Speech #930121012

I am compelled to offer this as a substitute. I would also like to have the opportunity to comment on some of the statements that have been made on both sides and particularly some made by the distinguished chairman of the subcommittee which reflect malinformation. misinformation. and egregious error and ignorance about some conditions that exist in our country particularly in the southwestern United States. But with respect to my amendment this simply makes it possible to issue the greatest number of visas to the country where there is the greatest demand. namely Mexico. Mexico is a special case and whether we deplore preferential visas or not. history is preferential and conditions are preferential. They are not theories. I cannot understand this distinguished committee. having acted as long as it has on these amendments. coming out with this amendment in the form it has. and having the audacity to say it is predicating its argument in behalf of the amendment on equality of treatment. Nothing could be further from the truth. The managers of this bill say that by giving every country a ceiling of 20.000 immigrant visas. every country is receiving equal treatment. I say this is balderdash. This flat ceiling discriminates flagrantly against countries such as Mexico and bigger countries and it tilts in favor of the smaller countries. Under the 20.000 limitation Iceland with a population of 210.000 would get a visa for 1 out of every 10 of its citizens. Mexico with a population of 51 million would get 1 visa for every 2.500 of its citizens. or Brazil would get just 1 visa for every 5.000 of its citizens. In fact I would like to underscore that Panama would get 20.000 visas for its population of 1.5 million. And Brazil. 20.000 visas for its population of 100 million. If this is equality. I am afraid I just do not recognize the meaning of that word. Where is the equality here? A 20.000 ceiling is a rank discrimination against a country such as Mexico where the need is the greatest and where the committee has abysmally lost the realism of the facts. Some of the remarks made by the chairman of the subcommittee remind me of the remarks printed in committee hearings back in the 1920s when we had some committees in the Congress and the country. discussing this question of immigration and referring to the Mexican. where borders have been nonexistent as late as 1923. where a citizen could cross either border merely by just putting in 5 cents for the bridge toll. There was no such thing as a visa at that time. There was still the historical heritage of our common border. We are talking about a country that had a tremendous amount of real estate in the United States.