mccotter said this as well.our interpretation is to be lawfully present in the united states with consent of the sovereign. mr. mccotter said that's the equivalent of a lawful permanent resident, ishe that correct, mr. mccotter? >> that's correct come a. >> and you agree, mr. o'brien? >> yes, i do. >> why is a visa holder not lawfully present in the united states with consent of the sovereign? >> first of all visa holder is a person who has a permanent -- a permit to come to the united states to request submission. a person who has been admitted to the united states by the appropriate authorities following inspection by an immigration officer is lawfully present. >> so someone with a work visa, i could go on for years and years, you are saying is not lawfully present?ea >> no, that's not what you set all. i said a person who is been admitted in a visa classification by h-1b, f1, sort and so forth, is lawfully present while the in compliance with the termsll of the immigration law. >> so i agree, but you were try

mccotter and i would also introduce into the record note by amy from the heritage foundation and alson op-ed in -- that was written by mr. cooper and paterson along the subject as well. without objection, i will insert that into the record. that concludes today's hearing, we thank the witnesses appearing before committee today. members will have 5 business days. without objection, the hearing is adjourned. [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations]drawal but one approvalof the security council measure calling for peace without assigning blame to the conflict .