Speech #890120797

It will be otherwise. of course. where there is sound evidence fairly and evenly balanced. On the MacGregor amendment I have heard no arguments in oppositi6n which seem to me to be persuasive. To argue that we ought not upset the traditional immigration policy with respect to Latin America when this bill is intended to upset our traditional policy toward the rest of the world is not persuasive. To argue that the imposition of a numerical limitation is discriminatory to Latin American nations when we impose by this bill a numerical limitation against all the other nations in the world is not persuasive. Indeed it convinces me that our failure to do so is discriminatory against the balance of the nations of the world among which are numbered friends and allies at least as important to our country as those neighbors and friends which we claim in the Western Hemisphere. To argue that we will do damage to our relations with Latin American countries while conceding that a numerical limitation will inevitably be required not only fails to persuade but in my mind concedes the desirability and necessity of taking the step now. during a general revision of our laws. rather than later in the emotional heat of a population crises when the damage doneif anywill be infinitely greater and infinitely more damaging. And I predict that within a decade we will be in this same Chamber imposingprobably at the request of the State Department---a numerical limitation on Western Hemisphere immigration. And I should like to express here my support for the amendment offered by the gentleman from Rhode Island . Within the last few weeks this House has approved private bills to admit a number of people in circumstances such as he describes who could not. under our present law. be admitted.