Speech #880149066

However. the national origins formula of the 1924 law remained an unsurmountable obstacle to what the people of the United States wanted to do. namely. to accept the responsibility which the U.S. position of leadership in the world had imposed. In 1948. the 80th Congress passed the first Displaced Persons Act. Woefully inadequate as that law was. it permitted the entry of 200.000 displaced persons outside of thA national origins quota limitation. but in spite of the objections of many. myself included. that law imposed an unfair mortgage of the immigration quotas. The 81st Congress passed the second Displaced Persons Act. sponsored by myself. Once again. the Congress recognized that the national origins quota system must be disregarded if this country were to respond to the public demand and discharge its mornl and humanitarian obligations. As a compromise. the unfortunate mortgage featura of the 1948 law was retained. In 1957. however. under a bill sponsored In the Senate by the late President Kenned? and in the House by my late friend and col league. Mr. Walter. the mortgage provision was stricken from the statute books in obvious recognition of the fact that the situ ation created by the simultaneous operation of the national origins system plus the mortgage. had become untenable. Congress knew that the doors to the United States could no longer stay tightly shut for immigrants born in some 11 countries of Eastern Europe which suffered most under Hitlers and Stalins rule. The ink was hardly dry on the basic act of 1952 when. early in 1953. the Congress recognized that while the displaced persons and refugees resettlement problems have not yet been solved. the new law. by carrying forward the national origins formula. left this country without any instrumentality to cope with its responsibilities and the emergent needs of the homeless. A new refugee admission law was proposed and quickly passed. It is known as the Refugee Relief Act of 1953. It brought to these shores over 220.000 refugees outside of the quota system. outside of the national origins formula and even without the pitiful expediency of the mortgage used in the 1948 and the 1950 enactments. Just as the two Displaced Persons Acts constituted the first loud and public admission of the obsolescence and the unworkability of the national origins formula of tho 1924 law. the Refugee Relief Act of 1953. enacted only 8 months after the 1952 act became effective. remains an equally convincing piece of evidence of the bankruptcy of the system so very unfortunately incorporated in the statute now in effect. Since 1957 every Congress. without exception. has been called upon to pass and did. indeed. pass a law further bending. chipping off. and whittling away the national origins formula. Under pressure of inescapable facts. the 85th Congress passed the Act of September 11. 1957. converting into nonquota status many thousands of immigrants in the first. second. and third preferences. the highly skilled aliens whose services were urgently needed in this country and the relatives of U.S. citizens and immigrants. Under the same law all unused numbers remaining from the Refugee Relief Act allocations were authorized to be usedagain without regard to national origin of the applicants. The Hungarian emergency caught the United States again unprepared to cope with the crying and most urgent need for offering asylum to the victims of Soviet terror. A broad interpretation of the law was used and the doors were open but the Congress had to act fast to redress the situation and the same 85th Congress enacted on August 8. 1958. the law granting permanent residence to upwards of 40.000 Hungarian refugees. The principle of national origins received another body blow. From 1957 on. this trend of congressional action in the field of immigration became obviousand permanent. Every year. without exception. brought new laws admitting outside of the national origins system highly skilled specialists. relatives of U.S. citizens and permanently residing aliens as well as refugees. always. however. on a piecemeal basis. never reaching the core of the problem. In 1958. the Congress passed four such laws. the acts of July 25. August 8. August 21. and September 2. The last one. Public Law 85892. had an additional significance as it selected just nationals of two countries for relief. the Portuguese victims of the earthquake which took place on the Azores and the Dutch expelled from Indonesiaa truly convincing admission of the inadequacy of the national origins quota system. as the quota for the Netherlands is relatively large. while the Portuguese quota is very smallboth equally inadequate to achieve congressional intent to help. The 86th Congress acted twice along the same lines. The act of September 22. 1959. granted nonquota status to relatives of U.S. citizens and permanent residents who had already experienced a waiting period on the consular registers exceeding 10 to 15 years. The act of July 14. 1960. admitted more Portuguese and more Dutchmen as well as authorized the paroling of refugees with the builtin provision permitting the Attorney General to adjust their status to that of permanent residence after they had spent 2 years in the United States. National origin was again totally disregarded. The 87th Congress did not deviate from this. now almost traditional. course of action. Again. under the Act of September 26. 1961. the reuniting of immigrant families was expedited by exempting large numbers of registrants from the national origin restrictions. Following that. under the act of October 24. 1962. the Congress has enlarged on the categories of relatives permitted to enter on a nonquota basis and for the fourth time since 1957 has extricated first preference applicants. the skilled specialists. from the national origins straitjacket. Thus. year after year the Congress continued to tear away bits and pieces of the national origins system until a situation was created where that system. as of fiscal year 1963. governs the admission of only 33 percent of our total immigration intake while the onus of it remains nailed down to our entire immigration code. In view of this history can we honestly say that we are now faced with a radical proposal? Are we really suddenly and dramatically departing from that which we presumably had held sacred for 40 years?