Speech #1030071863

But at least we all agree that the objective ought to be to provide the best possible health care for the greatest number of people within the limits of our resources. The same could be said for virtually every other difficult issue that the Nation. and by extension those of us here in Congress. must deal with. When it comes to immigration we have not even taken the first step of debating and establishing our goals. Immigration to the United States is governed by an inchoate and often incomprehensible hodgepodge of stat. utes. regulations. and procedures. Cobbled together over the last 100 years in the true spirit of ad hocraoy. Americas immigration laws utterly lack the support and confidence of the people of the United States. The time has come to move beyond the myths. shibboleths. and clioh6s and open a national debate on an issue that Attorney General Janet Reno has aptly described as "one of the most critical issues that we face this decade." There is no better place to begin than by taking a clearheaded look at exactly what Americas immigration tradition has been. For years. those who have promoted expanded immigration levels and who have urged us to wink at massive illegal immigration and abuse of our political asylum laws. have argued that we must be true to Americas immigration tradition. But what exactly is that tradition? Upon closer scrutiny. immigration to the United States today Is anything but traditional. From 1820 until 1965a period that encompasses most of our history as a nationthe United States admitted an average of less than 300.000 immigrants a year. During that 145year period we settled the frontier. fought a civil war. created an industrial revolution. engaged in two world wars. endured a great depression and ultimately emerged as the worlds greatest military and economic superpower. There were ebbs and flows in immigration over this period. but taken together 300.000 immigrants a year Is our true immigration tradition. And. with the exception of one relatively short period at the beginning of the 20th century. these levels rarely varied. Contrast those levels of immigration with the numbers we are seeing today. Depending on estimates of illegal immigration. we are now resettling between 1.2 million and 1.5 million newcomers every year. There is nothing traditional. or rational for that matter about attempting to absorb the population of Nevada every year. year in and year out. When history is written. the decade of the 1980s will be remembered as a decade of wretched excess and. true to form. immigration was taken to excess as well. As we focus on reining in many of the other excesses of the preceding decade. we must not overlook immigration. Unless serious reforms are undertaken. 15 million newcomers will settle in the United States during the 1990s. Yet we continue to act as though immigration exists in a vacuum. Not a whit of thought has been devoted to how we will meet the needs of that population. There has not been a single debate in Congress about how we will provide a first class education to all these new children. provide quality health care to the sick. secure adequate and affordable housing. ensure that there will be sufficient Jobs. improve and expand infrastructure. cope with environmental degradation. or ensure domestic tranquility. In short. we are admitting unprecedented numbers of new immigrants without even a modicum of planning. We are taking a leap of faith hoping that somehow everything will work out tomorrow. Over the past 15 years. Congress and successive administrations have acted on immigration like they have acted on the national debt. As a result. our immigration laws are in the same mess as our financial situation. The American people are angry about both the budget deficit and immigration. Nobody has asked them if they want to foot the bill for what is happening. Nobody has consulted with them about whether they want to see the social and cultural makeup of their nation radically altered. Nobody has ever asked the American people if they want to see the population of the United States grow by more than 50 percent within the lifetimes of their children and grandchildren. In a democracy. the people have a right to be consulted on issues of vital importance to their future. Every public opinion poll done in the past 15 years indicates that the American peopleof very race. religion. ethnic group. and region of the countrywant to see legal immigration reduced to more traditional levels and illegal immigration brought under control. Several weeks ago. Jim Hoagland wrote in the Washington Post that immigration would soon become topic A in all the industrialized democracies. It is time. therefore. that Congress began to address this issue and the concerns of the people seriously. It is for these reasons that I am introducing comprehensive legislation aimed at establishing an immigration policy for the United States. I wish to note that while many piecemeal immigration proposals have been introduced to deal with particular problem areassuch as asylum abuse--no other Senator or Congressman has introduced a comprehensive reform bill. Comprehensive reform is essential for effectively addressing this critical issue. The problems with our immigration system have grown too large to be dealt with by tinkering with the margins. The troubles with our immigration process cannot be solved with a few moie dollars. or a few more border guards. or by tightening up on asylum regulations. The problem is the system itself and that is why I am proposing that it be reformed top to bottom. It is time to reexamine all aspects of the issue: Controlling illegal immigration. ending abuse of our political asylum process and establishing. for a change. some guiding principles by which we can administer a legal immigration policy that is fair. rational. and which serves the interests. of the United States. Under the legislation I am proposing. we would begin to restore immigration to its more traditional and manageable levels of about 300.000 annually. Annual levels of 300.000 would restore immigration to more traditional levels. To put the excesses of our current immigration numbers in perspective. even if we were to enact this decrease of more than 50 percent. the United States would still have the most open and generous immigration policy in the world. Paring back immigration to more manageable levels would necessitate some long overdue changes in the way immigrants are selected. The evergrowing pressure to expand immigration levels is a byproduct of a system that grants immigration preferences to extended family members. Each time we admit a new immigrant. we expand the pool of people eligible to join the queue of those who would like to immigrate in the future. Thus. under the current system. the more immigrants we admit. the greater the pressure becomes to admit relatives who feel they have entitlement to come to America. We now have an astounding backlog of 3.4 million such peopleroughly equivalent to the population of the city of Los Angeles. What is more. people who immigrate under one of the family reunification provisions do not have to meet any obJective criteria which measure whether they are likely to become contributing members of our society. Of the more than I million people who settle here each year. not more than about 50.000 are selected based on what they can do for the United States. We have lost sight of the fact that immigration is a public policy and like all public policies it is supposed to serve the best interests of the United States. To both serve the national interest and reduce the pressure for everexpanding immigration quotas. we must eliminate immigration preferences for extended family members. The nuclear family is the bedrock of our social structure and when an immigrant is selected he or she should be entitled to bring a spouse and unmarried minor children. but the United States must make it clear that there is no implicit or explicit promise that other family members will be permitted to immigrate as a result. Like other immigrantreceiving countries. the United States has a duty to set limits on the number of people who can come and fill those quotas based on an objective assessment of our own national interests. Events in recent months. such as the hideous bombing in New York. have demonstrated that one of our most important national interests has been grossly neglected. with tragic results. Illegal immigration has become not only one of our most costly problems. but a threat to our national security. For decades. we have pretended not to see the problem of illegal immigration. The time has come to begin treating this matter seriously through a combination of enforcement and deterrence. Twice in the past 7 years Congress has authorized increases in Border Patrol manpower and. in both instances. failed to appropriate the necessary funds. With an estimated 3 million people illegally crossing our borders every year. Congress must significantly increase the size of the Border Patrol to ensure our borders are secure. This will require roughly twice the number of Border Patrol officers we now havean increase to 9.900 personnel. Inadequate manpower is pennywise and poundfoolish. The Constitution requires that we provide for the defense of the Nation. As long as anyone can enter this country. at any time. for any reason. we are failing to meet this most basic of our constitutional obligationsthe security of the people. In addition to adequate manpower. we must also provide those who guard our borders with the necessary equipment to do their jobs. It is a waste of the taxpayers money to pay Border Patrol agents wages when their vehicles are often in such a state of disrepair that they are unable to guard our borders. How can we expect aliens to take seriously our commitment to securing our Nations borders when Border Patrol vehicles often sit idle for lack of gasoline? Given the other events that are taking place here in Congress this week. namely. producing a budget that makes significant reductions in the Federal deficit. the legislation I am introducing today contains a plan for paying for the increased border security I am proposing. My colleague. Senator DIAMNM FEINSTEiN of California has already suggested the institution of a border crossing fee to cover the costs of these needed improvements. Her idea has been incorporated into this bill. A $3 fee would raise approximately $1 billion a year to fund efforts to combat illegal immigration and expedite travel for the hundreds of millions of people who cross our land borders for legitimate reasons. As important as Improving security along the border is. however. the cornerstone of our policy to control illegal immigration must be effective deterrence. We will never be able to stop all the people attempting to enter the United States illegally as long as they believe they will be able to live and work in this country if they can successfully elude the Border Patrol. In 1986. Congress made a deal with the American people. In exchange for granting amnesty to 3.1 million people who had violated our immigration laws. Congress promised to institute effective deterrents to further illegal immigration in the form of employer sanctions. These sanctions penalize employers who hire illegal aliens instead of citizens and legal residents. Congress also promised to establish an effective and nondiscriminatory way for employers to verify whether each newly hired worker was eligible to work in the United States. Instead. the Federal Government has sat by idly as the deterrence factor of employer sanctions has been eroded by rampant document fraud.