Speech #930120746

Chairman. I rise in support of H.R. 981. which represents the very extensive work of a very scholarly committee and is a bill which I think commends itself in every respect to the other Members of this Chamber. One of the important aspects of H.R. 982. the illegal alien bill. which I also supported and which has passed this House already. was the assurance that was given that we were going to follow up by trying to bring some logical order and some balance into the handling of the Western Hemisphere immigration. This bill does just that. It also brings a measure of humanity as well as rationality into our handling of immigrants from our neighbors to the north and to the south and provides for the same kind of orderly preference procedure and commonsense approach that exists with respect to handling immigration from the Eastern Hemisphere. I do feel that the House should seriously consider the possibility. which I understand the chairman of the Judiciary Committee is going to raise by offering an amendment. of increasing the immigration quota from our two immediate neighbors. on the north and south. that is. Canada and Mexico. During the course of the subcommittees hearings into the illegal alien problem we had hearings in Los Angeles. and in El Paso and spent considerable time looking at the origins of problems involving illegal immigration from south of our border with the Republic of Mexico. I think we were all impressed with the fact that there is a very serious problem which exists when you have an affluent country on one side of a border and a country that is still in process of developing and has many serious economic problems on the other side. We interviewed illegal immigrants who had been rounded up for transporting back across their border in the camp where they were awaiting transportation. and. to a man. they all said the only reason why they left Mexico and illegally entered the United States was because they were searching for work. All those whom we interrogated said they would not have left Mexico but for that fact. and if they could have obtained a job in Mexico they would have returned voluntarily to Mexico. I agree that there is an important principle in treating all countries alike. I think a strong case can be made for that. and certainly we should move in that direction. At the same time I think the Members should consider the fact that to reduce the maximum allowable immigration under the preference system to 20.000 from each country. which is what this bill would do. will result in cutting in half the current flow of immigration from Mexico under the preference system. I think that could aggravate pressures and tensions inside Mexico. I think we have to consider the practical desirability of helping maintain a tranquil and stable atmosphere on the south side of the border. In the end. the problems of Mexico can only be solved by the people of Mexico. with our help where that is possible. However. I believe that. in view of the serious economic conditions inside Mexico which create the pressure on Mexicians to cross the border. it could be a mistake to make a radical cut in the flow of legal immigratio:. from Mexico at this time. While I have not finally decided to support the anticipated amendment to increase the quota from Mexico and Canada to 35.000. I would like to point out that the State Department has recommended that this be done. and that the views of the chairman of the Judiciary Committee are entitled to considerable weight.