Thread: GOP Leaders to Drop Felony for Immigrants

http://hosted.ap.org

Apr 12, 7:06 AM EDT

GOP Leaders to Drop Felony for Immigrants

By DAVID ESPO
AP Special Correspondent


WASHINGTON (AP) -- The two top Republicans in Congress, confronted with internal party divisions as well as large public demonstrations, said Tuesday they intend to pass immigration legislation that does not subject illegal immigrants to prosecution as felons.

A written statement by House Speaker Dennis Hastert of Illinois and Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist of Tennessee, did not say whether they would seek legislation subjecting illegal immigrants to misdemeanor prosecution or possibly a civil penalty such as a fine.

"It remains our intent to produce a strong border security bill that will not make unlawful presence in the United States a felony," the two men said. An estimated 11 million men, women and children are in the United States illegally.

The Republican-controlled House passed legislation late last year that is generally limited to border security measures. It makes illegal immigrants subject to felony prosecution.

Senate efforts to write a broader bill - covering border security, a guest worker program and a path to citizenship for many of the 11 million in the country illegally - are gridlocked with lawmakers on a two-week vacation.

Frist has said he intends to bring the issue back to the Senate floor, although he stopped short of a flat commitment and the prospects for passage of an election-year immigration bill are uncertain.

The late-afternoon statement by the top GOP leaders in both houses came after days of large street demonstrations by protesters opposed to criminal penalties for illegal immigrants.

Additionally, in a Washington Post-ABC News poll published during the day, only 20 percent of those questioned said they favored declaring illegal immigrants to be felons and barring them from work. More than 60 percent indicated support for the general approach envisioned in the leading Senate proposal. It includes a requirement that illegal immigrants be required to pay a fine and back taxes as part of a process of qualifying for eventual citizenship.

Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, D- Mass., dismissed the proposal by the GOP leadership, saying: "Actions speak louder than words, and there's no running away from the fact that the Republican House passed a bill, and Senator Frist offered one, that criminalizes immigrants."

"This debate shouldn't be about making criminals out of hardworking families ... but rather about strengthening our national security and enacting a law that reflects our best values and our humanity," Kennedy said.

The question of a penalty has dogged the debate for months and been the subject of intense political maneuvering.

GOP aides pointed out that Rep. James Sensenbrenner, R-Wis., chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, had tried during debate on the House floor to reduce the penalty to a misdemeanor.

The attempt failed on a vote of 257-164, with 65 Republicans and 191 Democrats opposed. Many of the Democrats, including members of the Hispanic Congressional Caucus, indicated at the time they favored no criminal penalties, and opposed the suggested change.

In their statement, Hastert and Frist said the Democrats who did so had demonstrated a "lack of compassion." In addition, they renewed the charge that Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid is seeking to "block action on immigration legislation."

Reid has denied the charges.

While they leveled their accusations at Reid, the GOP leadership has been struggling with internal divisions.

Several House Republican conservatives have vociferously denounce Senate proposals as amnesty for lawbreakers.

And while Frist praised the leading Senate proposal last week as a "huge breakthrough," he was the only member of the GOP leadership to embrace it. Two other members of the group, Sens. Jon Kyl of Arizona and Kay Bailey Hutchison of Texas, voiced their opposition. Sen. Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania opposes the measure, according to a spokesman.

Sen. Elizabeth Dole of North Carolina, who heads the party's senatorial campaign committee, declined this week through an aide to take a position on the bill.

A spokesman for Sen. Mitch McConnell, the second-ranking Republican, sidestepped a question by saying the Kentucky lawmaker favors a comprehensive approach.

http://washingtontimes.com/national/200 ... -7189r.htm

Alien felony proviso dropped
By Charles Hurt
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
Published April 12, 2006

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Any immigration legislation passed by Congress this year will not include the inflammatory provisions approved by the House last year that make it a felony to be in the United States illegally, Republican leaders on Capitol Hill said yesterday.

House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert and Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist said in a joint statement that "it remains our intent to produce a strong border security bill that will not make unlawful presence in the United States a felony." The commitment removes a primary concern held by many Democrats who say that the yearlong imprisonment carried by a felony conviction is too harsh.

House Republicans also said yesterday they are committed to rewriting a section of their immigration bill that caused an uproar among religious and humanitarian leaders who say the law could be used to prosecute them if they unwittingly give food or shelter to someone who turns out to be an illegal alien.

Since the House passed its bill in December, Democrats have seized upon the criticism as another reason for opposing the border security legislation.

"It is certainly not in keeping with my understanding of the Scriptures, because this bill would literally criminalize the good Samaritan and probably even Jesus himself," Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, New York Democrat, said last month.

House Judiciary Committee Chairman F. James Sensenbrenner Jr., Wisconsin Republican, said the provision is aimed at the ruthless "coyotes" and "snake-heads" who smuggle people into the country.

"Since the House bill's passage, many have misconstrued the House's good-faith effort to bring human traffickers to justice as a way to criminalize humanitarian assistance efforts," Mr. Sensenbrenner and other Republican leaders wrote in a letter to the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops. "The House bill does no such thing, nor did it intend to."

Under current law, it is illegal to transport, harbor or conceal aliens and to encourage or induce them to remain in the United States. House Judiciary Republicans say courts have interpreted these laws broadly to mean "help or advise," and yet they have never been used to prosecute humanitarians.

"We can assure you, just as under current law, religious organizations would not have to 'card' people at soup kitchens and homeless shelters under the House bill's anti-smuggling provisions," Mr. Sensenbrenner wrote. "Prosecutors would no sooner prosecute good Samaritans for 'assisting' illegal immigrants to remain in the U.S. under the House bill than they would prosecute such persons for 'encouraging' illegal immigrants to remain in the U.S. under current law."

At the request of U.S. attorneys along the border who prosecute human smugglers, the House bill makes culpable anyone who "assists, encourages, directs or induces a person to reside in or remain in the United States." Still, Mr. Sensenbrenner said he stands ready to revise his bill so humanitarians aren't "ensnared in this moral effort to end suffering at the hands of human traffickers."

Already, House Republicans have tried revising their bill to reduce the felony penalty for simply being in the United States illegally. But that effort was thwarted by Democrats intent on killing the entire bill.

In December, Mr. Sensenbrenner introduced an amendment to the immigration bill to make unlawful presence a misdemeanor instead of a felony. All but 11 Democrats voted to kill the amendment.

"There were 191 House Democrats who voted to oppose House Republican efforts to reduce the crime of unlawful presence in the United States from a felony to a misdemeanor," Mr. Hastert and Mr. Frist said yesterday in their joint statement. "Instead, they voted to make felons out of all of those who remain in our country illegally."

Mexico will charge a illegal immigrant with a felony, but these spineless cures we sent to represent us are to afraid to stand up for the people they are suppose to be representing.
I have already faxed and emailed these two plus Dole and Burr. There must be a criminal charge or you have just thrown the borders further open.
My only regret is this is not an election year for ours.

Just wait until an illegal alien kills one of their family members. We'll see how fast they want to make illegal immigration a felony then.

This is a shame.

This also shows there willingness to be weak and keep back sliding. The penalty should stay a felony to make it firm enough to set it in an illegal Aliens mind that illegal Border entry is bad..... to stop illegal immigration, which is the goal.

We should all get on the phones and letters to the Reps. to make sure they keep it as a misdemeanor or now the House bill will get watered down and mean nothing --- once again passing a sham bill that does nothing but make things worse.

Back sliding for votes probably also. But remember folks tell Congressmen the Latino vote is merely 15% and candidates would be better to stick with the monstorous 80% Americans who will support candidates that will have illegal Aliens enforced against with common sense laws that have all the reason for such simple laws to rightly and legitimately exist.

This came out on our news Monday, April 10. I figured it was either to keep the trouble stirrred up by mentioning 4437 or try to dispell some of the trouble brewing by making the illegals think they won a victory.

However, is anyone has been paying any attention at all, this was the one sticky point, even in the House that kept it from passing by a far greater margin than it did.

Felons get put in jail. people. Do you want to solely support 20million or more illegal aliens in prison for a year? Misdemeanor and deportation sounds a lot cheaper to me.

I am so angry about this bogus Washington Post/ABC News poll! It keeps being trotted out as the "difinitive" voice of the American people in nearly every current MSM report on this issue.

Before the marches, independent polls consistantly showed that 70-90% of Americans were opposed to any type of amnesty? Now, after the marches, which have infuriated even former fence sitters, 60% of Amercans FAVOR amnesty? It appears the GOP has been thrown a big ole bone...in which to save face should they cave to the Dems.

I can just hear Frist now: "Our compromise, which combines increased border security with a path to citizenship for those already here was based, in large part, on the results of the Washington Post/ABC News poll which proved.........bla, bla, bla"

after the marches, which have infuriated even former fence sitters, 60% of Amercans FAVOR amnesty? It appears the GOP has been thrown a big ole bone...in which to save face should they cave to the Dems.

Does seem strange, doesn't it? And could it be that they just reversed the questions on the polls or something to appease the illegals.

But you know what, it is those November polls that are going to make the difference and I don't think that they can get enough illegals registered to outnumber us there!

But you know what, it is those November polls that are going to make the difference and I don't think that they can get enough illegals registered to outnumber us there!

True enough..but, if ANY amnesty is passed, I am not voting...AT ALL! Why bother? My (our) bleak future will have already been set in stone.

True enough..but, if ANY amnesty is passed, I am not voting...AT ALL! Why bother? My (our) bleak future will have already been set in stone.

Grey Parrot, if they pass something and don't put it into effect yet, I will still vote with the hope of undoing the harm before it takes effect.

And, if we can't be heard over the roar of the invaders, 2008 will probably be the last election I will ever vote in as well. Like you say, what would be the point?