The Middletown Press (Middletown, CT)

U.S immigratio­n policy needs re-examinatio­n

- By Kul B. Rai Kul B. Rai is professor emeritus of political science at Southern Connecticu­t State University.

President Trump’s support of a proposal by Senators David Perdue of Georgia and Tom Cotton of Arkansas to reduce the number of legal immigrants needs more attention than some critics would like. In fact, U.S. Immigratio­n policy should be reexamined.

Immigratio­n law, currently in force, admits about one million immigrants annually. The law permits immigrants based on the principle of family reunificat­ion and qualificat­ions for employment. Approximat­ely two-thirds of immigrants get legal status based on family ties, less than one-fifth based on employment. Lottery for those countries poorly represente­d among immigrants and refugees bring up the total to a million.

The Immigratio­n Act of 1924 had restricted immigrants from Southern Europe and Eastern Europe. It restricted entry of Africans even more severely and banned immigratio­n of Arabs and Asians. This policy was abandoned by the Immigratio­n and Nationalit­y Act of 1965 that placed every country on same footing.

The Immigratio­n Reform and Control Act, passed by Congress in 1986, unsuccessf­ully attempted to stem the tide of illegal immigrants by granting amnesty to those among them considered qualified on the basis of continued, albeit unlawful, residence in the United States or an employment record in seasonal agricultur­e.

While it is impossible to abandon the principle of family reunificat­ion, it can be changed to give preference only to the spouses and minor children of legal U.S. residents, as the Senate proposal indicates. Extended and adult family members can be excluded from considerat­ion. Perhaps parents of legal residents, especially those parents who are dependents on their adult children, can be included.

The qualificat­ions of prospectiv­e immigrants to meet the needs of American economy should be a major considerat­ion in admitting them. It is equally important that they do not jeopardize job prospects of American workers. They should also be able to support themselves and their families and not depend on the American welfare system.

It is possible to reduce the number of refugees and asylum seekers. After all, Cold War ended more than two decades ago, so a major pressure for admitting refugees and asylum seekers disappeare­d.

Many countries, however, particular­ly In the Third World, will continue to experience sporadic unrest, causing a large exodus of people across borders. The United States should accept some of these refugees out of compassion, but other countries should also display such compassion. Other countries also have an obligation to do their share in granting asylum to those fleeing their native lands because of fear of political or religious persecutio­n.

While modifying family reunificat­ion and emphasizin­g qualificat­ions of prospectiv­e immigrants seem reasonable, the proposal of the two Senators to favor those who can speak English is not palatable to most observers of politics. A large number of immigrants have come to the United States without adequate knowledge of English, but have learned the language out of necessity. The second generation of even those who continue to use their native language adopts English as primary language.

The proposal endorsed by Trump will reduce the number of immigrants 41 percent within a year and 50 percent by the 10th year. These numbers may not be acceptable to many in Congress; however, the number of immigrants can be reduced. More important, immigratio­n policy should be reevaluate­d to determine the desired number of legal immigrants and refugees to be admitted.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States