Speech #890133077

Germany. France. and Scandinavia. but this is because the basic population of our country is made up largely of stocks which originated from those countries. and the reasoning back of the present system is that additional population from those countries would be more easily and readily assimilated into the American population. Naturally. those immigrants can best be absorbed into our modern population whose backgrounds and cultures are similar. It is indubitably clear that if the majority of Americans had sprung. not from Western. central. and southern Europe. but from central Africa or southern Asia. we would today have a vastly different country. Unquestionably. there are fine human beings in all parts of the world. but people do differ widely in their social habits. their levels of ambition. their mechanical aptitudes. their Inherited ability and intelligence. their moral traditions. and their capacities for maintaining stable governments. The advocates of this legislation state that the increase in immigration brought about by its passage will be miniscule and will amount to only a few additional thousand persons annually. but I fear that the practical result will be otherwise. In my judgment. it is completely unrealistic for us to be considering legislation that is going to permanently increase our immigration to any degree whatsoever. I grant that the immigrants who have come to this country have made a magnificent contribution to our development. Anyone who attempts to articulate this contribution is doomed to understatement because. certainly. this Nation was put together by immigrants and would not exist if they had not come here. It is true also that immigrants have continued to play an important role in our Nations development. But that role has been and is dwindling in importance. Most of us are descendants of immigrants. but this is no longer a nation that needs immigration as it once did. Indeed. the problems we will face in the years ahead will be those of a surplus population rather than needed population. In this respect we. are like most other nations of the world. But. unlike other nations. we have not yet learned how to give primary consideration to immigration as it will affect us internally. without developing a guilty conscience. We have yet to make the philosophical transition from an Immigrantseeking nation. which we were until fairly recently. to one whose population has developed to the capabilities of our present resources. But why. Mr. President. should the United States be the only advanced nation In the world today to develop a guilt complex concerning its immigration policies. when it is already far more liberal than other countries in this respect. and in view of the fact that other advanced nations are selective in dealing with immigrants and without apology? Every other country that is attractive to Immigrants practices selectivity and without apology. For example. Trinidad is an island country that gained its independence from Great Britain a few years ago. Yet. under a new British law. immigration from Trinidad is closely restricted. Australia has no quota at all. It simply excludes anyone of nonEuropean ancestry. I am told that the Japanese Government discourages im. migration from many countries. I am also Informed that Israel has a policyas it has every right to havebased on religion. Why should the United States. therefore. not reflect careful selectivity and be more restrictive in the formulation of its immigration policies? Our first responsibility In matters of immigration. at a time when automation is on the rise and the population explosion Is giving cause for concern. is to the people of the United States and not to the entire population of the world. The advocates of change assure us that under the proposed legislation it will be easier for people of special skills to come into the country and help the U.S. economy. Yet. under the new legislation. there would be an increase in quotas for such countries. as Trinidad.