Speech #930125238

Mr. Speaker. Congress has long made it clear that its intent regarding its immigration and nationality laws was to keep family units together and to preserve family ties. To do so. it has been willing to acknowledge the less than rigorous enforcement of the immigration laws. The Immigration and Naturalization Act of 1965. improving upon earlier immigration legislation. demonstrated our humanitarian interest and concern for the peoples of the world by equalizing treatment under our laws all people wishing to emigrate to our country from both the Western and Eastern Hemispheres. This new preference system initiated in 1965 has functioned well. but there are a few points which I feel need correction. The bills which I am introducing today will enable sons and daughters and parents to be more easily united with their families. facilitate naturalization despite language difficulties. and update adjustment provisions for lawabiding persons who are ineligible for permanent residence despite having resided in this country continuously over a long period of time. Two of the bills essentially clarify the language of two sections of the Immigration and Nationality Act by substituting the words "son. or daughter" for "or child." It Is necessary to do this because the law defines a "child" as being an individual under 21 years of age. therefore. sons. and daughters of citizens who are over 21 are ineligible for the privileges accorded a "child" in these sections of the act. This substitution would make the Act consistent with the intent of the Congress in seeking to reunite families by excluding spouses. parents. "sons or daughters" of U.S. citizens or permanent residents from deportation or excludability because of fraudulent information on visas or other documents necessary to gain entrance to this country. Other provisions of the Immigration and Nationality Act stipulate that understanding. reading. writing. and speaking English is a prerequisite to naturalization. Only people over 50 years of age and having resided in the United States for at least 20 years at the time the law was enacted in 1952. or those physically unable to comply. are exempt. This measure should be extended a bit further in light of the Supreme Court rulings on literacy as a qualification for voting rights. Essentially. the Court has ruled that citizens are considered intelligent enough to exercise their franchise without literacy tests. or with a knowledge of Spanish or Hawaiian. In view of this ruling. my bill proposes that people over the age when they can successfully master a new language. who are literate in their native tongue and meet all other qualification standards. should be permitted naturalization. Further. this bill would allow those over 60 years of age and having resided in this United States for at least 20 years. to waive the literacy requirement if they otherwise are qualified for naturalization. The last bill which I am submitting today is a further continuation on the same theme. and attempts to cope with the estimated 1 or 2 million illegal aliens presently in our country. Although not a solution to this problem. my bill would permit persons who have resided continuously in the United States since 1965 who have conducted themselves in a lawful manner. and are of good moral character to be allowed to take their place in our society without fear of deportation. In conclusion. Mr. Speaker. these bills do not present a departure from previous immigration policy. but merely reaffirm the Congress humanitarian inclination to relax the enforcement of immigration laws when it comes to family units. This country has traditionally welcomed those from abroad seeking a new life in this country. and although we have been forced to limit the number of people admitted to the United States. it has never been the intent of the Congress to break up family units or to threaten deportation of those who have lived a substantial portion of their lives as normal. lawabiding citizens in the interests of rigorously enforced immigration laws. Favorable action on this legislation is then a further testament to the Congress purview on this matter.