‘It’s Not Going to Be Starved to Death’ : INS Chief Backs Amnesty Law Funding

Despite fears in Congress that the landmark immigration law will be “starved to death,” the nation’s top immigration official asserted Wednesday that there is no need to worry yet about whether his agency will have enough money to implement the new legislation.

But at the same time, Immigration and Naturalization Service Commissioner Alan C. Nelson refused to discuss the Reagan Administration request for INS funding in fiscal 1987 and 1988.

“It’s not constructive” to speculate on funding at this point, Nelson argued at a hearing of the House Judiciary subcommittee on immigration, refugees and international law. Earlier, Rep. Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) had asserted that the Administration may succeed in killing the bill by not funding it adequately.

But, Nelson declared: “It’s not going to be starved to death.”

Doubts Over Progress

The exchange was one of several that indicated the extent of congressional dissatisfaction with progress by the INS in implementing the immigration law, which President Reagan signed Nov. 6. Under the law, illegal immigrants who have been in the United States since before Jan. 1, 1982, will be allowed to apply for legal resident status, as will farm workers who worked at least 90 days during the 12 months that ended last May.

The law, the most extensive revision of immigration statutes in 30 years, also calls for penalties against employers who knowingly hire illegal immigrants. Passing the legislation was a hard-fought effort and many in Congress believe that implementing it will be at least as difficult.

Several Democrats on the subcommittee clearly believe that holding back on money to implement the law will contribute greatly to the difficulty.

“We don’t want to give you a job to do and then cut you off at the knees,” Rep. Romano L. Mazzoli (D-Ky.), chairman of the subcommittee and one of the law’s architects, told Nelson.

More Funds Sought

To implement the measure, which includes beefing up the nation’s border patrol by 50%, Congress authorized an extra $422 million for the INS in fiscal 1987 and $419 million for 1988. Currently, the agency has a $600-million budget.

Mazzoli said he has been told that the INS requested a supplemental increase of $356 million for this fiscal year, which began Oct. 1, but that the request was chopped to $306 million by the Justice Department, the INS’ parent agency.

Furthermore, Mazzoli worried that the request would be cut back even more at the Office of Management and Budget. The cuts, Mazzoli said, would be “unacceptable.”

For his part, Nelson tried to portray himself as anxious to implement the new law aggressively, while at the same time remaining loyal to the Administration’s effort to create a frugal budget.

‘Good-Faith Effort’

“We will do very well,” he said, adding later: “Let’s proceed on a good-faith effort” at cooperation between Congress and the Administration.

Spokesmen at both the Justice Department and the OMB declined to comment on the amounts of the budget requests, saying that the 1987 supplemental request and the 1988 budget proposal would go to Congress on Jan. 5.

The hearing, the first to deal with implementing the new law, also clarified one of the sensitive issues concerning employer sanctions.

Sanctions against employers who knowingly hire illegal immigrants, including fines and jail terms, begin next June. But it has been unclear what risks employers will take between the effective date of the law--Nov. 6--and June if they hire illegal immigrants.

Rules Change in June

Paul Schmidt, acting counsel for the INS, said that employers must verify the legality of new workers beginning in June. But he also said that no verification will be necessary for workers who are no longer on the payroll by then.

Employers will not be liable for penalties for illegal aliens on their payrolls before Nov. 6, he said. However, if those workers don’t qualify for amnesty, they could be deported if caught.

One contentious issue remains unresolved, however, the interpretation of a clause in the law involving “brief, casual and innocent” absences from the United States. Many supporters of immigrants’ rights point out that the law allows people to return to their homelands for short periods of time and still meet the law’s continuous residency requirement for legal status.

But Nelson has directed INS offices to process for deportation anyone caught entering the country, saying that people could come into the country for the first time and claim that they had left only briefly, thus gaining legal status.

Illegal aliens who qualify for legal residency now can get permission for emergency foreign travel. Part II, Page. 1.