Speech #970008844

Mr. Speaker. we take great pride in the fact that our Nation is a nation of immigrantsmen and women who made their way to our shores for a better way of life and for the freedoms they did not have in their mother countries. Our Immigration and Nationality Act has been amended many times to further make its regulations more just and equitable. Public Law 89236. for example. repealed the national origins quota concept as a system for selecting immigrants to the United States and substituted a ceiling on Eastern Hemisphere immigration on a firstcome. firstserved basis. within various preference categories. and a 20.000 limit per country. Public Law 94571 further amended the Immigration and Naturalization Act to apply the 7 category preference system. as well as the 20.000percountry limit. to the Western Hemisphere as well as the Eastern Hemisphere. Public Law 95412 contained the two ceilings in a single worldwide ceiling of 290.000. with a single preference system. The Refugee Act of 1980. Public Law 96212. eliminated refugees as a category of the preference system. set the worldwide ceiling at 270.000. and made separate provision for the annual and emergency admission of refugees. Some foreign nationals are inadvertently still being discriminated against. despite the new limitations. Ireland. for example. was the mother country for millions of our new seed immigrants in the last century. These hardworking men and women helped make our Nation great. Ireland used 6.307 immigrant visas in fiscal 1964 and 1.180 in fiscal 1978. And as far as we know. this reduction was not voluntary. When we realize that between 1820 and 1978. 4.723.344 immigrants have come from Ireland. we begin to get a sense of the problem. It seems that the natives of countries highly favored by the national origins quota system almost by definition are more apt to have ancestors buried here than close relatives who can petition for their entry. Because so many Irish came so long ago. the preference quota systembrother or sister of a U.S. citizen for examplerarely applies. Therefore. I introduced legislation. H.R. 34. to correct this inequitable situation which has gone on for too many years. In 1965. we were assured that upon passage of the new immigration amendments. all nationalities would be treated on an equal footing. History has taught us otherwise. Thousands of deserving immigrants are unable to qualify for visas under the new law and immigrants from those countries have dwindled considerably. I urge the support of my colleagues for H.R. 34.