[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 41 (Friday, March 22, 1996)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E418]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




            IMMIGRATION IN THE NATIONAL INTEREST ACT OF 1995

                                 ______


                               speech of

                          HON. STENY H. HOYER

                              of maryland

                    in the house of representatives

                       Wednesday, March 20, 1996

       The House in Committee of the Whole House on the State of 
     the Union had under consideration the bill (H.R. 2202) to 
     amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to improve 
     deterrence of illegal immigration to the United States by 
     increasing border patrol and investigative personnel, by 
     increasing penalties for alien smuggling and for document 
     fraud, by reforming exclusion and deportation law and 
     procedures, by improving the verification system for 
     eligibility for employment, and through other measures, to 
     reform the legal immigration system and facilitate legal 
     entries into the United States, and for other purposes:

  Mr. HOYER. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of the Smith 
amendment to the Immigration in the National Interest Act. I want to 
commend him for his commitment to this issue and for offering this 
important amendment. It is crucial to the safety and security of those 
trying to escape terrible regimes and to this Nation's international 
leadership role on asylum.
  America must continue to shoulder its international responsibility to 
afford asylum to its fair share of those who are repressed and are at 
risk in their countries. As a Nation of immigrants, we must leave our 
door open and continue to admit those persons fleeing from places which 
do not practice the values and beliefs we hold so dear. At the same 
time, it is clear that the United States cannot admit all those who 
would want to come here for solely economic reasons. However, we have a 
duty to those who seek admittance for humanitarian reasons. The United 
States has traditionally accepted refugees not for the economic and 
social reasons but because refugees are usually in grave danger.
  H.R. 2202 would limit annual refugee admissions to 75,000 in fiscal 
year 1997 and 50,000 every year thereafter. This represents a 
significant decrease from the 98,000 refugees and no legitimate 
rationale has been given as to why this level was achieved. This would 
require drastic reductions in the number of former Soviet Jews, 
Evangelical Christians, Ukrainian Catholics, Vietnamese, Bosnians, and 
Cubans, Chinese, and Africans.

  The current refugee resettlement system works by allowing the 
executive and legislative branch to consult on an annual basis on what 
the appropriate levels should be. This provides greater flexibility and 
the ability to respond to changes which occur throughout the world with 
refugees. On the other hand, the cap in the bill is inflexible and will 
not provide us with appropriate mechanisms to respond to refugee 
developments. Congress already has control over the number of refugees 
through the budget process. If we believe the administration's 
estimated levels are inappropriate, the Congress can choose not to fund 
them.
  The best solution to the world's refugee crisis is to work with other 
nations so that they can assume an appropriate share of the 
international refugee burden. We need the cooperation of our 
international neighbors. If we decrease our own refugee by half, we 
send the wrong message to those nations.
  I again want to thank Mr. Smith for offering this amendment and urge 
my colleagues to support it.

                          ____________________