USA Green Card Immigration Blog

Gun Legislation’s Failure Shadows Immigration Bill – NYTimes.com

May 3rd, 2013

Gun Legislation’s Failure Shadows Immigration Bill – NYTimes.com.

WASHINGTON — As a gun safety bill dissolved on the Senate floor last month, a group of eight senators — some who had supported the failed measure — had already moved on to a policy battle they found more promising: reinventing the nation’s troubled immigration system.

But despite broader Republican support for an immigration overhaul, the inability of Congress to pass modest gun legislation involving background checks is a warning for the immigration bill’s journey.

The warning does not mean failure, especially since most Republicans believe that immigration changes, unlike gun legislation, would help them politically. But it does indicate that the road to consensus on immigration will be far bumpier than the narrative on Capitol Hill suggests.

“There was a lot of Washington talk about the gun bill’s possibilities, but I never saw that reflected in the people at home,” said Representative Jack Kingston, Republican of Georgia, who has served since 1993. “Now there is all this buzz about the immigration reform, and that is not reflected, either.”

Like the gun legislation, the immigration bill, an 800-page proposal conceived among the eight lawmakers, must go through the Judiciary Committee, where the sharp partisan differences that defeated the gun bill are already on display.

Senator Charles E. Grassley of Iowa, the lead Republican on the committee, has expressed skepticism, as has Senator Ted Cruz, Republican of Texas. Last month, Mr. Grassley sparred with Senator Charles E. Schumer, Democrat of New York, in a hearing over Mr. Grassley’s suggestion that the origins of the suspects in the Boston Marathon bombings should be part of the immigration debate.

Just as the fight over the gun bill pivoted on a single policy disagreement — the question of keeping records on background checks — single divisive issues like whether or not immigrants here illegally should be given a pathway to citizenship can undermine other components to legislation on which there is broad agreement.

President Obama underscored on Tuesday how disagreements over basic principles can thwart a bill. Should a proposal from House Republicans not meet what he called “basic criteria,” including a pathway to citizenship for the estimated 11 million immigrants in the country illegally, “then I will not support such a bill,” he said.

Certain buzzwords in the gun debate became toxic to supporters of gun control. Opponents insisted, for example, that a new background-check law would result in gun registries, which the legislation explicitly would have forbidden. Similarly, proponents of strong border security will most likely be skeptical of the government’s commitment to improve it, which House Republicans say is essential, and keep beating that drum.

“I think the opposition is counting on mistrust of government, hatred of Obama and the idea that Congress can’t get anything right to combine as the pathway to no,” said Frank Sharry, the executive director of America’s Voice, an immigrant advocacy group.

Many Congressional Republicans say they are bracing for Mr. Obama to blame them for any problems with the legislative process.

“I do get the sense that everything for this administration seems to be a day-to-day tactical decision, rather than a legislative strategy of how to get things passed,” said Senator Roy Blunt, Republican of Missouri. “That’s not the same as doing what it takes to get work done.”

Process could also prove an enemy. Senate leaders will need 60 votes to even start on a bill, but before then they will have to ponder numerous amendments from the left and right — all of which could injure the bill’s chances in both camps. In fact, when Mr. Obama was a senator, he fought for a “poison pill” amendment in 2007 to phase out a guest-worker program favored by Republicans, an amendment that, when attached to the bill, helped sink it.

Some House members have already started to go their own way with far more modest, incremental proposals. Republicans there will certainly produce a far different bill from the Senate’s. Should the Senate and House end up in a conference to reconcile two bills, the final measure may well end up closer to that produced in the Senate, as has been the case with other bills that have gone to conference.

If this happens, Speaker John A. Boehner, Republican of Ohio, might be presented with the excruciating choice of bringing a more liberal version of legislation to the House floor or failing to close the deal on immigration reform that many in his party believe is needed.

Perhaps the most important factor in the bill’s favor is its broad support among a wide variety of constituencies, including the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the agricultural industry, labor unions and many church groups. Unlike the gun legislation, the immigration bill has no strong single opponent analogous to the National Rifle Association. Immigration legislation also has a compelling advocate in the Senate.

Senator Marco Rubio, the Florida Republican who has the greatest stake in the success of the measure, has made broad efforts to get in front of critics, something that the gun-control lobby — more like the immigration advocacy movement in 2007 — did not really do.

“Here’s my encouragement to my colleagues who don’t agree with the bill that we’ve crafted,” Mr. Rubio said on the Senate floor last week. “Change it. Let’s work on changing it. If you believe that what we have today is broken, if you believe that the status quo on immigration is chaos and a disaster, if that’s what you believe, as I do, then let’s solve it.”

The gun measure, for all the advocacy it got from the families of Newtown, Conn., and other victims of gun violence, did not have a supporter with the ambitions of Mr. Rubio behind it. This could prove to be the bill’s best hope, or Mr. Rubio’s greatest risk.

“The political imperative on immigration compared to guns is that if you take down Rubio, you take down the Republican Party,” Mr. Sharry said. “But we understand trying to get something in a divided Congress with a bill that the president supports is a tough call. We have a real roller coaster ride ahead.”

No Comments » | Immigration Reform | Permalink
Posted by usagreencardblog

Marco Rubio Says His Immigration Bill Can’t Pass the House | TIME.com

May 1st, 2013

Marco Rubio Says His Immigration Bill Can’t Pass the House | TIME.com.

WASHINGTON (AP) — A sweeping immigration bill in the Senate ran into criticism Tuesday from advocates who complained it puts up undue barriers to citizenship for millions here illegally.

Officials from several immigrant rights’ groups and the Catholic church held a conference call to highlight their concerns about the bill, including a cutoff date that excludes people who arrived here after 2011, and provisions disqualifying anyone with a felony conviction or more than two misdemeanors. President Barack Obama praised the Senate bill generally, though he said he would prefer to see some changes.

Immigrants would also have to pay $2,000 in fines and hundreds more in fees along the bill’s 13-year path to citizenship, and meet income and employment requirements designed to ensure they have resources above 125 percent of the federal poverty line and won’t need to draw on public welfare programs.

Advocates said the policies taken together could exclude hundreds of thousands or even a million or more of the 11 million immigrants here illegally. The Senate Judiciary Committee is to begin voting on the legislation next week.

“If you’re going to leave several hundred thousand behind and leave them in the shadows you’re not solving the problem,” said Kevin Appleby, director of migration and refugee policy for the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops.

“We’re very concerned that what the bill does is it punishes people for being poor,” Appleby said.

Marielena Hincapie, executive director of the National Immigration Law Center, said that after reading the 844-page bill, advocates have concluded it needs “major improvements.”

Advocates are also concerned that the bill requires certain goals on border security to be met before anyone can get a green card qualifying them for legal permanent residence and ultimately citizenship, and some say that the path to citizenship takes too long.

Despite their concerns, advocates said they continued to support the overall goals of the bill and promised to fight for its passage even as they try to make it better. And it’s not clear that they have much hope of getting a more favorable agreement.

The bill written by four Republican and four Democratic senators is a delicately crafted compromise meant to balance liberal with conservative goals, and the authors have promised to stick together to oppose any amendments that significantly alter the legislation. And the legislation already is seen as too permissive by many in the conservative-controlled House, which also will have its say.

Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., who helped write the bill, told radio host Mike Gallagher on Tuesday: “The bill that’s in place right now probably can’t pass the House. It will have to be adjusted.”

Several of the bill’s authors have said the American public only is willing to accept citizenship, still derided by some as amnesty, if it comes with tough conditions. Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., defended the bill’s approach.

“Becoming a United States citizen should not be easy, it’s never been easy for anyone who came here from another country,” McCain said Tuesday at a forum at the University of Southern California Schwarzenegger Institute for State and Global Policy. Republicans such as Rubio have indicated they won’t be able to support the bill if border security and enforcement provisions are weakened.

Obama, who’s embraced immigration legislation as a top second-term priority, also praised the Senate bill Tuesday even though it is stricter in some areas than his own approach on immigration. For example, Obama has not supported making the citizenship pathway contingent on border security.

“The bill that they produced is not the bill that I would have written, there are elements of it that I would change, but I do think that it meets the basic criteria that I laid out from the start,” Obama said at a news conference Tuesday. Those criteria are more effective border security, cracking down on employers who would hire immigrants here illegally, enacting improvements to the legal immigration system, and creating a pathway to citizenship, Obama said.

Obama said he was open to different solutions that might be proposed by the House, but only if his basic criteria still are met.

“And if they meet those criteria but they’re slightly different than the Senate bill, then I think that we should be able to come up with an appropriate compromise,” Obama said. “If it doesn’t meet those criteria, then I will not support such a bill. So we’ll have to wait and see.”

No Comments » | amnesty, border security, Immigration Reform | Permalink
Posted by usagreencardblog

Barnes: ‘Immigration Reform Is Starting to Roll’ | The Weekly Standard

April 25th, 2013

Barnes: ‘Immigration Reform Is Starting to Roll’ | The Weekly Standard.

It is rare in Washington for the trend lines on a controversial issue to come together as favorably as they have for immigration reform.

Public support is roughly around 70%, according to various polls, with Gallup having it at 72%. Senate Republicans blocked an overhaul of immigration laws in 2007 but now a substantial bloc of Republicans, alarmed by the GOP’s shrunken share of the Hispanic vote in the 2012 election, are eager to enact “comprehensive” reform legislation.

For their part, Hispanic groups recognize that this is an opportune moment for achieving their goal of citizenship for illegal immigrants in America. They are willing to accept legislation with a protracted timetable—a minimum of 13 years—before citizenship can be attained.

And two backers of immigration reform have emerged as key players since Congress took up the issue last week with hearings of the Senate Judiciary Committee. One is President Obama. In February, the leak of a White House bill—including provisions that would be anathema to Republicans—threatened to upset the pro-reform coalition. Since then, the president has promised to stay out of the congressional deliberations.

The other is Republican Sen. Marco Rubio of Florida. His role is as critical as the president’s, but for a different reason. Mr. Obama can stymie legislation, but Mr. Rubio’s leadership is essential to passing immigration reform in the first place. This is why Republican Sens. John McCain and Lindsey Graham, longtime advocates of reform, recruited him and created the bipartisan “Gang of Eight” with four Republicans and four Democrats.

Mr. Rubio is “a game-changer,” says Mr. Graham. “He brings a lot to the table,” with solid conservative credentials and a large following among Republicans. Mr. Rubio is ambitious and often mentioned as a presidential candidate in 2016. But as a Cuban-American, he has motives that are more personal and ideological than purely political. This enhances his credibility.

Yet the favorable climate for changing the U.S. immigration system doesn’t mean it’s a cinch to pass. There are formidable opponents. Sen. Jeff Sessions of Alabama, probably the most underrated Republican on Capitol Hill, is already a dogged critic of the legislation drafted by the Gang of Eight. So is Ted Cruz of Texas, the smart and outspoken Senate freshman.

In the House, “it’s going to be a lift,” says Florida Rep. Mario Diaz-Balart, a member of a bipartisan group developing a bill expected to be similar to the Gang of Eight’s. “It’s super-emotional and technically very difficult.”

Then there is the Boston bombing. Its impact on the fate of immigration legislation is unclear, but it isn’t likely to make passage any easier. GOP Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky said the bombing has exposed “a weakness in our current system.” If the immigration debate isn’t used “as an opportunity to fix flaws . . . made even more evident last week, then we will not be doing our jobs.”

Mr. Rubio echoed Mr. Paul. “I disagree with those who say that the terrorist attack in Boston has no bearing on the immigration debate,” he said in a statement on Monday. “The attack reinforces why immigration reform should be a lengthy, open, and transparent process.” The current schedule calls for a final vote before the July 4 congressional recess.

That may be optimistic. The Gang of Eight’s bill is 844 pages long and provides opponents with plenty of opportunities for objections. It would create two stages toward citizenship—first legal residency here, second a green card and permanent status. Border security would have to be bolstered in measurable ways before green cards are issued and a path to becoming citizens is opened.

The security aspects of the bill—which have prompted serious attacks, mostly from conservatives—are both complicated and open to different interpretations. For instance, if in five years from the bill’s enactment all nine segments of the Southwest border aren’t 100% secure, and if 90% of those crossing illegally aren’t being apprehended, then a Southern Border Security Commission of four governors and six Washington appointees would draft a new security plan. Whether the commission would have the authority to impose its plan is in dispute.

To answer critics, Mr. Rubio’s Gang of Eight allies have largely stood aside and let him respond. He is neither shy nor risk-averse. He volunteered to appear on the talk-radio show of Mark Levin, a conservative and opponent of the proposed reform bill. The senator told Rush Limbaugh that the four governors on the 10-member border commission “will take care of this problem and they’ll be given the money to be able to take care of it.” He didn’t explain exactly how.

Mr. Rubio is best at touting the virtues of immigration reform and refuting the notion that Hispanics, once citizens, will overwhelmingly vote Democratic. “I think the future of conservatism and, in fact, the future of America depends on how effective we are at explaining to as many Americans as possible why the road we are on right now is such an economic disaster,” he said on the Limbaugh show. “I just refuse to accept the notion that somehow we’re not going to be able to make that argument successfully to Hispanics.”

The Senate will be first to act this year, and the bill needs 60 votes to pass. With Mr. Rubio supporting it, Mr. Graham says it can get 70 votes, including half of the 45 Republicans. He suggests passage by 48 Democrats and 22 Republicans. That’s optimistic but not impossible.

The House won’t rubber-stamp the Senate bill. The guest-worker program is likely to be expanded in the House. But on immigration the House isn’t an automatic barrier to Senate legislation. House Speaker John Boehner and Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan have spoken favorably about immigration reform.

Jeffrey Bell, a Republican consultant who works with Hispanic groups, says the momentum behind reforming the immigration system will make a bill “unstoppable” if the Senate and House pass bills and then confer to meld the two.

Will a new law help Republicans? Hispanic support for GOP presidential candidates fell from George W. Bush’s 44% in 2004 to Mitt Romney’s 27% last year. Mr. Rubio says that Republicans shouldn’t expect a surge of Hispanic votes, but Hispanics will at least be willing to “listen to us.”

Mr. Bell, a former adviser to Ronald Reagan and Jack Kemp, goes further, arguing that Republicans shouldn’t worry about who gets credit for successful reform. “If Democrats get 10 times more credit, it’s still in Republicans’ interest,” he says. “It will free them” to compete for votes that, more often than not, were beyond their reach.

No Comments » | Immigration Reform | Permalink
Posted by usagreencardblog

Why Diversity Visas are Important | Politic365

April 23rd, 2013

Why Diversity Visas are Important | Politic365.

By Rep. Cedric Richmond (D-LA)

A plaque at the base of the Statue of Liberty famously reads, “Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free.” One-hundred thirty years after Emma Lazarus penned those famous words, some lawmakers want to change the meaning to “give me your scientists, engineers and STEM grads.” My congressional colleagues have recently advanced plans to eliminate the Diversity Visa program, the most effective method of attracting immigrants from a wide range of backgrounds, in favor of increasing the number of high-skilled immigrants.

Rep. Richmond

I am in favor of increasing high-skilled immigrants as well but do not favor hurting American diversity to do it. If our focus in immigration reform is exclusively on high-skilled or STEM immigrants, where do the rest of the millions yearning to join our ranks fit in? America draws tremendous strength from its diversity, which prompts the question: As Congress contemplates comprehensive immigration reform, why are some lawmakers aiming to curb diversity instead of promoting it? To those who propose eliminating this program to make space for high-skilled immigrants, I say immigration policy need not be zero sum. We don’t have to reject DV recipients to make room for high-skilled immigrants. We can and should do both.

There is a general consensus that our current immigration system is far from perfect. In the House Judiciary Committee, we have begun examining the issue, and I am hopeful my colleagues will use the opportunity to produce a piece of legislation that is bold, effective and compassionate. Some in Congress are open to expanding high-skilled immigration, which I support. However, I outright reject any immigration plan that does so at the expense of the DV program, because that plan would fail to be either effective or compassionate.

The State Department’s DV program allocates visas via lottery based on regional and country-specific immigration patterns. DV recipients vary in their nationalities, education levels and professional qualifications but have the common trait of being from countries that have sent fewer than 50,000 individuals to the United States in the past five years. The sole eligibility requirement is that applicants hold a high school degree or have a job that requires at least two years of training. This allocation method vastly improves the diversity of people coming to our country while ensuring that they have the basic job skills to immediately contribute to our economy.

It is a program that helps people from lesser-represented nations earn the chance to make a contribution to American society and also brings rich cultural diversity. Nearly half of lottery-based 2012 DV recipients hail from African nations with an additional 30 percent from underrepresented countries in Europe. The diversity lottery program is a proven method of offering a path to legal permanent status for residents of African nations and other underrepresented regions seeking a better life here in the United States.

The desire from those abroad to join our ranks is overwhelming. Tens of millions have applied for the limited amount of diversity visas available every year, illustrating the demand and need to maintain this vital path to American citizenship. Additionally, research shows that DV recipients are generally younger, better educated and more likely to speak proficient English when they arrive in the U.S. compared with the average legal immigrant. Our country’s immigration system is long overdue for an overhaul, but the DV program is not something that is in need of a fix — especially when it yields long-term economic and cultural gains for our incredible melting pot.

Rep. Cedric Richmond (D-La.) serves on the Committee on Homeland Security and the Committee on the Judiciary.

No Comments » | diversity visa, Green Card Lottery, Immigration Reform | Permalink
Posted by usagreencardblog

Black Caucus troubled by Senate plan to replace ‘diversity’ visas – The Hill

April 23rd, 2013

Black Caucus troubled by Senate plan to replace ‘diversity’ visas – The Hill.

Black lawmakers and civil rights groups are concerned by a proposal in the Senate’s immigration reform bill that would do away with “diversity” visas that are often a pathway for African and Caribbean immigrants to enter the United States.

Advocates said they haven’t seen evidence yet that a new merit-based program is an acceptable replacement for the diversity visas, which total 55,000 each year and are granted via a lottery.

Hilary Shelton, director of the NAACP Washington bureau, said he is telling lawmakers not to eliminate the diversity program when comprehensive immigration reform moves forward.

“At this point, we are urging lawmakers not to eliminate the diversity visa program,” Shelton told The Hill. “This is one of the places in the bill that needs to be addressed. We will work with our friends in the Senate, and we have started working with our friends in the House as well.”
Rep. Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.), co-chairman of the immigration task force for the Congressional Black Caucus (CBC), called the Senate bill “a significant step in the right direction” but said his caucus is worried about the plan to eliminate diversity visas.

“With respect to the abolishment of the diversity visa lottery program, the CBC is extremely concerned that it might limit the future flow of immigration for people from certain parts of the world,” Jeffries said. “That’s troublesome, and we’re evaluating the merit-based visa proposal to determine if it’s fair and balanced.”

The diversity program makes 55,000 visas available each year to countries with low immigration rates to the United States. Those awarded the visas are chosen by a lottery, with about half typically going to African immigrants.

Republican lawmakers have targeted the program in the past for elimination, arguing the program’s lottery system can lead to fraud and undermine national security.

The Senate bill proposes ending the diversity visas in 2015 and creating a new, merit-based visa program. It would make 120,000 visas available per year, rising to a maximum of 250,000, depending on the need for them and the unemployment rate. Immigrants would earn points toward visas based on their education, employment, family ties and other criteria.

“The jury is still out on whether the merit-based visas will be sufficient to address the concerns we have identified with diversity visas,” said Wade Henderson, president and CEO of the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights. “We are concerned but we are still looking, and we are still making a decision.”

Some groups are furious with lawmakers for putting the diversity program on the chopping block.

“This is not a zero-sum game where we take from one to give to another. That is not how comprehensive immigration reform should work,” said Bertha Lewis, president of The Black Institute. “We are really, really angry about this diversity visa business.”

Jeffries said it was “too early to say” whether he would support the Senate bill without changes. The CBC is in talks with lawmakers negotiating a House immigration overhaul, he said.

“The situation is still very much in flux, and we won’t know until the end of the month what that bill might ultimately look like,” Jeffries said.

Rep. Steven Horsford (D-Nev.), another co-chairman of the CBC’s immigration task force, said the group met on Wednesday afternoon to discuss the diversity visa issue.

“We continue to be concerned about the discontinuation of the diversity waiver, and the fact that … African and Caribbean immigrants who are participating in the diversity visa [program] per year could lose that pathway,” Horsford said.

Horsford said CBC leaders have been in talks with immigration reform negotiators in both the House and the Senate. He suggested the merit-based replacement program was included in the Senate bill at the urging of the CBC.

“In large part, this alternative has been proposed because of our concerns with the diversity visa [discontinuation]. Meaning, we brought this issue up when we heard that it was being talked about [being] eliminated,” Horsford said. “And we said, ‘Look, without some meaningful alternative that ensures that all communities, including Caribbean and African immigrants, are protected, then, you know, we [the CBC] would have major concern.’”

Horsford said Rep. Yvette Clarke (D-N.Y.), another leader of the CBC’s immigration task force, has been in talks with Sen. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.), a member of the Senate’s “Gang of Eight,” about diversity visas.

“And now that we have the language, and now that we can see the alternative specifically, we can, you know, begin to work on how it affects our communities,” Horsford said.

Horsford said he expected the House immigration reform bill would have similar language related to diversity visas and the merit-based replacement program.

Shelton of the NAACP said he was hoping for “a strengthening” of the diversity visa program in the immigration reform bill by increasing its numbers of visas and expediting their processing time.

“It has not been demonstrated yet that the merit-based visas that are being lifted up will solve the problems that diversity visas were intended to solve,” Shelton said. “There may be a need for an amendment to fix this problem in the future to help African and Caribbean immigrants.”

No Comments » | diversity visa, Green Card Lottery, Immigration Reform | Permalink
Posted by usagreencardblog

Senators say Boston no excuse to defeat immigration bill – Politics – The Boston Globe

April 22nd, 2013

Senators say Boston no excuse to defeat immigration bill – Politics – The Boston Globe.

WASHINGTON — Two senators who helped write bipartisan immigration legislation said Sunday that the Boston Marathon bombings should expedite an overhaul of the system rather than stall it.

Senator Lindsey Graham, Republican of South Carolina, said on CNN’s “State of the Union’’ that the bombings that left three dead ‘‘should urge us to act quicker, not slower when it comes to getting the 11 million identified,’’ referring to the estimated number of immigrants living in the country illegally.

Senator Chuck Schumer, Democrat of New York, who also appeared on the CNN program, said keeping the status quo is not a very good argument, given what happened in Boston.

Schumer said critics are using the bombings to oppose a proposal they disliked from the start. He said that if they have suggestions to make the proposal better, they should speak up.

On Friday, Charles E. Grassley, a senior Iowa Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee, which is debating the plan submitted by a bipartisan group of eight senators, said the Boston attacks should figure into that debate.

Some conservative commentators and congressional Republicans want to shift the focus away from economic and humanitarian concerns to border security and the potential threat from terrorists entering the country.

Tamerlan Tsarnaev, 26, the older brother suspected in the Boston bombings, had an application for US citizenship placed on hold after the FBI questioned him on potential Islamic extremist ties.

Tsarnaev, who was shot to death by police on Friday, was a legal permanent US resident.

His younger brother, Dzhokhar, 19, who is in custody, became a naturalized US citizen in 2012.

The Tsarnaev brothers and their two sisters came to the United States from the Russian region of Dagestan in 2002, after leaving the central Asian nation of Kyrgyzstan. They followed their parents, who had been granted political asylum in the United States.

Grassley opened a hearing on the immigration legislation Friday by stressing that the issue was important ‘‘particularly in light of all that’s happening in Massachusetts right now and over the last week.’’

“Given the events of this week, it’s important for us to understand the gaps and loopholes in our immigration system,’’ Grassley said in his opening statement. ‘‘While we don’t yet know the immigration status of people who have terrorized the communities in Massachusetts, when we find out it will help shed light on the weaknesses of our system.’’

Representative Mario Diaz-Balart, Republican of Florida, who is part of a group working on similar immigration legislation in the House, criticized Grassley’s remarks. “Linking something like that to other legislation I think is probably not appropriate at this time,’’ Diaz-Balart said.

No Comments » | border security, Immigration Reform | Permalink
Posted by usagreencardblog

Immigration bill filed in Senate; opponents hope to use delays to kill it – The Washington Post

April 18th, 2013

Immigration bill filed in Senate; opponents hope to use delays to kill it – The Washington Post.

A bipartisan group of lawmakers formally filed an 844-page immigration bill on the Senate floor early Wednesday, setting the stage for months of public debate over the proposal.

Leading Capitol Hill opponents of the proposal to overhaul the nation’s immigration system are coalescing around a strategy to kill the bill by delaying the legislative process as long as possible, providing time to offer “poison pill” amendments aimed at breaking apart the fragile bipartisan group that developed the plan, according to lawmakers and legislative aides.

The tactics, used successfully by opponents of an immigration bill during a 2007 debate in the Senate, are part of an effort to exploit public fissures over core components of the comprehensive legislation introduced Tuesday by eight lawmakers who spent months negotiating the details.

The authors of the bill are considering whether to formally embrace it at a news conference Thursday, a move designed to build momentum for the plan. Conservative critics cautioned Tuesday that the legislative process must not be rushed.

An open process “is essential to gaining public confidence in the content of the bill. We know it’s complicated,” said Sen. John Cornyn (Tex.), the top GOP member on the Senate Judiciary Committee’s immigration subcommittee. “I can’t see any reason to undermine confidence by trying to jam it through without adequate time for people to read it and to hear from their constituents.”

Cornyn aides said the senator is not necessarily against the bill. They said he is encouraged by the bipartisan progress but wants adequate time for debate.

Sen. Charles E. Grassley (R-Iowa) called the pace of the legislative process — with Judiciary Committee hearings set for Friday and Monday — a “serious problem.” Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa) suggested to the conservative National Review that caution on immigration is important in light of early speculation that the Boston Marathon bombings might have been carried out by a foreign national with a student visa — speculation that authorities said is not based on any specific finding.

The highly anticipated legislation crafted by the eight Democratic and Republican senators is divided into four sections: border security, immigrant visas, interior enforcement and reforms to nonimmigrant visas (workplace programs).

“We have always welcomed newcomers to the United States and will continue to do so,” reads the introduction. “But in order to qualify for the honor and privilege of eventual citizenship, our laws must be followed.”

The bill states that illegal immigration has, in some cases, become a threat to national security and that strengthening the laws will help improve the nation economically, militarily and ethically.

Aides said Sen. Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) filed the bill after 1:30 a.m. on behalf of himself and his seven colleagues in the working group, known as the “Gang of Eight”: Democrats Robert Menendez (N.J), Richard J. Durbin (Ill.) and Michael F. Bennet (Colo.), and Republicans Lindsey O. Graham (S.C.), John McCain (Ariz.), Marco Rubio (Fla.) and Jeff Flake (Ariz.).

No Comments » | illegal immigrants, Immigration Reform | Permalink
Posted by usagreencardblog

Bill offers a path to citizenship, new path on immigration – Politics – The Boston Globe

April 17th, 2013

Bill offers a path to citizenship, new path on immigration – Politics – The Boston Globe.

WASHINGTON — A sweeping immigration bill that a bipartisan group of eight senators completed Tuesday seeks not only to fix chronic problems in the system and bring an estimated 11 million immigrants to the right side of the law. It would also reorient future immigration with the goal of bringing foreigners to the country based increasingly on the job skills and personal assets they can offer.

The bill, by four Democrats and four Republicans, is the most ambitious effort in at least 26 years to repair, update, and reshape the US immigration system.

The part of the bill expected to draw the most controversy is a 13-year pathway to citizenship for immigrants who have been living here illegally. In an effort to make that proposal acceptable to Republicans who fear it could unleash a new wave of illegal immigration, the senators placed a series of conditions along the pathway that would require the Department of Homeland Security to spend as much as $5.5 billion over 10 years to increase enforcement and extend fencing along the Southwest border.

The border security programs would have to be fully operational before any immigrants who had been here illegally would be able to apply for permanent resident cards, the first step toward becoming US citizens.

But the overall proposal is only one part of the complex bargain. Created by the senators in closed-door negotiations, the bill codifies other compromises designed to break logjams that have clogged the immigration system.

President Obama praised the legislation as ‘‘largely consistent’’ with the principles he had laid out for an immigration overhaul. After a meeting with two senators from the group, Charles Schumer and John McCain, the president said in a statement that the provisions of their bill are ‘‘all common-sense steps that the majority of Americans support.’’

McCain said his onetime rival for the presidency was ‘‘very supportive’’ but understands that ‘‘everybody didn’t get everything they wanted.’’

Schumer praised Obama for giving the senators room to craft the bipartisan legislation. ‘‘I thanked him for that. John thanked him for that.’’

Schumer said the process would begin formally with hearings Friday in the Judiciary Committee, with the goal of voting on the bill in the Senate in late May or early June.

For the first time, the legislation would create a merit-based program to award the visa for legal permanent residents, known as a green card, based on a point system. When the merit system takes effect, five years after the bill is passed, at least 120,000 foreign-born people each year would be able to gain green cards by accumulating points based on their skills and education, as well as their family ties and the time they have lived in the United States.

Over a decade, the balance in the immigration system would gradually shift away from the 75 percent of visas that now go to family members of immigrants already here. As a result of the merit program, closer to 50 percent of visas annually would go to immigrants based on their family ties, while about half would be based on job skills.

As part of the border security triggers, the bill would require all employers, within five years, to verify the legal status of new hires using a federal photo-matching system. It would also require the federal government to create an electronic system within 10 years for checking foreigners as they leave the country through airports and seaports.

The bill also would also create two new guest-worker programs, one for farmworkers and another for low-wage laborers.

It would give employers in technology and science fields tens of thousands of new temporary and permanent resident visas annually, which they have been urgently seeking for computer engineers and foreign graduates with advanced degrees from US universities. It raises current annual caps on temporary high-skilled visas, known as H-1B, to 110,000 from 65,000, while adding 5,000 more of those visas for the foreign graduates. The cap would gradually rise to 180,000.

And the bill would allow young immigrants who came to the United States illegally as children to become citizens after only five years.

Perhaps the most original compromise is the path to citizenship for immigrants here illegally. Several Republicans, especially Senator Marco Rubio of Florida, insisted that there could be no special, separate path for them. But Democrats, led by Schumer, fought for a direct, manageable pathway that would ensure that most immigrants here illegally get a chance to earn their way to becoming citizens.

In a first phase, those immigrants would spend a minimum of 10 years in Registered Provisional Immigrant Status, which would allow them to work and travel. After 10 years, they would be eligible to apply for green cards through the merit system.

No Comments » | amnesty, border security, citizenship, Immigration Reform, work visas | Permalink
Posted by usagreencardblog

Senators formally file immigration bill – CNN.com

April 17th, 2013

Senators formally file immigration bill – CNN.com.

(CNN) — A bipartisan group of senators formally filed legislation early Wednesday calling for border security as the cornerstone of immigration reform.

The bill also would prevent undocumented immigrants from reaching full legal resident status until after the government takes steps to keep unauthorized workers from getting jobs in the United States, according to a summary released before the bill was filed.

The measure drafted by the “Gang of Eight” senators says “high risk border sectors” — those with at least 30,000 illegal crossings a year — must be sealed off before most undocumented immigrants could start their journey to legal residency.

It makes exceptions for law-abiding immigrants who arrived in the United States as children and completed high school. It also exempts some farm workers, according to the summary.

Conservative senators have insisted on border security as a condition for the legislation. Some Democrats, whose party controls the chamber, have agreed.

Quota-based border security

The bipartisan bill lays down strict criteria for the creation of a secure border. It calls for $3 billion to beef up border security, which includes fortifying fences, staffing up patrols and acquiring surveillance technology from the Department of Defense — including drones and drone pilots, according to the summary.

It also requires constant surveillance of high-risk border areas and demands that border officers turn back at least 90% of those who attempt illegal border crossings each year.

The path to legal residency? Border security

Only undocumented immigrants who arrived in the United States before December 31, 2011 would be eligible for legal residency, according to the bill summary. They also can’t have any felony convictions in U.S. or foreign courts.

But smaller offenses can also block residency. The bill would block applicants with more than three misdemeanor convictions, including for offenses such as reckless driving, trespassing or vandalism.

Voting illegally also triggers ineligibility and authorities can turn back applicants if they have certain infectious diseases or questionable “morality,” according to the summary.

Time and money

The bill would also require undocumented immigrants to pay a penalty of up to $500 for having come to the United States illegally and also pay any back taxes before receiving temporary approval to stay.

But that approval — call registered provisional immigrant status — opens up most U.S. jobs and allows the applicant to travel outside the country and return legally.

The status lasts for six years and can be extended for an additional $500 fee, if the applicant has not gotten into any trouble with the law.

After 10 years as provisional residents, immigrants could become lawful permanent residents by following the same guidelines as immigrants who enter the country legally. That process includes a $1,000 fee.

Blue card for ag workers

The proposal also calls for issuing agricultural workers a new type of legal status card: a blue card.

Agricultural workers who are currently in the country illegally would be allowed to apply for the card if they have worked in the U.S. agriculture industry for at least 100 days in the two years prior to December 31, 2012.

Applicants must also pay a $400 fee, show they have paid their taxes and have not committed a crime.

The bill caps the blue cards at about 112,000 for the first five years.

Blue card holders would be eligible for permanent legal residency in five years, half the time of other adult immigrants in the country illegally, according to the summary.

The proposal would also set minimum wages across several categories of agricultural workers.

Members of the Republican-led House of Representatives are working on their own immigration overhaul plan, which also includes border security measures.

No Comments » | border security, Immigration Reform, undocumented workers | Permalink
Posted by usagreencardblog

Immigration Bill Expected to Focus on Work Skills – NYTimes.com

April 12th, 2013

Immigration Bill Expected to Focus on Work Skills – NYTimes.com.

WASHINGTON — The sweeping immigration bill that a bipartisan group of senators is preparing will include a major new merit-based program for foreigners to become permanent legal residents based on their work skills, including both high-skilled and blue-collar workers, according to people familiar with a draft of the legislation.

Over time the program, just one piece of the bill, would open up many new opportunities for foreigners to settle in the United States based on their skills, a shift from the focus on family ties that is the main foundation of the current immigration system.

But the bill will also include a host of measures to eliminate, over 10 years, a backlog of 4.7 million immigrants who have applied to come here legally and have been languishing in the system, waiting for permanent resident visas known as green cards. As a result, during the next decade, millions of immigrants who have been waiting patiently for legal documents will be united with their family members here.

The bill, an intricate combination of many interlocking parts, also provides a path to citizenship for an estimated 11 million immigrants living in the country illegally. Under the plan, those immigrants would wait at least 13 years before they could apply to become citizens.

The eight senators who are drafting the legislation, including Charles E. Schumer of New York, a Democrat, and Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, a Republican, said this week that they had reached broad agreement on its major pieces and hoped to present it early next week.

Mr. Schumer said Thursday that all issues among the senators had been resolved. “All that’s left is the drafting,” he said.

At the crux of the legislation is an effort to bridge the gap between Democrats, who strongly support and are seeking to protect family immigration, and Republicans, who are eager to move immigration toward a system based on work skills that foreigners bring to the United States.

The senators are under pressure to move quickly to introduce the bill. Senator Patrick J. Leahy of Vermont, a Democrat who is chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, has scheduled a hearing for next Wednesday. This week, tens of thousands of immigrants and their supporters rallied Wednesday on the lawn of the Capitol, calling for a path to citizenship for all illegal immigrants in the country and urging Congress to move swiftly.

One major goal of the bill is to put immigrants who have been living in the country illegally at “the back of the line” behind immigrants who made every effort to follow the rules, so that no one here illegally would become legal residents or citizens until those already in the system have the chance to do so.

Also, at the insistence of Republicans — particularly Senator Marco Rubio of Florida, another member of the bipartisan group — the bill also avoids giving illegal immigrants a separate pathway to citizenship. Under the proposal, no new green cards would be created in the future exclusively for them.

Instead, in a novel compromise worked out in hard-fought negotiations, immigrants who had been here illegally would gain a provisional legal status in which they would remain for at least 10 years. They could work legally and travel, but they would not become permanent residents.

During the first decade, the aim is to clear backlogs. Then, formerly illegal immigrants could apply for merit-based green cards, along with many other foreigners applying legally. After three years with a green card, the formerly illegal immigrants would be eligible to apply to become American citizens.

Some Senate staff members stressed that the final draft of the bill is not complete, and that many details could change, although not the broad outlines and goals.

Among proposals to reduce backlogs is a plan to accelerate green card applications of foreigners living legally in the United States who have been waiting to receive their documents for 10 years or more.

Any immigrants who have been working legally in this country for 10 years would also move rapidly to receive green cards, either through the current system or later through the new merit system.

The plan would also free up additional green cards by eliminating a category of foreigners who are now eligible for those visas: siblings of United States citizens.

The bill would also remove annual limits on the number of green cards for a different category, spouses and minor children of legal permanent residents. The senators estimate that 800,000 immediate family members will move through the backlog and gain green cards over the next decade as a result of that change.

At the end of 10 years, the bill would create a program offering 138,000 merit-based visas each year to foreigners based on their work skills, but also on other considerations including family ties. Green cards will be offered to workers in three categories: high-skilled foreigners in technology and science, employees with a middle range of white collar skills, and low-wage workers. Farmworkers are not included, as they will come under a separate program.

Immigrants who will be eligible for merit green cards would include those formerly here illegally, if they have remained in good standing, learned English and passed other requirements, and remained employed for 10 years.

But other migrants would be eligible for those green cards as well, including agricultural guest workers who had been legally employed in this country for 10 years, and other temporary visa holders. There would be no special, dedicated path to citizenship for immigrants who had once lived in the country illegally.

No Comments » | green card, illegal immigrants, Immigration Reform | Permalink
Posted by usagreencardblog