Speech #1000146228

The House Appropriations Committee accepted that amendment by 2711. and the full House adopted the continuing resolution with the family unity amendment intact by a vote of 248170. The Senate did not include such a provision in its version of the bill. and the House conferees receded to that position. The amendment was designed to provide critical protection to wives. husbands. and children of persons who have received or will receive legal immigration status under the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986. That critical protection was a moratorium on deportations of these family members until the person granted legal status could petition for his or her spouse or child to receive legal status as well. That adjustment to legal status would not be under the socalled amnesty program. but under the immigration laws applicable to everyone else. Despite the obvious humanitarian and practical appeal of such a provision. vocal critics began to look for flaws in the family unity measure. Rather than offering constructive alternatives. they chose to completely sidestep addressing the very real concerns of immigrant families. They cast the good and hardworking people who merely want assurance that their families can live in peace without fear of separations in the worst possible light. They suggested hairraising scenarios of criminalsconvicted murderers. rapists. and drug dealersCuban Marielitos. and AIDSinfected persons being provided blanket protection from deportation. These detractors knew very well that it was a simple matter to perfect the amendment to avoid the possibility of such occurrences. by explicitly exempting persons who are inadmissible. In fact it was so simple. that the substitute I developed with Chairman RODINO of the Judiciary Committee to address concerns that had been raised dealt with that problem with less than a dozen words. It was also a simple matter to address the two or three other concerns that had been raised. It wont do for any Member of Congress to claim that immigration law is too complex for him or her to have decided whether the amendment deserved support. The potential for officially condoned family separations is far too serious for that sort of abdication. The issue has been put to rest for this year. but I can assure you it will be raised again in the next Congress. Therefore. I think it is important to assess why it was that the amendment was not accepted by the conferees. In my opinion. the conferees attention was deflected to irrelevant concerns about whether or not these immigrant families were being treated better or worse than wouldbe immigrants. Misleading comparisons were made by the Senator from Wyoming . who took it upon himself to address the conferees. and. tragically. succeeded in overriding the broad support the substitute family unity amendment had from other immigration experts and legislators. The House and Senate Judiciary Committees chairmen. Mr. RODINO and Mr. BIDEN. and the Senate chairman of the Subcommittee on Immigration and Refugee Affairs. Mr. KENNEDY. were leading supporters.