(Please welcome Marisa McNee of the Coalition for Comprehensive Immigration Reform, offering a follow up to our discussion of the current immigration bill working its way through congress, discussed here last week. Marisa and her colleagues, Jeff Hauser (CCIR), Doug Rivlin (National Immigration Forum), Lynn Tramonte (National Immigration Forum) and Maurice Belanger (National Immigration Forum) will be on hand in the comments for the next hour or so to answer questions about this bill and the current legislative effort to promote fair and just immigration reform. As always when we have guests, please remain on topic and use the prior discussion thread for off-topic discussion. Thanks! Please welcome our guests. — Pach)
The Coalition for Comprehensive Immigration Reform (CCIR) welcomes the opportunity to engage with the FDL community on the issue of immigration, one of the most important, complicated, and heated policy debates of our time. Our broken immigration system has long bedeviled our political system, and we appreciate the chance to engage in a dialogue with progressive activists to create the space where a solution to this charged issue will be forged – a space that must reach across the aisle because the road to real solutions is bipartisan.
We hope to provide some context to the debate over comprehensive immigration reform and also make ourselves available to provide as much information as possible about the Senate compromise immigration reform bill that will hit the Senate this week.
If you're asking, "Who is CCIR?" the short answer is that we are a campaign working to achieve comprehensive immigration reform, powered by the efforts of immigrant rights, policy advocacy, grassroots, religious, civil rights and labor organizations across the United States.
Working for true and fair immigration reform requires a careful balance between ideals and political reality that upholds the nation's values. It is colored as much by the hardworking immigrants who embody and renew the American dream, as it is by the pressing need to restore the rule of law and a system that respects all workers. The status quo is untenable: twelve million undocumented immigrants live fearfully in the shadows subject to exploitation and being plucked from their families, 500 people die each year in the desert seeking a better life, U.S. workers are asked to compete with undocumented immigrants often afraid to demand basic protections like due wages or a safe work environment, and hate groups are on the rise.
America has a need and a moral obligation to act. With that backdrop, we see Thursday's Senate compromise immigration reform bill as a strong shove forward, and recognize Senators of both parties for their efforts to reach an agreement that will launch the debate.
Because the crisis of the undocumented must be addressed – and addressed now – we are glad that even conservatives such as Jon Kyl, Saxby Chambliss, and Johnny Isakson have finally joined the majority in recognizing that an earned path to citizenship is not amnesty.
However, we see the agreement as the point of departure from which the Senate must work to achieve the type of system America needs – one that rewards work while protecting workers, honors families, restores the rule of law, and strengthens our economy.
As the agreement stands, it does not yet meet those goals. Among the principal concerns are a proposed temporary worker program which would create a permanent underclass of workers without rights, and the dramatic undoing of one of the cornerstones of American immigration policy, family reunification.
If "temporary means temporary" when it comes to a program for future workers, it creates two big problems: it either creates a churning second-class workforce with limited rights and opportunities, or, more likely, it creates incentives for immigrant workers to ‘jump the program," creating another fast growing poll of undocumented workers. Workers without any opportunity to put down roots could be used against low-wage workers already here. We oppose guest worker programs. However, we do support a temporary worker program with a path to citizenship as a way to provide legal channels for future migration. We believe it unlikely that even the best enforcement system will stop undocumented immigration unless a "break the mold" new worker program is created, providing new workers equal rights and a realistic, structured path to citizenship. Our aging population, growing demand for low-skilled workers, and growing inequality across the Americas, makes an enforcement-only strategy unrealistic. And it is clear to us that native-born and legal immigrant low-wage workers will fare better competing with new workers sharing equal rights, rather than with indentured servants.
The bill also radically undermines family reunification, devaluing the intact family structure. And it does so to create instead a point system skewed toward wealth and education that shuns humble workers and ignores family and employer ties. As Gen Fujioka, program director for the Asian Law Caucus in San Francisco has noted this proposal "will undermine the most important ingredient in creating healthy communities. Families are the source of our social, cultural, and economic vitality. The Senate proposal makes it more difficult for talented and hardworking immigrants to put down roots in the United States."
So, given those concerns, what can be done?
We urge two actions:
(1) Make sure that those timid political strategists inclined to advocate punting this issue until 2009 -as Atrios and Ezra Klein have suggested`– are aware that the netroots, like the country, demand action now.
(2) Make sure that both parties understand that the Kennedy-Kyl compromise is a good starting place, but not an acceptable end point.
We urge the FDL community to use its voice to ensure our elected officials address this problem in a workable, fair, and practical manner that reflects real American values.
Addendum from Pach: If you want to contact your representatives, you can find easy access to all their information using the clickable map and/or the address locator at this site.
Related posts:
Spotlight
Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About Firedoglake
Advanced search
Zed?
Critics take aim at immigration deal
AP – Key senators and the White House are eager to push their bipartisan immigration deal through the Senate by Memorial Day, but as details of the bargain emerged Monday, hope for that deadline was slipping.
Where is the emphasis on enforcement of laws against employers who hire illegal workers?
This is Doug at the National Immigration Forum, one of the CCIR coalition partners. While we are scared of a bad bill, we are terrified of no bill at all. More deaths in the desert, more exploitation, more evidence that Washington can’t lead, and more deportations, false documents, and black market.
As a country, we need to this debate to move forward and for this issue to be resolved.
Title III imposes very harsh penalties, especially on recidivist employers — up to $75,000 per unauthorized alien.
Welcome Marisa, Jeff, Doug, Maurice and Lynn. Thanks for coming by to help our community learn about this bill and the issues involved.
Just a reminder, folks: please keep this conversation on topic, and continue any off-topic discussions in the morning thread just below this one on the front page.
Section 302, to be precise.
Jeff Hauser @ 5
Thus making it perfect for Soviet-style enforcement against businesses run by Democrats or any Republicans that don’t fork over enough
bribe moneysupport for the party.I would like to ask our guests, by what legislative process do we think we might be able to make improvements to this bill? Are we essentially relying on the conference committee to make necessary adjustments, and do we in fact expect a victory-hungry president to sign whatever the Congress sends to him?
Also, I would ask if you have any names to suggest as key swing votes, who may really need to hear from their constituents on this.
Pachacutec @ 9
Obviously, the legislative process is fluid, but it is our strong hope that the House will generate a bill with equally strong, or stronger, legalization, but with better language on future workers and families in particular.
Indeed, we think that the worker language as currently written would have serious troubles passing a Democratic controlled House.
If the House passes a better bill, Pach is of course right — it is up to conference to reconcile.
That process would be controlled by dems, but still have to produce an end result that would get 60 votes.
So we expect improvements, but cannot promise people perfection.
As we’ve said, however — the situation is urgent, and the political dynamics may never be better.
On employers, the bill would penalize repeat offenders $75,000 per immigrant hired. That’s pretty steep. The bill balances a number of carrots and sticks.
I’m not so sure $75k is cheap, considering the annual compensation for each employee is likely to be less than that.
The real devil, as I see it, is in the funding and infrastructure to investigate and provide for enforcement.
I’d like to ask our guests to comment on what such provisions are in the current bill.
Douglas @ 12
Interesting. What defines “repeat” offender? How confident can we be that this definition will be enforced? Or that the fines themselves will be enforced?
I’m not convinced that monetary fines are strong enough enforcement. I feel there needs to legal consequences for the blatant flauting of the existing laws that is currently so widespread.
Also, if any of our guests want to amplify what’s good so far in this bill, adding to the main post, please jump in so we understand the whole playing field.
Pachacutec @ 10
As to swing votes — there are two categories.
On final passage, it is a fairly standard list of conservative dems moderate Rs for the most part… with some interesting additions subtractions. This list might also be altered by the nature of this bill — hard to say definitively.
On amendments — it is CRITICAL that the swingRs (Gordon Smith, Maine Senators, Voinovich, etc…) get on board with fixing this bill. We think there are a number of Republicans who are targets to get behind improvements on family unification, but we are limited because the signatories to the deal may be bound to vote against ANY amendments that alter the deal’s structure.
So that would include Specter, McCain, Graham, and Martinez.
Hagel, Hatch, the Alaska Senators = they are also targets on amendments.
On temporary worker provisions — at some level, I’d urge calling House Ds — Pelosi, Lofgren, Conyers, Rahm, Steny, Clyburn are all critical here. The House might be the better place to make our stand on those issues.
Pachacutec @ 15
This will be useful. AFAIK, the compromise bill is generating more heat from the Right than from the Left.
I’m still trying to figure out where people are going to get $5,000 from.
Why is the money such a prominent piece of this legislation?
One other question; any thoughts on the madness that took place in Painesville, Ohio over the weekend? Some 400 people are holed up in a church because of immigration raids.
Pachacutec @ 15
A real path to citizenship for 12 million — and, while in the probationary period, these 12 million have far more leverage to stand up for themselves with bad employers, go to the police to report crimes, etc…
No more deaths in the desert.
Accelerated clearing of the backl;og of family unification applications.
Better due process provisions than last year’s Senate passed bill.
The RNC and key conservatives acknowledging that we’re not discussing “amnesty,” a huge messaging hurdle that has caused moderate politicians serious angst.
Much stronger employer enforcement.
A chance to focus on homeland security, since the 12 million will be “within the system” and we can focus on the handful of terrorist needles amongst a huge haystack (sorry for the metaphor!) of hardworking immigrants pursuing the American dream.
Pachacutec @ 15
What’s good: earned legalization for about 12 million people; the DREAM Act giving students who stay in school or serve their country a path to legal status; AgJOBS, a compromise worked out between the Ag business and United Farmworkers to grant legal status to those in the ag industry; family reunification so that most of those now waiting for a visas (up to 22 years in some cases) can get a visa over the next 8 years; no significant hits on the due process rights of non-citizens as we saw in last year’s Senate bill…Those are the main ones.
STTP in Ohio @ 18
Clearly, conjecture is possible, but what we do know is that this sort of devastation on families would end with passage of a bill like this one on legalization.
Pachacutec @ 15
This is Maurice from the Immigration Forum. Among other things, the bill contains a broad legalization program that would put most of the undocumented here now (since January 1 of this year) on a path to citizenship. There are some hoops they must go through, and it will take a number of years to gain permanent residence, but in essence they will be able to come out of the shadows
One topic I’d like to mention is that
current U.S. immigration law does not allow lesbian, gay or bisexual citizens or permanent residents to petition for their same-sex partners to immigrate. This is how people like me wind up as ex-pats. Help bring us (and our partners) home!
Pachacutec @ 10
Thanks for being here today, everyone.
Also, is there a “hit list” or a quick summation of things you’d like to change about the bill such that people can create realistic pressure around them?
Pachacutec @ 13
The bill has dramatic increases in infrastructure enforcement, including detention beds, fencing, increased border patrol and I.C.E agents. The bill also includes a substantial worker authorization verification system.
The one caveat, of course, is that this is all subject to appropriations which would be a separate bill.
Lou Dobbs is the biggest roadblock to any immigration reform bill from his daily program at CNN he can rally the 30%ers and use US! as raw meat for his hatemonger viewers. What do you think of the idea of pushing for people being able to choose what cable channels they get? Immigrants and their supporters for example could choose to Cancel CNN because of Lou Dobbs! If we can get some Democrats to stand up for us and push to make this a law then after Lou loses viewers Congress might feel it is safe to pass a fair imigration law. We could organize mass cancelations of CNN from Hispanic Churches the Priests could bring cancelation forms! By hurting CNN and Lou we show Congress that we have power!
What kind of reaction is the bill getting from the immigrant communities themselves, to the extent we can get real feedback?
I’m sure there’s a kind of relief that real pathways to citizenship are on the table, effectively making immigrant community members feel like people, not unwelcome animals, but then again, it must be hard for people working so hard all day to get information about the complexities and hurdles in the current bill.
The family provisions (or lack thereof) must, I’m sure, be a real source of fear and concern, especially in light of the ICE raids and family incarcerations.
Thoughts?
Marisa: is the enforcement targeted to the laborers or to the employers?
How much does the bill target the most vulnerable instead of those who do the exploitation?
The whole thing isn’t about immigration anyway. The whole thing is a cover to mask the fact that we are losing American jobs because they’re being sent overseas. Thank you Bill Clinton, and you might want to remember that if you’re thinking of voting for Hillary.
That’s a good question, Jane. I created my own interpretation of such a list here, but our guests may accent things differently.
I’d be glad to hear them chime in, as it might help our people know what to say when they make calls, send faxes, etc.
STTP in Ohio @ 18
We’ve been in touch with HOLA and our friends in Ohio who have been actively opposing the raids that took place in Painesville on Saturday. For those who are interested, there will be a march today at 5 pm in Painesville:
WHEN: Monday, May 21, 2007 at 5:00 p.m.
WHERE: St. Mary’s Church (268 N State St. Painesville, OH 44077) to
City Hall (7 Richmond St. Painesville, OH 44077)
Are there any obvious loopholes in the bill that need to be sewn up? Anything along the lines of No Child Left Behind, which became an abominable piece of legislation by virtue of the administration’s lack of commitment to public education?
STTP in Ohio @ 18
To me this looks like screening by social class. People who are able to scrape up $5000 for every family member will probably be members of the middle class; poorer people will be relegated to the guest worker program, and will not be eligible for permanent residence.
Pachacutec @ 30
Obviously, the worker program unless it is improved is problematic. If it is a churn, burn, and return “guestworker” program, it undercuts U.S. workers by creating a second-class labor market with limited rights. It is also bad for the U.S. because, based on about 400 years of history, some people come and go back, but others put down roots, fall in love, start careers, and want to stay. If we don’t have a legal way for people to stay, then we run the risk of a growing pool of underground workers. Finally, unless we have a path to citizenship for workers who want to stay, they will be cut off from truly participating in this country.
Pachacutec @ 28
It’s going to be a combination, with this bill or any bill that ultimately passes. In the Senate agreement, the main enforcement tool is the worker verification program, which will make it harder to get work without work authorization.
Targeting individuals, there are stiffer penalties for illegal entry and re-entry, among other things. Targeting employers, there are steeper fines and criminal penalties.
If there are more legal visas, however, there will be much less pressure to get around the legal system.
thank you so much to Marisa McNee! i hope this won’t be the last time you visit – the topic needs a longer conversation to bring me (and perhaps others) up to speed on this bill.
Apparently this legislation envisions that in the future- people will not cross the border without a paper from the US allowing it.
Of course that’s bullshit- we have shown no ability to control immigration- and there is no reason to think that will improve- so we are likely maintaining the same old system- unless we crack down on hiring.
Without hiring controls (which means sending some US citizens to jail) there will never be any control of immigration.
Dover Bitch @ 32
Good question. Our colleagues are pouring over the draft right now looking for such things. Some are likely due to “drafting errors” — mistakes that come back to haunt, some are are devils in the details, but we are confident that anything problematic will be detected and corrected…if not, we have opportunities to blow this up.
Cynic @ 29
Good paying jobs are going overseas which is a seperate issue blaming Bill and what can we do about it is a whole other post. Immigrants are coming here to do jobs Americans don’t want to do I think they should be treated fair if they come here to work. Wages for Americans at bad jobs won’t rise unless Immigrants have the same rights as American workers do to complain when they are cheated, denied pay, or harrassed at bad job or unsafe jobs. Also we have to point out the GOP myth that its ONLY Immigrants who work bad jobs is false! We need to show how “regular” Americans are hurt when they work bad jobs because if everyone thinks its only immigrants getting hurt then Republicans will bet that their base won’t care.
Interestingly enough- goopers want to screen immigration by education- giving a strong preference to people with college degrees and technical job skills. In other words- they want to bring in workers that compete for high paying jobs rather than minimum wage jobs. Wonder how that will fly in the end?
Pachacutec @ 10
I think Jeff has provided the beginning of an answer to this question up above, but I also think that until the debate moves forward, it will be difficult to tell for sure, who may or may not provide key swing votes on this issue as of yet.
As Douglas said, we are still pouring over summaries and language of the agreement. The National Immigration Forum will be posting information about the agreement as the debate proceeds (including things that need to be fixed) on our Web site at: http://www.immigrationforum.org
I would like to chime in to emphasize that I certainly agree that temporary/guest worker provisions are a bad idea, as I understand them to be embodied in the bill. I disagree that the bill “radically” undermines family structure. It certainly draws the ambit of “family” much more narrowly, but I would bet that many people are surprised that it was so broad to begin with. I’m a little jaundiced because when I met my ex-boyfriend’s hoping to emigrate grandfather for the first time, he spent 45 minutes querying me on why it was he wouldn’t qualify for Social Security immediately upon arrival. (My friend reminded me that in their native country elderly parents were seen more like dependent children than they are in the U.S., and obviously, dependent children are first on our list of those to be protected).
What are the views of the Virginia delegation if known?
It’s coming up on an hour for this chat, and I know our guests are multi-tasking as lobbying is happening in real time.
You’ve all been really generous with your time and I imagine you may be able to pop back in to answer remaining questions over the next 24 hours.
That said, if you have to take off to, you know, work on the bill with the folks on the Hill, feel free to say so, and thanks so much for joining us to shine a spotlight on these issues for our community.
Let’s keep the conversation on topic, folks, and please join me in thanking our guests. I know they’d like to stay, and maybe some of them will be able to, but this is a hot project they are all working on as we speak.
i haven’t been able to find the compromise bill on thomas yet, but here’s the version that was released friday (in both html and pdf)
Thank you for joining us, hope you can come by again!
Douglas @ 38
Thanks for the reply, but even more so for the initiative you are taking.
Well, that’s a nice idea but I worry that if we push too hard that will only serve to mobilize the GOP base and quite a few of the undecided too. Sentiments are pretty strong on this issue through out the country.
Keep Fighting the Good Fight Thank You!
rw at 40 — That’s an interesting observation, and one that gets very little coverage, I think. The reforms in immigration visa law for things like specialty knowledge waivers and such have really put a crimp in a lot of corporate work that requires specialized engineering and other particularized info and research — especially given that American students are falling further and further behind in mathmetics, sciences and engineering studies. (Thank you, no child left behind. *cough*) It never fails to amaze me how so many policy initiatives from these folks are based so much on selfish, personal greed rationales and have so little to do with lifing the whole of our society up — and others for that matter.
The most egregious question that desperately needs to be addressed is the question of family separation. Children do not ask to be born into desperate circumstances, but they do deserve to be treated with some measure of dignity and respect and care, and we are falling far short of that in so many respects.
Hi everybody-I must agree on the problematic nature of the guest worker provision. A few weeks ago, I had the opportunity for a face-to face meeting with CIS Director Emilio Gonzales, and asked him for one example, from anywhere in the world, where a guest worker program had worked as advertised. He couldn’t do it.
rwcole @ 37
Actually, there is strong evidence that if people have a legal means for entry, they will use it. During the 40s and 50s, we had a crappy but big “guestworker” program with Mexico and illegal entry dropped significantly. While we wouldn’t want to replicate the exploitative nature of that program (it was truly awful), the concept that by expanding legal avenues you dry up illegal ones is sound. The goal is to replace a disorderly illegal flow with a regilated legal one.
Enforcing at the workplace is a key component, but unlike the plausible deniability in today’s system (the documents looked good enough to me, officer), a biometric work authorization card tells the employer the person holding that card is the person to who it was issued and that that person is allowed to work.
i’m so bummed i missed most of this conversation – i have so many questions…
for example:
what is the rational for acting this year instead of 2009? i confess to being quite ignorant… but it seems to me that if good policy is the goal – wouldn’t waiting until after the 2008 election be helpful? i can see the benefit of using immigration as a wedge issue to fracture the republican party… but that seems like the only benefit.
if this really is a once in a decade or two chance for fundamental reform – why not try to get it right? would having a dem president help?
Redd
When we think about this legislation- we tend to think about it soley in terms of poorly educated hispanic immigrants. Of course any legislation would apply to ALL immigrants. It’s currently increasingly difficult for many people who got here on investor visas, education visas, tourist visas, etc to stay or or arrange for their children to stay.
Any proposed legislation needs to be looked at from a thousand points of view to see how it affects all.
Douglas
I would expect that those who are allowed in legally would make use of that opportunity- and those who are denied legal entry would use other means as they do now- which means that any restrictions on WHO- or HOW MANY are nonsense.
STTP in Ohio @ 18
because, like requiring State IDs for voters, it makes it harder (in some cases virtually impossible) to comply.
What really steams me up the most about the whole immigration fiasco is that you will always hear this from the Republicans:
“We need these workers because they do a job nobody else wants.”
I don’t think they do jobs Americans don’t want, they do jobs that Americans don’t want because of the low rate they are paid to do them.
When will immigrants start requesting the same pay as everyone else, or will they never request more because it would put them out of work?
Thanks all. And Barbara @ 43, we don’t know where the Virginia delegation is. Sen. Warner was with us last year and Webb is new. Call them and ask!!! And tell them to do the right thing!!!
Thanks.
On the $5,000
Actually- that probably won’t be difficult. You’d be surprised at the new pickup trucks sitting in areas that are probably 80 percent illegal.
These people are making money and in many cases pretty good money. They work hard and save.
Marisa McNee (CCIR) @ 25
hmmm. wonder who is going to handle a workload like that?
I think helping current residents gain status gives them more ability to fight for living wages and safe working conditions, which will raise the bar for everyone else. Card check campaigns that help workers organize need to be protected and strengthened, too.
Of course, employers are not so crazy about all that.
spurious @ 33
ding!
Douglas @ 34
That’s a very powerful point. How do you think it can be rewritten to make it better, in terms of what’s actually possible, factoring in support of various congressional members, etc? Given the fact that it’s crunch time, I think some focus on realistic goals would be very helpful to our community when the pick up the phone and call their reps.
Douglas @ 38
you had better be there after midnight when the bill is in Conference and babysit it until they vote.
rwcole @ 40
just a head fake. they really just want to keep their slave class. They dont mind letting in a few more potential Republicans.
another question…
how do you see issues of worker migration affected by our (imo immoral and stupid) trade policies? we had a bit of a discussion about this issue last week (here’s my previous comment).
i wonder how much of the anti-immigration “heat” currently in our national conversation could be resolved/removed if we had a rational trade policy. (look! over there! an immigrant to blame all our problems on!)
Actually, the way to really solve the immigration problem from Mexico would be to have a different foreign policy. One that lifted Mexico up from 3rd world status to something at least a little closer to ours. Instead we have had decades of exploitation, resource extraction and on and on.
I don’t like the ‘entry fee’ and I don’t like the ratings system according to education levels……..H1 visas/tech workers.
Your level of education should have nothing to do with it. You are able to afford the entry fee, and you had the money for an education, not fair to get a free pass because you were from the upper classes.
Bill Gates said if we don’t get tech workers here, the work will be shipped overseas. what a crock, older tech workers here can’t get hired, they want young, lower pay-scale people……….sickening how they are framing it.
Anyone who has already been working here for a minimum amount of years and can prove it should be on the top of the list. They’ve been standing in line the longest……
And the time you spent going to school here shouldn’t be rated as equally as ‘working’ here.
Your level of education should have nothing to do with it. You are able to afford the entry fee, and you had the money for an education, not fair to get a free pass because you were from the upper classes.
And it ought to be first come, first served. With immediate family ties considered in the rating.
And this may be OT but I have never understood why, because you are born here, you get citizenship.
Douglas @ 52
would this card be only for immigrants or would we all have RFID installed?
“Lou Dobbs is the biggest roadblock to any immigration reform bill from his daily program at CNN he can rally the 30%ers and use US! as raw meat for his hatemonger viewers.” @ # 26
I really have to agree with this. Dobbs has taken some hits lately — one from a NYC Jewish immigration group who called for him to be fired, and another from 60 Mintues — and he needs more.
He spews racist bilge.
noen @ 67
amen!
The probability of bad legislation is very high with this. There must be thousands of pages of immigration regulations and law and this bill will affect virtually every page. Should be studies carefully by staff for a year or so in my opinion to make certain that it’s ready for prime time. It should NOT be rushed through to give a lame duck president a quick victory.
Change Mexico from an oligarchy to a true democracy.
Stop exploiting them. Make it so that they have reasons to stay at home and we solve the immigration issue.
I don’t understand why more people don’t point out this simple fact.
Right-wing viewpoints wrt the Immigration Bill:
The Corner’s Andy McCarthy: “The crisis in immigration is only an enforcement crisis. It is not a crisis that millions of people who have chosen to live and work here illegally must live “in the shadows.” That is their problem, not ours. I am not in favor of rounding them all up – those thin resources ought to be dedicated to ousting the illegals who violate our criminal laws. But I will never understand the urgency to address their status.”
Instapundit on whether conservatives “are getting unhinged over” immigration: “There’s definitely some of that. On the other hand, there’s also a lot of rational dismay about the GOP leadership’s efforts here, which have produced yet another self-inflicted wound.”
Kausfiles: “Using advanced, high-tech tools, Karl Rove has found the last pocket of support for Bush and destroyed it with laser-like efficiency.”
Townhall’s Hugh Hewitt: “There are so many problems with this bill that it should not be introduced in the Senate absent a period of open hearings on it and the solicitation of expert opinion from various analysts across the ideological spectrum. There is simply too much here to say “Trust us,” and move on.”
Right Wing News: “If this bill passes the Senate, I’m going to organize multiple Googlebombs that target every Republican in the Senate who is up for reelection in 2008 and votes for this amnesty bill. I’m going to find the worst, most damaging, hit pieces on the entire world wide web and I’m going see to it that every person who searches for the name of a pro-amnesty Republican in the Senate will see those articles.”
A lot more of these at the National Journal
a zed, a zed!! I got a zed!!
er, I mean “New thread”
I can’t think of a change in US foreign policy that would solve all the problems of Mexico and Guatamala. Granted that we really fucked those countries over in the past- stealin a nice part of one and arranging to have the best parts of another put in the hands of an american banana company- but we aren’t going to fix their economic problems with the stroke of a pen- THEY have to do it.
i am very concerned about the lack of transparency to this process. i’d be much more comfortable if we could have a series of congressional hearings to explain the pros and cons of various policies. i’d also like to see proposed legislation made available to the public to read and study and comment on.
ok. that was dream world… but, i’m still uncomfortable with the big push to rush this through. right now, i just don’t trust the process. can anyone reassure me on this? or should i be concerned?
selise @ 53
Quoting Ezra, who I think has summarized this issue as simply as I’ve seen it:
The particular political circumstances we’re in are nearly unique: Bush has nothing left to lose but his involvement still provides cover for Republicans, Democrats can get an immigration bill without full ownership over it, the space is open for the subject because the President won’t allow action on other liberal priorities and the Congress won’t countenance any conservative agenda items, and so on. You have the RNC defending a bill that, were it offered under a Democratic president, they’d be tearing apart. Meanwhile, this just won’t be a priority for the next president: President Democrat will want to do health care, not amnesty, and President Republican will want to get reelected someday. So this is the shot.
rwcole @ 76
don’t underestimate what nafta has done.
selise @ 77
I think the legislation has been made available online…I’ll see if I can dig up a link for you.
noen @ 73
Quoting myself, but I believe this is the crux of the issue. It is, in fact, the crux of a lot of issues. The reason we were attacked on 9-11 is because of our vicious and brutal foreign policies over the last century. If we had instead worked to truly lift all and to spread true democracy to all we would be in a far different world today.
We have to change our attitude towards the rest of the world. And we need the media to start telling the truth about how our policies really affect the rest of the world. But sadly, I think these are pipe dreams right now. I’m not very hopeful about mankind lately.
Marisa McNee (CCIR) @ 78 –
thanks… if you are saying that now is the best time to get some amnesty – then i’m in support (i’d like to see more amnesty – not less).
“what NAFTA has done”
I suppose that part of the intention of NAFTA was to allow the importation of labor embodied in goods- so a company can set up a factory in Mexico just accross the border and make stuff- say concrete blocks- and then import the blocks bringing the cheap labor along with it- so the labor can stay where it is and prosper.
I don’t think it quite worked out that way.
rwcole @ 76
That’s partly true. It can’t happen all at once and yes, they need to have a part too. But we have had a pretty big part in determining the fate of Latin America. Most of their dictators have been put there by us. We could start there and end that inhuman practice.
What I am advocating is a change in our general “stance” with respect to the other nations of the world. It’s a tall order though and I’m not sure how attainable it is. It might also be off topic and if so I apologize.
Somewhere last year I believe the 6.5 billion mark was passed in the human population on this planet. I am sure it is as hard to keep an accurate count on this as it would be to count all the ants on this planet. Then some intellect predicted that by 2030 or 2050 the population would expand to 9 billion. That is, I am afraid, way off the mark. Since somewhere in the mid 20th century to last year the population went from 2 billion to the 6.5 billion of last year. Now if the population was only 2 billion about 50 years ago and since time immemorial that is how much it had accrued then explain how in only 30 or 50 more years it will be only 9 billion. I estimate it at least 27 billion for exponentially population increasing.
Now, I am trying to be short as I have to leave for work, with the American Revolution in the 1700’s that freed up all the land and our free enterprise edition of economy, our country has become the honeypot of the world. No need for there to be other revolutions to ‘improve’ other’s countries, just ride the coattails of our forefathers. Come on in and keep our economy that great big tsunami that is ready to crash at anytime. We will make room. Hell, we will even figure out how to construct housing on the walls of the Grand Canyon to let all these hapless souls in to keep our elites from picking up after themselves and make them feel good about giving these people a job for little or nothing. And not to worry because the middle class can still maintain the medical, educational and other social services these immigrants will use.
I cannot pick the time, day or year but there is a big correction coming because even now, the planet cannot support the current population. And it will not be pretty.
dmac @ 68
I agree. And what is not often taken into account is that people who have been working here for a number of years have also in most cases been paying taxes and paying into the Social Security system as well. This should count as ‘points’ too.
btw, kids, fresh thready goodness up and ready for the reading, if anyone wants it. Feel free to chat here, though, if you like. Lotsa discussion to go around today…
There is a debate in Latin America on the best road out of third world status.
The “India” model and the “China” model are both mentioned.
The US doesn’t much care for the China model and is pretty active in “discouraging” it.
The trouble is that we have preached the power of democracy and unregulated free enterprise until we are blue in the face- and many countries gave it a good go- didn’t work for them.
Granted that we have a strategic interest in the hemisphere- but we’d be better off encouraging a variety of approaches and “best practices” conferences to evaluate what’s working objectively. We’re still scared shitless of “communism”- go figure- it died years ago.
What’s really at stake is the degree of central planning that a government should do in building a subpar economy. Both China and Japan have used strong central planning and control successfully.
Marisa McNee (CCIR) @ 78
And I’d like to add to what Marisa says that although we do not know what the prospects would be for a better bill in 2 or 4 or 6 years, we do know that if there is no bill this year, many thousands of immigrant families will be ripped apart as enforcement continues and gets worse because money has already been appropriated for it.
We advocate for the process to proceed because we hope to be able to improve the bill. This is the starting point. This is not a good time to throw in the towell. If it stinks at the end, it will be easier to kill it later that it is to keep it alive now.
Whether we are able to improve it now, or even if a better bill is considered years down the road, on this issue–with the country divided and with both parties divided–we aren’t going to get a perfectly sensible, coherent, piece of legislation, as much as it pains a policy wonk like me to say that. There will always be challenges that will need to be fixed.
That makes sense to me. Thanks!
Had a lunch meeting to attend, but wanted to thank those that responded to my question/comments.
I think a point system for awarding some immigrant visas is a great idea — in fact, why not simply take that provision out of this (otherwise not-that-useful) bill and use it to replace the fraud-ridden and illogical diversity visa program? I’d take people with demonstrated skills over someone who simply found the golden ticket (or, as often happens, contracted a fraudulent marriage with someone who won the golden ticket after promising to pay off thousands in debt to organized crime intermediaries once he/she gets to the States. You get the picture.)
Otherwise, I don’t see too much good in the current bill. I think all current family based preferences should be preserved, though it might help to give consular officers overseas a few more tools to root out the bad ones (i.e., based on fake relationships). Furthermore, guest worker programs never, ever work. Look at the experiences in W. Europe: better to give everyone who works hard and pays taxes a stake in the country and a chance at citizenship.
Finally, the wall . . .. Walls never work. Sure, more CBP and ICE agents, sensors, aircraft, etc., may help. Going after employers would be much better.
But what chance is there of that?
Ultimately, a NAFTA for labor would be the best solution.
What of the Jerry Nadler’s Permanent Partners Immigration Bill? Why is that never discussed as part of immigration reform here or elsewhere?
Or since it would benefit mainy same-sex couples do we get thrown into it being solely a gay rights issue? Since Family Reunification is an important issue, I’d wish more people would be concerned about our families than someone’s great Aunt once-removed getting a green card.
rwcole @ 55
Part of the issue is that we believe that immigrants here are smart enough to be responding to the job market. While the U.S. is creating enough low end jobs that it is now attractive for people to seek to escape desparate circumstances elsewhere in the Americas, if that demand is sated via legal channels, future undocumenteds will find an unwelcome job market and stop coming.
Let’s now underestimate the effectiveness of the networks of communication between immigrants and their home countries.
selise @ 77
The Senate is the starting point.
The House Judiciary Subcom with jurisdiction — Zoe Lofgren’s Immigration Committee — has been holding a series of low visibility but highly informative hearings. They will begin marking up legislation next month, and that process should be more regular.
Then, following House passage and a debate on the floor there… we’d have a conference convene that would produce something requiring additional votes in each chamber.
In other words — this process is far from over, and much more openness is soon to follow.
The Senate process was complicated by any number of factors, several of which people can probably make educated guesses about, but which might not be politic for me to mention explicitly. :)
Jane Hamsher @ 63
Ideally, any bill would include continuity of employment here (employers AND employees would like that — why get adept at a job and then have to go home?) AND a REALISTIC chance at eventual citizenship and a unified family.
We should push for those fixes now — with the understanding that if we fail to get them, we absolutely need to regroup and make sure that the House does better.
Marisa McNee (CCIR) @ 78
So then why do you say that Ezra has “suggested” punting on the issue? Also, Atrios – based on Ezra’s post – recanted his suggestion that we punt. Maybe it’s just a little confusing construction, but I think you’re imputing the wrong motives to those two.
dday @ 97
Actually, my point was that Ezra and Atrios were suggesting the opposite, that despite what some strategists might suggest, the issue should be dealt with now. Perhaps that wasn’t clear? My apologies, Ezra and Atrios did not suggest we should punt, their point was to the contrary.
I don’t agree with anything about this bill.
Everyone seem to be discussing this legislation as if it exists in a vacuum. We already have a ton of immigration law. It’s being ignored. I want the existing law enforced and I want the borders protected.
When that happens, talk to me about new law.
What this bill seems to achieve, by these comments alone, is a state of hyperpluralism — a combination of laws, statutes and exceptions that renders lawful options frozen and useless. This is a position that immediately leads to only one way out, in political science terms-that being revolution. The question needs to be asked, who does this immigration reform really bill serve? At one end, the undocumented. And at the other extreme, corporations, meetpackers, the construction industry, the restaurant industry and the major corporations that need cheep labor. Niether party is a voter. The simple and correct option is simply to enforce the law of the land.
Everyone seems to be ignoring one aspect. If this illegal immigration continues we will soon be an overpopulated country. Over population will mean a lower standard of living for all except the very wealthy (competition for both natural resources and jobs). Before immigration policy changed back in the 60s we allowed ca. 300,000 legal immigrants every year. Now that number has increased to over 2 million annually. That is just those who come legally. Also keep in mind that while the illegal immigrants stay here they are continuing to have children who then become “anchor babies” making this country responsible for their welfare.
Mexico accounts for the largest share of illegal immigrants. This is shameful because Mexico is not a poor country. The truth is, their wealthiest don’t want to pay enough taxes to provide social services. Meanwhile, remittances account for over one third of Mexico’s GNP. Why are all these trade deals so darned one sided when Mexico could, if it wanted, provide good paying jobs for their citizens.
The longer this illegal immigrant issue goes unresolved the worse off we will be because as I type I can assure you that our borders are being flooded with illegals to take advantage of what they perceive as another amnesty deal.
Something should have been done long ago.
Many here believe there should be no educational requirements. This bill doesn’t require that every immigrant be highly educated. I do believe that our current immigration policy already accounts for different educational levels and how many we accept in each category. The problem now is most of the people coming illegal are uneducated peoples. We do not need a vast population of low education level people because we have people in this country now we did not graduate from high school. What you will have is our citizens competing for the same jobs and thus lowering the wage for all.
In the H1B1 category employers are allowed to pay those workers less than an American worker. Consequently, we have people in computer science and engineering who lose their jobs in favor of H1B1 visa holders.
There are so many interrelated issues contributing to the problem of undocumented workers although the biggest is coming here uninvited.
It’s our trade policy, our foreign policy in general, and people willing to break our laws to get inside our country. Why aren’t their native countries doing something to make them want to stay in their own country? Where is their responsibility? The United States cannot be the world’s keeper.
Close the borders, truly enforce punishment against employers who hire illegals because they know exactly what they are doing whether they feign innocence or not, pressure the countries who send their citizens to the U.S. to do something about their own economy, and raise the federal minimum wage in this country and enforce it so all workers are paid a living wage. If employers had to pay a living minimum wage they would hire U.S. citizens over foreign nationals.
If we are so short of workers (I question that) than make certain any temporary worker program requires a federal minimum wage regardless of worker status.
I really don’t buy that Americans won’t do those jobs because it leaves out the end. Americans won’t do those jobs without a fair wage, benefits, and worker safety enforcement. You have to wonder just who was doing those jobs before the illegal immigrants took them. The answer, of course, was Americans until employers could hire an illegal and pay them less. There is also the problem of the lazy American.
I worked in the fields on the family farm, hired out to hoe beans, and detassled corn, and babysat until I graduated from high school. A lot of these jobs could be filled by high school and college students and our own population of those without a high school education who would take these jobs year round.
The packing industry for years paid good wages and benefits. Then the employers took the packing plants out of the cities into the rural communities and hired low paid workers and there went the good paying jobs.
American employers are our own worst enemy along with our own government.