Speech #840102973

Chairman. Massachusetts Committee for Revision of the McCarranWalter Immigration and Nationality Act. Boston. Mass. DEAR MR. PRESTON: I have your letter of December 27 asking my views on our immigration and naturalization laws and policies. I had been scheduled to testify on this subject in the course of the recent hearings of the Senate Subcommittee on Immigration and Naturalization headed by Senator KmGORE first in Washington and then In New York but. as you know. the hearings were recessed. I am glad. however. to pass along my general views on these laws which have aroused such resentment both at home and abroad. In criticizing the McCarranWalter Act. I criticize not only the restrictive innovations which appeared in that law for the first time. but also harsh and restrictive provisions passed over the years since 1924. and reenacted by the McCarranWalter Act. such as the national origins quota system. I am aware. of course. that the act contained some good features. for example. the removal of absolute barriers to immigration and citizenship based on race. applicable to Japanese and a few other Asiatic groups. There was also the very good provision permitting husbands of American citizens to be admitted into the United States on a nonquota basis. But unfortunately the bad outweighs the good. And in my opinion the worst thing about the law is the national origins quota system of selecting immigrants. As originally passed in 1924. the discriminations based on race and national origin affected aliens. but the McCarranWalter Act goes further by discriminating against naturalized citizens of the United States. The national origins system of selection was originally designed to confine the larger part of immigration to northern and western Europe. and to diminish immigration from southern and eastern Europe and fror Asia. The limitation on southern Europe adversely affects Italy and Greece. and the limitation on eastern Europe was chiefly aimed at Poland. The total Immigration quota as it works out is about 154.000. distributed on the basis of the national origins of the people of the United States in 1920. This resulted in Great Britain and northern Ireland receiving an annual quota of 65.361 and Ireland 17.756. or more than onehalf of the available annual quota. But in recent years there has been but little immigration from the countries with the largest quotas. like Great Britain. with the result that from 1925 through 1952 out of a total of about 4.362.000 who might have been admitted. under 2 millionabout 44 percentwere actually admitted. While granting the original discriminatory motive behind the national origins quota system. defenders of this system today disclaim any such motivation. But we cannot convince the people of Italy. Spain. and Greece. for example. that we really do not mean to discriminate if the law does in fact discriminate. The existence of such discriminations has created ill will throughout the world. Without conferring any benefit upon our country. the national origins system has worked against us in many ways. We are almost alone in the world as an Englishspeaking country with immigration laws based on racial and national discriminations. Of course. immigration to this country can no longer be unlimited. but whatever annual maximum is determined by or under the authority of Congress should be distributed in a way best suited to our needs and to world. conditions. The authority to grant immigrant and nonimmigrant visas is vested in our consular officers abroad. The discretion is so absolute that not even the Secretary of State has any power or duty or function relating to the granting or refusal of visas. Thus the fate of an applicant for permission to enter the United States may be determined by the whim or caprice of a single individual. The decision of a customs official with regard to the admission of a sack of beans can be appealed to the highest court of the land. But the decision of a consular official with regard to the admission of an American citizens mother or wife is final and subject to no appeal whatever. This situation is offensive to all our ideas of due process of law and to the principles of equal justice. Another indefensible situation exists with respect to proceedings for exclusion and deportation of aliens. The inquiry officer conducts the proceedings. examines the witnesses. and then proceeds to act as judge. and to pass upon the sufficiency of the evidence he has put into the record. This combination of administrative and judicial functions in one officer is a surviving relic of methods condemned by the Administrative Procedure Act. We are all familiar with the damage we have suffered from delays and refusals to issue visas to visiting scientists. World organizations are shunning the United States and holding their conventions and congresses elsewhere to avoid such unfortunate experiences. Of course. everyone is in favor of every reasonable precaution to insure the security of our people. our property. and institutions. but an excessive zeal that bars from our shores the best minds of other nations is inconsistent with our position of liberalizing international communication. The McCarranWalter Act of 1952 subjects naturalized citizens to restrictions which do not apply to nativeborn citizens. for instance. in the matter of permissible length of residence abroad. The claim that there is no satisfactory basis for such distinctions seems sound. and I hope that the difficulties visited upon naturalized citizens by the operation of the McCarranWalter Act of 1952 will also be removed. Piecemeal changes in this law. however well intentioned. are certain to be unsatisfactory. because the many sections of the immigration code are so interwoven as to make a complete revision. with a new and more humane approach. the best remedy. President Truman not only vetoed the act but he advised a revision of the preexisting law. President Eisenhower. both during and after t3 campaign of 1952. advocated revision of the McCarranWalter Act. Unfortunately. neither President Eisenhower nor members of his administration have yet taken any steps to redeem those pledges. I hope the Congress will nevertheless proceed to dispel the atmosphere of fear and prejudice and other unworthy motives in which our immigration laws and policies are cloaked. and give the American people an honest. forthright piece of legislation. guarding our shores and our people from undesirables. but extending a traditionally warmhearted welcome to those we can help and who can help US. Sincerely yours.