Speech #1010044004

Mr. President. this seconddegree amendment is taken from the earlier Helms substitute amendment which would preserve the national level of immigration but reallocate the number of visas so that familyconnected immigrants would dominate less and businesssponsored immigrants would receive additional visas. As I stated when the Senate discussed the Helms substitute. I believe that is not bad policy. I think that is good polic3. It is a policy I like. I think more independent immigrants. more business immigrants. breaking this lock of thie remoteness of family reunification. is in the national interest. I know that is controversial. I think there is no doubt we should admit a larger number of immigrants because they possess certain skills and qualities that will serve our country well. S. 358 would increase both the number of familyconnected immigrants and the number of independent immigrants. The Helms amendment now would hold familyconnected immigration at approximately the current levels. as I read it. while increasing the number of independent immigrants significantly. That is what Senator SPECTER is trying to do. except Senator SPECTER is adding numbers and Senator HELMS is crunching numbers placing them within the national level of immigration. That approach is something - agree with. that we should have a nauional level. I would not reduce familybased immigration below present levelswell. it doesno. not below present levels. That is a correct statement. but it would increase the number of immigrants who enter because U.S. employers have requested them and if the Department of Labor has gone through their certification process that no U.S. workers qualify and are available to fill those positions. The original Helms substitute did change the fifth preference definition and. thus. I voted against it because the earlier Helms amendment violated the agreement I previously made with Senator KENNEDY and Senator SIMON. However. the Helms seconddegree amendment does retain the fifth preference. as in current law. In addition. the present seconddegree amendment has the other beneficial qualities regarding increasing independent immigration and it stays with my philosophy of reaching the national level of immigration. not a cap. That is not what we have ever called it. Others have. In this situation. I would intend to support the Helms amendment since it does not violate my agreement with my comanagers and others I have discussed this measure with and it gets toward the same things except it does not increase numbers. it pulls them within the present numerical national level of immigration.