1. Changes in the preference structure.—At present, the procedure under which specially skilled or trained workers are permitted to enter this country too often prevents talented people from applying for visas to enter the United States. It often deprives us of immigrants who would be helpful to our economy and our culture. This procedure should be liberalized so that highly trained or skilled persons may obtain a preference without requiring that they secure employment here before emigrating. In addition, I recommend that a special preference be accorded workers with lesser skills who can fill specific needs in short supply in this country.

2. Nonquota status for natives of Jamaica, Trinidad, and Tobago_should be granted. Under existing law, no numerical limitation is imposed upon the number of immigrants coming from Canada, Mexico, Cuba, Haiti, the Dominican Republic, the Canal Zone, or any independent country in Central or South America. But the language of the statute restricts this privilege to persons born in countries in the Caribbean area which gained their independence prior to the date of the last major amendment to the immigration and nationality statutes, in 1952. This accidental discrimination against the newly independent nations of the Western Hemisphere should be corrected.

3. Persons afflicted with mental health problems should be admitted provided certain standards are met.-Today, any person afflicted with a mental disease or mental defect, psychotic personality, or epilepsy, and any person who has suffered an attack of mental illness, can enter this country only if a private bill is enacted for his benefit. Families which are able and willing to care for a mentally ill child or parents are often forced to choose between living in the United States and leaving their loved ones behind and not living in the United States but being able to see and care for their loved ones. Mental illness is not incurable. It should be treated like other illnesses. I recommend that the Attorney General, at his discretion and under proper safeguards, be authorized to waive those provisions of the law which prohibit the admission to the United States of persons with mental problems when they are close relatives of U.S. citizens and lawfully resident aliens.

4. The Secretary of State should be authorized, in his discretion, to require reregistration of certain quota immigrant visa applicants and to regulate the time of payment of visa fees.-This authority brings registration lists up to date, terminate the priority of applicants who have refused to accept a visa, and end the problem of "insurance" registrations by persons who have no present intention to emigrate. Registration figures for oversubscribed quota areas are now inaccurate because there exists no way of determining whether registrants have died, have emigrated to other countries, or for some other reason no longer want to emigrate to the United States. These problems are particularly acute in heavily oversubscribed

areas.

Conclusion

As I have already indicated the measures I have outlined will not solve all the problems of immigration. Many of them will require additional legislation; some cannot be solved by any one country. But the legislation I am submitting will insure that progress will continue to be made toward our ideals and toward the realization of humanitarian objectives. The measures I have recommended will help eliminate discrimination between peoples and nations on a basis that is unrelated to any contribution that immigrants can make and is inconsistent with our traditions of welcome. Our investment in new citizens has always been a valuable source of our strength. Sincerely,

SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS

JOHN F. KENNEDY,

Section 1 amends section 201(a) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, under which quotas for each country are determined. It abolishes the national origins system by reducing present quotas by one-fifth of their present number each year for 5 years. As numbers are released from national origins quotas, they are added to the quota reserve established in section 2. Thus in the first year, 20 percent (roughly 32,800) are released to the pool; in the second year, the pool has 40 percent of present quotas (or 65,600); until in the fifth year, all numbers are allocated through the pool. To provide some immediate relief to minimum quota areas, the minimum quota is raised to 200, but is then reduced in the same manner as other quotas.

Section 2 establishes the quota reserve pool under which all numbers will be allocated by the fifth year. In each of the 5 years constituting the period of transition, the pool will consist of (1) the numbers released from national origins quotas each year, and (2) numbers assigned to the old quotas but unused the previous year because insufficient demand for them existed in the assigned quota

area.

These numbers are issued in the order specified in amended section 203 of the Immigration and Nationality Act. That is, first call on the first 50 percent is given to persons whose admission, by virtue of their exceptional skill, training, or education, would be especially advantageous to the United States; first call on the next 30 percent, plus any part of the first 50 percent not issued to the skilled specialists, is given to unmarried sons and daughters of U.S. citizens, not cligible for nonquota status because they are over 21 years of age; first call on the remaining 20 percent, plus any part of the first 80 percent not taken by the first two classes, is given to spouses and children of aliens lawfully admitted for permanent residence; and any portion remaining is issued to other applicants, with percentage preferences to other relations of U.S. citizens and resident aliens, and then to certain classes of workers. Section 203 further provides that within each class, visas are issued in the order in which applied for-first come, first served. These preference provisions, which under present law determine only relative priority between nationals of the same country, will now determine priority between nationals of different countries throughout the world.

To prevent disproportionate benefits to the nationals of any single country, a maximum of 10 percent of the total authorized quota is set on immigration attributable to any quota area. However, this limitation is not applied if to do so would result in reducing any quota at a more rapid rate than that provided by section 1. Ultimately, of course, the limitation applies to all.

Exceptions to the principle of allocating visas on the basis of time of registration within preference classes are provided to deal with specific problems. Since some countries' quotas are now current, their nationals have no old registrations on file. To apply the principle rigidly would result, after 4 or 5 years, in curtailing immigration from these countries almost entirely. Such a result would be undesirable not only because it frustrates the aim of the bill that immigration from all countries should continue, but also because many of the countries so affected are our closest allies. At a time when the national security rests in large part on a continual strengthening of our ties with these countries, it would be anomalous indeed to restrict opportunities for their nationals here. Therefore, the bill allows the President, after consultation with the Immigration Board (established by section 16), to reserve up to 50 percent of the reserve pool for allocation to qualified immigrants (1) who could obtain visas under the present system but not under the new bill, whose admission (2) would further the national security interest in maintaining close ties with their countries. He is also given authority to grant visas to such immigrants without regard to the 10-percent limit on the number of immigrants from any country.

The President may also disregard priority of registration within preference classes for the benefit of refugees. Many refugees, almost by definition, are uprooted suddenly. They have had no thought of immigration before being forced to leave their usual homes by natural calamity or political upheaval; or they may be fleeing from persecution or dictatorship, in which case previous registration would have been dangerous. He may consider these and other factors in deciding whether to admit any applicant as a refugee or require him to await his turn under the regular procedure.

Finally, it is provided that if the President reserves, against contingencies, any numbers during the year, but does not then find them needed for the named purposes, they are to be issued as if not reserved. Similarly, the 10-percent limitation on the number of visas to be issued to any quota area is removed where other persons would not be foreclosed from entry by its removal.

Section 3 amends section 201(c) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, which presently limits the number of visas issued in any single month to 10 percent of the total issued each year. This limit is needed to insure that persons entitled to preference by virtue of skills or family ties will not be foreclosed from that preference by a rush of earlier applications which exhaust the annual quota. To insure that all numbers are nevertheless issued, present law provides that numbers not issued during the first 10 months may be issued during the last 2 months of the fiscal year, without limitation up to the total annual quota for the quota area. Often, if close to the full 10 percent is not issued in each of the first months, undesirable administrative problems result in the last 2. The amendment allows the issuance each month of the 10 percent authorized for that month

plus any visas authorized but not issued in previous months. It thus allows more even spacing of visa issuance during the year.

Section 4 amends section 202 of the Immigration and Nationality Act to eliminate the so-called "Asia-Pacific Triangle" provisions, which require persons of Asian stock to be attributed to quota areas not by their place of birth, but according to their racial ancestry. By the end of 5 years, this provision would be superfluous in any case, since national origin will no longer limit the admission of qualified immigrants. But the formula is so specially discriminatory that it should be removed immediately, and not operate even in part during the 5-year transition period.

Subsection (c) raises the minimum allotment to subquotas of dependent countries, thus preserving their present equality with independent minimum-quota areas. The dependent countries' allotments are taken from the mother countries' quotas. To prevent the dependent countries from preempting the mother countries' quotas disproportionately, it is provided that the dependent countries' shares of the quotas will decrease as the governing countries' quotas are reduced. Subsection (e) conforms the present section 202(e) of the Immigration and Nationality Act to the change in designation prescribed in subsection (c).

Section 5 repeals section 207 of the Immigration and Nationality Act, which prevents the issuance of visas in lieu of those issued but not actually used, or later found to be improperly issued. Thus in Germany alone, under present law, over 7,000 visas are taken by persons entitled to nonquota status, and 2,000 more visas are issued to persons who do not apply for actual admission. All these visas are lost. Such a result is inconsistent with the new bill, which seeks full use of authorized quota numbers.

Substituted for section 207 is a specific command that nonquota immigrants shall not preempt visas which would otherwise be issued to quota immigrants. Section 6 amends section 101(a)(27)(A) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, which grants nonquota status to spouses and children of U.S. citizens, to extend nonquota status to parents of U.S. citizens as well.

Section 7 amends section 101(a)(27) (C) of the Immigration and Nationality Act to extend nonquota status to all natives of independent Western Hemisphere countries. Under present law, such status is granted to natives of all independent North, Central, and South American countries, and of all Caribbean island countries independent when the Immigration and Nationality Act was enacted in 1952. The amendment extends the status to countries gaining their independence since then.

Section 8 amends section 203 (a) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, which establishes preferences for immigrants with special skills and relatives of U.S. citizens and resident aliens.

Subsection (a) relaxes the test for the first preference accorded to persons of high education, technical training, specialized experience, or exceptional ability. Under present law, such persons are granted preferred status only if their services are "needed urgently" in the United States. The amendment allows their admission if their services would be “especially advantageous” to the United States. Subsection (b) eliminates the second preference for parents of American citizens, now accorded nonquota status by section 6.

Subsection (c) grants a fourth preference, up to 50 percent of numbers not issued to the first three preferences, to parents of aliens lawfully admitted for permanent residence. It also grants a subsidiary preference to qualified quota immigrants capable of filling particular labor shortages in the United States. Under present law, if an immigrant does not meet the rigorous standards of the skilled specialist category, he is not preferred to any other immigrant even though he may answer a definite need in the United States which the other immigrant does not. The amendment allows to persons filling such a definite need a preference of 50 percent of visas remaining after all family preferences have been satisfied or exhausted.

Section 9 amends section 204 of the Immigration and Nationality Act, which establishes the procedure for determining eligibility for preferred status under section 203.

Paragraphs (1), (2), and (3) provide for the filing of petitions, on behalf of the workers granted preference by section 8, by the persons who will employ them to fill the special needs. Paragraph (1) provides for approval of these petitions by the Attorney General, and paragraph (2) requires that he consult with the Immigration Board and interested departments of Government before granting preference to these workers with lesser skills.

Paragraph (2) also exempts skilled specialists from the present petition procedure, to conform to the new procedure established in paragraph (4). Under present law, persons with high education, technical training, experience, or ability may qualify for preferred status only when a petition requesting their services is filed by a U.S. employer. This requirement unduly restricts our ability to attract the educated, trained people whose services would significantly enhance our economy, national life, and general welfare. Thousands of such people have no way of contacting employers in the United States in order to get the necessary job. Even if they knew whom to contact, few jobs important enough to attract such highly skilled people are offered without personal interviews. And only a few very large enterprises and institutions have representatives abroad with possible authority to hire. Thus many highly skilled applicants cannot obtain the jobs presently required for preference; they cannot be hired abroad, because hiring is done domestically; and they cannot be hired domestically until they enter. Moreover, the requirement of prearranged employment, as to these persons, is unnecessary. Such a requirement may serve two ends. First, it may help to insure that the immigrant, granted preference for a defined purpose, will fulfill that purpose; if we need engineers, he should work as one. Highly skilled specialists, however, will always work at their specialty, provided that employment is open. The only check needed, therefore, is that the Attorney General ascertain from the Board (which has consulted the Secretary of Labor and studied such problems with specific reference to immigrants) that job openings exist in the immigrant's special field. The second end the present petition procedure may serve is confirmation of the applicant's own evidence of his training, education, or skills; presumably he would not be employed unless qualified. But such confirmation is superfluous if proper controls are enforced when the visa is applied for. And since we allow immigrants to enter without U.S. citizens vouching for their loyalty-a far more important matter-there seems no reason to require their capability to be thus additionally supported.

Paragraph (4), therefore, allows the Attorney General to grant preferred status to highly skilled immigrants upon affidavit of the immigrants, supported by such other documentary evidence as he shall prescribe.

Section 10 amends section 205(b) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, providing for petitions to establish the right to a preferred status as a relative of a U.S. citizen or lawfully resident alien, to conform to substantive changes made by section 8.

Section 11 amends the "fair share" refugee law to remove a provision which has hampered its operation. Presently, that law allows the entry only of refugees within the mandate of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees. The provision relating to the United Nations mandate is stricken out, so that our refugee law is no longer subject to outside control. In addition, subsection (b) repeals the "fair share" law's special provision for 500 "difficult to resettle" refugees; these have all been settled, and the authority is now unnecessary.

Section 12 amends the Refugee Relief Act to allow the admission of refugees from north Africa generally, and Algeria particularly, who are unable to return to their countries because of their race, religion, or political opinions. The act now admits such refugees from "any country within the general area of the Middle East," which is defined as the area between Libya on the west, Turkey on the north, Pakistan on the east, and Saudi Arabia and Ethiopia on the south. The amendment substitutes Morocco for Libya as the western border of this area. Section 13 grants discretionary authority to the Secretary of State to specify the time and manner of payment of the fees for visa applications and issuances set by section 281 of the Immigration and Nationality Act. The discretion granted will allow him to control two undesirable situations.

One, many people in countries with oversubscribed quotas register their names on visa waiting lists even though they have no present intention of immigrating; they regard the registration as "insurance" against a possible future move. These registrations make planning difficult and encumber administration. The amendment would allow the Secretary of State to require a registrant to deposit part of the $5 visa fee at the time of registration. While not unduly burdensome on those who wish to come here, such a rule might discourage the most frivolous registrations.

Two, otherwise admissible immigrants, particularly refugees, are often unable to pay the $20 visa fee. Rather than bar them from entry, the Secretary is given authority to allow postponement of payment until they have earned the money here.

Section 281 is further amended to equalize the visa fees paid by all immigrants; at present, nonquota or preference applicants must pay $10 more than persons not entitled to priority.

Section 14, like section 13, addresses the problem of "insurance" registrations. Many people who applied for visas years ago, and have been offered visas repeatedly, have turned them down each year. They wish only to preserve their priority against some future event. This addition to section 302 (c) of the Immigration and Nationality Act would allow the Secretary to terminate the registrations of those who had previously declined a visa. Like section 13, it also is important in connection with a projected reregistration of all applicants in certain oversubscribed quota areas, in which we have no way of knowing whether registrants have died, emigrated elsewhere, or changed their minds; the Secretary could terminate the registration of all persons who fail to reregister as required. The provision is not made mandatory to avoid embarrassing or endangering registrants in totalitarian countries, who have no desire to approach an embassy before visas are actually available for them.

Section 15 amends subsections (a) (4) and (g) of section 212 of the Immigration and Nationality Act to allow the entry of certain mentally afflicted persons. Under present law, no visas may be issued to aliens who are feebleminded or insane, or have had one or more attacks of insanity, or who are afflicted with a psychopathic personality, epilepsy, or a mental defect. This provision has an unfortunate effect on families seeking admission though one member, often a child, is retarded or feebleminded. Such families are forced to choose between leaving the child behind, or staying with it; in either case, the child is condemned to facilities for treatment which are often inadequate. The person afflicted may not enter even if the family is willing and able to care for him, nor even if he is one of the 85 percent of mentally afflicted persons who can be substantially helped by proper treatment.

The amendment gives the Attorney General discretionary authority to admit such persons who are the spouses, children, or parents of citizens, resident aliens, or holders of immigrant visas. The Attorney General, after consultation with the Surgeon General of the U.S. Public Health Service, would prescribe the controls and conditions on entry, such as the giving of a bond to insure continued family support, as would be appropriate in each case.

The bars to epileptics are removed entirely, since this affliction is now under the control of modern medicine. Those few epileptics whose illness prevents normal functioning will be excludable under the provision barring persons likely to become public charges.

Section 16 establishes the Immigration Board. The Board is composed of seven members. Two are appointed by the Speaker of the House, two by the President of the Senate, and three, including the Chairman, by the President. Members not otherwise in Government service are paid on a per diem basis for actual time spent in the work of the Board.

The Board's duties are to study, and consult with, appropriate Government departments on all facets of immigration policy; to recommend to the President whether to reserve quota numbers in the national interest under section 2; and to recommend to the Attorney General criteria for admission under the occupational preferences of section 8.

Section 17 grants consular officers discretionary authority to require bonds insuring that certain nonimmigrants will depart voluntarily from the United States when required. This amendment to section 221(g) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, by providing an additional safeguard against a later refusal to depart, would allow the issuance of visas in many borderline cases in which visas are now refused to students and visitors.

STATEMENT OF HON. CORNELIUS E. GALLAGHER, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY

Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, there is, as you know, broadbased sentiment for changes in procedures for the allocation of immigration quotas. For too many years we have permitted a system that favors the nations of one area of Europe but severely and unfairly restricts the quotas of other nations. There is within the Congress strong support for action that would erase the injustice of the present system-to provide a system of allocation on an equitable basis to people of all nations.