Kennedy et al on immigration
"First, our cities will not be flooded with a million immigrants annually. Under the proposed bill, the present level of immigration remains substantially the same… " Ted Kennedy
"This bill we sign today is not a revolutionary bill. It does not affect the lives of millions. It will not restructure the shape of our daily lives." Lyndon Baines Johnson at the signing of the Hart-Celler Immigration Bill in 1965
Secondly, the ethnic mix of this country will not be upset…. Contrary to the charges in some quarters, [the bill] will not inundate America with immigrants from any one country or area, or the most populated and deprived nations of Africa and Asia….
“In the final analysis, the ethnic pattern of immigration under the proposed measure is not expected to change as sharply as the critics seem to think.”
Emanuel Celler, Philip Hart, Jacob Javits, Julius Edelson,Harry Rosenfield, Maxwell Rabb, Myer Feldman, Abba Schwartz, Norbert Schlei, Ted Kennedy, Lyndon Johnson . . .
“This amnesty will give citizenship to only 1.1 to 1.3 million illegal aliens. We will secure the borders henceforth. We will never again bring forward another amnesty bill like this.” Ted Kennedy on the 1986 Simpson Mazzoli amnesty
"(If) the current immigration laws are repealed, the number of immigrants next year will increase threefold and in subsequent years will increase even more ... shall we, instead, look at this situation realistically and begin solving our own unemployment problems before we start tackling the world's?" - Rep. William Miller of New York, a letter to The New York Times, Sept. 8, 1964, p. 14.)
Inarguably, every one of the assurances issued by the legislation’s supporters proved to be false. With adoption of the Hart-Celler Immigration Act of 1965, legal immigration began a striking rise from both Latin America and Asia. In the decade of the 1970s, Europe and Canada sent 20 percent of legal immigrants and Latin America and Asia sent 77 percent, a pattern that has continued through the 1980s, 1990s, and into the 2000s.32 (The 5,000 immigrants from India that Robert Kennedy predicted turned out to be many, many times that.) And the ethnic mix of America has been radically altered, with implications that reach into every corner of our policy-making and our politics at the local, state, national, and international levels. CIS at
http://cis.org/NYT_immigration_coverage
while no subsequent immigration reform debates have generated coverage quite so egregiously one-sided and myopic, since 1965 the Times has failed to report on various immigration debates with needed balance and rigor. Demagogic accusations of nativism continue, as well as an institutional resistance to framing and pursuing vital journalistic questions, demonstrating, on too many occasions, a “contempt prior to investigation” that the 19th century liberal political philosopher Herbert Spencer said “is a bar against all information” and “proof against all arguments.” CIS at
http://cis.org/NYT_immigration_coverage
“In light of our 5 percent unemployment rate, our worries over the so called population explosion, and our menacingly mounting welfare costs, are we prepared to embrace so great a horde of the world’s unfortunates? At the very least, the hidden mathematics of the bill should be made clear to the public so that they may tell their Congressmen how they feel about providing jobs, schools, homes, security against want, citizen education, and a brotherly welcome ... for an indeterminately enormous number of aliens from underprivileged lands.” ...Whatever may be our benevolent intent toward many people, [the bill] fails to give due consideration to the economic needs, the cultural traditions, and the public sentiment of the citizens of the United States.” (Myra C. Hacker, Vice President of the New Jersey Coalition, U.S. Senate, Subcommittee on Immigration and Naturalization of the Committee on the Judiciary, Washington, D.C., Feb. 10, 1965. pp. 681–687.)