Speech #1010042883

KENNEDY. and SIMON on this particular bill. It has many valuable features. I know that Senators who take on this particular thankless task of dealing with these difficult issues are buffetted by those who say we let in too many immigrants on the one hand. and those who say we let in too few on the other. Sometimes charges get hurled and epithets hurled around directed at Senators KENNEDY and SIMPSON that are shameful and uncalled for. So I do appreciate the work they are doing. and also Senator SIMON. Having said that. we have a major problem with the bill which the HatchDeConcini amendment addresses. Mr. President. the purpose of this amendment is to ensure this bill does not operate automatically to reduce the number of visas available to immigrants and poor family connection preference categories below the current level. I want to take some time to explain the family preference situation tinder current law and the changes made by S. 358. My concern is about those changes. and then I want to explain the HatchDeConcini amendment. Under current law. there are two broad categories of legal family immigration. One category is for other family connected immigrants Linder a preference system. Under current law. there is no cap on the number of immediate relatives of U.S. citizens who can immigrate to this country each year. Immediate relatives of U.S. citizens are their minor children. spouses. and parents of citizens over 21 years of age. They can enter the country each year without limit. Minor children. spouses. and parents of citizens over 21: unlimited immigration. In addition. 216.000 visas are allotted to other family connected preference immigrants of the following preference categories. So we are talking about family connection preference immigrants. There are four preference categories: Unmarried adult children of U.S. citizens. spouses. unmarried children of permanent resident aliens. married children of U.S. citizens. and brothers and sisters of adult U.S. citizens. Moreover. most importantly. the visas allocated to these four family connection preference categories each year are not. and I repeat not. offset by the number of immediate family relative immigrants who enter the country in a given year. Thus the 216.000 visas for family reunification in these four family connection preferences or preference categories are always available each and every year under current law. Under the bill before us. S. 258. which this chart shows. the number of visas for family reunification under the four family connection preference categories could drop below the 216.000 provided annually under current law. This is the problem that the HatchDeConcini amendment seeks to avert. Let me explain how the bill works In this regard. There is a new subsection 201(c)(1) of the Immigration and Nationality Act. and under the bill. this would establish a worldwide level of family connection immigration. That is for the four family connection preference categories. That annual worldwide level is equal to 480.000. minus a number of immediate family relatives. plus the number. if any. of unused independent visas. Now. that looks pretty good under current law and as of today. If there are any unused visas from the independent immigrant category. that category or employer sponsored or new seed immigrants. they will be added to the number of visas available. Because it is unlikely there will be any such unused visas. I want to put that part of the formula to the side. The crux of the issue for family connection preference immigrants under this bill is basically this: The bill starts with 480.000 allowed in. It then subtracts. minus from the 480.000. a number of immediate family relatives to enter the country to determine the number of visas available to the four family connection preference categories for the following fiscal year. And the number of immediate relative immigrants eligible to enter the country each year remains uncapped. Accordingly. because approximately 220.000 immediate family relatives entered the country last year under this particular bill. if it becomes law. without the HatchDeConcini amendment. the 480.000 figure would be offset by the 220.000 figure. Now. this would leave 260.000 visas available for family reunification In the four preference categories In the following year. Indeed. this is the figure which the sponsors of S. 358 have provided. I note that this would be an increase of 44.000 under current law. That is good news. The bad news is that as immediate family immigration increases each year. the offset. of course. reduces the number of visas available to immigrants In the four preference categories. Make no mistake about it. pitting immediate family relative immigration against family connection preference immigration is a very profound change in our legal immigration policy. My basic concern is that such future increases might reduce the number of visas available to the four preference categories below the 216.000 which are currently available under current law. Indeed. this offset could drastically reduce family preference immigration and even eliminate it. Nothing in S. 358 guarantees this will not happen. This is a difficult area in which to make predictions. because Immigration patterns can vary over time. These patterns were also sensitive to world events. The number of immediate family relatives who immigrated to this country in 1980 jumped about 10 percent over the 1979 number. The 1979 number. in turn. was about a 10percent increase over the 1978 figure. Yet. the increase from 1980 to 1981 was less than 1 percent. Between 1985 and 1986. the number again increased by nearly 10 percent. So the increases vary. Now. we need to remember that as the undocumented aliens that have been granted amnesty become citizens and are thereby eligible to bring in immediate relatives. the extent of immediate family immigration could dramatically increase. That would reduce this number down to where it could be well below the 216.000. According to a GAO [General Accounting Office] letter to me dated July 7. 1989. just a week ago. family preference immigration in the four preference categories would. tinder current law. total 2.160.000 between 1990 and 1999. The GAO also estimated. however. that under S. 358. as it is presently before us. that number would drop to 1.501.151. That would be a decrease of nearly 659.000 family connection preference immigrants. Moreover. the GAO also estimated that as a result of the offset of immediate relatives against the family preference immigration categories. as immediate family immigration rises during the decade. family preference immigration would drop to zero by 1999. Now. this assumes there is no change in the immigration levels established in the bill. Earlier. in March 3. 1989. testimony. the GAO estimated that family preference immigration under S. 358 as originally introduced would drop to zero by 1998. Therefore. the bill before us. as amended in committee. delays this draconian outcome by just 1 year. according to the GAO. Now. I realize that the bill provides for a mechanism to increase or decrease the level of family connection immigrants by adjusting the 480.000 figure against which immediate family immigration is offset. Even if the visas for family connection preference immigrants drop below 216.000. however. there is no guarantee that this mechanism will result in any increase in the visas available for these immigrants and for these families. for reuniting these families. Let me explain this mechanism. Under the bill. in the March before fiscal year 1984. and every 3 years thereafter. the President may recommend no change. an increase or a decrease. in the 480.000 level. against which the immediate family relatives are offset.