Session #104 · 1995–97

Speech #1040191477

Mr. Chairman. I rise today In strong opposition to this immigration reform bill. H.R. 2202. I agree with my colleagues that we have a legitimate national interest in ensuring that people come to our country through legal means. There is ample need for a reasoned and balanced debate about reform of our immigration system. However. the provision in this legislation fall far short of achieving the goal of effective immigration reform in a responsible. fair. and humane manner. I have many areas of concern in this bill. H.R. 2202 goes too far in placing extreme restrictions on legal Immigration. decreasing by 30 percent total annual number of the legal immigrants admitted into this country. Legal immigration has been of central Importance to our development as a nation. We began as a nation of immigrants. and our country continues to reap untold benefits from the energy. ideas. talents. and contributions of those who arrive in this country seeking the opportunity to prove themselves and to contribute to the greatest Nation on Earth. H.R. 2202 sanctions discrimination against the families of legal U.S. residents who have paid their taxes. served in the Armed Forces. and contributed to the growth of the Nations economy and to the cultural diversity of our society. In a Congress which heralds family values as its prevailing theme. this bill is extreme antifamily legislation. Restrictions to family reunification in this bill ensure that American families may be forever separated from their loved ones. Under this legislation. virtually no Americans would be able to sponsor their parents. adult children. or siblings for immigration. Not all Americans subscribe to the restrictive definition of family imposed in the bill--nor should they. The bill will cut annual refugee admissions in half. Can we be so cold as to tell these victims of persecution to go away. our doors are shut. our country is full? This extreme cap would severely limit the flexibility of the U.S. refugee system to respond to unpredictable humanitarian crises. The proposal for summary exclusion included in the bill would eliminate many of the procedural protections to ensure that legitimate asylum seekers receive full consideration of their asylum claims. Nervous. frightened. exhausted victims are charged with one chance to prove their claims of persecution. If an error is made. they face immediate deportation. A victim of rape. torture. or gender persecution may have difficulty effectively discussing his or her case under restrictive procedures. The severe restriction of benefits to Immigrants is yet another point of great concern in this legislation. Only 3.9 percent of immigrants who come to the United States to join their families or to work. rely on public assistance. compared to 4.2 percent of nativeborn citizens. Yet. the myth persists that welfare benefits are the primary purpose for immigration to the United States. This bill does not achieve the goals of real and rational Immigration reform. It hurts families. It hurts children.
Identified stereotypes
The paragraph perpetuates the myth that welfare benefits are the primary purpose for immigration to the United States.
Keywords matched
asylum claims Immigration immigration immigrants refugee deportation asylum seekers Immigrants family reunification

Classification

Target group
Also mentioned
refugees
Sentiment
Negative
Stereotyping
⚠️ Yes
Confidence
100%
Model
gemini-2.0-flash
Framing
Legal / procedural Family values Humanitarian

Speaker & context

Speaker
NANCY PELOSI
Party
D
Chamber
H
State
CA
Gender
F
Date
1996-03-20
Speech ID
1040191477
Paragraph
#0
← Prev Next →