Thread: Striving for an immigration deal

I'm only posting this article because, from what I can see, it's the most thorough in explaining the latest immigration bill proposed. If I'm wrong, please let me know ok?
~~~~~~~~~~

Thursday, March 22, 2007
Striving for an immigration deal

The lawmakers who introduced the House immigration bill are optimistic opponents on both sides can be won over.
By DENA BUNIS
The Orange County Register
WASHINGTON – Two House lawmakers who usually disagree on most things have teamed up to see if they can garner enough support for one of the most complicated issues of the day – immigration – to get a comprehensive bill passed that can eventually land on President Bush's desk.

Reps. Luis Gutierrez, D-Ill., and Jeff Flake, R-Ariz., each have factions within their parties who don't support the bill introduced Thursday. Gutierrez and Flake call it the "Security Through Regularized Immigration and a Vibrant Economy Act," or STRIVE. Even the name shows the two are bending over backward to convince their peers that the bill is not an amnesty and that it will help bail out segments of the economy that rely mostly on illegal immigrant workers.

"Our bill is about ending illegal immigration," Gutierrez said at a packed news conference.

While the majority of Democrats are expected to support the kind of measure Gutierrez is proposing, he acknowledged the bill cannot succeed without Republican votes. Some Democrats, particularly some freshmen elected from the nation's heartland, campaigned against illegal immigration.

Flake and Gutierrez hope the president's support for such an approach will help attract GOP votes. Bush has steadfastly supported a major immigration overhaul since his first term.

"The stars are finally aligned to get this done," said Flake, who said he has six other Republican supporters so far. Gutierrez said he has many supporters, including all the Democratic members of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus and Rep. Rahm Emanuel of Illinois, head of the Democratic caucus.

The measure includes elements long espoused by advocates of a broad immigration-policy change. They include more Border Patrol agents, a biometric card system to verify employment status, a program for future foreign workers and a plan that would allow the estimated 12 million undocumented immigrants here to seek legal status.

The bill also incorporates the DREAM Act, which would make it easier for children who are illegal immigrants to go to college and then get jobs, and the AgJobs bill, which creates a guest-worker program for agriculture.

The bill includes features that concern immigration advocates but are designed to elicit skeptical lawmakers' approval.

Illegal immigrants would within the next six years have to leave the United States for either Mexico or Canada, go to a processing center and re-enter the U.S. legally. Lawmakers were vague about exactly how long they would have to stay outside the country under what is being called the touchback provision. But staff members said they could stay as little as one day.

"We have questions about the operational viability and the political viability of (that provision)," said Frank Sharry, leader of the National Immigration Forum.

Rep. Ed Royce, R-Fullerton, who said he was appalled by the bill, hopes the touchback provision doesn't fool his colleagues into believing it's anything other than amnesty.

"If touching back means that an illegal immigrant can simply cross the border for five minutes and then gain legal status, then the provision is meaningless," Royce said.

In Orange County, where the details of the bill were just becoming known Thursday, immigration advocates zeroed in on that provision.

"I think it's unrealistic, though, to expect these people to leave," said Ana Maria Patina, a lawyer and Hispanic activist in Santa Ana. Patina was skeptical that the government could create a program that would let illegal immigrants leave the country and return quickly.

And Amin David, leader of Los Amigos of Orange County, said even a short stay outside the country would worry fearful illegal immigrants.

"If I leave, then the big, heavy, steel door will close down, and I'm on the other side," David said that people will think. He said the proposed $2,000 fine – $500 to apply for legal status initially and $1,500 to get on the path to citizenship – will also be difficult for many immigrants to afford.

Bonnie Robb of San Clemente, founder of the Orange County-based Minuteman Project Support Chapter, said the bill "is just another word for amnesty."

And Pat Shuff of Fullerton, a member of the California Coalition for Immigration Reform, believes such a law would encourage illegal immigration.

"We don't need any new immigration laws – we need to enforce the ones we have," she said.

The measure also says that before any legalization plan or new worker program were to start, the Department of Homeland Security would have to certify that better border surveillance is in place and that the employer-verification system is under way.

Such a trigger, first suggested by Republican senators last year, is something White House officials have also discussed.

The bill will receive a rigorous scrubbing in both the Judiciary Committee, where San Jose Democratic Rep. Zoe Lofgren heads the immigration subcommittee, and in the Homeland Security Committee, where Garden Grove Democratic Rep. Loretta Sanchez heads the border subcommittee that will have jurisdiction over the measure's border-security provisions.

Sanchez said she supports a comprehensive measure but has not signed on to the Gutierrez measure.

"I'm very pleased that the process is beginning, and I think this (issue) is going to gain a head of steam," she said.

Nor has Lofgren signed on. She said in a statement she welcomes input from all her colleagues but made it clear that her subcommittee will craft a bill she believes can get enough bipartisan support to clear the House.

In the Senate, Sen. Edward Kennedy D-Mass., is negotiating with fellow lawmakers and the White House. He said he wants to have as much consensus as he can before bringing a bill to that body's judiciary committee.

But time is limited, lawmakers say.

Gutierrez said Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid told him Wednesday that he has reserved the last two weeks of May for the immigration debate.

And those who want to see such a bill pass say if something doesn't clear the Senate and House this year, it would be extremely difficult to get it done during the 2008 presidential campaign.

What's in the bill
• Border security

Adds 11,600 border-patrol agents, 2,500 port of entry inspectors, 1,200 Immigration and Customs Enforcement investigators and 50 deputy U.S. Marshals. Strengthens border controls, including vehicle barriers and enhanced surveillance technology. Makes evading border-inspection personnel a crime.

• Interior security

Increases the number of agents enforcing immigration laws in the nation's interior and increases penalties for document fraud, smuggling and gang violence. Reaffirms that local police have inherent authority to enforce criminal provisions of immigration law in the normal course of their duty.

• Employer enforcement

Creates an electronic system for employers to verify that the people they hire are legally entitled to work in the United States. Would replace the Basic Pilot Program with a fraud-proof card. Prohibits the creation of a national identification card. Increases penalties for hiring illegal immigrants.

• New worker program

Would allow 400,000 foreign workers and their families into the U.S. each year to take jobs Americans don't want. Applicants would have to have a job lined up, have a clean criminal record and undergo a medical exam. After five years of work, they could apply for conditional permanent residency and eventual citizenship. Any community with an unemployment rate greater than 9 percent would be ineligible. The 400,000 would be adjusted based on market needs. A new H-2C visa would be valid for three years and renewable for another three. Application fee, $500; permanent-status fee, $500.

• Legalization plan

Would first allow illegal-immigrant workers and their families who have lived and worked in the United States since June 1 to get conditional-immigrant status by paying a $500 fine and passing a criminal-background check. Status valid for six years.

Permanent status and citizenship: Within six years, immigrants would have to leave United States, go to Mexico or Canada, and re-enter legally. An immigrant would have to also pay a $1,500 fine, have a good work record, learn English and civics, pay back taxes and pass a criminal-background check.

• Trigger

The new worker program and legalization plan wouldn't take effect without border-security and employment-verification measures in place.
What's next? HOUSE
• Committees: Judiciary and Homeland Security share jurisdiction. Immigration panel chair Rep. Zoe Lofgren, D-San Jose, and border security panel chair Rep. Loretta Sanchez, D-Garden Grove, expected to hold hearings.

• Strategy: While hearings proceed, supporters and opponents will be trying to sway fellow members. Advocacy groups on both sides will be pressuring lawmakers.

• The bill:So far no bill has been introduced. Senators, White House negotiating specifics.

• Strategy: Senate Leader Harry Reid has told House members he wants to have a bill on the floor during the last two weeks of May.

Reaffirms that local police have inherent authority to enforce criminal provisions of immigration law in the normal course of their duty.

So, they're finally admitting that local police have this right? Of course, it's after legalizing 12 million to 20 million people. Sure took them long enough to figure this one out!

Ostrich

Increases the number of agents enforcing immigration laws in the nation's interior and increases penalties for document fraud, smuggling and gang violence. Reaffirms that local police have inherent authority to enforce criminal provisions of immigration law in the normal course of their duty.

This article is more specific, Same as always, just trying to fool us into thinking there is something different about it. Dream act , AGS bill ,do we look like we were born last night????I guarantee you I don't!

This has one big loop hole in it. It is flawed in as it says "police have inherent authority to enforce criminal provisions of immigration laws in normal course of duty " ( Then they will have to make being in this country a felony in order for local police to enforce) it they can't enforce the laws in our towns it is not good enough.
So I guess you could say!!

But good article Jean!!

Do all the illegals from other countries have to go back to their home country or go to Mexico??? This is idiotic! What about chain migration?

We need to find out who the six republicans are that signed on to this!