MOORHEAD of California and Mr. SCHEUER of New York. The 1970s became a turning point for the United States with respect to this issue of immigration. It became clear that changes made in our policies for dealing with the influx of immigrants had to be recognized. Those immigrants. of course. were seeking a better way of life. Many months have gone into the preparation of the legislation that is before us this evening. I want to first commend my colleagues for their diligent and wellintentioned efforts. However. this bill contains a lethal combination. In addition to providing no cap on legal immigration. we will be opening the doors to millions of illegal aliens. I submit to you. when we get to the amnesty section of this bill. This amendment before us will allow us to achieve at the very least some control over legal immigration by setting an annual ceiling of 450.000. approximately our present level for legal immigration. The American people do not support massive immigration. In repeated public opinion polls. 80 percent of those polled want legal admissions reduced below the 400.000peryear level. No reasonable person involved in immigration reform wants to stop immigration entirely. but we are concerned about the growing resentment of immigrants and immigration. With over 10 million Americans out of work. and I know this concerns my colleagues because just the other day the House passed legislation to restrict foreign competition in an attempt to preserve American jobs. and with the growing Government deficit that we have. we cannot afford to simply open our doors to all who wish to come here. The demographics and costs of immigration are staggering. According to the 1979 Justice Statistical Yearbook. 270.000 immigrants were admitted that year under our system of preferences for relatives of American citizens alone. Fully onethird of that number came under the fifth preference category. brothers and sisters of U.S. citizens. and their spouses and children. This is. in my view. chain migrationchain migrationat its very best. Above and beyond that. 270.000 legal relative immigrant category. we admitted another 218.000 refugees. Once these immigrants achieve permanent residence. he. she. or their dependents become eligible for all the benefits of U.S. citizenspublic assistance such as food stamps. AFDC. and SSI. Additionally. in this same year. and mind you. this is before we commenced this 3year dialog on immigration reform. in 1979 we documented 1.1 million undocumented aliens apprehendedapprehendedin this country alone. Conservative estimates show that over 800.000over 800.000undocumented or illegal aliens have entered this country each year since For the sake of argument. I offer findings of several studies. One study found that 29 percent of illegal Dominicans. for example. in New York City alone receive welfare. Another study found that 18.5 percent of a group of undocumented women in Los Angeles were receiving welfare. A study of unemployment insurance applications from aliens in Illinois found 46 to 51 percent of them to be illegal. I point out these studies only to emphasize that the costs of immigration have not been sufficiently documented for us to make the sweeping reforms that this legislation proposes. We cannot possibly control the costs of illegal immigration if we cannot put a hold on the costs of legal immigration. At a time when Government programs are being pared. this legislation is a further threat to our social service safety net. We have three options. First. to increase spending for social services. second. to reduce services to our most needy citizens. or third. to control legal immigration.
Identified stereotypes
Generalization that immigrants are a drain on social services and take American jobs.