Speech #880197577

I also express appreciation for the fact that I shall be given sufficient time in which to state the case. Mr. Chairman. the issue before the House .today is whether Congress will support a fullscale. uninhibited and longoverdue study and review of immigration policy. as required by law. The Appropriations Committee has thrown this issue to the membership of the Housewithout prejudiceso that it can be decided in the light of day and reported to the people. This is the first time in my memory and I am sure in the memory of others that a procedure of this type has been followed on an appropriations matter. This is a strange situation to say the least. I ask why the Joint Committee on Immigration and Nationality Policy should be singled out for this kind of treatment. It is not enough to say some Members do not favor joint committees. or. the gentleman from New York feels the Subcommittee on Immigration of which I am chairman can undertake the long overdue review of immigration policy. or that the same Members of the Senate and House serve on both the joint committee and the respective subcommittees of both Houseswith one exception. The reasons for this peculiar state of affairs go much deeper and it is time they were flushed out into the open. The question before the House iswho is determined to block a full and open inquiry into immigration policy and why? It is not the Appropriations Committee because that committee has felt the issue important enough to put it before the entire membership for decision. Hidden forces have been at work to block a congressional inquiry into immigration policy. Those forces have been working behind the scenes and that work has blocked joint committee action since last August. The work of the joint committee has been delayed for 8 monthsa delay which I maintain has been damaging to the national interest. Answers to these questions will identify the forces at work to block action by the joint committee. Will it be denied by the Member from New York that last June he threatened to depose me as chairman of the Subcommittee on Immigration unless I conformed to his ideas as to how the work of that subcommittee should be conducted? Will it be denied by the Member from New York that he favored activation of the joint committee and a fullscale immigration policy review until he learned I was to be elected chairman of the joint committee? Will it be denied by the Member from New York that he informed me last August he would oppose root and branch all my efforts to activate the joint committee? Will it be denied by the Member from New York that he apCX----480 proached members of the Appropriations Committee asking them to kill the appropriation request of the joint committee?