Speech #910015991

Many have wives or husbands and childreli residing abroad. Others. single beneficiaries. have parents abroad as well as brothers or sisters both here and abroad. As you can see. the introduction of such large numbers of private immigration raises questions and has significant consequences. First. with a total Immigration of 170.000 per year authorized by general lawoutside the Western Hemisphere which had unlimited immigration until July 1. 1968to have over 6.000 private billsmany involving more than one personin a 2year period is a rather high number of proposed exceptions to the general law. Second. unfortunately. It has become increasingly obvious that a large number of aliens are coming to this country under the false claim that they are nonimmigrant visitors when. in fact. they intend to seek employment and remain here permanently. When they are detected violating their visitor status by overstaying their authorized stay. and by taking employment. they importune Congressmen to introduce a private bill to grant them immigrant status. The fact is that. except for a very. very few. these bills are of a nature that could not possibly receive favorable action under almost any circumstances. You may be interested to know that the 90th Congress enacted private immigration bills benefiting only 10 persons in the categories of nonimmigrant aliens affected by the rule change. Most bills merely buy time for beneficiaries to stay in the United States and build up equities or qualify administratively for admission while the subcommittee falls further and further behind in its docket. That is a large proportion of the bills have no chance for ultimate favorable consideration under established policiesbut by reason of their introduction they permit some aliens to stay in the United States. marry U.S. citizens and take employment. raise U.S. children. and as a result. gain preferred positions for admission under general law. A situation exists where the introduction of private bills is being used primarily as a delaying tactic to prevent deportationbills with no chance of favorable action but which. by their introduction. buy time during which the beneficiary may qualify under the general law. The subcommittee has always looked with disfavor upon such bills since they would benefit those who violate the law over aliens who apply for immigrant status in the home country under the general law and patiently wait their turn for admittance. A final unhappy consequence of the huge volume of private immigration bills is that the Immigration Subcommittee is delayed and obstructed in its consideration of the good and meritorious private bills and the important task of dealing with needed changes in the general law. I suggest that the reasons for the rule change are obvious and new policy has been long overdue. Members need have no fear that the new rule will prejudice them with respect to private immigration bills of merit. The rule can be waived upon showing a good cause. Thus. if an alien. by reason of an unusual set of circumstances. has valid and equitable grounds justifying a private bill. the subcommittee has procedures whereby deportation can be stayed and the Member heard. I can assure you that for my part. and I am confident I speak for all minority Members. the rights of every Member will be fully protected.