Speech #980214559

On the basis of what I have heard tonight. for the gentleman to say that when he caps at a certain number he does not adversely impact on the policy of family reunification down the line is absolutely not in keeping with the facts. This amendment would deduct the number of visas issued to immediate relatives in the previous fiscal year from the visas available to other categories. It would cut into family reunification and have the effect of creating further backlogs for sons and daughters of U.S. citizens and relatives of permanent resident aliens. thus dividing families for many years. Statistics reveal the immediate relative category is issued 160.000 visas per year. Deducting this number from the ceiling would penalize family reunification categories. Future increases in immediate relative visas would lessen the number of family visas issued. I would note the Select Committee on Immigration and Refugee Policy recommended keeping the traditional freestanding immigration of immediate relatives. Immigration of immediate relatives should be "free standing" without penalty to other immigrants in the system. There is no provision of the immigration law more consistent with our humanitarian traditions and sense of obligation to our citizenry than that of allowing our closest relatives family reunification. I might also suggest to the gentleman that being a member of the present administration. I would point out the Justice Department has been opposed to his amendment. that the State Department has written that it would affect foreign policy. Third. I think it is putting the cart before the horse. That is because what the gentleman is attempting to do is to deal with legal immigration when the problem that confronts us today that we have been attempting to deal with is the problem of illegal entry. I would like to insert at this time letters I have received in support of retaining the structure of existing law allowing a generous and fair system of immigration.