[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 117 (Friday, August 2, 1996)]
[Senate]
[Pages S9482-S9483]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
IMMIGRATION REFORM
Mr. SPECTER. Madam President, I have sought recognition to discuss
briefly one of the aspects of the immigration conference report which
will come before the Senate either today or shortly after we return
from recess. I think that it is very important that we reform our laws
to provide increased resources to protect our borders and combat
illegal immigration.
Nevertheless, I have been very much concerned about a number of
provisions of the immigration bill. The provision which concerns me the
most is the so-called Gallegly amendment, which would give the States
the option to limit education opportunities to children of illegal
immigrants. In my opinion, it is unthinkable in America to deny
education to any children, regardless of their status, whether their
parents are illegal immigrants.
That is something I feel particularly strongly about because both of
my parents were immigrants. My mother came to this country as a child
of 5 with her parents from a small town on the Russian-Polish border.
My father came from Ukraine Russia, literally walked across Europe with
barely a ruble in his pocket, sailed steerage--the bottom of the boat--
to come to America to make a better life for himself. He did not know
at the time he had a return trip ticket to France, not to Paris but to
the Argonne Forest, where he fought in World War I as a buck private,
to make the world safe
[[Page S9483]]
for democracy, and carried shrapnel in his legs until the day he died.
My parents had legal status as immigrants, but sometimes that is a
hard thing to determine. I do not think any child ought to be deprived
of educational opportunities because of the status of his parents, even
if they are illegal immigrants.
I have been strongly opposed to the Gallegly amendment. I have agreed
to sign the conference report, however, because of a significant change
which I have insisted upon. That change is that, in addition to some
other modifications which have already been made for a child in the
first grade to complete the sixth grade and a child in the seventh
grade to complete the 12th grade, the modifications I pressed to have
included, and I think have been included by agreement, would provide
for a comprehensive study to be conducted by GAO, the General
Accounting Office, at the end of 2\1/2\ years, which would determine
what impact the Gallegly amendment had on the children who were
excluded from education, what impact it had with respect to juvenile
delinquency, the crime rate, what impact it had on their educational
status, what impact it had on their family status, and what impact it
had on reducing illegal immigration. Following release of the study
there will be a mandatory vote on repeal of the Gallegly provision in
the Congress, both Houses, within a very short period of time, whatever
the results of the GAO report may have been.
If the Gallegly amendment was not repealed on that vote, then there
will be a similar study after 5 years, and then another mandated
automatic vote on the repeal of the Gallegly provision by the Congress.
It is my judgment, Madam President, that if the Gallegly amendment is
subjected to a vote at 2\1/2\ or 5 years, it would be repealed by the
Congress and signed by whomever might be the President. Whether it is
President Clinton or Senator Dole, the then President would sign it. I
think if the Gallegly amendment were standing alone now, it would be
rejected by the Congress.
I do not think that the entire immigration conference report ought to
be rejected because of this single provision, considering the
modification that I have presented, which, as I say, I think is being
accepted and will be in the conference report. I wanted to make that
brief explanation.
I yield the floor.
Mr. DASCHLE addressed the Chair.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Democratic leader is recognized.
____________________