Mr. Speaker. I recall. with a sense of humble pride. that occasion. 1 year ago today. when I witnessed the signing of the reform amendments to the Immigration and Nationality Act. The true spirit of equality. so steeped In American tradition. became part of our immigration laws that day replacing national origins. after over 40 years. as cri-. teria for selecting immigrants to the United States. Thatsystem. -and I do not wish to eulogize it today. was based on the fallacious belief that the place of birth. or the racial origin of a human being. determined the quality of a level of mans intellect or his moral character. or his suitability for assimilation into our Nation and our Great Society. I mention this discarded system only to revel in its repeal. One of the very first speeches I made in this Congress over 40 years ago was directed against the national origins theory devised back in 1921. Although the reform was a long time in coming. the fruit of the lengthy labor is sweet. The legislation enacted last year was a monumental step in establishing an immigration policy consistent with our times and based upon a mans family relationship and value to the United States. We must make certain that this legislation which has eliminated discrimination on its face does not fortuitously result in a supine discrimination. No legislation is without imperfection. During the course of the last year. certain provisions of this legislation have raised doubt of their feasibility. The provisions requiring a labor certification have proved to be a burden. both on the intending immigrant and on the petitioning citizen. Provisions setting forth waiver procedures for certain grounds of excludability are inadequate. We have had a chance to see the law in operation.
Identified stereotypes
The paragraph refers to the 'fallacious belief' that place of birth or racial origin determines intellect, moral character, or suitability for assimilation.