[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 146 (2000), Part 1]
[Senate]
[Page 117]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]



                             ELIAN GONZALEZ

  Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, as a grandmother, and as a member of 
the Senate Immigration Subcommittee, I want to say a few words about 
the case of Elian Gonzalez, and particularly to indicate my strong 
support for the concurrent resolution Congressman Rangel has introduced 
in the House. Senator Dodd has just submitted a similar resolution in 
the Senate this afternoon, of which I am a cosponsor.
  As you know, this resolution expresses the sense of the Senate that 
Elian Gonzalez should be reunited with his father, Juan Gonzalez of 
Cuba. I have been in California, but nonetheless I have been following, 
as closely as anyone could over the television, the events surrounding 
this youngster--the very tragic events.
  Based on my understanding of the situation, Elian has enjoyed a very 
close and loving relationship with his father and his grandparents in 
Cuba. As a grandmother, this has a lot of meaning to me. Those who know 
Juan Gonzalez have described him as an ``ideal father'' who spent as 
much time as he could with his son.
  Elian has been living in his father's home, where his grandparents 
also play a role in raising him. Although Elian's mother and father 
shared joint custody of the child, he actually spent 5 out of every 7 
days of the week in his father's home. It is my understanding that his 
father can support him, that he can provide a good home for him, and, 
above all, he is a good and loving father. Both he and Elian's mother 
had joint custody of the youngster.
  To the best of my knowledge, there is no evidence that Juan Gonzalez 
was either neglectful or abusive in his relationship with his son. 
After all, a strong parental bond should be the overwhelming test for 
reunification--that and the fact that the touchstone of U.S. 
immigration policy has been to protect and reunite the family.
  Elian's maternal grandparents also took part in raising their 
grandchild, often keeping him when either parent was working. Despite 
the divorce of Elian's mother and father, both parents and their 
respective families maintained, warm relations and continued to play an 
active role in the youngster's life.
  We cannot know of the mother's true motivations or intentions when 
she and Elian left Cuba. Elian's father has maintained, however, that 
Elian's mother, Elizabet Broton, took their son without his knowledge 
or consent.
  Elian's fate should not be subject, I believe, to the politics of any 
one party or political ideology. I urge all of us--in Florida, in Cuba, 
and in the Halls of Congress--to cool the rhetoric, to set aside any 
political views, and commit ourselves to seeing this process to a 
rightful conclusion.
  The central issue in this case should not be America's policy toward 
Cuba but, rather, the sanctity of the family bond between a parent and 
his child. Without evidence of abuse or neglect on the father's part, 
no government has the authority to disrupt that bond, no matter if the 
bond is in the United States or Cuba, or any other place. The father is 
the father and should have lawful custody.
  In addition to my concerns about the negative impact of legislation 
to grant citizenship to Elian on him and his family, and what that does 
to the pending court case, I also have deep concerns about the impact 
this would have on our own immigration policy. It would certainly, at 
the very least, reflect an uneven application of immigration policy by 
the United States. It would be, I believe, a case of major political 
first impression and set a precedent all across this land in virtually 
every case from anywhere. It could also create a precarious situation 
for an American child abroad.
  The INS continues, to this day, to send back children to their home 
countries, even those with repressive regimes. Several months ago, two 
Haitian children were sent back to Haiti while their mother remained in 
the United States to file for asylum. Here you have a mother in the 
United States filing for asylum, and during that period the children 
were sent back to Haiti. It is true that, after protests and several 
weeks of separation from their mother, Federal authorities did permit 
the children to reenter the United States. Or you can look at the case 
of a 15-year-old Chinese girl who today is being held in juvenile 
detention and has been held in juvenile detention for 7 months. At her 
asylum hearing, the young girl could not wipe away her tears because 
her hands were chained to her waist. According to her lawyer, her only 
crime was that her parents had put her on a boat so she could get a 
better life over here. She remains in detention to this day.
  I think that is a terrible wrong. Here is a youngster who was put on 
a boat by her parents, who is now in a jail on the west coast of the 
United States and goes to a hearing chained like a common criminal. In 
cases such as these, I believe we should review and perhaps even change 
immigration laws as they relate to minors in certain situations.
  I am in the process of writing a letter to the chairman of my 
subcommittee, the Senator from Michigan, asking that he hold hearings 
on some of these cases as well as on whether immigration law with 
respect to children should, in fact, be changed in certain 
circumstances.
  I believe our immigration policy must be consistent and fair. In any 
given year, the INS handles more than 4,000 unaccompanied minors, and 
the vast majority are sent back to their families. Others are detained.
  I have received scores of phone calls from citizens in California who 
say, if this child were Salvadoran, if he were a Mexican child, if he 
were a child from China, the child would be sent back to his country. 
Why is this child different? Because political organizations in a 
couple of States want to make a point with this child's situation?
  I think the point is, granting American citizenship in this manner 
will affect every other situation. We might as well know what we are 
doing when we do this. I think the only way to look at it is to take a 
look at all of our immigration laws, as they affect children, in an 
orderly way over a period of time. But in the meantime, current law 
should be followed with respect to this youngster.
  I think granting U.S. citizenship in this manner, which is really 
without any precedent, would be a very far-reaching action. It would 
also play out negatively for U.S. children who might be taken to 
foreign countries without the consent of the U.S. citizen parent. I 
have actually tried to help in a case involving a child in Saudi Arabia 
and found it most difficult. Once we begin to violate that law, what 
does it say for other American children who might find themselves in a 
similar circumstance in a foreign country? As a grandmother, I must 
say, I shudder to think how I would feel in this same situation.
  In conclusion, I don't believe our role as a national legislature is 
to interpose ourselves in a decision that should rightfully be made by 
a father.
  I thank the Chair and yield the floor.

                          ____________________