Tag: immigration reform (page 7)

I have an op-ed in today's Washington Examiner newspaper reproduced here...There is No Immigrant Crime Wave.

Politicians will do anything to get elected, including using random, unrelated high-profile crimes to mislead the public, generating fear and hysteria.

Using government statistics that show just 4% of our 2.25 million federal and state inmate population are non-citizens and that young foreign-born men are five times less likely to be incarcerated than those born in the U.S, I argue:

Immigration does not breed crime. Our prisons are not overflowing because of crimes by the undocumented. They are overflowing because of our failed criminal justice policies and over reliance on incarceration versus treatment and rehabilitation with respect to our nonviolent homegrown offenders.

There is nothing wrong with having a debate about immigration. But it is deplorable to falsely stereotype and malign millions of law-abiding people because of one’s desire for a particular outcome in that debate.

Hope you'll read the whole thing. It will make the xenophobic anti-immgrants out there see red.

Tom Tancredo is in need of an attention fix for his fledgling Presidential campaign that while never getting off the ground still took a nose-dive when immigration reform fell off the table.

His latest is to introduce a bill that he knows will not pass but hopes will push emotional buttons back into overdrive.

Everybody knows that if you are born in this country, you automatically are a U.S. citizen. Under Tancredo's bill, a baby born to undocumented residents would be stripped of citizenship.

Tancredo's legal foundation for this is his unique view of the 14th Amendment. How unique?

Tancredo doesn't have any co-sponsors for his bill. Asked what support he expected, Tancredo, standing alone on a podium, looked to the right and the left and noted the absence of fellow lawmakers.

More...

I agree with Jane and John Amato of Crooks and Liars: The Republicans blocked the immigration reform bill and voters will remember that when its time to go to the polls.

I wasn't happy with the bill because it was too onerous on the path to legalization and too disrespectful of principles of family reunification.

Yet, there's no doubt that Republican xenophobes killed immigration with their false insistence that it was an amnesty bill. And voters are likely to make them pay. Republicans are the biggest losers in the debate:

Hispanics represent the fastest-growing chunk of the American electorate. Their choices help drive the rising swing states of presidential politics: Colorado, Nevada, Arizona, and New Mexico.

Ding, Dong, S. 1639 is dead.

The Senate drove a stake Thursday through President Bush's plan to legalize millions of unlawful immigrants, likely postponing major action on immigration until after the 2008 elections.

The bill's supporters fell 14 votes short of the 60 needed to limit debate and clear the way for final passage of the legislation, which critics assailed as offering amnesty to illegal immigrants. The vote was 46 to 53 in favor of limiting the debate.

The roll call vote results are here. While the defeat is considered a "stinging setback" for President Bush, I'm glad it's dead for other reasons. The path to citizenship was too onerous and the bill failed to preserve the principles of family reunification and protect workers' rights. It was too heavy on border enforcement and too punitive.

We probably won't see another bill until 2009, when we have a new President, hopefully a Progressive Democrat and a new Congress.

Looking ahead, here's what I think a 2009 bill should include. In fact, I'm going to call it the TalkLeft Immigration Reform Act of 2009 (TIRA). This is a work in progress and I may propose Amendments as time goes on.

More..

Just when you thought it was over, the Senate today voted to review the immigration bill. Debate is beginning now on dozens of amendments. You can watch it on C-Span here.

Prediction: The compromises will dilute the value of the bill to nothing. The path to citizenship is already is too onerous. Family reunification principles are already devalued. Concessions to Republicans are likely to make it worse.

The bill is S 1639, which you can view on THOMAS by typing the bill number in the search box.

There is one bi-partisan amendment that I favor and the Bush Administration opposes:

More...

100 immigrants (and bloggers and videographers) departed Union Station yesterday on an Amtrak train bound for Washington. The tour is called "Dreams Across America". Along the way the immigrants will tell their story.

On June 13th, 100 dreamers will travel by train all across America to tell the stories of their American dream. You can follow them and their journeys. More important, you can tell the world your own immigrant story, or your parents’, or grandparents’, right here, in text, or by video.

I think this is such a great idea. Here's more:

Kudos to the town of New Haven Connecticut:

City officials approved a plan Monday to offer illegal immigrants identification cards that would let them open bank accounts and use other services that may be unavailable without driver's licenses or state-issued IDs.

Supporters say the program, approved by the Board of Aldermen and believed to be the first of its kind in the nation, will help safeguard the city's estimated 15,000 illegal immigrants. If they can open bank accounts, immigrants will be less likely to carry large amounts of cash, a practice that makes them easy targets for robbers.

The funding for the cards will come from a private foundation. It's not the first time New Haven has extended help to the undocumented:

New Haven, a city of about 125,000 and home to Yale University, already offers federal tax help to immigrants and prohibits police from asking about their immigration status.

The latest New York Times poll shows a strong majority of Americans favor allowing undocumented residents to obtain legal status:

Taking a pragmatic view on a divisive issue, a large majority of Americans want to change the immigration laws to allow illegal immigrants to gain legal status and to create a new guest worker program to meet future labor demands, the poll found.

Two-thirds of those polled said illegal immigrants who had a good employment history and no criminal record should gain legal status as the bill proposes, which is by paying at least $5,000 in fines and fees and receiving a renewable four-year visa.

The respondents weren't specifically asked about the compromise legislation.

More...

Credit where credit is due, and today it goes to New Mexico Governor and presidential hopeful Bill Richardson, who says he will oppose the Immigration compromise because it is too onerous for immigrants:

Mr. Richardson initially said he would support the immigration compromise announced earlier this week. But on Wednesday, he said that after reading it in detail, he had decided to oppose it, saying the measure placed too great a burden on immigrants — tearing apart families that wanted to settle in the United States, creating a permanent tier of second-class immigrant workers and financing a border fence that Mr. Richardson had long opposed.

“This is fundamentally flawed in its current form, and I would oppose it,” he said. “We need bipartisanship, but we also need legislation that is compassionate. I’m not sure that this is.”

Thank you, Governor Richardson.

More....

We've been hearing for days that Republicans and the immigrant community are not happy with the compromise immigration reform bill that the Senate will begin debating today.

Add another group to the mix: Employers aren't happy either.

A bad bill is worse than no bill at all. The Senate has a long way to go to make this bill palatable. Can they do it?

Here are the employers' objections:

I just got my hands on the 326 page compromise immigration bill. Here's a link (pdf.) Dated May 18, it's called The Secure Borders, Economic Opportunity and Immigration Reform Act of 2007.

It's not acceptable.

The New York Times gets it right in an editorial today:

It is the nation’s duty to welcome immigrants, to treat them decently and give them the opportunity to assimilate. But if it does so according to the outlines of the deal being debated this week, the change will come at too high a price: The radical repudiation of generations of immigration policy, the weakening of families and the creation of a system of modern peonage within our borders.

Debate is scheduled to begin Monday afternoon on the bill. How can debate begin on a 326 page bill when the first many Senators will have a chance to look at it is Monday morning.

This needs to be tabled until everyone has had a full chance to digest it and kick out the worst provisions. Otherwise it will be like the Patriot Act, passed in haste and repented for years to come.

Update: Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi are skeptical. They say the bill needs to be improved in the Senate. I agree, particularly with respect to the family separation issues, the need to go back to the home country and wait, possibly for years, to return and the onerous path to permanent residency and citizenship.

********

The 300 page immigration reform bill won't be publicly available until tomorrow. Here is a summary of key provisions:

— Undocumented immigrants who came to the United States before Jan. 1, 2007 — an estimated 12 million — would get immediate, but probationary, legal status and ability to work and travel if they pass background checks.

— Undocumented immigrants and their families could get new “Z'’ visas good for four years, but renewable indefinitely, by paying a $5,000 fee per head of household. After eight years, holders of Z visas could apply for permanent legal residence — a green card — by returning to their home countries and paying another $4,000 penalty.

— Between 400,000 and 600,000 foreigners would be able to come every year to work. They could stay for two years on new “Y-1′’ visas then return home for one year and could renew the visas for a total of six years in the country. They could bring their families with them for one two-year period.

More...