Thread: Congress leaves immigration bill for another day

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/nation/4227210.html

Oct. 1, 2006, 12:18AM
Congress leaves immigration bill for another day
Both houses are unable to agree on what is reform


By MICHELLE MITTELSTADT
Copyright 2006 Houston Chronicle Washington Bureau

WASHINGTON — For all the fierce debate that raged this year in congressional corridors and spilled onto the streets of Houston and other cities in massive demonstrations, Congress has left town essentially stalemated over illegal immigration.

Though congressional Republicans can claim some success in adding billions of dollars for enhanced border security and securing approval for 700 miles of fencing along portions of the U.S.-Mexico boundary, the philosophical clash between the enforcement-minded House and the legalization-friendly Senate has been postponed — most likely until next year.

"It's essentially a tie, a stalemate in which neither vision of reform has won out," said Frank Sharry, executive director of the National Immigration Forum. "The debate will continue to boil, and it will be left to Congress in the future to deal with."

Several factors
In the end, vastly different diagnoses about how to prevent illegal immigration, internal Republican divisions, President Bush's loss of clout on Capitol Hill and a highly competitive clash for control of Congress in the November elections all contributed to lawmakers' failure to deliver on an issue they vaulted to public attention.

House Republican security hawks raced out first last December, passing an enforcement-only bill that would criminalize illegal immigrants, crack down on their employers and set up a mandatory employment-verification system requiring new identification procedures for all workers, American and foreign. Champions of the security-first approach insist that the borders must be secured before any broader changes to immigration policy can be contemplated.

Outraged by the criminalization provisions, millions took to the streets in Houston, Los Angeles, Chicago, Milwaukee and other cities last spring and denounced the House bill as anti-immigrant and inhumane.

Siding much more closely with Bush's vision, the Senate responded in May with a vastly different plan pairing increased enforcement with an opportunity for citizenship for most of the country's estimated 12 million illegal immigrants and a guest-worker program for future immigrants. Backers of what has become known in Washington shorthand as comprehensive immigration reform argue that illegal immigration can't be fully resolved unless all aspects are addressed together.

House Republicans swiftly deemed the bipartisan Senate plan an amnesty program that would repeat the mistakes of 1986, when Congress pledged to halt illegal immigration for all time by legalizing nearly 3 million people in exchange for making it more difficult for foreign workers to be hired. The legalization went through, but employer sanctions were never properly put into place or enforced. Illegal immigration continued apace until exploding in the late 1990s and this decade.

Dismissive of the Senate plan and courting conservative voters vexed by illegal immigration, House Republicans refused this summer to negotiate over differences in the bills. Instead, they launched a flurry of hearings around the nation, designed to fan opposition to the Senate bill. And, into the waning hours of their legislative session that ended Friday night, House GOP leaders sought unsuccessfully to convince the Senate to embrace House-passed measures speeding deportation, cracking down on criminal gangs and reducing court power over federal immigration enforcement.


What did get done
House Republicans point out they did succeed in adding billions of dollars to expand the Border Patrol, add thousands of detention beds and begin funding a multibillion-dollar "virtual" fence comprising motion detectors, lighting, unmanned aerial vehicles and other high-tech surveillance equipment. And, Congress prodded the Department of Homeland Security to end the much-criticized practice of "catch-and-release" policy in which the Border Patrol, because of a lack of detention space, released non-Mexican illegal immigrants pending their deportation hearings. The vast majority never showed up for the hearings.

Some Republicans say the new measures are working.

"If you talk to people on the border now, they are starting to see a tightening up," said Rep. Michael McCaul, an Austin Republican who chairs a House Homeland Security subcommittee and represents parts of west Harris County. Illegal immigration "didn't happen overnight. It's not going to get solved overnight. But I think what you're going to see is the American public realizing that a lot of the things we've done up here are having an impact on the border."

Such a realization by the public could pave the way, lawmakers suggest, for greater acceptance of solutions for dealing with the illegal population. One plan calls for a guest worker program to bring in the foreign workers that U.S. business interests, agriculture and others insist are absolutely essential in a low-unemployment economy.

"I think there's a recognition now that this is an urgent — perhaps the most single urgent — domestic issue confronting the country," said Sen. John Cornyn, a Texas Republican who chairs the Senate immigration subcommittee. "And I don't believe it will be delayed forever."


Dead or still kicking?
Cornyn retains some hope that Congress could resume the immigration debate in comprehensive fashion when lawmakers return for a brief session after the November elections. Others predict Congress won't take up the topic until after the new session is gaveled in next January with new members who were elected in November.

Others say it may be well after that before the legislation comes up again.

House Homeland Security Committee Chairman Peter King, R-N.Y., for one, indicated little desire to address a broader immigration fix until the borders are battened down.

"The position of the House is that we're not going to be looking toward amnesty or toward a path to citizenship until we first show that we control the border," he said. "And then, we can get back to that."

Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff estimated earlier this year it would take until the end of 2008 for his department to gain operational control of the southwest border.


What works, what doesn't
Some lawmakers tout fencing and other border-control measures; others argue illegal immigration won't be solved by a build-up. Nearly half of all illegal immigrants came here legally but overstayed visas.

House Republicans are seeking to achieve "an impossible dream," said Sen. Mel Martinez, R-Fla., a key champion of the Senate plan. "You're not going to secure the border unless you also provide a legal means for people to travel to do the jobs that America needs done."

For some, Congress' inability to undertake a widespread fix this year is a deep disappointment. "It's really a lost opportunity," said Sen. Dianne Feinstein, a Democrat from California, where the state's $30 billion agriculture industry is struggling to find workers amid heightened border enforcement. "We've got food on the ground that's not being harvested; we've got people plowing under fields; we've got people who are not going to plant. It's a very difficult time."

Sen. Jeff Sessions, an Alabama Republican who staunchly opposed the Senate bill, offered a far different assessment: "In one sense it has been productive. We didn't make a big mistake by passing a terribly flawed bill."

michelle.mittelstadt@chron.com

What works, what doesn't
Some lawmakers tout fencing and other border-control measures; others argue illegal immigration won't be solved by a build-up. Nearly half of all illegal immigrants came here legally but overstayed visas.

Is this true? Half of the illegal immingrants in the U.S. simply overstayed their visas? If it is true, then a beefed-up fence isn't going to deter illegals as much as I had hoped.

Sen. Jeff Sessions, an Alabama Republican who staunchly opposed the Senate bill, offered a far different assessment: "In one sense it has been productive. We didn't make a big mistake by passing a terribly flawed bill."

Well said, I agree.