Thread: Immigration plan irks groups hoping for broader reform

Immigration plan irks groups hoping for broader reform

Posted on Thu, Mar. 29, 2007
By Dena Bunis

The Orange County Register

(MCT)

WASHINGTON - Advocates of a broad immigration overhaul that would include paths to citizenship for illegal immigrants and a wide-ranging program for new foreign workers and their families expressed outrage and disappointment Thursday as details of a more restrictive plan suggested by the White House began circulating on Capitol Hill.

"What we've had described to us and what we've seen is neither passable or workable," Angela Kelley, deputy director of the National Immigration Forum, said during a conference call with reporters and advocates of comprehensive overhaul.

A 23-page PowerPoint presentation by administration staffers outlines a program that has all the elements of the kind of broad policy change passed by the Senate last spring. It enhances border enforcement, forces employers to verify the legal status of their workers, and includes a temporary worker program and a plan to deal with the 12 million illegal immigrants living in the United States.

But several key details embodied in those principles are seeming deal-breakers for most Democrats and the groups who have been working for years for a change in immigration policy. And moreover, the administration plan envisions a fundamental change in the way the United States admits immigrants.

Currently, the emphasis is on family unification. In fact, 58 percent of the 1.1 million immigrant visas issued each year go to family members of American citizens and legal residents.

What the administration envisions is moving toward a system in which the skills of the applicant would be paramount.

"Future employment needs are not being met; high-skill worker needs are not being met," said Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., one of a group of GOP lawmakers who helped push through last year's Senate bill. Graham appeared with Sen. Edward Kennedy Thursday morning at a news conference with clergy members dedicated to passing a comprehensive bill again.

"I am very pleased with the level of cooperation and the general outline the White House has presented," Graham said in an interview after that event. Several other lawmakers seemed reluctant to criticize details, instead focusing on the increased activity by the White House on this issue.

Kennedy talked in general about the administration's proposal - outlined to him and several other Democratic and Republican senators Wednesday. But he did say that there are some compromises he is not willing to make.

"Let's make it very clear," he said. "You don't compromise on the morality of these issues. There are stakeholders in this and the stakeholders are the final determinants about whether something is going to fly." Legislation that doesn't have the confidence of the people who are affected, he added, is "going nowhere."

This is the first time since President Bush said in 2001 that he wanted a comprehensive package that the administration has been so specific about what it wants to see in a bill.

Bush's plan would create a temporary worker program that would not allow new foreign workers to bring their families with them to the United States. And these workers would be allowed to come only for three two-year stretches. They'd have to go home for at least six months between each two-year work period.

"Why should we do less than the American people are willing for us to do and millions of them have marched for?" Rep. Luis Gutierrez, D-Ill., said of that proposal. Despite problems with the details, Gutierrez said he is still "happy that the White House is taking this issue seriously and is investing political capital in it."

The White House plan envisions a legalization plan for the illegal immigrants here now. But it would be much more expensive and more restrictive than the one included in the bipartisan House bill introduced last week by Gutierrez and Rep. Jeff Flake, R-Ariz..

Under the administration vision, immigrants coming forward seeking legal status would have to pay a $2,000 fine for every three-year period they continued to live and work - now legally - in the United States. They would also have to pay a $1,500 fee every three years to process the new Z visas the government would create.

And when it comes to long-term legal status, these Z-visa holders would be allowed to apply for green cards, but would then have to pay $8,000 more when their green card application was approved. These applicants would have to return to their home country to get these applications handled. It's not clear from the White House summary how long they would have to stay outside the U.S. And then these applicants would go to the back of the visa line. Advocates estimated it could take 30 years for them to get their green cards.



http://www.fortwayne.com/mld/newssentin ... 996579.htm

Here's my plan:
enforce the law and put criminals in jail, both the illegals and those that aid and abet them, including our politicians.

And then these applicants would go to the back of the visa line. Advocates estimated it could take 30 years for them to get their green cards

COOL!!

Whatever it takes to stall the traitors until the real Patriots can get some power to do something.

I think this amnesty thing is a linch-pin in the NAU, and that's why king george is working so hard to get it done. Including purposely throwing the mid-terms to get a Congress that will help him. After all, why would he care what party is in Congress if our sovereingty is due to be extinguished anyway?

People like that only look at the ends, not the means.

Did any of you read the STRIVE Act? It is written in exactly the same context as the SPP and North American Union. I thought the House had been left out of the loop with regards to the SPP. This shows that Gutierrez and Frisk know too much about the NAU to be just coincidence. I think they have been in on it since 2005. That leaves me to wonder how many more snakes are nesting in the House.

"Let's make it very clear," he said. "You don't compromise on the morality of these issues. There are stakeholders in this and the stakeholders are the final determinants about whether something is going to fly." Legislation that doesn't have the confidence of the people who are affected, he added, is "going nowhere."

The word STAKEHOLDERS is another code word used by the SPP/NAU people. So they are "the final determinates about whether something is going to fly"? Kennedy is an old gas-bloated windbag and only looks out for the Big Business and Special Interests groups.

Legislation that doesn't have the confidence of the people who are affected, he added, is "going nowhere."

The ONLY people who should matter in this, are the AMERICAN people. It doesn't matter if illegal aliens and their supporters don't like it!

I've become so cynical though, that I'm wondering if these pro-illegal groups are complaining about this bill, just to make us feel like we pro-enforcement people are getting something out of this deal.

It's all psy-ops! Kabuki!!

They're just looking for a 'mid-point' that the American people will swallow.

As long as the illegals HERE NOW get to stay and the worker program installed.

Then the enforcement charade will stop and the NAU will be fully manned.

Did anyone else notice king george saying yesterday on the steps of the White House that " we will continue to find ways to ensure the security and prosperity of North America"

I got a chill down my back.

We have to keep our eyes on the prize, just keep letting your voices be heard keep calling Washington, a spread the news to those who sit and have done nothing we have to get as many people informed and vocal as we can. God Bless America