Question:
Immigration Bill?
Answer:
The House of Representatives late Friday night approved a
border security bill that builds new fences and detains more illegal
immigrants but does not include the broader immigration reforms that
many seek.
With Republicans divided, Democrats more or less united and business
lobbyists upset, the House passed the border security package on a
239-182 vote. If it beats the odds and becomes law, the bill would have
far-reaching consequences for American businesses and immigrants alike.
"Securing our nation's borders is an imperative," said Rep. James
Sensenbrenner, R-Wis., the bill's author and chairman of the House
Judiciary Committee.
Under the bill, new security fences, cameras and lights would arise
along 700 miles of the Southwestern border, and officials would study
building another fence spanning the Canadian border.
All U.S. businesses would have to check worker eligibility through a
government database, and tens of thousands of additional immigrants
would be detained.
The bill also would create a new felony called "illegal presence"
within the United States, which could be punished by more than a year
in jail. An amendment added Friday would eliminate the diversity visa
lottery program by which 50,000 immigrants a year are randomly selected
from more than 6 million applicants worldwide.
This bill is either an insult to our intelligence or a con on the
American people," said Rep. Howard Berman, D-North Hollywood, a
longtime negotiator on immigration issues. He added, "I'm very
skeptical that we will ever see this bill coming back here."
Republican leaders limited debate Thursday and Friday so that certain
hot-button proposals wouldn't arise, even as more than 35 other, often
symbolic, amendments were permitted. For instance, the House included a
provision ordering a "hard deadline" to attain "operational control" of
the U.S. borders.
Conservatives, though, were blocked from trying to eliminate what they
call "birthright citizenship," which is the automatic U.S. citizenship
granted to children born in this country to illegal immigrants. That
debate would have discomfited a party seeking Latino voters.
At the same time, Berman and his allies were blocked from offering
competing bills that would create a new guest-worker program and
establish new avenues for illegal immigrants to obtain legal status. A
number of Central Valley lawmakers and farm and labor groups prefer
this approach to the more single-minded border security bill.
"This is not the comprehensive solution we must have," said Rep. Jim
Costa, D-Fresno, a member of the House Agriculture Committee. "It's
half a loaf, at best."
Reps. Doris Matsui, D-Sacramento, and Mike Thompson, D-St. Helena, also
opposed the bill.
"Unfortunately," Matsui said as debate began, "this legislation focuses
entirely on border security and cracking down on illegal immigration.
It fails to truly address the underlying issue of why people (are) ...
risking death to come to the United States."
And the politicians wonder why they have such a huge credibility gap
with Jane and Joe Average. Wonder if they'll ever figure it out.
Change does take place when there is a lot of political
pressure. Something substantive will take place if Bush is concerned
about his legacy of his office, and decides to push Congress to pass
this legislation. And if Republicans want Democrat support, then they
should compromise by adding in programs supported by Democrats. We
haven't had much recognition of the improving economy because most
workers have been left out of large corporate profits. Reform like
this is the opportunity for the govt to control immigrant workers and
keep a lot of Americans from unemployment and stangnant pay and no
benefits.
