WASHINGTON: Recommendations made by the Commission on Immigration Reform last week, although embraced by President Clinton, are expected 16 have an adverse impact ‘On the family reunification provisions of the current immigration law which are favored by the Asian American Community, including Indian Americans the nine member commission, headed by former Rep. Barbara Jordan, a Texas Democrat, called for initially reducing legal immigration to 700,000 a year and ultimately to 950,000 from the current level of about $30,000. As a corollary, the commission said that Congress should speed up the admission of the immediate families of legal aliens already in the United States, while eliminating is a eligibility for other family members, including brothers, sisters and adult children of U.S. citizens.
This would mean that the second and fifth preference categories of the immigration law that allow for U.S. residents to sponsor family members including adult children and extended family members, would be amended, effectively making immigration more difficult for these people.
These two categories, since the immigration law was overhauled in the mid1960s, have envisaged Asian Americans and Hispanic Americans as being able to bring into the country their extended families, and thus far atiempistocither tamper with or eliminate these provisions have been staved off.
Jordan denied last week that the commission had set out to reduce the member of immigrants and said that it had arrived at the lower numbers by reordering the priority given to various categories.
She also dismissed suggestions that the commission had been influenced by prevailing antiimmigrant sentiments among both the public and Congress.
Clinton, who met with Jordan, issued a statement praising the ‘commission’s Report as “consistent with my own views” and describing them a profanity, pro work, pro naturalization.”
“It appears to reflect a balanced immigration policy that makes the most of our diversity while protecting the American work force so that we center compete in the emerging global economy,” he said.
Clinton said that the panel’s recommendations had “I aid out a road map for Congress to consider.” He also said that the proposal “appears to reflect a balanced immigration policy that makes the most of our diversity while protecting the American work force so that we can better compete in the emerging global economy.”
The panel’s proposals also called for a reduction in the limit on employment related immigration from 140,000 year to 100,000, while eliminating the annual allotment of 10,000 visas for unskilled workers.
Jordan said at a news conference that “at an age in which unskilled workers have far too few opportunities opened to them … the commission sees no justification to the continued entry of unskilled foreign workers, unless the rationale for their admission serves a significant national tersest, as docs the admission of nuclear family members and referees.”
Karen Narasaki, executive director of the National Asian Pacific American Legal Consortium, said: ‘We are outraged. This is an attack on the Asian community.”
There are a million Asians whose families have filed applications for them to immigrate in categories that would be eliminated by the commission—brothers and sisters and adult children of U.S. citizens,” she said.
White House Press Secretary Michael McCurry said he understood that some immigrant advocates arc “up in arms” over the recommendations, but said, ‘We respectfully dis+ agree” with some of the fears expressed.
McCurry said that, while endorsing the concept of the commission’s recommendations, the White House is “not wedded” to the specific numbers, Offered by the panel and would work with Congress to “refine” a specific target. “The numerical adjustments and the limits can be achieved without causing undue distress” for would-be immigrants, he predicted.
Meanwhile, Dan Stein, executive director of the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR), which has called for sharp reductions in immigration, said the President’s support is “pivotal” in the immigration debate because it “completes the Process of establishing a bipartisan consensus” on immigration reform.
But Rep, Dick Armey, Republican from Texas, who is the House majority leader, assailed the recommendations, saying, “The commission fails to tell us why we should so dramatically reduce legal immigration.”
“It is long on recommendations, but short on analysis,” he said, and described the recommendations as “a misguided attempt to make legal immigrants the scapegoats for America’s problems.”
Article extracted from this publication >> June 23, 1995
