> senator feinstein. >> let me ask miss vaughn, where do you find denise undeserving? where do you find to blame her? i am not saying you blame her. but in terms of a policy, the immigration situation blames her. she, because of a choice made by her parent, was brought here. the parent probably had a very

hard time, looked for a brighter future, had a small child a year old, came to this country, and this small child struggled and evolved into one wonderful, special person. how does the people like her -- and they are truly like her -- get the blame for other problems with our immigration policy? and i know what they are. i -- i have been a mayor. i have seen what happened with kathryn steinle. there are a lot of problems out there. but this is a population that is contributing, is educating, is serving in the military, is proud and knows nothing else but america. why should america reject them? >> i don't think america should reject them. and i -- i don't think americans

blame people with daca for this situation. i think that they're upset that our failure to enforce our immigration laws over decades has led to the situation that we have now with, we estimate, about 12 million people in the country illegally, and you know, they want to see this resolved to the extent possible and recognize that there are moving parts. >> so you're saying that your testimony is really not about daca, whether this is a good bill to put forward? >> i think that congress should take steps to address the status of people with daca, but only if it also takes steps to balance out the effects that we're going to see in chain migration and also get to the root of the problem, you know, where really

the blame is, is our failure to enforce our immigration laws and to take steps to make sure that going forward we do enforce our laws and so that we prevent further illegal immigration and address the fiscal costs that are inevitable. >> so, if i understand you correctly, then you're saying, daca isn't the problem. if we can address our laws, such as increasing the border patrol, such as seeing that there is practical and adequate security on the border, perhaps e-verify, whatever the mechanisms are, that you would be satisfied? >> well, there were some problems with daca in the fact that it was improperly implemented, without approval from congress. >> yes, but that, by executive order, that's done now. >> right. but -- and also the careless

implementation of it does have to be addressed, because if there is to be an amnesty for people with daca we have to recognize that as much as there are many wonderful people who did receive it, there were some mistakes made in the issuance of benefits to people who should not have received them. for example, people who -- >> well, there have been revocations, some 2,000 of them. so there has been that introspection and examination. i think -- i think that needs to be recognized. >> yes, i agree. that's why, you know, i can't be a guaranteed conversion from daca status to green card, you know, without some review to make sure that the application wasn't fraudulent or, you know, are there problems with it. but i think the agency can deal with that. i think that congress needs to make sure that u.s. cis collects enough in fees so that other legal immigrants are not

subsidizing any, you know, legalization program or amnesty. i think all of this is possible. but i think that we need to recognize it just -- it's simply converting people with daca to green cards is not going to address the underlying problems that are to blame for this situation. >> i understand. thank you. thank you, mr. chairman. >> senator durbin. >> thank you, mr. chairman. mr. heartsel. i am saddened by the story you told. i am sorry that your family suffered such a tragic loss. i really am. there has not been a single approach which we've considered for any of these daca recipients or d.r.e.a.m.ers that didn't involve a criminal background check. we do not want people who are going to commit violent crimes in this country. we certainly don't want them coming here and expected to be

treated royally or forgiven for that. that is unacceptable and i am sorry your family went through that. >> thank you, sir. >> miss vaughn. i worked for six months on comprehensive immigration reform. did you know it included e-verify? >> yes. that's why i have hopes that congress might be willing to include that in legislation. >> we certainly want to. but as i said, we can't put on the backs of daca and d.r.e.a.m.ers comprehensive immigration reform. part of it was that people came out of shadows. registered with the government. paid a filing fee, went through a criminal background check and turned in the information so we could monitor them. on a renewal basis, for a regular period of time. that was part of e-verify. so that once and for all we would get this behind us. it passed the senate with 68 votes. 14 republicans voted for it. then they wouldn't take it up at the republican house. we also, in order to pass it, put more border security than anyone has ever seen in the history of this country into that bill. the corker/hoven amendment.

i voted for it. i thought we overdid it, but we did it. it was balanced. border security, e-verify, the d.r.e.a.m.ers and giving them a chance. it was comprehensive. we couldn't get the support that we needed to get it passed. but it's critical as far as i'm concerned that we do comprehensive immigration reform, not just for all the reasons you mentioned but because finally we need a system that works. i would add this notion about chain migration, if you think about it for just a second, if we say under daca you had to be under the age of 16 when you came to the united states, then chain migration for ultimate d.r.e.a.m.ers and daca members will not include their children. any children they have are already born in the united states. so when you put that in as a category of there are going to be two new immigrants for every

daca recipient, don't include their children. it doesn't work. it doesn't violate the laws of america. it violates the laws of biology. >> no, i did not include them in the calculation. really it's parents, spouses, and relatives of those relatives that were calculated in my -- the children of the people with daca are citizens. >> that's exactly my point. when it gets beyond parents, spouses and children, you get into a long, long, long waiting list, sometimes 20 years, before you would even be considered to come into this country. >> actually, parents come in in unlimited numbers right away. >> i said besides parents, spouses and children. it's the other siblings and such who have to wait forever and ever. that's the way it is already. it doesn't change a bit by anything we're considering. miss rojas marquez, there are 28 medical students at loyola strich college of medicine, daca

recipients in chicago. if they don't have daca extended they cannot apply for residencies so that they can become specialists because to be a resident you have to be able to legally work in the united states a lot. and so those medical students are saying to us, if you don't do something about daca our medical education comes to a halt. we can't proceed to apply for residencies. is this one of the things that you're thinking of as we speculate about the impact? >> that's exactly one of my major concerns in terms of, you know, my own career. so, for me, i finish medical school, it would be in 2019. and my daca would expire by then. so for me, you know, there is no opportunity to apply to residency, to seek employment of any type. >> most of us are from states that have portions of our states desperate for doctors. >> that's where i want to work

in. >> that's where we want you to work. so i hope we can get the job done. thank you, mr. chairman. thank you to the panel. >> senator herono and senator blumenthal. then we'll be done. >> do you fear deportation after march 5th if congress does not act? >> i absolutely fear deportation. for most of my life that has been my reality is, you know, fearing deportation and when daca arrived and when i received my own daca, it was a sigh of relief. and so, after march 5th, that is something that i am, you know -- at least for me, i am eligible for the re nunewal. so hopefully i'll be able to have mine from two years after that date. for me, it is a terrifying time.

>> were you here for the testimony of the earlier panel? >> i was. >> so you heard the testimony that there are no plans to deport using the information that the daca participants provided to government? >> mm-hmm. >> does that lessen your fears of deportation? >> it doesn't because i hear on the news every day of families that are being separated, of individuals being deported, so i don't have, you know, a security since it seems like this is discretionary in terms of enforcement. i feel like i could be in any situation where i could land in the hands of i.c.e. and have no protection in terms of being able to stay in the country. >> there was acknowledgement by the previous panel that even as there are no plans to use the information, that could change. so i share your concern that all of the daca recipients, even those with extensions,

especially if the court strikes down daca in the first instance as unconstitutional or illegal -- i don't know what kind of protections -- extensions would provide. attorney general sessions, when he announced the ending of the daca program, said that daca -- and i quote, denied jobs to hundreds of thousands of americans by allowing these same illegal aliens to take those jobs, unquote. he also said rescinding daca would, quote, save lives and, quote, protect communities. do you know, miss marquez, of any factual basis for these assertions by the attorney general? >> in my own personal experience, i am being -- training to be a doctor to save lives. and so, for the people, for myself and for the people that i know and in the organization that i co-founded which includes 800 individuals across 42 states, we are training and aspiring to be health professionals. so i think the opposite of some of those remarks.

>> are you familiar with the study that was done by professor roberto gonzalez regarding daca? >> i have reviewed some of the results. >> wasn't the main point of his study is that daca recipients have been able to continue their education, increase their financial stability, build their careers and boost the economy, even if, in his study, it indicates that there are a number of daca eligible young people who stopped going to school, who didn't pursue higher paying jobs because of the very situations that they were in, and that, when they became daca recipients, then they went back to school and were able to pursue better jobs. isn't that what he says in his study? >> yes, that is what he says in the study. i actually have some information -- it was a new study. it's by the center for american

progress, professor tom wong at uc san diego, the national immigration law center, and this was conducted recently in august of 2017. and this had -- it was a little bit larger study, 3,063 respondents in 46 states. and the district of columbia. similar findings in terms of education, 45% of respondents were in school, 72% pursuing a bachelor's degree or higher among those individuals. and for those who are currently in school, 94% of respondents said, because of daca, i have pursued educational opportunities i previously could not. and there also was an estimate that ending daca would result in the loss of 460.3 billion from the national gdp over the next decade. and also in terms of employment, that 91% of respondents are currently employed. from this group that was

surveyed. >> i am somewhat familiar with the c.a.p. study. the cato institute, which is a prevent conservative organization. are you aware they've also said that eliminating daca -- this is a cato estimate -- that eliminating daca and deporting its participants will cost the american economy $283 billion over the next ten years? are you familiar with -- or aware of the cato? >> i am not familiar with the cato study. >> it points out that the actual evidence based on these reports indicates that daca recipients are contributing members of our community. they are not out committing crimes and doing heinous things. and in fact, i want to thank the daca participants for the contributions that they are making to our community. and i certainly extend my sympathies to you for what happened to your grandmother. none of us is sitting here

thinking that that -- that that -- that having undocumented people do those kinds of crimes and not be prosecuted is acceptable to any of us. that is not the case. so my sympathies to you. and i speak as an immigrant myself. many immigrants, many of you probably are not immigrants, that we talk about chain migration. i have to say that the immigrants to succeed in this country need parents and grandparents to come because everybody is working. that was my experience in my own family as an immigrant. thank you, mr. chairman. >> senator blumenthal. >> thank you mr. chairman, and thank you for holding this hearing. i want to joint mr. heartsel in expressing my sympathies, i think all the members of our committee feel that you deserve our condolences and our

sympathies and i think that this issue often is very much clouded with emotion, justifiable emotion. and i think that we are all grateful to you for being here today. i would like to ask ms. vaughn. are you familiar with the studies that have just been cited by senator hirono? >> yes, i have read them. >> do you agree with them? >> you can't really agree or disagree with a survey. >> you agree that they're accurate? >> no, i don't think that the center for american progress study is -- was done, you know -- that it's -- that its findings are necessarily reflective of the larger population.

>> would you agree that the daca d.r.e.a.m.ers contribute a great deal to our economy? >> i am sure some of them do. i think what we've found is that the daca population really spans the whole spectrum of education attainment and socioeconomic status and so on. that there are many people who have done very well. there are some who are struggling. >> looking at them in the aggregate, wouldn't you agree that they are a net plus, a major net-plus to our economy? >> i don't think that there is enough information to show that. i think indications are otherwise, actually. >> you have surveys to show or studies to show otherwise? >> the only one i know of that surveyed in a -- in an academically sound way people who actually have daca was the

harvard study. that indicated -- he also believed that even his findings skewed in favor of higher levels of education than he felt were actually present in the daca population. >> is that professor gonzalez? >> yes. and so -- >> because my time is limited, i want to move to another topic. i am very, very troubled by the administration's approach to daca. in effect, throwing it to congress. and washing its hands of real leadership. i believe congress has an obligation and we have a bipartisan consensus that there is a need to provide a path forward here for people who are living here who have come here without any decision on their part, have lived here for all of their lives, virtually, and contributed greatly to our

country, both its economy and its culture and their communities. and i am also concerned about the fairness issue of their having come forward to volunteer information with the promise that it would not be used against them. the other day senator harris asked the acting secretary of homeland security, elaine duke, whether this personal information would be shared with i.c.e., and she said, quote, i can't unequivocally promise that, no, end quote. this morning, we heard at least one of the panel members say that this information will in fact not be used or shared with

i.c.e. that leaves, at best, confusion. wouldn't you agree with me that there is certainly fundamental unfairness in using this information against these individuals to locate and deport them and possibly also -- in fact, i think likely, a due process issue under the constitution in their having come forward with an explicit promise of the government that then is betrayed? >> me? well, the problem is that the obama administration really could not make that promise with any certainty because they -- the policy that they created was improperly done. if the daca policy is allowed to

wind down without congress being able to agree on how to move forward, i don't expect and i don't see any sign, and it would be logistically very difficult, so i don't think it's going to happen that all of a sudden people who had daca will become priorities for immigration enforcement. that just doesn't make sense. >> it wouldn't have made sense a year ago to even talk about this unprecedented mass deportation of 800,000 people, but that's the reality that we face right now, correct? >> no, i don't think that's a realist realistic likelihood. i do think that it's fair to the public to preserve that opportunity for i.c.e. to possibly use information that is in u.s. cis, which is an agency of the department of homeland

security in their repository if it's necessary for public safety or national security or some other compelling reason, in the same way that local law enforcement agents where i live might have to go into the driver's license database to find out my address to arrest me if they had to. i mean, there are certain -- >> but if there were no compelling public safety threat -- and you have used the word "compelling," if there were no such compelling public safety threat, would you agree with it would be just plain unfair and unamerican to use the information that was gained by the government after a promise that it would not be used? and you may say that it was unwise or maybe uncertain for the administration to make that

promise, but it was made by the government of the united states of america. >> actually -- i mean, in all of the public statements about daca under the obama administration, they always said that it was prosecutorial discretion that was exercised on a case-by-case basis, that it was not a legal status, that it was -- you know, thoroughly their discretion to confer that benefit on people. so i am not really even, you know, with all due respect, i am not sure that they really did make that promise. >> my time has expired. i thank you, mr. chairman. >> senator coons. >> thank you, chairman grassley. thank you for holding this hearing. i would like to thank both panels of witnesses for your testimony before us today. i had the pleasure of visiting with a number of d.r.e.a.m.ers in delaware earlier this year, daca recipients, who are american in every sense that i understand it except for illegal

status. it is my hope that today we can send a message to some of the students whom i had the opportunity to meet, studying at delaware state university or studying at the university of danger delaware or elsewhere in my home state. stephanie gonzalez working to alabama a law enforcement officer, who wants to be a pediatric oncologist. that we support them and that it is possible for them to achieve the american dream. miss rojas, i just wanted to congratulate you on your accomplishments and your dedication to serving others. how did your experience growing up as an undocumented immigrant in the united states influence your decision to become a physician? >> being of low income and also not having -- we had very limited access to health care. and so my family and i struggled

in terms of having -- being able to see a doctor regularly. so this is something that has been in my family that i saw and also communities around me. just limited access to health care. and also as someone who, you know, is able -- i was fluent in spanish and, you know, i really connect with immigrant communities and other communities as well. i feel like i just want to be able to serve others so that people in communities are healthy and safe. so i feel like it's, you know, the values that my family instilled in me to give back and to persevere is what really brought me to being a doctor. and i only hope to be able to serve. >> help me better understand, if you would, how your life has changed since the introduction of daca and how your life has

changed and the lives of others you have gotten to know through the pre-health d.r.e.a.m.ers program have changed as a result of its current uncertainty. >> in terms of the new announcement or from gaining daca -- would you clarify at what point would you -- how our lives have changed because of daca or because of the announcement? >> both. >> okay. so, because of daca, i can truly say in every sense i came out of the shadows. i feared leaving my apartment and, you know, was always very frightened that maybe i was followed or just, you know, i lived with a lot of uncertainty day to day. and also in terms of my future, you know. i was studying at uc berkeley. always, you know, wanted to give back, and yet, when i thought

about my graduation, i wouldn't have employment opportunities, even while in berkeley there was internship programs and other programs where, you know, i wanted to apply to but i couldn't because of my immigration status. so for us and so many others, it truly lifted us out of the shadows to be able to, you know, live, really, almost normal lives in terms of our day-to-day lives. but i think was an opportunity for us to participate in programs, you know, gain access to job opportunities, you know, and also, for example, buying homes and other opportunities that were unreachable. these are things that i never dreamed of being able to achieve when i was, you know, in college and before then. so it completely changed our lives, and it turned us around.

you know, i am so grateful the day that i got my daca. so this announcement for me was really difficult to hear. it felt like everything that i had worked towards could just disappear in the blink of an eye. and i know for the prehealth d.r.e.a.m.ers community it's so devastating. now people are wondering should they apply to graduate programs anymore. sort of being at a loss for hope and uncertainty that really is p pervasive among me and the community that i know. so it's been absolutely devastating. we don't know what's going to happen. we are really looking towards congress to find a solution. >> thank you, ms. rojas. as you have heard from a number of senators on both sides of the aisle today, we really hope we will be able to find our way towards a resolution that addresses some of the unsettled

issues here, that gives some certainty to you and many other d.r.e.a.m.ers. i have been a sponsor of the d.r.e.a.m. act in the past and support it. >> thank you. >> it's my hope that we'll find a way to negotiate a responsible compromise and embrace the moment here sooner rather than later and move forward and give predictability to folks who hope to and already have contributed to the united states and to our future. thank you. thank you, mr. chairman. >> we'll be done in about two minutes. i want to thank, of course, all the witnesses, because this has been a very important hearing, and especially you folks here that are what we call the non-government panel. you have travelled here at your own expense and prepared for probably, all by yourself, for this hearing. the committee appreciates the testimony from all of the witnesses and your thoughts are going to be very crucial as we consider a pathway forward on daca. we held this hearing in order to

consider how best to move forward in addressing the problems created by president obama's unconstitutional executive action. we heard from the government, an outside expert and advocate for our best -- how best to balance this delicate issue. on one hand, we have to consider the status of hundreds of thousands of young, unauthorized immigrants. on the other hand, we have to respect the wishes of many americans to don't want to see our country engage in a continuous cycle of illegal immigration and amnesty. we have to keep in mind that half of the americans will only support a fix to daca if it includes border security and increased interior enforcement. there is a way to address this problem. but it requires compromise. we have great empathy for these young people.

we have heard from them today. outstanding progress that they've made in their life and their contribution to our society. and we want to ensure that they are treated fairly. but we also have to make sure that we aren't addressing the same exact problem ten or 15 years from now. the only way to do that is to fix our nation's broken borders and beef up our interior enforcement. many of the solutions to our nation's immigration problems have garnered great bipartisan support. for example, biometric entry and exit. and there is general agreement without doubt about rooting out the criminal elements, addressing those problems alongside of daca shouldn't be political. it is just plain, old fashioned common sense. fixing daca and our enforcement problems together isn't just common sense. but it also lays the foundation

for a real future discussion of our nation's lawful immigration system. but we can't even have that conversation until we secure the borders and significantly reduce undocumented immigration. so i look forward to working with my colleagues on this committee and probably some people that aren't on this committee and both in the house and senate, so in a bipartisan, bicameral way as we consider a path forward. i hope the consideration of the last congress in which we voted out 31 bills, all non-partisan, 18 of them got to president obama, that we have the ability in this committee to do that. i think the record of this committee shows bipartisanship, and that's, of course, what it's going to take to get this job done. so, with that statement, i conclude the hearing, except to say the record will remain open

for one week for member statements and questions for the witnesses, and i know that i have more questions that i will be submitting and i expect others will have questions as well. for you three here before us, thank you very much for your patience and everybody that's been so cooperative in the audience as well. thank you for helping us expedite this hearing and for your -- your just being nice about everything. thank you very much. adjourned. the u.s. house yesterday approved the 2018 republican budget resolution. it instructs the relevant committees to work on tax reform

efforts and ways and means chair kevin brady released his committee's work schedule. the bill will be introduced on november 1st. his committee will begin the markup process on november 6th with floor action before the thanksgiving break. the senate finance committee is expected to take action on tax reform later this fall. you can read the budget resolution and tax reform language at our website, c-span.org, click the congress tab. here is more from a capitol hill reporter. >> richard reuben, how does the republican budget proposal specifically set up the next steps for tax reform in congress? >> well, it does two things. one is it sets up what's known as reconciliation. that's the fast-track procedure that lets a bill move through the senate in particular without any democratic votes. it can get on the floor with a straight up or down vote, and republicans have the majority, and it can also get off the floor, passed, with a straight up or down vote. that's unlike most legislation

which has the 60 vote threshold in the senate where republicans would need democratic assistance. so the budget by the house and senate agreeing on this, clears a path for that to happen. the second thing it does is set the budgetary parameter for the tax bill. it says the tax bill can increase deficits by as much as $1.5 trillion over the next decade. that's the outer limit that the tax-writing committees will attempt to hit as they craft this bill. >> part of your headline on the passage of the house bill says the move starts a six-day countdown to release of the closely guarded details of the tax plan. tell us a bit about what the time line looks like for the tax bill in the house anyway? >> this is -- you're going to want c-span on 24/7 in november. it's going to be really busy and really furious. the ways and means committee in the house will release the text of their bill on november 1st and start their committee markup, their amendments and votes, november 6th.

the senate finance committee will weigh in at some point maybe that week or early the following week. it will be on the house floor probably the week of november 13th and on the senate finance committee and the senate floor shortly after that. the goal, members in both houses, leaders in both houses say it's to get the house and senate to pass something by thanksgiving. then we'll go away, eat some turkey, come back and try to reconcile the differences between whatever the house passes and whatever the senate passes. we expect the two bills to be somewhat different. >> it was close getting the budget resolution. 20 republicans voting against the measure. a number from new york and new jersey with concerns about state and local tax deductions, what specifically don't they like about the possibility of that being included in the tax reform package? >> they don't like anything about repeal being included in the tax bill. here is why. if you are from a high-tax state, new york and jersey, california, none of those members voted against the budget, you -- you are able now to deduct your state and local

taxes, your income or sales taxes and your property taxes from your federal tax bill. that's a real benefit for residents of those states and even the other things that are likely to be in this bill, bigger standard deduction, lower rates, are not going to offsess for a lot of people, particularly in those states and districts. republicans from new jersey were trying to make a point. they did. they weren't able to take down the budget, but they made a very clear point that they're going to try and reach some sort of accommodation, some sort of deal that may not get all 11 members who voted no on the budget from those states, but they're going to have at least maybe a way to get a few of them. the way is to focus somehow on property taxes and acknowledge that people from high income areas where income tax deductions are a bigger concern

may just never be able to vote for the house tax bill. >> certainly, that's been an argument for democrats in the house as well. nancy pelosi after the vote issuing a letter to all members saying our caucus has to be fully mobilized. what's their number one argument against the tax reform package? >> the number one argument is there's a real benefit to billionaires and millionaires. we've heard this from democrats repeatedly. they say this plan is just too tilted to people at the top of the income scale. it repeals the estate tax, cuts the corporate tax rate and other businesses. their second argument is the deficit argument, saying this is going to increase budget deficits and put pressure on spending programs, medicare medicaid and social security.

>> let's briefly look at the senate. you tweeted about john cornyn saying the goal is to get the tax bill through the senate. as you mentioned, you also write about there are obstacles in every direction. are there more in the senate and the house? >> i think that's what we're going to find out in november. the senate math is tougher. they've got 52 votes and they need to hold 50. you can imagine the usual set of members on the senate side that might have some defeifficulties. senator corker, senator flake has got his differences with his party right now. senator mccain, senator collins. you can imagine at some level they can only lose two of those members. so that's going to be the challenge for republicans in putting this package together on

the senate side. >> has the white house been taking an active role so far, treasury secretary steve mnuchin and gary cohen, have they been participating with members of congress? >> that was happening more over the summer and into september. they've been engaged but letting the committees really do a lot of the detail work to get the bill where it needs to be in order to pass to get through the committee and onto the floor. we did have a situation where the president weighed in on potential changes to 401(k) plans. that's something that members are sensitive to hearing from the president and having him get involved. he's got political clout among the republican base, but also jumpingclaring red lines and what can't change and what has to change is something that can up end a complex process. that dynamic between the administration, particularly the president and his twitter account and the republicans on

the hill is something that bears watching as november rolls forward. >> lots of tax debate ahead. reporting on all of it is richard rubin, who is tax policy reporter with the wall stre"wal journa journal". secretary mattis's trip and tax reform, likely topics for today's white house briefing. sarah sanders will be meeting with reporters live on c-span starting at 2:30 eastern. all five fcc commissioners testified before a house committee this week, their first joint capitol hill appearance since president trump took office. they talked about the president's tweets and the first amendment, net neutrality and the sinclair media merger.