Speech #1040190282

Mr. Speaker. I am in opposition to the rule for H.R. 2202. the Immigration in the National Interest Act of 1995. If passed. this bill will dramatically change the way that we deal with immigration in this country. I am concerned. therefore. because a number of very important amendments. specifically those relating to the bills legal immigration provisions have been excluded from consideration. H.R. 2202 attempts to do too much too fast. By combining the enforcement of Illegal immigration and the reform of legal immigration in one bill. I fear that we are sending the wrong message to the American public. While I. like most Americans. believe that we must stem the tide of illegal immigration to this country. legal immigration serves important national interests. Given the legal and administrative complexities of the reform challenge at hand. we must examine each component to the fullest extent. I am hopeful. therefore. that my colleagues will support the CraneDooleyDavis amendment. which would strike the parts of title V (subtitles A. B. and C) that would virtually prevent American citizens from sponsoring their adult children. siblings. and parents. reduce Americas support for refugees. and place additional experience requirements that will complicate companies ability to hire foreign scientists and engineers. The current legal immigration system is specifically designed to strengthen families by reuniting close family members and fueling prosperity by attracting hardworking individuals. We must not abandon these principles. At a time when strong family bonds are more important than ever. restrictions. in family based immigration will hurt legal immigrant families In America. It Is disturbing to think that Government policy will keep such families. even parents and their children. apart just because a child is older than 21 years of age. Energetic young people. about to enter the work force. are exactly the type of new Americans that compliment the existing work force. Not only will they fuel our economy along with our existing population. but they will be here to care for their aging parents. Most Americans do not think that their children. at any age. are ever distant family members. Similarly. barring entry of brothers and sisters of U.S. citizens because of the current backlog in that visa category is especially unfair to the citizens and their siblings who have followed the rules and waited patiently in linesome for 15 years or more. H.R. 2202 imposes nearly insurmountable obstacles for U.S. citizens seeking to bring their own mothers and fathcs to the United States. The legislation enables the U.S. Government to control and overrule the decisions of families by requiring that U.S. citizens purchase high levels of insurance for their parents and lowering the priority for the parents visa category. This category will only receive visas if any are left over from other categories. The State Department projects that within 3 years after the law takes effect no visas will be available for parents. In addition. H.R. 2202 will require citizens and legal residents to show that their income will be 200 percent above the poverty line In order to bring their parents. minor children. or spouses to the United States. More than 35 percent of Americans. over 91 million people. have incomes below 200 percent of the poverty line. The bill will have a devastating impact on American families who will be barred from living in the United States with their own husbands. wives. parents. and adult children. Proposed restrictions in employmentbased immigration will have a negative impact on the U.S. economy. It is crucial that the American workplace reflects the international character of Its customers and responds to both domestic and International competitive pressures. Achieving such a work force requires looking beyond the U.S. labor market. Employees. researchers and professors possessing both innovative technical skills and multicultural competence ensures our economic viability in world markets. Additionally. placing a cap on the number of refugees admitted to the United States ignores our leadership role in providing protection and safe harbor to those fleeing political and religious persecution. Strict levels of refugee admissions ignore the changing and urgent nature of refugee situations. U.S. policy should maintain the flexibility to respond appropriately to emergency situations. I also have serious reservations about a national employment verification system which would tend to subject individuals to invasions of privacy and discrimination.