Thread: KS: Scaled-back immigration bill faltering

Posted on Sun, Apr. 27, 2008
Scaled-back immigration bill faltering
BY JEANNINE KORANDA
Eagle Topeka bureau

TOPEKA - Legislators declared illegal-immigration reform one of their top priorities at the beginning of the session. But as they head back for a final few days this week, a compromise bill is foundering.

The measure, significantly scaled back from earlier proposals, rankles lawmakers from both parties. Some Republicans say it doesn't do enough to go after illegal immigrants. Some Democrats say it doesn't punish the employers who hire them.

House Speaker Melvin Neufeld, R-Ingalls, said it would be "very unfortunate" if the Legislature ended its work without a comprehensive immigration reform bill.

But he cautioned that the bill isn't likely to please people on either side of the contentious issue.

"There's not going to be an immigration bill that anyone likes," he said. "Immigration is no different than any issue -- there's no silver bullet, no one-year solution. Big issues are like that."

The compromise legislation cut out penalties for employers that misclassify employees as contract workers -- one way to avoid taxes and checking employment eligibility. That has become a major point of contention.

"It's a deal breaker for me," said Rep. Judith Loganbill, D-Wichita, who was on the six-member conference committee and refused to sign off on the changes.

The bill could have advanced without Loganbill's agreement if the full House had approved a motion to "agree to disagree" on the last day of the regular session.

But it voted 59-57 to send the bill back to the conference committee. The committee still is looking to the House.

The House could hold another vote on the report Wednesday and accept the measure, said Rep. Arlen Siegfreid, R-Olathe, the House's top member on the conference committee.

If that doesn't happen, said Sen. Pete Brungardt, R-Salina, who heads the conference committee, he will talk to leadership of both chambers to gauge how important the issue is before calling the committee back to try to resolve the problems.

Misclassification issue

Both the House and Senate began the year with aggressive proposals that attempted to prevent illegal immigrants from receiving public benefits or in-state tuition or casting a ballot. They also included strict penalties for employers who knowingly hired illegal immigrants. Those proposals have been pared dramatically.

The conferees' proposed bill cut House language to require employers to check potential employees' immigration status through a federal database called E-Verify.

It would drop a Senate-approved provision to penalize labor unions for collecting dues from illegal immigrant workers.

Jeff Glendening, vice president of political affairs for the Kansas Chamber of Commerce, said his group was happy with the compromise bill, given that it does not mandate E-verify and would not call for any business to lose its license.

The misclassification penalties were a big deal for Democrats, Loganbill said.

"We have a lot of employers that are less than honest in this state and they are getting away with some wrongdoing," she said.

The practice hurts workers and businesses that followed the rules, she added.

Glendening said he did not think misclassification of workers is a problem, "outside of the very few numbers of bad actors."

Employee classification is a "gray area" of the law with about 21 factors that define how a worker can be classified, he said.

"It would be very easy to misclassify someone unintentionally," he said.

Vote expected

Right now, it is a waiting game.

Lawmakers will have to wait and see if anyone brings the bill up for another vote, Siegfreid said.

Rep. Steve Huebert, R-Valley Center, who sits on the conference committee, thinks there will be a vote.

He is not happy with either chamber's version of the bill, but something needs to be done, he said.

"The issue will probably come back again next year irregardless, but I think there is a strong sentiment to try and push something out this year," he said.

Brungardt calls the legislation "a good piece of work.... I think people do want to see the state address the issue."

Sen. Roger Reitz, R-Manhattan, who also is on the committee, doesn't expect the compromise bill to change significantly. He does expect a vote.

"There is enough irritation on the part of too many people to say that it will go away quietly," he said.

Contributing: David Klepper

http://www.kansas.com/news/story/385547.html

Jeff Glendening, vice president of political affairs for the Kansas Chamber of Commerce, said his group was happy with the compromise bill, given that it does not mandate E-verify and would not call for any business to lose its license.

If the COC is happy with the compromise bill, then it must be a lousy piece of legislation with no teeth or real effectiveness.