Speech #910203350

Mr. Speaker. there are four major problem aieas in the Immigration and Nationality Act which demand immediate attention. On April 30. I introduced H.R. 17370. a bill to offer practical solutions to these problems and to bring the Immigration and Nationality Act into line with our avowed immigration policy objectives. These objectivesreuniting families and preference for aliens with skillswere set forth in the progressive 1965 amendments to the act. The 1965 amendments were the product of an executive communication presented to the Congress in 1964 which contained safety features to insure a reasonable and fair transition from the old national origins system to the new system. However. some of these safety features were compromised out of existence and the result has frustrated our aim at a fair and equitable immigration policy. My bill has four principal features: First. a worldwide quota on immigration excepting Mexico and Canada. two. flexible provisions for refugees. three. a realistic preference system. and four. elimination of the backlog in the fifth preference for brothers and sisters. The present law sets a limit of 120.000 on the number of immigrants who may enter the United States from the independent countries of the Western Hemisphere. This ceiling is a naked ceiling with no provision for a preference system to reunite families or to welcome aliens with much needed skills and there is no distribution of numbers among the several countries. Furthermore. the lack of an orderly procedure for visa issuance tends to impair our relationship with contiguous countriesCanada and Mexico. In recognition of the command undefended borders we share with these countries. it is only logical that we. in the spirit of cooperation and understanding. accord Canada and Mexico a special status. in other words. a nonquota status. My bill establishes an annual ceiling of 250.000 immigrants on a worldwide basis. excepting only our neighbors Canada and Mexico. and other defined special immigrants who have enjoyed a nonquota status. Each foreign country will be allowed to send up to 25.000 qualified immigrants to the United States annually rather than 20.000 as prescribed under present law. The next problem area involves the admission of refugees. Since World War II. the Congress has enacted several major statutes authorizing the admission of refugees. but it was not until the 1965 amendments that a refugee provision became part of the permanent law. Although this provision was laudable. a few moments after it became effective it was obvious that this provision was inadequate. Present law provides for the annual admission of up to 10.200 refugees from Communistcontrolled areas and refugees uprooted by natural calamity or military action. The position of the United States as a world leader demands that we. with other countries of the free world. be in a position to offer asylum to the oppressed. We must be able to take quick. effective. and affirmative action to permit the orderly entry into the United States of a fair share of refugees seeking freedom. We must uphold Americas tradition as an asylum for the oppressed. Before this current fiscal year was half over. the 10.200 numbers set forth in the law for refugees were exhausted mainly because of tragic happenings in Czechoslovakia and an expulsion policy in Poland. Many of us. members of the Committee on the Judiciary. joined with Chairman EMANUEL CELLER in imploring the Attorney General to exercise his parole authority in the Immigration and Nationality Act to keep the doors for asylum open to refugees. In agreeing with this request. the Attorney General advised the committee that legislation in the refugee field was urgently needed and that the general parole authority would be invoked for refugees only temporarily. The refugee provisions in H.R. 17370 are not new. They are similar to provisions contained in H.R. 9112. by Chairman CELLER. which I and other Members cosponsored last year and also similar to provisions supported by previous administrations. My bill amends section 212(d) (5) of the Immigration and Nationality Act by adding a new section which authorizes the Attorney General to parole into the United States refugees physically present in a country which is not Communistdominated or Communistoccupied without geographical or numerical limitation. Provision is also made for the adjustment of status to that of permanent resident for such refugees. The definition of "refugee" covers persons fleeing from any Communistcontrolled country or area or from any other country due to persecution or fear thereof and who are unwilling because of such persecution or fear to return to their country or area. Persons uprooted by natural calamity or military operations whether within their own country or otherwise are covered. This global authority in the absence of restrictions as to the number of refugees who could be accepted would provide maximum flexibility in the pursuit of humanitarian and foreign policy objectives. The United States would be better able to cope with any arising emergency or other type of refugee problems in a manner consistent with broader objectives. The parole of refugees. under this amendment. is conditioned upon a determination by the Attorney General after consultation with the Secretary of State. that such parole would promote U.S. interests. This is consistent with the terms of U.S. legislation governing the use of funds for assistance in behalf of various categories of refugeesMigration and Refugee Assistance Act of 1962 (Public Law 87510). The current preference system for immigrants presents the third major problem area. The percentage of numbers available under each preference is based upon the average number of immigrants admitted under each preference over the years preceding the 1965 amendments. But demand fluctuates and patterns of immigration frequently change. Consequently. the existing rigid system of percentage is not in focus with the need for visas to serve the best interests of the United States. The third preference categorymembers of the professions or persons of exceptional ability in the sciences and arts- is oversubscribed and only those beneficiaries of third preference petitions filed prior to July 8. 1968. are being considered for visa issuance. Likewise. the sixth preference--skilled or unskilled workers in short supplyis oversubscribed back to October 1969. The use of numbers for the higher preferences exhausts any possibility for nonpreference or new seed immigrants to get visas to this country. H.R. 17370 revises the order of preferences and establishes four new preferences. The first preference provides 62.500 visas for the spouse. or unmarried son or daughter of an alien lawfully admitted to the United States for permanent residence or to any qualified immigrant who is the married son or daughter of a citizen of the United States. or the unmarried brother or sister of a citizen of the United States. The second preference provides that up to 62.500 visas shall be available to members of the professions or persons of exceptional ability in the sciences and arts. To insure fair distribution. not more than 5.000 visas will be available to any one country under this preference. The third preference provides up to 62.500 visas. plus unused visas from the first and second preference. for skilled workers whose skills are needed in the United States. The fourth preference allocates 37.500 visas. plus any numbers left over from the first three preferences. for religious workers. aliens who will not seek employment in the United States or who do not have to earn a living. and investors. Then. 25.000 visas. plus any unused visas from the first four preferences. are reserved for nonpreference immigrants. Of these available numbers. 25 percent are reserved for persons under 25 years of agethe new seed immigrants. In order to give this new system a chance to work. I have also provided that any beneficiary of a current fifth preference petition. brothers and sisters of a U.S. citizen. which was filed prior to July 1. 1970. shall be considered as a special immigrant and thus not subject to any numerical limitation. I must point out at this time that the transition from the national origins concept to the firstcome. firstserved concept was predicated upon a reasonable phaseout period which was intended to alleviate backlogs then existing in certain preferences. Unfortunately. this just did not happen and the fifth preference particularly has continued to be oversubscribed. The continuation of this oversubscription has unfavorably affected the sixth preference and in some countries. such as Italy. sixth preference numbers will never become available without remedial legislation. This proposed preference system offers flexibility and is in concert with an equitable immigration policy. Mr. Speaker. the Congress over the years has taken giant steps to advance fairness and reasonableness in our immigration policy. The 1965 repeal of the national origins concept for selecting immigrants was a magnificent advancement. However. we are obligated to seek ways to perfect the law so that the best interests of the United States in foreign policy and domestic policy can be served. A sectionbysection analysis of H.R. 17370 follows: