Speech #1000146230

Mr. Speaker. I am further pleased that this continuing resolution for fiscal year 1988 contains provisions representing a compromise between the Immigration and Naturalization Service and the Congress on a number of important issues involving the Special Agricultural Worker Program. I want to express my thanks to INS Commissioner Alan Nelson for his cooperation and assistance on these issues. Because of his willingness to consider our concerns and agree on certain policies I believe the SAW Program can continue on the positive course it has followed since its enactment. The SAW Program was established in the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 to provide a legalization program for aliens who have worked in U.S. agriculture. Its goals were to ensure an adequate supply of laborers for this critical sector of the American economy and to protect the rights of those who have worked in agriculture. The program provides that aliens who can present evidence that they have worked in U.S. agriculture for at least 90 days can obtain legal status under the new immigration law. The agreements reached in this continuing resolution represent another step in a long process of negotiation between the INS and Congress on how the SAW Program should be implemented. Last spring reports of agricultural worker shortages in Oregon and Washington raised deep concerns about the INS interpretation of the immigration law. Representatives from those States. the three authors of the SAW Program. myself. Representative HOWARD BERMAN and Representative CHUCK SCHUMER. and other interested members met with the Commissioner of the INS and representatives of the State and Labor Departments to explore ways to improve the performance of the Service in terms of processing SAW applications. We focused on three primary areas where improvements were needed. First we asserted that the INS policy of requiring a full SAW application before entry into the United States and work authorization was granted was directly contrary to the clear intent of the immigration law. Furthermore. congressional negotiators questioned how a SAW applicant could collect evidence that he or she worked in U.S. agriculture without physically entering the United States. Second. we felt strongly that the law did not support the INS policy of deporting any potential SAW applicant who could not prove he had been in the United States since before May 1. 1987. This practice presented a serious obstacle to many qualified SAW applicants. Third. the INS policy at that time was to accept SAW applications only at the U.S.