On the recordAugust 5, 2020
I go back to the question I asked rhetorically a moment ago. What is it about the speakers of these languages that are mentioned in the amendment offered by my friend and distinguished colleague, the junior Senator from Florida--that is, the native speakers or speakers who hold a degree in the languages of Spanish, Portuguese, Haitian, Creole, Cantonese, Taiwanese, Hokkien, or Hakka--that makes them more deserving of an allocation of an employment- based immigrant visa than the speakers of Hindi, of Urdu, or of any of the languages spoken in India? As I mentioned a moment ago, you have a real problem, a real inequity. Overwhelmingly, the per-country cap punishes would-be immigrants from India in a way that doesn't affect any others, except maybe some from China. By the way, he covers some of the language groups spoken in and around China, including Cantonese and Taiwanese. So why not Mandarin? Then, if Mandarin, why not any of the languages spoken in India? This cuts right to the heart of why it is we need this reform and why it is we have an Elvis Presley-era, outdated, outmoded, unwise, and fundamentally inequitable immigration code--one that is at odds with the way our immigration system works.…





