EXHIBIT E Nonimmigrant visa issuance at offices in trust territories (by post of issuance) Source: Annual report of Immigration and Naturalization Service, 1963, p. 47. EXHIBIT G 90 109 145 147 948 Temporary visitors admitted from Trust Territories of Pacific under sec. 101(a) (15) (B) Source: Annual report of Immigration and Naturalization Service, 1963, p. 51. NUMBER 7 STATEMENT BY HON. OGDEN B. REID OF NEW YORK INCLUDING SECTION BY SECTION ANALYSIS OF H.R. 11837 Mr. Chairman, it is a privilege to appear before you today to discuss my bill, H.R. 11837, which provides for a comprehensive revision of our immigration laws. My bill abolishes the discredited national-origins quota system, which we do not follow in practice, but which retained in the fabric of our laws, has so needlessly tarnished our image among the peoples of the world. My bill retains the concept of quotas-fair quotas, based both upon the proven immigration needs of the various countries, and upon our own economic and social capacity to receive and assimilate such welcomed immigration. It proposes a system, I believe, both conceptually sound and administratively feasible. It will not make large changes in the numbers of those who annually come to our shores-indeed, such changes will be small, for our actual national record of welcoming immigrants has been generous in the past. But it will make great changes in the image which we present to the world through our basic immigration law. Our present immigration policy-based on national origins-is seriously discriminatory. Our quota system is sadly out of date; 44 years out of date. It is still figured on the census of 1920. It discriminates flagrantly in favor of Northern and Western Europeans and against Southern Europeans. Is there any justice in the fact that Italy, with 51 million people, has a quota of only 5,666 a year while Great Britain, with 53 million has a quota of 65,000? Is there any logical reason why Greece with 8,500,000 people is allowed only 308 immigrants per year while Sweden, with less than 7,500,000, has 3,300-10 times as many? Nor is that the end of the unfair differences of treatment. An American who has a Swiss brother can get him admitted at once. But his neighbor, whose sister is Italian, may have to wait years to get her a quota number-under our regular immigration law. Both are Americans and both have the American sense of fairness, and both, therefore, would be equally offended by such unequal and inequitable treatment. We make a fetish out of the quota system, yet the facts show we ignore it more often that we use it. In the last 10 years, 1 million immigrants came here under quotas which would have allowed 1,500,000 to enter-which means one-third of those quotas were wasted on countries which did not use them. In the same period, 1,500,000 other immigrants came in outside the quotasunder special and temporary legislation and exceptions, such as were needed, for example, to give asylum to the gallant freedom fighters of Hungary. That means that three out of every five immigrants during that decade came in outside the quotas. Since we wanted them to come, it seems clear that they should have been able to come within the basic law rather than as exceptions to it. I submit that when three-fifths of a law's results are exceptions to it, it's high time to change the law. Mr. Chairman, the major provisions in the bill include: 1. A fundamental revision of the national-origins quota system: The concept of racial or ethnic origin for orientals is abolished. This is the so-called AsiaPacific triangle concept. A person's nationality under this bill would be determined by the place of his birth. A person of Chinese ancestry born in Brazil would be treated as a Brazilian rather than as a Chinese for purposes of immigration. An approximate doubling of the present 155,000 quota numbers to 300,000 annually; and the basing of future quotas upon one-sixth of 1 percent of the total number of people in the United States as determined by each future U.S. census. A quota figure thus obtained would be distributed among the various nations in proportion to actual immigration and proven desire to enter the United States between 1924 and 1964. The actual increase in those coming to the United States 36-382-64-pt. 1-25 would be negligible as special legislative provisions regularly admit about 150,000 per year outside the official quota numbers. Unused quotas in any given year would be redistributed from countries which do not use them (the United Kingdom) to countries which need them but do not have enough quota numbers (Italy). This redistribution would only be within each of four major regions: Europe, Asia, Africa, and Australasia-not among the four. 2. Quota preferences are broadened and parents of U.S. citizens are made nonquota and would be promptly admitted. The uniting of families is important to this country and should be made a reality for many who are now tragically separated. 3. Minimum quotas shall be doubled to 200. Dependent territories will be permitted to utilize the quotas of the governing countries. All countries and islands in the Western Hemisphere, dependent or not, are made nonquota. 4. Provision is made for annual parole of refugees and escapees into the United States up to a number of 15,000-or up to any number if the President decides an emergency exists. Such refugees may be given permanent immigration status after 2 years in numbers up to 25,000 per year. 5. Second-class citizenship as between native-born and naturalized Americans is abolished. This places in legislation that principle which the Supreme Court has recently affirmed. 6. A fourth preference is established for brothers, sisters, married sons and daughters of U.S. citizens, thus doubling the number of visas available to them under former provisions, and parents of resident aliens are added to the preference list. Unused numbers are made available to persons willing to work at jobs for which a shortage of willing workers exists in the United States. 7. Provisions for naturalizing persons who have served honorably in our Armed Forces are liberalized. A section-by-section analysis of my bill follows. In addition, I include a statement containing a brief explanation of certain technical changes in the bill, H.R. 11437, which I expect to introduce in the House, following this testimony. Mr. Chairman, an American is a hybrid of many breeds and has the vigor of that high heritage. What began with an Italian, sailing in a Spanish ship, has seen, in our own time, an immigrant's grandson reach the White House and so the grand story goes on. We are truly a nation of immigrants. If we would honor our heritage we must put an end-here and now-to discriminatory national origins quotas, second-class citizenship, and divided families. A SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS OF H.R. 11837, a Bill To AMEND THE IMMIGRATION AND NATIONALITY ACT, AND FOR Other PurpoSES The first sentence of the bill provides that the act may be cited by its short title the "Immigration and Nationality Act Amendments of 1964." The remainder of the bill is divided into seven titles, as follows: Title I. Revision of the quota system. Title II. Liberalization of the preference system. Title III. Modification of existing law relating to the admission of persecuted people. Title IV. Addition of standards by which an alien may be admitted into the United States. Title V. Restriction of the power of deportation. Title VI. Liberalization of provisions for naturalization through service in the Armed Forces. Title VII. Restriction of provisions relating to the loss of nationality. TITLE I. REVISION OF THE QUOTA SYSTEM Section 1 of the bill revises the quota system and its method of determination as established by section 201 of the present law. The annual quotas of each quota area would be equal to one-sixth of 1 percent of the entire population of the United States as determined by the latest official census. At present such numbers are determined by the population of the United States in 1920, with certain exceptions. Distribution of these quota numbers will then be given on the basis of a new formula. Each country would have at least 200 numbers available, rather than the present 100. The remaining numbers would then be distributed among the several quota areas in proportion to the actual immigration into the United States between July 1924, and July 1963, but not to any country with unused quotas during that period. Existing law provides that such distribution shall be made according to the national origins within the U.S. population in 1920 (except those allocations made to quota areas within the Asia-Pacific triangle or those countries receiving the minimum quota of 100). This provision of the bill markedly changes the existing law and substitutes a new concept for the former national-origins concept of quota allocations. Section 1(b) prescribes the technical method by which such quotas are determined and proclaimed. It is similar to existing law, except the Secretary of Commerce and Attorney General are eliminated-in effect, they do not play a role in such determination. Section 1(c) establishes a formula by which such numbers are made available during the year-10 percent each month, except that the last 2 months of the year will have no limitation. It is similar to existing law. Section 1(d) of the bill states that nothing in the bill shall prevent the issuance of an immigrant visa to an immigrant as a quota immigrant even though he is a nonquota immigrant. This is similar to the existing law. Section 1(e) introduces another change in the existing law. Under terms of the bill, a quota pool for four regions is established so that unused quotas from one area can be assigned to the pool in which the area is located and then reassigned to other areas in that region which have oversubscribed lists. The regions so established are Europe, Asia, Africa, and Australasia. Boundaries of areas within the regions are to be determined by the Secretary of State. In the existing law, no such provisions exist-unused quotas for one country cannot be assigned to another country having a waiting list (sec. 207). This provision completes the process of superseding the national origins concept of quota allocations (see sec. 1, above). Section 2 of the bill provides for the charging of quotas of colonies to the governing country. It eliminates the maximum limitation of 100 which presently applies to the subquota areas; provides that no limitation applies—an unlimited amount may be charged against a governing country. Section 3 abolishes certain provisions regarding the quota chargeability of aliens who are attributable by one-half ancestry to people indigenous to the Asia-Pacific triangle (sec. 202(a)(5) and sec. 202(b) are repealed). Such aliens are now charged to this area regardless of their place of birth. TITLE II. LIBERALIZATION OF THE PREFERENCE SYSTEM Section 4 of the bill establishes a liberalized preference system for the allocation of immigrant visas within quota areas. The first preference allots 50 percent of the quota to those whose services are "especially advantageous" to the United States because of education, technical training, specialized experience or exceptional ability of the immigrant. Present law (sec. 203 (a)) requires that such skills be needed urgently before the person is entitled to a preference. Parents of U.S. citizens, who under present law are second preference, are made nonquota under this bill. Section 2 of the bill would allot 20 percent of the quota to qualified quota immigrants who are the unmarried sons or daughters of citizens of the United States. A new preference is established allocating 10 percent of the quota to qualified immigrants who are the brothers, sisters, married sons, or married daughters of citizens. The law now provides no specific allocation to such a preference. This section also allows a special preference to qualified quota immigrants capable of performing specified functions for which a shortage of employable and willing persons exists in the United States. Section 5 makes conforming amendments to section 205(b), necessitated by the liberalized preference classes. TITLE III.-MODIFICATION OF EXISTING LAW RELATING TO THE ADMISSION OF PERSECUTED PEOPLES Section 6(a) of the bill amends section 212(d) of the act (which grants the Attorney General authority to parole aliens into the United States) by adding a new subparagraph (B) which defines the term "escapee" as any alien who because of persecution or fear of persecution on account of race, religion, or political opinion has fled or shall flee from any Communist, Communist-dominated or Communist-occupied area or from any country within the general area of the Middle East, and who cannot return to such area or country on account of race, religion, or political opinion, or who is out of his usual place of abode because of a national calamity, military operation, or political upheaval, and who is in a country or area which is neither Communist nor Communist dominated and who has not firmly resettled and is in urgent need of assistance for the essentials of life. It authorizes the President, whenever he finds that a situation has arisen creating a class of escapees to direct the Attorney General by proclamation to parole into the United States such refugees selected by the Secretary of State. The Attorney General is further authorized in the absence of a Presidential proc lamation to parole up to 15,000 refugees into the United States in a fiscal year upon selection by the Secretary of State. Subsection (b) of section 6 of the bill adds a new paragraph to section 212 of the act, authorizing the Attorney General upon application of an alien paroled into the United States under section 212(d) (5) to adjust his status to that of an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence. If the Attorney General is satisfie that the alien has remained in the United States for at least 2 years, is a person of good moral character, and that such action is not contrary to the national welfare, safety, or security, he may record the alien's admission for permanent residence as of the date of the alien's last arrival. The Attorney General must submit a complete report to Congress in the case of each alien whose status adjusted. Either the Senate or the House of Representatives may pass a resolution disapproving the adjustment of status prior to the close of the following session of Congress, in which case the alien will be required to leave the United States in the manner provided for in existing law. If neither House of Congress passes such a resolution within that time, the alien's status will be adjusted as of the date of his last arrival. The number so admitted shall not exceed 25,000 is any fiscal year. This provision also applies to all persons who have been paroled into the United States prior to enactment of this bill. TITLE IV. ADDITION OF STANDARDS BY WHICH AN ALIEN MAY BE ADMITTED INTO THE UNITED STATES Section 7 amends section 212(g) to provide that an alien who has served honorably in the U.S. Armed Forces in time of war or during a period of national emergency, or is a spouse, child, parent, brother, sister, unmarried son or daughter of a citizen of the United States or is authorized to perform the ministerial or priestly functions of a recognized religious denomination, may be admitted into the United States in the discretion of the Attorney General, if such admission would not be contrary to the national interest, safety, or security. None of the classes of aliens normally ineligible to receive visas are excluded from admission under this provision, except the following: Persons who are: 1. Likely to engage in immoral activity, 212(a)(13); 2. Engaged in activities for which sufficient workers exist in the United States, 212(a) (14); 3. Likely to become a public charge, 212(a)(15); 4. Ineligible to receive citizenship, 212(a) (22); 5. In violation of narcotic laws, 212(a) (23); 6. Seeking to engage in activity to endanger the welfare, safety, or security of the United States, 212(a) (27); and 7. Likely to engage in subversive activity, 212(a) (28). TITLE V. RESTRICTION OF THE POWER OF DEPORTATION Section 8 of the bill states that deportation of an alien may be prevented if he meets the same requirements of section 7 and his stay here would not be contrary to the national interest, safety, or security. Section 9 makes the definitions of section 101 (a) and (b) applicable to the administration of sections 7 and 8. Section 10 establishes that a numerical limitation on the number of aliens who shall be granted the status of aliens lawfully admitted for permanent residence pursuant to these 2 sections (7 and 8) shall not exceed 5,000. |