Thread: House GOP needs our help!

http://www.newsday.com/news/nationworld ... news-print

IMMIGRATION DEBATE: GOP on the offensive

WASHINGTON - The immigration debate may not be over just yet - and legislation introduced by Rep. Peter King could be at the center of a Republican bid to go on the offensive.

King (R-Seaford) said he would introduce his pending immigration bill in the House this week, legislation that focuses on border security and cracks down on employers who knowingly hire illegal immigrants.

The bill was set to be introduced two weeks ago, the same day that a comprehensive immigration reform bill failed in the Senate. When that controversial measure, and its bipartisan support, fell apart, King held off on introducing legislation that was more to his liking.

After a week of deliberations, King's bill is back on the radar but getting it to the Democrat-controlled House floor, let alone passed, will be a tough sell.

"It's going to be difficult to get it to the floor - very difficult, impossible, unless the Democrats want it to get to the floor," King said last week. "We may offer parts of the bill as amendments, do it piecemeal, and see if there's a public effort to get parts of it taken up separately."

House leadership continues to meet with members on the immigration issue to determine how or whether the subject will come up in that chamber, according to a spokesman with Speaker Nancy Pelosi's office. Her office had not seen language in the King bill, the spokesman said, and declined comment on whether it would be taken up.

The Senate immigration bill would have allowed undocumented immigrants to seek a special visa, tightened border security and created a system to ensure employers hire only legal workers. The bill failed a crucial vote June 28 that would have brought the measure to a final vote.



King's proposition

King, ranking member of the House Homeland Security Committee, was never a fan of the Senate's immigration bill. He was among the Republicans who said it granted "amnesty" to illegal immigrants and he eventually worked up the conservative response to the Senate's measure.

The bill, co-sponsored by King and Rep. Lamar Smith (R-Texas), will be "98 percent the same" as legislation they announced June 19. The bill allows for a defined number of temporary agricultural workers each year based on market conditions and enforces previously enacted sanctions against employers who knowingly hire illegal immigrants. It also would make English the official U.S. language.

Regardless of the Senate bill's fate, King said he had always planned to introduce the bill as a statement of the GOP position on the issue, possibly for renewal in the fall. But on the day before the House's Fourth of July recess, King said talk turned to advancing the bill.

"A consensus did seem to be developing," King said. "A majority seemed to be supporting enforcement. There was talk that final day, that maybe we should push this."

Minority Whip Roy Blunt (R-Mo.) is among House GOP members backing King's bill, his office said, and expects widespread support from party members for the legislation.

Long Island immigration advocates said King's bill has many of the same problems as past GOP attempts to tackle the immigration issue. The bill focuses too much on border security, with not enough recognition of the need for immigrant labor, and no plans to deal with an estimated 12 million illegal immigrants already in the United States, according to Patrick Young, program director of the Central American Refugee Center in Hempstead.

The bill also bars workers from bringing family with them and provides no path to permanent status or citizenship, which Young opposes.

Other groups said they supported the idea of tighter border security behind King's legislation.

"Before we do anything, anything in this country, we have to secure those borders," said Ron Lewandowski, Eastern Suffolk director of the national Minutemen group, "We have to control the flood from the Mexican border, particularly."



'All-out' push needed

King said he would introduce the bill, but it would take an "all-out" push by House GOP leadership to advance it.

While he said party leadership was "going in that direction," the bill would require some Democratic support. But legalization - King's "amnesty" - was a major part of the Senate's bill, and lack of it in the GOP House alternative may be a stumbling block.

"Democrats are under pressure to not have anything come up that doesn't have a legalization component," King said, adding that working pieces of the bill into other legislation is "probably the best way to get it done. We can make the grand statement of a comprehensive bill, but find a way to get parts of it in other places."

Among those calling for legalization is Nadia Marin-Molina, executive director of the Workplace Project, a Hempstead-based membership organization for immigrant workers and their families.

"They tried to put as many of those enforcement provisions in the bill that didn't make it through the Senate," she said. "It doesn't seem like anything will happen in terms of anti- or pro-immigrant legislation."

Highlights of the King-Smith legislation

Increases number of border guards

Allows for a market-based number of temporary agricultural workers per year

Does not provide privileges to undocumented workers

Enforces previously legislated sanctions against employers who knowingly hire illegal immigrants

Makes English the official U.S. language

Count me in

Count me in also.

On second thought:

We should not take any steps without consulting with WILLIAM first.

What does it do to the 12 million illegals already here?...No deportation provision?.. why not include an increase of ICE manpower to go after the 600,000 fugitive aliens still here?

The current Chairman of the Immigration subcommittee Zoe Lofgren will not allow this to go anywhere this year. She is a about the most anti-enforcement representative you can imagine, by trade she is a immigration lawyer and card carrying member of AILA.

OK, people, yes maybe this is necessary - but is it really?

We have laws - laws that will remedy the problem and do it with nothing more than enforcement.

Why don't these lawmakers go on the offensive against the President for lack of enforcement.

Why don't they go on talk shows and stress enforcement?

Why dont' they have town meetings and encourage citizens to stress enforcement?

Why don't they write op-ed pieces stressing enforcement?

Can't a group of lawmakers introduce some kind of resolution or just statement that they demand the Pres. enforce the laws as written?

Why don't these Senators stress that local law enforcement could do much to fix this. Not in an immigration sense, but just in real law enforcement - fake DL, fake ID, zoning laws, etc., etc.

I would like to see these senators write an op ed piece or just a letter to the editor of all newspapers in their state - encouraging people to tell their local law to enforce the laws they can enforce.

Anytime they talk about some law regarding immigration - I wonder what they are going to tack on that we don't know - especially in this case, where there is absolutely no need for any further laws.

Be careful what you wish for, you might just get it.

Political posturing? Smoke and mirrors? Too quick back to the floor could mean passage with the excuse that not all will be pleased, but, we tried hard and this is the best we could do.

Enforce the current laws first. Take control of the border. This IS the Federal Govts. first duty! I for one am not in a hurry for new bills or new laws. I would just like to see current laws enforced. Afterall, 20 yrs. ago I went through this debate,,,,,kicking screaming and hollerin' This time around looks like a mirror of the 86(?) debate. Except for the size, and now we can use e-mail vs snail mail.

"To chose one's victim, to prepare one's plan minutely, to stake an implacable vengeance, and then go to bed.........there is nothing sweeter in the world." Joseph Stalin

roundabout

That's my thinking - just tell them no more laws for a while until we dust off the ones we have and see how they work.

I agree with roundabout. We don't need a new bill at this time. The laws as already written need enforced! Forcing another bill on the floor will only open it up to bad amendments. You can bet the Democrat majority will do all it can to change the bill through the admendment process. It's unfortunate, but I think we all know an enforcement only bill will never make it through a Democrat controlled Congress.

I say we need to stay on top of Bush and Secretary Chertoff. They have an obligation to enforce and obide by the laws already in effect!