Speech #1040190409

Mr. Chairman. as a strong advocate of immigration reform. I am extremely pleased that the House has turned its attention to an issue that has a growing impact on our lives and is very important to those we represent. Due to the hard work and perseverance of our colleague. Representative LAMAR SMITH. we are considering a sweeping bill that contains strong deterrents to illegal immigration. reduces legal immigration levels. and improves the priorities of legal immigration admission. This bill. the Immigration in the National Interest Act . takes an important step toward returning our immigration policies to their original intent: to serve our national interest and make America a better place for citizens and immigrants alike. I commend Representative SMITH for his willingness to confront this complex and emotionally charged issue. As with any public policy debate. a thorough understanding of the subjects history is essential to thoughtful and productive discussion. This is particularly true with legal immigration. Unfortunately. those who oppose Immigration reform frequently Invoke the unjust argument that reform violates the tradition of Immigration and disparages the contributions immigrants have made to our society. Such assertions Irrationally and unfairly shift the Immigration debate from immigration policy to Immigrants themselves. Immigrants who come in this country legally are not to blame for the problems associated with Immigration. The problems stem from a bad immigration policy that allows for unmanageable levels of Immigrants. Under a wellregulated Immigration system. immigrants can and will continue to make great contributions to our country. Mr. Chairman. current immigration policy can hardly be called traditional. To the contrary. our current policy flouts immigration tradition. Before 1965. immigration numbers went through surges and lulls every few years. These lulls allowed for assimilation. enhancing the ability of immigrants to reach educational and economic parity with citizens. Since 1965. there have been no lulls. only a steep climb. From the founding of our Nation In 1776 until 1965. immigration traditionally averaged 230.000 people a year. Abruptly. in the 1970s and 1980s. immigration escalated above the traditional level of 230.000 to more than 500.000 a year. In the 1990s. immigration has been running around 1 million a year. Largely to blame for this persistent swell in immigration is a series of illconceived amendments to our immigration laws. beginning in 1965. The most notable repercussions of the amendments are chain migration. huge backlogs of immigrants waiting to come to the United States. extended family reunification at the expense of nuclear families. and illegal immigration. The mass immigration fueled by these adverse changes to our immigration policy has resulted in overwhelmed public benefit programs. overcrowded schools. hospitals and prisons. and created undue job competition and language barriers. Moreover. our outofcontrol immigration system places an enormous burden on American taxpayers. Recent analyses by the Center for Immigration Studies have concluded that immigrants cost us at least $30 billion per year. I strongly encourage my colleagues to keep these points in mind as we debate this bill. As for illegal immigration. H.R. 2202 will help restore integrity to our borders and send a strong message to those who would defy our immigration laws that their actions will not be tolerated. I am particularly encouraged by the bills provisions to reform asylum. increase border security. and eliminate the welfare magnet that draws aliens across the border illegally. In fact. I have sponsored legislation that mirrors these provisions. The only essential element I find missing from the bill is a provision to end automaticbirthright citizenship. and I look forward to future debate on this issue. Clearly. H.R. 2202 is the product of an extensive analysis of the defects In our laws that drive illegal immigration. It is my most sincere hope that as this bill moves through the legislative process. these provisions are not weakened. While I support the bills antiillegal immigration components. I must admit that I am not as enthusiastic about its reforms of legal Immigration. Without question. It is an improvement over our current system. However. by his own admission. Representative SMITHS bill will permit higher legal immigration levels than during 65 of the past 70 years. or more than 700.000 legal immigrants per year. This is just a modest cut from the 1994 legal immigration level of about 800.000. As the sponsor of legislation to place a limited. temporary moratorium on legal immigration that would reduce immigration to a more historic level. I cannot completely endorse the bill before us. I believe that the legal Immigration levels in H.R. 2202 are too high to efficiently curb the countrys Immigrationrelated problems. In addition. the levels in the bill do not accurately reflect the views of most Americans who favor a more moderate flow of immigration. As an example. a recent Roper poll of people across the country showed that 70 percent of all respondents support a level of Immigration below 300.000 per year. According to the poll. this view is supported by 52 percent of Hispanics. 73 percent of blacks. 72 percent of conservatives. 71 percent of moderates. 66 percent of liberals. 72 percent of Democrats. and 70 percent of Republicans. In view of this data and a host of similar immigration polls that are as compelling. H.R. 2202 does not completely respond to the publics concerns about immigration. Consequently. I will continue my efforts on behalf of lower. more manageable immigration levels. Mr. Chairman. immigration is beneficial and practical only when it is governed by sensible. clearly defined goals that are suited to our Nations interests and needs. Regrettably. our current system lacks such goals. I fear that if we allow our dysfunctional immigration policie5 to continue. the positive aspects of immigration will be forgotten and immigration will be viewed as chaotic and destructive to the well being of our country. I strongly urge my colleagues to support immigration reform.