The details of the assignment of functions to

the Departments and how they will mesh together have not been finalized. Regardless of how the specific

functions are ultimately allocated, however, there

is a general process which the Government will go

through to enforce the employer sanctions.

I would like to describe this process.

If I may,

The Administration's employer sanctions legislation contemplates that, prior to hiring a worker, the employer will review Government-prescribed documents which

identify the job applicant and attest to the authority of the applicant to work in the U.S.

Employers will

note which documents were reviewed on a special form
prescribed and furnished by the Government. The form
will require the signature of both the employee and
the employer attesting to the submittal and review
of the documents. This form will be retained by the
employer.

The first step in the employer sanction enforcement process will involve a check of that form by Government compliance personnel to determine if it is complete and whether anything on its face indicates that an employee might be an illegal alien. If an employer were to refuse to give the Government access to these

forms, an administrative subpoena could be issued. If the Government finds that a form is missing or incomplete, or that a form gives rise to a suspicion of the employment of an illegal alien, the Government will then conduct a more in-depth investigation, which would include employer and employee interviews and examination of other corroborating documents, to determine the status of the employee..

If the interviews and further investigative activity indicate the presence of an illegal alien, the Government will then pursue enforcement of the employer sanctions through the assessment of fines against the employer and, in the case of an employer engaged in a "pattern or practice" of hiring illegal aliens, injunctive action through the U.S. district courts. An employer who is issued a notice of intent to fine by the Government will have an opportunity to request an agency hearing.

If the employer is still not satisfied with the Government's decision after the agency hearing, the employer may seek review of the decision in the U.S. district courts. The Government will be able to enforce payment of fines through action in the U.S. district courts and all fines will be paid into the U.S. Treasury.

In addition to enforcing employer sanctions, the President's program for addressing the undocumented worker problem calls for increased enforcement of

existing fair labor standards laws by the Department of Labor. These increased fair labor standards enforcement efforts by the Department of Labor are intended to complement employer sanctions by removing the economic benefits which accrue to employers from employing illegal aliens under substandard working conditions. It is anticipated that additional resources will be requested for this purpose.

In sum, we believe that employer sanctions, coupled with increased fair labor standards enforcement, will discourage employers from hiring illegal aliens and reduce the demand coming from this country for undocumented workers. This, in turn, should significantly reduce the number of aliens arriving in search of unauthorized employment opportunities in this country.

This concludes my prepared statement. I would

be glad to answer any questions you may have.

Senator SIMPSON. And now, Ambassador Asencio, we are very pleased to hear your remarks.

STATEMENT OF HON. DIEGO C. ASENCIO, ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR CONSULAR AFFAIRS, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE Ambassador ASENCIO. Yes, Mr. Chairman. I will also summarize. We are convinced that the Department of State, Mr. Chairman, and I think, paraphrasing something you said, that the employer sanctions proposal is the heart of the resolution of the illegal alien question and I think is the only way that this problem will come under control.

From a foreign relations point of view, the alternatives to sanctions are just completely inconceivable. Either massive border controls or massive deportations would impact on trade and legitimate travel to such an extent and would embroil us in such controversy with our neighbors that it would be unthinkable.

There is also the aspect that we are convinced that they would not be particularly practical, because the resources that would have to be devoted to this make it problematical as to whether we would succeed even if we had a completely open-ended resource picture.

Above all, we consider that it would be damaging to our own heritage and self-esteem. There are a number of other considerations. We think that the primary reliance, for instance, on border controls affects primarily neighbors or near neighbors. And as you mentioned, Mr. Chairman, we are also talking about visa abusers from other parts of the world. So that, in effect, would not resolve the problem.

There is another aspect that we have to consider. That is that most other industrialized nations, and paticularly Western Europe, already have internal controls over employment of aliens. What we are really talking about is entering the modern era. We are probably one of the few remaining countries that does not have this type of measure.

There is another aspect I think this committee should address also. That is that our insistence on visitor's visas in the absence of this type of control is an irritant in our relations with any number of countries but particularly Western Europe where this procedure has been waived for a number of years.

And as you know, Mr. Chairman, we have a nonimmigrant visa waiver bill that also attempts to bring this into line with these other countries. And we consider this a complementary approach to the administration's package because this type of internal control on employment would be an additional safeguard that would supplement our current approach of verification of departure. So I think these two approaches are particularly akin.

The other aspect we have to consider is that our consulates in Third World countries are often burdened with substantial numbers of applications which must be severely screened and many refused. This places our officers in our posts in an adversarial position with regard to the local community and the host government. It would seem to us that this type of internal control would eliminate a substantial drain on consular resources abroad, would ac