Immigration Blog

Pages: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8

Closing Amendments to S.2611 Immigration Compromise Bill


May 25, 2006

Yesterday afternoon the Senate considered several amendments to S.2611, the Hagel-Martinez Immigration Compromise bill.  Among the results were:
  • Increasing the amount of fees required by the legalization program by $500.00, raising the total amount of fees to more than $3,200.00.  The amendment passed 73-25.
  • Reserving 2/3 of the 55,000 diversity visa lottery numbers for persons with advanced degrees in math, science, and technology.  The effect of the amendment will likely be a substantial decrease in the number of diversity visas granted, as the majority of diversity visas go to third world countries.  The amendment passed 56-42.
  • Removing international adoption responsibilites from the Department of Homeland Security and placing them wholly within the Department of State.  The amendment passed on a voice vote.
  • Terminating the guestworker program after five years.  The amendment failed by a single vote 48-49.

A handful of amendments are expected to have votes this morning with a vote on the final bill expected this afternoon.



Immigration and America


May 24, 2006

Two things really struck me today in regards to the immigration debate swirling throughout the U.S.  First, on my drive home I listened to a caller on a local talk radio show talk about how Mexicans working in American restaurants were spreading diseases like e.coli because they "don't have our hygiene," among other statements similar in nature.  This particular radio show's host--who in past dealings has always been fair on this issue--was absent and his replacements for two days now have been exploiting the immigration issue to keep listeners on the station.  Today's particular replacement didn't bother to interrupt or voice disagreement with this lady's blatant racist remarks.  And second, this evening I read a news release issued by U.S. Citizenship & Immigration Services stating that USCIS had just returned from Iraq after swearing in more than 200 immigrant U.S. soldiers as naturalized citizens.  Last year over 7,000 immigrants serving in the U.S. Armed Forces became naturalized citizens.  Two glaring insights into immigration and America.  Which one makes you proud?

Reminder: No Immigration Reform Laws Have Been Passed


May 24, 2006

I just want to remind readers that no new immigration reform laws have been passed into law.  The bills and amendments I've previously discussed are all important parts of the debate about what an immigration reform law should look like and steps in the process of getting a new law.  But the contents of any reform are still uncertain, its passage into law is far from certain, and final resolution could still be months away.



Senate Heightens Employer Responsibility--and Fines


May 24, 2006

The Senate yesterday passed the Grassley (R-IA) Amendment by a vote of 58-40 that will require electronic verification of the immigration status of all new hires, beginning 18 months after the program is funded by Congress.  Employers who hired unauthorized workers after that time would be subject to a fine of $20,000 / worker.  Repeat violators could be subject to prison terms of up to three years.  The electronic verification system would replace the current I-9 compliance system with the hopes of disrupting the production and use of fraudulent documents.  The Senate amendment differs from HR4437 in that only new hires would be verified rather than all employees under the House version.  In this amendment Congress has again placed a tremendous onus on the Department of Homeland Security to develop and implement a workable system of verifying employment authorization, the very nature of which is quite complex and fact-specific.  This is a daunting task that, if poorly or incompletely done, could create havoc for both U.S. and immigrant populations alike.

Orange Card Amendment Fails in Senate


May 23, 2006

Senator Feinstein's (D-CA) "Orange Card" amendment failed by roughly a 2-1 differential today in the Senate.  The Orange Card amendment would have eliminated S.2611's three-tiered approach to immigration reform based on an immigrant's length of residence in the U.S. and replaced it with a single program open to all immigrants residing in the U.S. as of January 1, 2006.  Senator Feinstein was rightly concerned about the complexity of the three-tiered approach and its incentive for massive fraud, which her amendment would largely have eliminated.  In my opinion, the Orange Card would be the most workable policy solution.  However, passage of the Orange Card amendment would undoubtedly have made a difficult conference committee even more contentious and further endangered the prospects of getting any type of positive immigration reform out of the House.  The Senate vote indicates that the Orange Card amendment was outside of the "middle ground" that has proved successful thus far in the Senate debate.  At the end of the day, the Senate may have avoided a "poison pill" by voting down the Orange Card amendment and retaining the three-tiered approach that favors long-term residence in the U.S.

Does the S.2611 Immigration Compromise Bill Even Matter?


May 22, 2006

With the unyielding rhetoric coming from conservative members of the U.S. House of Representatives it is easy to wonder if passage of a Senate immigration bill even matters.  After all, even if the Senate bill passes it still has to be reconciled with the House bill in a conference committee in which James Sensenbrenner, author of HR4437, will be the chief House negotiater.  Then the committee's final product has to be approved again by both the Senate and the House. 
 
House Republicans have largely rebuffed President Bush's 5-point immigration policy speech (as well as his chief advisor Karl Rove) in favor of enforcement-only measures.  Four of Tennessee's five Democratic House members voted in favor of HR4437 as well, with recent statements from Harold Ford, Jr. (who is running for Bill Frist's Senate seat) proclaiming his continued opposition to any "amnesty" program.  Unlike the Senate, where the "middle ground" has been largely successful in the form of the Hagel-Martinez votes, the middle ground seems to have no voice at all in the House.
 
So, does S.2611 even matter?  Yes, because the Senate will need as strong a hand as it can get going into a conference committee that will see little if any compromise from the House.  The stronger the Senate's hand the more it can give up and still come out with a workable policy; the weaker its hand the closer the bill is likely to resemble the House's version.
 
It is entirely possible that after all the work that immigration advocates have put into the Senate bill, that they may have to turn against it if the final product turns out to more closely resemble HR4437 than S.2611.  What is certain is that the work that advocates have done in the Senate in recent months will pale in comparison to what will be required to swing the House to a moderate position in the immigration debate.


Update on Senate Amendments to Immigration Bill


May 18, 2006

The Senate has been debating amendments to the immigration reform bill this week.  Some of the results of these votes are as follows:
  • Authorizing more than 350 miles of fencing and vehicle barriers along the U.S. - Mexico border.
  • Adopting a "prevailing wage" standard for determining wages that must be paid to guestworkers.
  • Prohibiting legalization of an undocumented person with a felony conviction or 3 or more misdemeanor convictions and those with prior orders of removal.
  • Heightening evidentiary requirements for proving periods of residence and employment.
  • Efforts to strike the guestworker program have thus far failed, as have efforts to block citizenship for long-term residents and permanent residence (green card status) for certain guestworkers.

More amendments will be debated in the coming days with the goal of a final vote by the end of the month.  Stay tuned.



What Kind of Immigration Bill Will Come Out of the Senate?


May 17, 2006

This week the Senate is considering approximately 40 amendments to the underlying immigration bill, S.2611--the Hagel-Martinez Compromise Bill.  The Hagel-Martinez bill basically tracks the 5-point plan laid out by the President in Monday's speech:  strengthening border enforcement, creating a guestworker program so the U.S. can meet its labor needs with a lawful workforce, allowing earned citizenship for long-time residents, and promoting assimilation.
 
These amendments run the gamut:  some would strip the guestworker program, some would strip the earned citizenship, etc.  As a result, though the Hagel-Martinez bill is comprehensive in nature, the final result of the Senate's work may not be.  This week's votes on these amendments will determine what kind of immigration bill comes out of the Senate.  It is so important for stakeholders in this debate to contact their Senators in support of a comprehensive approach that recognizes that a border wall alone is not going to resolve our immigration issues.


President Bush's 5-Point Immigration Plan


May 15, 2006

Tonight in a prime-time televised speech, President Bush laid out his 5 point plan for immigration reform:
 
1.  Secure the borders:  deploying 6,000 National Guard to support Border Patrol efforts; employing new technology to monitor the borders: training local and state law enforcement officers in border states to enforce immigration laws; and increasing detention capacity.
2.  Temporary worker program:  creating a guest worker program that matches willing workers with willing employers; workers must leave at conclusion of their program.
3.  Employer responsibility:  require greater employer responsibility in hiring legal workers; establishing better verification procedures and more reliable worker documentation.
4.  Permitting long-term residents a path to citizenship:  after paying a meaningful penalty, paying any taxes owed, learning English, and securing employment, long-time residents would be permitted a path to citizenship, behind those who had entered legally.
5.  Promoting assimilation:  emphasizing the importance of learning English.
 
President Bush spoke of finding the rational middle-ground and he's on the right track.  Regulating the flow of people into the U.S. is a rational and legitimate need, but it cannot be done with enforcement measures alone.  Keeping people out should not be the goal; rather encouraging them to use meaningful and effective legal measures should be the goal.


U.S. Troops to the Border?


May 15, 2006

President Bush has announced plans to send up to 6,000 National Guard troops to the U.S.-Mexico border to support border enforcement efforts.  The move is undoubtedly an effort to appease enforcement-only advocates in order to secure passage of some form of comprehensive immigration reform.
 
Some congressional members are wondering if the National Guard, already stretched by the Iraq war, can simultaneously handle border enforcement, as well.  Mexican President Vicente Fox has voiced concern over the impact of militarizing the borders.
 
The President is giving a prime-time speech on the issue tonight, so we will know more soon.
 
 


Pages: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8