Comprehensive Immigration Bill at Senate

NY Times Editorial
Immigration's Moment

Published: March 15, 2006
This is a pivotal week in the search for answers for the nation's immigration problems. The Senate Judiciary Committee resumes debate today over a bill whose design and fate could determine whether Congress finally achieves comprehensive, workable immigration reform or adds to decades of failure.

The Senate's role is crucial because the House has already passed its bill, a punitive measure that seeks to stem the immigrant tide without offering the other half of a true solution: a constructive approach to the estimated 12 million people who are already here illegally. Since the House bill would make being here without papers an aggravated felony, would turn people who extend charity to illegal immigrants into "alien smugglers" and would grant state and local police officers the "inherent authority" to enforce immigration laws, the authors presumably want to rouse the country to seek out and deport every last unauthorized person.

Nothing in past experience suggests that such an effort is possible, or that it would accomplish anything beyond making millions of people shrink further from the sunlight of lawfulness and order, and giving the bill's sponsors the transient illusion that the United States is a mighty fortress unto itself.

The Judiciary Committee is under pressure from the Senate majority leader, Bill Frist, to complete a bill by the end of the month. Its chairman, Arlen Specter, is trying to walk a tightrope between the hard-core restrictionists and those who favor real reform. Senator Specter has shaped an unsatisfactory compromise: a program that would not build in a path to citizenship. It would create a hired army of permanently temporary workers, who would be free to take our most strenuous and unwanted jobs but not to integrate into society.

The bill would not explicitly bar those with temporary work visas from pursuing the existing paths to citizenship, but since the number of green cards would not appreciably increase, their path to citizenship would effectively be blocked. Mr. Specter's bill would not create a two-tiered society with a permanent underclass; it would merely enshrine the phenomenon in law.

One sign of this country's self-confidence and strength has been its ability to welcome and absorb the people who want to make new lives here. Senators John McCain and Edward Kennedy, recognizing this, have offered a bill that would provide a path to earned legalization for those who put down roots, learn English, keep their records clean and pay back taxes and steep fines.

Mr. Specter and his committee colleagues should follow the McCain-Kennedy example in creating a comprehensive immigration bill, one that acknowledges that permanent guest workers, while important, are no substitute for immigrant citizens who work their way up to better jobs, pay more taxes, buy houses and consumer goods, and otherwise strengthen the social fabric.

If the committee needs more time to do this, Mr. Specter should insist that Mr. Frist ease up on his deadline. President Bush, meanwhile, should show leadership in pushing for sensible and humane program for temporary workers. He should rediscover his election-season enthusiasm for his vision of America as a land of opportunity "para todos," for all. And the rest of us need to decide where we want to live: in a shining city on a hill, or a gated community in a cul-de-sac.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/15/opinion/15wed2.html?_r=1&th&emc=th&oref=slogin
 
Get updates at www.immigrationvoice.org

the said:
Just called up the Senate Judiciary Committee. Today's meeting is already over. They could not relay the hearings on their website due to the sudden change in the rooms. The record of today's meeting is not yet out. We'll have to check on other websites like AILA to see what amendments were included.

Tomorrow's meeting starts at 9 AM.
Click to expand...
This was just posted at www.immigrationvoice.org - you should get the latest possible updates over there!
 
http://www.aila.org/content/default.aspx?docid=18835

Senate Judiciary Committee Continues Slow Progress in Markup of Immigration Reform Legislation
Cite as "AILA InfoNet Doc. No. 06031540 (posted Mar. 15, 2006)"


The Senate Judiciary Committee continued its consideration today of draft legislation on comprehensive immigration reform sponsored by Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter. The Committee officially took up the bill, known as the “Chairman’s Mark,” on March 2 but has made very slow progress to date.

The following is a very brief summary of the amendments that were addressed during today’s session. See our previous update on last week’s markup sessions. We will continue to update you as action on the bill continues.

1. The Committee passed by a voice vote a compromise amendment by Feingold that would preserve some level of judicial review over naturalization applications.

2. A Specter 2nd degree amendment to a Sessions amendment on evading inspection passed.

3. A Leahy amendment on security-related issues passed by voice vote.

4. A Kennedy amendment to ameliorate the Mark’s retroactive provisions was debated and deferred.

5. A Feinstein amendment to modify the provisions of the Mark relating to border security was deferred for future action.

6. A Durbin amendment to strike the Mark’s criminalization of unlawful status was once again deferred for future consideration. Feinstein attempted to offer a 2nd degree amendment that would provide aliens with a 60-day grace period for visa overstays before they are subject to criminal prosecution under INA § 275(a), but Specter would not allow it since Durbin’s underlying amendment was set aside.

7. A Durbin amendment to ameliorate the Mark’s smuggling provision so as not to criminalize humanitarian assistance was once again debated and deferred. Kyl spoke in opposition to the amendment. Cornyn had a second degree that Hatch thought was insufficient. Hatch, Schumer and Biden spoke in opposition to Cornyn’s 2nd degree. Cornyn was not convincing, but Kyl did some damage.

8. A Sessions amendment to affirm the inherent authority of state and local law enforcement personnel to enforce federal civil immigration laws during the normal course of carrying out their duties was discussed. Specter offered a 2nd degree that would limit the inherent authority of states and localities to the enforcement of the criminal provisions of the immigration laws. Sessions would only support the 2nd degree if the provisions of the Mark criminalizing unlawful presence remain intact. Thus, if the Durbin amendment to strike those provisions passes, Sessions wants to revisit the Specter 2nd degree. Specter’s 2nd degree passed by voice vote.

9. A Sessions amendment that would require the Secretary of Homeland Security to provide information to the National Crime Information Center (NCIC) related to aliens who may have violated certain immigration laws passed by a voice vote. The broadly worded amendment would encompass visa overstayers, other civil violators, and even members of vulnerable populations such as asylum-seekers who are improperly documented but seeking relief. Leahy and Kennedy voted against the amendment and Leahy spoke in opposition to overloading the NCIC database with individuals who do not belong in it. A Specter 2nd degree amendment that would provide a procedure for requesting removal from the database and modify the group of individuals included in it passed by voice vote.

10. A Sessions amendment that would require at least one law enforcement agency in each state to enter into a § 287(g) cooperative enforcement agreement to enforce immigration laws against alien smugglers was considered. Sessions accepted a Coburn 2nd degree amendment that would clarify: (1) that such agreements would be purely voluntary, and (2) that the §287(g) enforcement authority would not be limited to alien smuggling. There was no quorum to vote on these, however, and they were set aside.

Part way through the markup, Specter attempted to jump to a debate on the issue of the undocumented population, noting that he has reiterated to Senate Majority Leader Frist that he (Specter) opposes bringing immigration reform to the Senate Floor before the Senate Judiciary Committee had completed its consideration of the Chairman’s Mark. Biden and Kennedy voiced their support of Specter’s desire to complete work in Committee. Kennedy added, “this issue is NOT going away, like some other issues,” and urged deferral of the Title VI discussion until tomorrow (Title VI contains the provisions dealing with the undocumented population). He added that we need to deal with ALL aspects of reform to have real, lasting border security—going forward with any of these components alone will fail.

Durbin said that, to defeat the House bill (H.R. 4437), the Committee needs to pass a strong bipartisan bill with the support of about 12 members. He feels the Committee should do an extra markup session on a day when there is no other Senate business. “We need to watch the House,” noted Durbin, adding: “They have a bill we need to fight at all costs. We need bipartisan support out of this Committee.”

Brownback stated that the Committee has started a process to create broad bipartisan support for good policy, and that this is the most significant legislation of the year. “We have serious problems with immigrant numbers,” he said. “We can’t live with these and need to change them. McCain/Kennedy would deal with this. How do we get the Mark to deal with these numbers? We need a way NOT to end up here again after 10 years. We can’t move too quickly.”

Cornyn described the process as akin to “digging out of a big hole,” noting that with enforcement done first, other issues would get simpler. He believes we need to impose circularity---not permanent immigration.

Coburn said that, like it or not, we have to deal with issue of the undocumented population. He urged the Committee to split the bill in two and do enforcement first, and work to reach consensus on other parts later in the year. “No one in the country trusts us on this issue because we haven’t enforced our existing laws,” he said.

Feinstein stated her concerns about the process, and also spoke out against comprehensive immigration reform and in favor of her more limited agricultural pilot program idea. She said she had met with Senator Craig (the sponsor of AgJobs) yesterday to see if they could work out their differences but there has been no resolution yet. She also expressed much frustration with Frist’s artificial timeline. She indicated her opposition to the House bill, and said that consensus was needed in the Committee (she believes the Committee has come to some consensus on the enforcement pieces but little else). She urged Specter to go back to Frist and ask for more time.

Sessions said we need to focus on enforcement now, and then have a national discussion later on the other elements of immigration reform. He believes Congress needs to focus on enforcement to build credibility with the public. “I’m not prepared to repeat 1986,” he said. “We should slow down.”

Specter repeatedly voiced his concern about “line-jumping,” arguing that the McCain/Kennedy bill would “leap frog” the current undocumented population over individuals who have been waiting in the backlogs. He also said that he’d prefer it if the legislation contained a path to citizenship but, as Chair, was trying to balance both sides.

In other hurdles to the Judiciary Committee’s completion of work on the bill, Senate Finance Committee Chairman Grassley, who is also a member of the Judiciary Committee, argued that the Finance Committee should have jurisdiction over the provisions of the Mark relating to the Social Security Act, adding that the IRS has raised serious concerns about some of these amendments. However, several other senators argued for consideration of these provisions in the Judiciary Committee. It is also possible that Grassley could exercise the Finance Committee’s authority by managing those amendments during floor debate.

The Committee disbanded about noon, due to a number of votes on the Senate Floor and the attendant low probability of maintaining a voting quorum in the Committee.
 
This bill is going nowhere !!!!!

The out put of this bill same as 1932. They have no will, so it is only a debate part of politics. I don't think it is worth spending time on this. This is a dead bill. :mad:
 
I think you are right. I am not expecting any immigration relef for people pursuing immigration legally.this bill is being used as a political ploy.
 
Senate Judiciary Committee Begins Debate on the 12 Million but Defers Vote Until After Recess
Cite as "AILA InfoNet Doc. No. 06031669 (posted Mar. 16, 2006)"


Members of the Senate Judiciary Committee finally broached the controversial subject of the undocumented population on day five of the Committee's markup of draft legislation on comprehensive immigration reform, but deferred any votes on the subject until after next week's congressional recess.
Chairman Specter began the day's proceedings by reiterating that it would be a "colossal mistake" for Senate Majority Leader Frist to bring an immigration bill to the Senate floor that had not been completely vetted by the Senate Judiciary Committee. As background, Senator Frist has threatened to bring his enforcement-only legislation directly to the Senate floor unless the Judiciary Committee produces a bill by March 27. Senator Frist could do this using the seldom employed "Rule 14" procedure that permits him to introduce a bill and bypass the committee process so that it goes directly to the Senate calendar. According to Senate sources, Senator Frist's bill would simply take Chairman Specter's proposal and strip out the guestworker plan and the provisions dealing with the estimated 12 million undocumented aliens present in the U.S.

Because Senator Frist apparently will not back off of his deadline, Chairman Specter proposed this morning to continue the Committee's work beyond what was to have been the final day of the markup (today). Unfortunately, the Senate is out on recess next week, leaving tomorrow or Monday, March 27, as the only available options for continued work. Most of the Senators present agreed that meeting on March 27 would make sense, with the exception of Senator Cornyn, who disagreed that bringing the Committee's incomplete bill to the floor would be problematic (clearly an attempt on his part to stave off debate in the Committee on what to do with the undocumented population). However, in a clear rebuke to Senator Cornyn, Chairman Specter responded that the Committee would proceed immediately to debate on the controversial issue of a path to citizenship for the undocumented!

Chairman Specter said that he and Senator Kennedy talked at length yesterday about the issue of the undocumented. He reiterated his concerns about the undocumented workers jumping the line in front of those who have followed the legal channels. He's concerned about 25-year backlogs for 4th preference beneficiaries and other long backlogs. However, he noted his willingness to find a way to put the undocumented on a path to citizenship at the end of the line. Chairman Specter also reiterated that he wants a bill to come out of Committee that can pass the floor and be reconciled with the House bill.

Senator Kennedy argued that the McCain/Kennedy bill will not lead to line-jumping, explaining that the bill's formula would clear backlogs and deal with the lines themselves. In addition, he noted his willingness to accept a 2nd degree amendment to ensure that legal permanent residence would not be granted to the undocumented population until both the current employment-based and family-based backlogs had been cleared. "What really is the alternative," he asked? "Mass deportations? Criminalization and a permanent subclass?"

Senator Kennedy continued by talking eloquently about the pure motives of immigrants who have come to this country, both historically and currently, to make a better life for themselves and their families. He said that we should admire the drive of these people. We should not treat them as criminals but should give them an opportunity. We should bring them out of shadows, have them pay a fine, work, and wait their turn. Senator Kennedy also noted that some 60,000 legal permanent residents currently serve in the U.S. Armed Forces.

Senator Kyl noted that no one on the Committee supports enforcement only, adding that his and Senator Cornyn's proposal would provide a "work opportunity," not a punishment. He said that the Specter "gold card" would be just like a green card but without the right to citizenship. He also opined that people waiting in the family-based backlog don't have the right to be in the U.S. now, so letting undocumented aliens get in line would harm those individuals who have been waiting patiently. At one point, he allowed that it might be OK to give a path to citizenship to high skilled workers but not to low skilled workers.

Senator Cornyn associated himself with Senator Kyl's remarks. "We can't accept everyone in the world who wants to come here," he said. And while he professed agreement with Senator Kennedy about the beneficial contributions and benevolent motivations of the undocumented population, he couldn't seem to get past the "law breaking" issue. "The American people won't accept a program to deal with the undocumented if we haven't finished the bill's enforcement titles," he argued. He also defended the Cornyn/Kyl "report to deport" proposal, noting that it is neither a ruse nor impractical. He added that the intention of the proposal is not to strand people outside of the country as some have accused.

Senator Durbin weighed in by stating that the immigration system has been broken for a long while. He recounted stories about important individuals he knows whose parents were undocumented aliens. He stood in support of the McCain/Kennedy proposal, calling it "tough but fair," and reiterated that we should not be criminalizing undocumented status, as both the Chairman's Mark and H.R. 4437 would do.

Senator Graham noted that many people, including many on the Republican side of the aisle, don't even want to debate this complex issue. For them, rounding these immigrants up and deporting them is the only answer. "Such a proposal is simply not feasible," Senator Graham added. He also noted that half of his family likely would not be able to meet the requirements of the McCain/Kennedy legislation, thereby buttressing the argument that it is no easy give away. "While there are lots of people on talk radio complaining about the undocumented, these folks are out there working," he said. "This is not a 'get out of jail free' card." In addition to those who would deport the undocumented population, there are others who would put them all in jail, he continued, adding that this also would not work. He warned Chairman Specter and others that they shouldn't be trying to avoid criticism on this issue, because they're all going to get it. He agreed that the undocumented population should be put in line behind all those currently waiting in the backlogs but does not believe it is appropriate to force them to leave the country in order to take part in the program, as this would break up families.

Senator Feinstein argued that the DHS would be incapable of handling such a massive program. She was also concerned with what would happen to those who apply for the program if they are unable to pass the requisite background checks. "Could people with minor misdemeanors get status,?" she asked. She requested a letter from Senator Kennedy's staff on the issue. Senator Feinstein also returned to the issue of DHS's processing capabilities, asking for additional information on the subject before the issue is brought to a vote.

Senator Specter indicated that he intends to work through the undocumented issue by beginning with the McCain/Kennedy bill and the 2nd degree amendment mentioned above by Senator Kennedy. He also indicated that there is a deal on the table between Senators Cornyn and Kennedy on the temporary worker (future flows) program.

Senator Feinstein brought up the subject of agricultural workers and wanted to know why they weren't included as part of the guestworker program. Senator Kennedy responded that the reason is because Senator Craig, the chief sponsor of AgJobs, would offer it as an amendment on the floor. Senator Brownback opined that they needed to have staff work out the details of any agricultural program.

Chairman Specter then noted that staff would be working out various details during next week's recess, confirmed continuation of the markup on March 27th, and gaveled the meeting to a close.
http://www.aila.org/content/default.aspx?docid=18845
 
Thursday, March 16, 2006
Compromise reached on guest-worker plan
Senate panel's deal includes legalization proposal.

By DENA BUNIS
The Orange County Register

WASHINGTON – The Senate Judiciary Committee today reached agreement on proposals for a new guest-worker program and a plan to allow the estimated 12 million illegal immigrants living in the United States to become permanent residents.

Less than 24 hours after most experts and Capitol Hill watchers believed the committee would be unable to get a bill to the Senate floor by Majority Leader Bill Frist's March 27 deadline, committee Chairman Arlen Specter had brokered deals between some key senators on the complex issue.

No formal votes were taken and committee staffs were preparing to spend the next 10 days drafting language that would put in place the compromises reached. It appeared that at least a dozen of the 18 members on the panel would be prepared to back this deal. The committee plans to meet first thing in the morning on March 27. It is not yet known whether Frist will allow the panel to finish and send its bill to the Senate floor or if he still plans to bring up a more limited, possibly enforcement-only measure.

But even if nothing scuttles the compromise between now and when lawmakers get back from recess, and if the Senate passes a bill with these elements, there would remain a steep battle to get agreement from the House. The House passed an enforcement-based measure in December that doesn't include a guest-worker program or a plan for undocumented immigrants in the United States now.

The most likely scenario, said ardent supporters of immigration reform who were pleasantly stunned by today's events, is that this will end in a stalemate, only to be brought up again in the next Congress. But they say it's important that the Senate go on record as supporting comprehensive change.

For the first time, Specter, R-Pa., who said he spent hours on the phone last night with Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass., agreed to Kennedy's plan to deal with the estimated 12 million illegal immigrants. Specter would have allowed these people to work indefinitely but not get green cards. Kennedy wanted to give them a path to legalization.
Specter agreed this morning with Kennedy's approach, provided that these illegal immigrants would not be able to start legalization proceedings until the backlog of 3 million people now waiting in countries around the world for their chance to come to the United States legally get their green cards.

The deal reached on a new guest-worker plan says that 400,000 new guest workers would be allowed into the country each year. Under the proposal authored by Kennedy and Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., that number would have been unlimited. But Kennedy, a senior member of the Judiciary Committee, agreed to a cap and also agreed that after working for two years, these new guest workers would have to go back to their home countries and reapply for another stint as guest workers, one that could last up to six years. But first they'd have to stay in their home countries for one year.

Built into this compromise, however, is a chance for these workers to get a waiver and not go home based on how long they have been employed here or if they are considered essential to a U.S. employer's business.

The plan also allows guest workers to apply for permanent U.S. residency, something not included in either Specter's bill or the other major proposal under consideration, the bill by Sens. John Cornyn, R-Texas and Jon Kyl, R-Ariz.

Kennedy essentially compromised with Cornyn, who chairs the immigration subcommittee. The deal takes parts of each of their proposals.

Not all members of the committee agreed with these compromises.
Kyl said he still believed the illegal immigrants would get preference over those waiting legally in line overseas because the undocumented would be able to stay in the U.S. and work until their turn at a green card came. Those waiting to come here legally don't have that option, he said.

And several committee members most opposed to a guest-worker program – most notably Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., were not at this morning's session.


http://www.ocregister.com/ocregister/homepage/abox/article_1053340.php
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top