Speech #930354787

The understanding that now emerges is wholly contrary to that which was presented to us earlier. In response to probing questions by members of the Senate Finance Committee. Secretary Kissinger has given us a clearer. if not a new. picture of the negotiations that have taken place between American and Soviet officials regarding the issue of immigration. Now we are told that no real agreement has been reached between American and Soviet officials after all. In his statement to the committee. Secretary Kissinger frankly admitted that he would not give "any assurances concerning the precise emigration rate that may result. assuming that the trade bill is passed and MFN is extended to the USSR. And then I went on to say: This testimony of Secretary Kissinger thus shows beyond all reasonable doubt. Mr. President. that we even lack assurances that Jewish emigration will be increased in the Soviet Union. let alone emigration of all other * citizens of Communist countries. At best. Secretary Kissinger has offered us. as an article of faith. a vague hope that if we grant L trade concessions to the Soviet Union. that the Soviet Union might be willing to increase Jewish immigration. Because it was obvious that the Soviets were not about to agree to the spirit of the JacksonVanik proposal. even with the 18month Presidential waiver. I felt that something had to be done. if only for the very close relatives of American citizens living in nonmarket countries. I thought that it was asking too much of the American people to give up valuable economic advantages and get so littleif anything at allin return. I thought that the American people themselves should get something. I realized that we could not expect a wholesale reform of the Soviet system. not even as it pertains to emigration. But we could settle for direct benefits to American families who have relatives in nonmarket countries. My amendment was therefore drafted to constitute a new section of title IV. completely separate from section 402 with its waiver provisions. I felt that the waiver allowed the administration too much leeway for interpretation on such an important and humanitarian concern as reuniting families. It was on this basis that my amendment was offered on December 13. As it was originally offered. it contained not only provisions to encourage emigration. but also the right to visit. The point of including visits was to lessen the burden on wouldbe emigres in nonmarket countries. An application for a visit would create less of a problem for them. and less suspicion. The right to visit could lead directly to increased emigration. I engaged in a colloquy with the distinguished Senator from New York and agreed. out of senatorial courtesy. to lay my amendment aside while further discussions could take place. so as not to hold up the Senate. Further discussions were held off the floor. with the distinguished Senator from Washington . the distinguished Senator from Connecticut