Speech #840013786

Mr. President. on behalf of myself. the senior Senator from Illinois . the Senator from Massachusetts . and the junior Senator from Michigan . I introduce for appropriate reference a bill to amend the Immigration and Nationality Act. It is a bill designed to reintroduce the spirit of humanitarian compassion and democracy into our immigration laws. It is my hope that the Senate Judiciary Committee will look upon this effort kindly and will report the bill to the Senate floor favorably. The Immigration and Nationality Act -of 1952 was not a controversial issue in the recent election campaign. Candidates of both majority political parties made clear their understanding that our present laws were in some respects discriminatory and undesirable. The President of the United States has declared that to be his position. Our effort with this bill is to correct some of those discriminatory and undesirable portions. Our bill does not constitute a complete revision of the present Immigration and * Nationality Act. It does not go so far as I would like it to go. However. it is a fair beginning on which reasonable men of both parties can agree at this time. It would. ameliorate some of the harsh provisions of existing law. making the law more flexible and adaptable to change in world conditions. It would aid us in carrying out our foreignpolicy objectives and thus help us to combat communism. It will also go far toward relieving the continuous pressure for emergency immigration legislation. We introduce the bill in the spirit of modest progress and progressive change. We introduce it in the hope that it can represent a consensus of nonpartisan opinion designed to help democratize our immigration and nationality laws. More specifically. the bill accomplishes the following: First. Section 1 restores to professors eligibility for nonquota statuswhich they enjoyed prior to the McCarran Actif a university requests their services. This proposed change is based on a feeling of confidence that our universities will select only wellqualified persons for employment on their teaching staffs. It. therefore. abolishes the unnecessary red tape and delay involved in requiring universities to obtain clearance orders from the local employment service and then proving to the Immigration Service that the professor whose immigration is being sponsored is needed urgently in the United States. My amendment in no way changes the security requirements of our laws as they concern all who wish to enter the United States. Second. Section 2 would grant to certain adopted children the immigration status enjoyed by natural children. This change would have 2 important effects: (a) it would make it unnecessary for adopted children of American citizens. in many instances of servicemen. to wait their turn on the quota or. as happens so often. to require that Congress pass a special bill on their behalf. (b) it would make adopted children of aliens eligible for the same quota status or quota preference as that enjoyed by natural children. thus avoiding the heartbreaking situations in which adopted children force their family to delay their trip to the United States or have to be left behind. As section 2 applies only to children adopted prior to their reaching the age of 14 years. and as it specifically excepts children adopted solely for the purpose of obtaining immigration preference for them. the danger of abuse is avoided. Third. Section 3 repeals the provision of the present law under which some quotas. generally those which are needed most urgently. are mortgaged for decades. in some cases even for centuries. Fourth. Section 4 ends one of the racially discriminatory features of the present law. It abolishes the racial ancestry blood test for persons "attributable by as much as onehalf of their ancestry to a people or peoples indigenous to the AsiaPacific triangle." Henceforth. all visa applicants would be classified only according to their. place of birth. Fifth. While section 4 still retains the nationalorigins principle. sections 5 and 6 would go far toward ameliorating its harsh effects. They do that without raising the existing overall quota ceiling of about 154.000. They simply provide that if. in any given year. no takers are found for any portion of these 154.000 numbers. that portion is not declared forfeited. as under present law. but is made available during the following year. without regard to national origins to (a) persons of special skills. (b) close relatives of citizens or alien residents. (c) persecutees. and (d) other groups of persons whose emigration to the United States would further our foreign policy. Another change effected by this section concerns the problem of family unification. Under present law. a person qualifying under the nationalneed preference may enter this country with his wife and minor children. all of whom are covered by the preference.