Thread: Breaking down immigration plans in Congress

http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drmn/l ... 10,00.html
Rocky Mountain News

To print this page, select File then Print from your browser
URL: http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drmn/l ... 10,00.html
The Border Within: Breaking down immigration plans in Congress
August 30, 2006

• These are the components of the House and Senate bills on immigration reform, as well as a compromise proposal being floated.

House bill

Border security: The Border Protection, Antiterrorism and Illegal Immigration Control Act focuses mainly on border security. It is sponsored by Rep. F. James Sensenbrenner Jr., a Wisconsin Republican.

Fence: Calls for a nearly 700-mile-long fence along the Southwest’s border with Mexico, which early estimates say will cost $2.2 billion to build. Would study need for a northern border fence.

Entry: When entry requires fingerprinting, all of an immigrant’s fingers would be printed.

Personnel: Does not add additional Border Patrol agents.

Technology: Would upgrade existing databases and fingerprint all of an immigrant’s fingers. Directs the Homeland Security secretary to come up with a plan for improving communications among immigration agents and local officials.

Guest workers: No new guest-worker plan.

Employers: All employers, including day-laborer sites, would be required to use a new employment- verification system, accessible by phone or electronically. Would require reverification of all current employees. Federal, state and local governments would have three years to verify employees. Hiring unauthorized workers could bring a fine of up to $7,500 for a first offense, $15,000 for a second and $40,000 thereafter. Repeat offenders would face up to 30 years in jail.

Incentive to return to home country: None.

Illegal immigrants: Makes being in the United States without authorization a felony. Currently, it is a misdemeanor. Also, it would make assisting an illegal immigrant a crime.

Detention space: Does not require a specific increase in detention bed space, although it does require mandatory detention of all noncitizens (except Cubans) caught trying to enter the United States.

Criminals: Would spend $650 million to expand to all states the Institutional Removal Program, which scans prisons for illegal immigrants and deports those who’ve been convicted of crimes before they are released back into society. Would increase penalties for crimes committed by immigrants. Would change illegal presence in the country from a misdemeanor to a felony, and also would make assisting an illegal immigrant a crime. Makes drunken driving a deportable offense.

Citizenship: No new path to citizenship.

State and local impact: Reaffirms states’ "inherent authority" to assist federal officials with immigration law enforcement and would send training manuals and pocket guides to local and state law enforcement agents. Would send $1 billion a year to states for reimbursement of immigrant detention through the State Criminal Alien Assistance Program, a nearly 38 percent increase over the current $376 million budget. Would bar funds from local governments that have so-called "sanctuary laws," defined as laws that prohibit law enforcement officers from "assisting or cooperating with" immigration officials. Allows Homeland Security grants to be used for border enforcement.

Services: Would make providing services to an illegal immigrant a federal crime, punishable by up to five years in prison or seizure of assets.

English: No requirements.

Senate bill

Border security: The Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act, sponsored by Sens. John McCain, R-Ariz., and Edward Kennedy, D-Mass., calls for some additional fencing and Border Patrol agents. However, the main thrust doesn’t include beefing up border forces, which proponents say hasn't worked in the past. Instead, the bill attempts to stem illegal immigration by making it easier to come to the U.S. legally to work.

Fence: Calls for a 370-mile fence and 500 miles of vehicle barriers at the border with Mexico. The Congressional Budget Office recently estimated the fence and barriers would cost $3.3 billion to build and maintain over five years.

Entry: Would require machine-readable, tamper-resistant documents with biometric data, such as digitized pictures or fingerprints, to gain entry to the U.S.

Personnel: Would add 15,000 Border Patrol agents in the next five years to the roughly 12,000 currently on duty.

Technology: Would add biometric data to all visa and immigration documents.

Guest workers: Would create 400,000 new three-year H-5A visas for low-skilled workers who can prove they have a job waiting in the U.S, can pay $500 fee, and clear security, medical and other checks. Job listings would be posted on America's Job Bank to make sure Americans had first opportunity at jobs. Number of visas available would change depending on demand. Visa could be renewed once. After six years, worker either returns home or must be in line for a green card that allows legal residency. The Congressional Budget Office estimates the program would give some sort of legal status to 16 million immigrants over a decade’s time. More than 13 million immigrants — legal and illegal — settled in the U.S. during the 1990s, according to the U.S. Census Bureau.

Employers: Mandatory participation in a computer database system would verify eligibility of applicants, costing $1.6 billion to create and maintain for the first five years. Doubles the upper and lower penalties for knowingly hiring illegal immigrants — fines that rarely have been enforced in recent years under current laws. Fines would go to $20,000 per worker, and repeated offenders would face jail time.

Incentive to return to home country: Would help fund economic opportunity and health programs in Mexico. Guest workers would get travel authorization to visit relatives at home.

Illegal immigrants: Makes having entered the United States illegally a continuing crime (now it is not). Workers who could prove they had been working in the United States for five years or more can stay and continue working if they pay at least $3,250 in fines and fees, pay back taxes and pass an English test. Those here two to five years must go to the border and apply to return. Those here less than two years must leave the country. Those convicted of a felony or more than two misdemeanors will be deported.

Detention space: Adds 20,000 detention beds, nearly doubling existing space, at a cost of $2.6 billion over five years. Requires mandatory detention of all noncitizens (except Cubans, Mexicans and some asylum seekers) illegally entering the United States.

Criminals: Would spend an undetermined sum to expand to all states the Institutional Removal Program.

Citizenship: After working for four years, an immigrant could apply for legal permanent residency, or a "green card." The immigrant would have to pass additional work and security checks, pay more fines and fees, and pass a civics test in English. After becoming a legal permanent resident, the person could apply for citizenship.

State and local impact: Would extend the SCAAP program and the federal reimbursement program for hospitals that give emergency care to illegal immigrants. Also would allow states to seek reimbursement for indirect costs of imprisoning illegal immigrants, such as court costs, detention costs and indigent defense costs, which are now not covered.

Services: Would result in an estimated 2 to 3 percent increase in child-nutrition services, food stamps and Medicaid because there would be more legal immigrants who qualify, according to the Congressional Budget Office.

English: Would require an English and civics test for legal status. Those tests currently are required only for citizenship.

Compromise proposal (no bill yet)

Border security: The Hutchison-Pence plan has not yet been introduced as legislation and is less detailed than either the House or Senate bills, but it attempts to satisfy the border security-first crowd by making that the focus of the first two years of the plan. After the president certified the border was secure, the guest worker program could begin. This plan could be introduced by either Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison, a Texas Republican, or Rep. Mike Pence, an Indiana Republican.

Fence: Calls for "strategic" border fencing and vehicle barriers, plus a "virtual fence," using technology such as sensors and unmanned aircraft. There have been no official cost estimates for this plan.

Entry: Entry for employment will require "Secure Cards," tamper-resistant ID cards containing personal and biometric information about the worker, plus information about the employer and the job the worker will fill. The temporary work visas would be administered by private U.S. employment agencies.

Personnel: Would double the current number of Border Patrol agents by adding another 12,000 over five years, with at least 10 percent going to the northern border. Also would add 1,000 U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents in five years, and 100 helicopters and 250 boats for Border Patrol agents.

Technology: Calls for a "virtual fence" with increased and upgraded unmanned aircraft, cameras, sensors and other technology. Also would include night-vision equipment, two-way encrypted radios with global positioning system capabilities, better fingerprint technology and radiation monitors at ports.

Guest workers: After the president certified the border was secure, a program of two-year work visas would start. "Good neighbor SAFE Visas" would be renewable for 12 years. Then the person could apply for a five-year "X-Change" visa. After a total of 17 years, the person could continue with an X-Change visa, go home, or apply for a "green card," or permanent legal residency. The number of temporary work visas available would depend on demand for workers.

Employers: Employers would have to try for 30 days to hire an American at a prevailing wage. Then the employer could notify an "Ellis Island Center" that an employee was needed. The employer would use the worker’s Secure Card to determine the person’s legal status and eligibility to work. Employers would face fines for not using the system. Employers would initially be required to use the system on prospective employees. Employers would have six years to verify their entire work force.

Incentive to return to home country: Workers here illegally would have an incentive to return home quickly because they would lose their jobs to another worker who had gotten in line for a new work visa, which could only be applied for at an "Ellis Island Center" abroad.

Illegal immigrants: Illegal immigrants already in the country would have to return to their home countries to apply for a visa.

Detention space: Add 20,000 detention bed spaces.

Criminals: Would also expand the Institutional Removal Program. In fact, this proposal adopts all the security measures of the House bill, except for two. It would not make it a felony to offer humanitarian assistance to an illegal immigrant, and entering the country would remain a misdemeanor.

Citizenship: Only people from countries in the North American and Central American free-trade agreements would be eligible. After receiving work visas for the maximum 17 years, the person could "self deport" to an "Ellis Island Center" run by a private U.S. business in his or her home country and apply for legal permanent residency and, eventually, citizenship.

State and local impact: Would use Medicare withholdings from immigrants’ paychecks to reimburse hospitals for treatment for uninsured immigrants and increase funding for local law enforcement efforts.

Services: Would not allow workers to receive social services for two years. Medicare payroll deductions would go into a fund to reimburse hospitals for care of foreigners. Social Security deductions would be refundable when the person left the United States.

English: Visa holders would be required to study English and pass an exam to have their visas renewed.


Issues

Border security: Which would be more effective for national security: Trying to make the border impermeable or trying to decrease the number of illegal immigrants sneaking across the border by offering workers a way into the country legally? Or is some combination of the two approaches needed?

Fence: Would a fence actually stop immigrants from entering illegally? How effective is the new technology?

Entry: Helen Krieble, a Coloradan, suggests that if U.S. companies can create a system of secure credit cards, companies should be able to create a biometric ID card for immigrants that couldn’t be faked.

Personnel: How many Border Patrol agents are enough? What is the most effective way to patrol the border?

Technology: How reliable is the technology? Use of unmanned aerial vehicles at the border was recently suspended after one crashed. Could better technology replace some of the need for personnel? Technology has long been a challenge for immigration officials. For example, Congress has repeatedly asked for reports detailing the data immigration officials collect, but so far the Department of Homeland Security has been unable to compile the information from its databases in the way Congress wants.

Guest workers: Would waiting for immigration reform two years after border is secure make securing the border more difficult? What would be the effect of doing nothing? Would making it easier to work in the U.S. legally really stem the tide of illegal immigrants? Would a guest-worker plan alleviate concerns that immigrant labor reduces wages and job opportunities for Americans?

Employers: What kind of burden would employer requirements place on businesses? For years, immigration officials have tried to create comprehensive databases, but have repeatedly run into difficulties. Could a new system be established quickly and effectively? What would it cost the government to enforce employer rules and impose fines?

Incentive to return to home country: Would helping an immigrant’s home country offer jobs and economic opportunity be more cost-effective than receiving the immigrant into the United States?

Illegal immigrants: What should be done with the estimated 12 million illegal immigrants already in the United States? Would having to return to the country of origin make immigrants less likely to participate? Would making illegal presence in the country a crime put too much burden on state and local law enforcement? How would local and federal law enforcement handle the increased caseloads, given that immigration officials do not have enough detention beds and personnel to currently handle the capture and deportation of illegal immigrants? If proving five years of residency in the United States were required, would a new fake-document industry in utility bills and other evidence arise?

Detention space: Immigration officials are routinely forced to release detained immigrants — or ignore criminal immigrants caught by local officials — because they do not have the space to keep them. How much space would be needed? Would that number change if other enforcement aspects changed, too?

Criminals: Immigrants who’ve committed crimes have been released from state prisons in the past because immigration officials don’t have the space or personnel to handle them. The Institutional Removal Program attempts to stop that. Illegal immigrants also are often released from local jails back into society. What would be done to help local jails, which could see an influx of inmates if new laws expand the definition of criminal behavior?

Citizenship: Should people who have broken the law to enter the country have a chance to become citizens? Are there too few chances to become a U.S. citizen? If so, what impact does that have on assimilation, civic participation and other aspects of American life?

State and local impact: Today’s hearing in Aurora will detail the financial impact of illegal immigration on states. Little information exists about the impact of proposed federal legislation on local and state governments.

Services: Should people who are here illegally have access to services paid for with tax money? What about children? What would happen if a segment of the community were not given access to such services? Would costs for immigrants who receive services, such as emergency medical care that is mandated by federal law, go down if more were here legally and possibly had jobs with health insurance? Or would costs go up because newly legal immigrants would be entitled to Medicaid, whereas illegal immigrants are generally not eligible, except for emergency care?

English: Who will teach immigrants English? How long should it take to learn the language?

Information compiled by Laura Frank/Rocky Mountain News

Sources: Congress, Congressional Budget Office

Copyright 2006, Rocky Mountain News. All Rights Reserved.

Incentive to return to home country: None.

What do you call a border fence and no job? Sounds like a clear message to me.