[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 39 (Wednesday, March 20, 1996)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages E394-E395]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




 PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 2202, IMMIGRATION IN THE NATIONAL 
                          INTEREST ACT OF 1995

                                 ______


                               speech of

                        HON. SHEILA JACKSON-LEE

                                of Texas

                    in the house of representatives

                        Tuesday, March 19, 1996

  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. 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 
bill's 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 
Crane-Dooley-Davis 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 
America's 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 line--some for 15 years or more.
  H.R. 2202 imposes nearly insurmountable obstacles for U.S. citizens 
seeking to bring their own mothers and fathers 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 employment-based 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

[[Page E395]]

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. Such a system would serve as 
an enormous administrative burden to the Nation's employers, especially 
small businesses. And even if such a system could be maintained with an 
error rate of only 1 percent--an impossibility since it would be based 
on INS and SSA data which have error rates of at least 30 percent--
hundreds of thousands of Americans would be denied employment 
opportunities annually because, according to an error in the data base, 
they were not eligible to work. Therefore, I support the Chabot-Conyers 
amendment, which would strike the employment verification system from 
the bill.
  Finally, H.R. 2202 would restrict immigrants' access to all Federal 
means-tested programs. This means that programs like child care, 
immunizations, the Head Start Program, battered spouse shelters, and 
Maternal and Child Health Care Programs will be out of reach for needy 
women and children. Compromising the health and education of women and 
children hurts all Americans. Children must not be made to suffer from 
the actions of their parents. Furthermore, it is not in our national 
interest to have a population of malnourished, nonimmunized, and 
uneducated children.
  H.R. 2202 also proposes to reimburse hospitals that provide emergency 
services to undocumented immigrants only if the hospital turns in the 
names of the undocumented people it serves. If this proposal becomes 
law people will fear seeking emergency care. By discouraging sick and 
critically ill people from seeking help, this provision jeopardizes not 
only the health of those who are ill, but also risks the well-being of 
their families and their communities. In addition, the measure will 
force doctors, nurses, and hospital administrators to spend valuable 
time and resources being law enforcers and learning to interpret 
immigration documents and understand the minutia of immigration law.
  In short, there are no easy solutions for the deep-seated problems 
facing our Nation. Scapegoating, however, is not the answer. The issue 
has never been should we deal with immigration but how. Although H.R. 
2202 comes clothed in good intentions, I am afraid the legislation does 
not capture fully the Commission's work and effectively bring about a 
long, lasting solution.
  Immigrants are not the cause of the widening gap between rich and 
poor, the deterioration of our public schools or the violence in our 
streets. Indeed, the causes of these problems are much more fundamental 
and it is time they were addressed. We as Americans, can handle them 
without resorting to left wing or right wing rhetoric. This is what the 
American people demand and it is what they deserve.

                          ____________________