RFE/RL -
04.29.2002
Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty
U.S.:
Congress Overhauling Immigration Agency In Response To 11 September
By
Andrew F. Tully
The
United States has always had a reputation for being an open society.
Citizens are not required to carry identification, and visitors have
historically found it easy to enter the country. Since 11 September,
however, the nation's immigration policies have come under scrutiny, and
the U.S. Congress is now in the process of overhauling the country's
immigration agency.
Washington,
29 April 2002 (RFE/RL) -- The U.S. House of Representatives voted by an
overwhelming margin last week (25 April) to dismantle the federal
Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) and replace it with two new
agencies.
If the
legislation becomes law in its present form, one of the new agencies
would be in charge of providing services to foreigners entering the
United States either as visitors or to pursue American citizenship. The
other agency would police the country's borders and enforce immigration
laws internally.
The U.S.
Senate is preparing a similar bill for passage. The Senate Judiciary
Committee will hold a hearing on it on 2 May.
The INS
has long had a reputation for inefficiency at best, and endangering the
country's security at worst. The agency is slow to act, rarely catches
up with visitors who have overstayed their visas and frequently admits
ineligible foreigners. Congressional figures show the INS has about 5
million applications pending, and that more than 300,000 foreign
visitors who have been ordered deported are still in the country.
Congress
had tried to reform the agency for the past three decades but did not
have widespread political support to move forward. That is, until 11
September, when 19 men hijacked four passenger jets and attacked targets
in New York and Washington. One plane crashed in rural Pennsylvania. All
19 hijackers were foreign-born men living in the United States on
temporary visas.
The INS's
shortcomings came under further scrutiny when it was learned that the
agency had approved visa extensions for two of the hijackers. The
extensions were granted before September, but because of bureaucracy at
the INS, the notices were not mailed until last month, six months after
the two suicide hijackers had died in the attacks.
As a
result, members of Congress who want to reform the INS have all the
support they need to move forward. The support is so great that last
week's House vote on reform of the agency was a lopsided 405 to nine.
There is also broad support for reform in the Senate.
After the
House vote, U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft, whose department
includes the INS and will include the two new agencies that are likely
to replace it, said restructuring the INS is a simple matter of
streamlining a badly managed government bureaucracy.
"It
is time to separate fully our service to legal immigrants, who help
build America, from our enforcement against illegal aliens who violate
the laws of America."
James
Lindsay, an immigration specialist, says there is no question that the
INS has been poorly run. He notes there have been many complaints about
the agency using obsolete computers that cannot keep up with the
agency's enormous caseload.
But
Lindsay -- a foreign policy analyst at the Brookings Institution, an
independent Washington policy center -- says equipment alone is not to
blame. He told RFE/RL that responsibility for the INS's inefficiency
rests with the people who manage the agency.
"Unless
the quality of the people who are there changes, then simply
reorganizing it may make relatively little difference."
Because
of changes brought about by the events of September, Lindsay says
foreigners will find it more difficult to enter the U.S. and to stay in
the country beyond the terms originally agreed upon.
"Our
immigration system is being 'securitized' [subject to stricter
security], to some extent, and it will be a little more fearsome for
those who are seeking to come and remain here."
But
Lindsay stresses that stricter security is not merely a function of the
proposed reorganization of the INS. He also attributes it to the USA
Patriot Act, a package of antiterrorism laws passed by Congress and
signed by U.S. President George W. Bush within weeks of the September
attacks. Some of these measures are being challenged in the courts as
unreasonable restrictions of American civil liberties.
Angela
Kelley is deputy director of the National Immigration Forum, an advocacy
group for immigrants based in Washington. She told RFE/RL that the INS
reform legislation that passed the House last week and a corresponding
bill in the Senate appear -- at least on the surface -- not to threaten
people wishing to come to the United States for honorable reasons.
"We
could end up with an actual highly functioning agency that can keep out
the 'bad guys' more effectively than it's currently been able to, and
let in people who want to come in and build the American dream. It's
possible. But there's a lot that's not known right now, quite frankly,
about where and what kind of restructuring we're going to end up
with."
Kelley
says her organization is concerned, however, about the latitude that
will be given to the attorney general and other senior officials who
will oversee the two agencies that will likely replace the INS.
According
to Kelley, these officials will have the authority to prevent foreigners
from entering the country, even on innocent business, and to
relentlessly track those who are admitted. She says the question is
whether they will use this broad authority wisely.
Kelley
says her organization and other immigration advocacy groups will be
watching the progress of the legislation now in Congress and will
challenge it in the courts if they believe the laws put unreasonable
restrictions on foreign visitors.