Thread: Enforcement-Plus Is Critical

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... 01193.html

Enforcement-Plus Is Critical
Any immigration bill must include a path to legalization.

Saturday, July 8, 2006; A14

AS REPUBLICANS this week began a series of hearings on immigration policy, President Bush was reportedly signaling new openness to compromise designed to produce legislation this year. The compromise, according to a report in the New York Times, would center on "enforcement-first": improve border security, as a majority of House Republicans want, and only then move on to the guest-worker program and legalization for illegal immigrants that Mr. Bush and a majority of senator s favor.

In principle such a compromise makes sense, but there are many ways it could go wrong. The rationale goes something like this: Congress has tried immigration reform before, most recently in 1986. That measure provided a path to legalization for undocumented workers and promised tougher enforcement to discourage illegal immigration, but the tougher enforcement never came, so the illegal immigrants kept coming. This time, therefore, the government should prove its commitment to controlling the nation's borders before offering hope to the 11 million or so illegal immigrants here now. Some version of amnesty (though the word won't be used) would be more palatable if Americans knew it wouldn't be repeated every decade or two.

The danger, though, is that "enforcement-first" will devolve into "enforcement-only," which would be both inhumane and impractical. So Mr. Bush, if he is exploring a compromise, should insist that enforcement and a path to citizenship remain part of one legislative package. The path to citizenship should be generous enough, and free enough of bureaucratic requirements, to be meaningful to most immigrants who have followed every other law since arriving here (including paying taxes). The comprehensive package should include a healthy enough increase in legal immigration to meet the needs of a growing U.S. economy, on both the high-tech and low-wage ends.

Most important, the delay in implementing these measures can't be inde finite -- and can't depend on conditions that will never be met. The legalization part of the package could wait for a year or two while the administration beefs up border patrols and workplace inspections. But it can't depend on some promise of decreased immigration that can never be met or measured.

In the end, enforcement-only won't work; and Mr. Bush, who knows that, shouldn't accept a disguised version of enforcement-only simply because he wants some legislation this year.

http://www.tennessean.com/apps/pbcs.dll ... 80312/1008

Saturday, 07/08/06

Immigration deadlock calls for compromise
‘Enforcement first’ approach could work if other elements guaranteed


There will be no immigration bill this year or any year without some serious compromise.

In trying to find the elusive middle ground on immigration legislation, some lawmakers have begun pushing a so-called "enforcement first" option: Put new border security measures (which everyone agrees are needed) in place now, and put off work on the creation of a guest worker program or a path to citizenship for those now living in the U.S. illegally.

While President Bush has long supported a comprehensive immigration effort, over the last few days he has signaled his willingness to accept an "enforcement first" approach.

Initially, the "enforcement first" option looked suspiciously like "enforcement only." The concern has been that if Congress addresses immigration in a piecemeal fashion, it will not be able to muster the votes to pass anything significant. And if all the United States is able to accomplish is better border security, it will still be grappling with the issues surrounding 11-12 million undocumented workers now in the country and the labor needs of American businesses.

But now the primary architects of the Senate's comprehensive immigration bill, Sens. John McCain and Edward Kennedy, are latching on to an "enforcement first" option. They now point out that the guest worker provisions in the Senate bill would take at least 18 months to establish. The citizenship path for current undocumented workers would take even longer. Why not pass a bill that establishes border security now and agrees to begin work on other elements over the next two years? Enforcement would be bolstered soon, but other elements would start down the pipeline.

The major problem with this approach is lack of trust. Those who support comprehensive reform, as this page does, fear that lawmakers would pass border security, then walk away from the more controversial elements.

But given the current stalemate, lawmakers all know that without some serious compromise, nothing will pass. Moreover, the White House's support for a comprehensive bill should raise the comfort level of those who share his approach.

The rhetoric on immigration has become overheated in large part because lawmakers on both sides of the issue have tried to use it as a political tool.

If they back off, pipe down and look at immigration as a policy decision, they could still find a workable compromise. •