LA TIMES: Laws and Funding Thwart Search for Illegal Workers

LA TIMES: Laws and Funding Thwart Search for Illegal Workers

 

As Congress debates immigration reform, its will to crack down on employers will be tested.

By Nicole Gaouette
Times Staff Writer

March 30, 2006

WASHINGTON — Every year, the Social Security Administration collects information from companies that could make it easier to crack down on illegal immigration.

A New Jersey labor broker and a security guard firm in California are among thousands of businesses that have filed Social Security tax payments for a large number of workers that do not match any known taxpayer. That, the Social Security agency says, is a sign that the workers are most likely illegal. In 2001, payments for 96% of the New Jersey company's workers did not correspond to any taxpayer on file.

Yet the authorities who enforce immigration law have no access to the names of the companies or the workers.

That is just one of many ways that legal barriers, funding priorities and other problems make it hard for immigration officials to go to the one place they know undocumented workers will be: the work site.

With the Senate debating an overhaul of immigration laws, the nation is about to see how much muscle Congress is willing to put into the effort to stop illegal hiring.

Proposals to increase federal oversight of employers and the workplace have long faced opposition from business groups, which say they fear taking on new costs and struggling with flawed government databases.

The House has passed legislation that would require companies to check the legal status of all employees with Homeland Security Department databases. It also would allow enforcement officials to see Social Security wage data and increase civil and criminal penalties for employing undocumented immigrants.

The Senate too is debating compulsory worker checks, along with proposals to boost the number of work-site investigators and raise penalties for hiring undocumented workers.

"Nothing gets enforced. Employer sanctions don't get enforced," Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) said during a recent Senate Judiciary Committee hearing. And the fact that existing laws against illegal hiring are not fully enforced, Feinstein said, "in itself is a magnet" attracting more illegal immigrants.

The number of federal workers who focus on finding illegal immigrants on the job has dropped in recent years, from 240 in 1999 to 90 in 2003.

And less than 1% of the money devoted to immigration enforcement is directed to crackdowns at the workplace, with the overwhelming majority spent at the nation's borders. Last year, 127 employers were convicted for hiring undocumented workers — a small fraction of the thousands of businesses thought to be using illegal labor.

The one Homeland Security program for checking worker eligibility is voluntary, is subscribed to by a small number of the country's employers and is off-limits to the agency conducting workplace enforcement.

Knowingly hiring undocumented immigrants became illegal in the U.S. in 1986. Congress required companies to have workers fill out an I-9 form — stating that the workers were U.S. citizens, permanent residents or authorized to work — and to check identification.

But it allowed workers to offer any of 29 documents, including report cards for those younger than 18, as proof of their identity and work eligibility. It did nothing to help employers sift forged papers from genuine ones, a task that has become more difficult as forgeries have become more sophisticated. The Government Accountability Office has said that employers can easily hire illegal workers by filling out the I-9 and accepting false documents, knowingly or not.

The Senate and House immigration proposals include limits on the range of acceptable forms of identification and move to make them tamper-proof by equipping them with biometric or machine-readable features.

Last week, President Bush acknowledged the difficulties employers had in checking identification when he talked about an onion grower he recently met: "I don't think he's in a position to be able to determine whether or not what looks like a valid Social Security card or whatever they show is valid or not," Bush said.

One tool employers such as the onion grower could use is Basic Pilot, run by a branch of the Homeland Security Department. It is a voluntary worker-verification program established in 1996 that many in Congress would like to make mandatory for all companies.

Under Basic Pilot, employers enter employee information into a website within three days of making a new hire. The system then matches the information with data at the Social Security Administration and the Department of Homeland Security, using Social Security numbers to confirm or deny the employee's eligibility to work. Employees who do not get confirmation must be fired.

About 5,500 of the country's 8 million employers were registered to use Basic Pilot in March.

Legislation before the Senate would require all companies to phase in the program within five years, whereas the House legislation would require firms to screen all new hires within two years of the law's implementation, with verification of previous hires to be completed in six years.

Some employers have reported that Basic Pilot helped them verify work status, but the program is seen as deeply flawed. Not all its computers are linked; in 2004, 15% of queries to the Homeland Security Department had to be entered manually. The program can detect document fraud, but it is blind to identity theft. Borrowing a legal worker's name and Social Security number allows an undocumented worker to sail through the checks.

And to the frustration of immigration enforcement agents, the authorities who manage Basic Pilot do not share information. They say employers might avoid signing up if they knew workplace enforcement officials were watching.

"It's not set up to be an investigative tool," said Bill Strassberger, a spokesman for U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services. "It's set up to be a tool for employers. It's an aid to employers as they attempt to verify the employment eligibility of their workers."

Along with the drop in staff numbers has come a decline in employer sanctions. The number of notices of intent to fine issued to companies that knowingly hired an illegal worker or improperly filled out an I-9 form plummeted from 417 in 1999 to three in 2004.

Dean Boyd, a spokesman for the Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency, said the drop in such notices was due in part to the realization that they did little to inhibit some firms who "saw them as the cost of doing business."

Instead, the agency is looking for ways to apply criminal charges against rogue employers. Boyd said that arrests of undocumented workers and their employers had risen since 2003, and that the immigration agency was planning to beef up its workplace enforcement efforts. Employers are often charged with money laundering or human smuggling, because a criminal case brings greater penalties.

Officials note that the administration's 2007 budget request allocates $47 million for work-site enforcement and calls for hiring 171 special agents and 35 support staff members.

"We're building workplace enforcement back up and looking to make this a priority," Boyd said.

Some lawmakers want to give enforcement officials access to Social Security data that could indicate which companies probably have a heavy concentration of illegal workers. The Social Security Administration tracks incidents of when tax payments do not correspond to any known taxpayer. But the law bars it from sharing the information.

Still, it is unclear whether Congress will approve the law change, as some lawmakers have worried that the change could weaken taxpayer privacy protections.

 

Charles M. Miller | MILLER LAW OFFICES | 12441 Ventura Boulevard | Studio City, California 91604|

 Tel 818 508 9005 | Fax 818 508 9458| California Certified Immigration Law Specialist | www.millerlawoffices.com                                                                   

This email is confidential, privileged and/or attorney work product for the sole use of the intended recipient.  Any review, reliance, distribution or forwarding without

express permission is strictly prohibited.  If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender and delete all copies.
 

 

LA TIMES: How DJs Put 500,000 Marchers in Motion

By Teresa Watanabe and Hector Becerra
Times Staff Writers

March 28, 2006

He's one of the hottest Spanish-language radio personalities in the nation. So when Los Angeles deejay Eddie Sotelo joined hands with his radio rivals to urge listeners to turn out for a pro-immigrant rally in downtown Los Angeles on Saturday, organizers hoped for a big turnout.

But many said Monday that they were stunned by how many responded to the call to march against federal legislation that would crack down on undocumented immigrants and penalize those who assist them.

As a result, what was initially expected to draw fewer than 20,000 ballooned into a massive march that police estimated at 500,000 and said was one of the largest demonstrations in Los Angeles' history. The march topped a wave of protests drawing hundreds of thousands of participants in cities around the nation, which organizers said influenced the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee's approval Monday of legislation that includes legalization for undocumented immigrants.

Rally supporters, including immigrant-rights activists, churches, and labor and community groups, agreed that the active advocacy of the region's top Spanish-language radio personalities was critical in drawing the enormous crowds, who marched more than 20 blocks along Spring and Main streets and Broadway to City Hall, wearing white "peace" shirts and waving American and Mexican flags.

The promoters included such on-air celebrities as KHJ's Humberto Luna, KBUE's Ricardo "El Mandril" (The Baboon) Sanchez, Renan "El Cucuy" (The Boogeyman) Almendarez Coello — whose often risque show has cast him as a sort of Latino version of Howard Stern — and Sotelo, better known to listeners as "El Piolin," or Tweety Bird. Coello's and Sotelo's morning talk shows are among the highest-rated programs in any language in Los Angeles.

"They were the key to getting so many people out," said Mike Garcia, president of Local 1877 of the Service Employees International Union. "If you listened to Spanish-language media, they were just pumping, pumping, pumping this up."

For his part, Sotelo said he decided to promote the cause — by calling a summit of his rival deejays to encourage them to do the same — after rally organizers told him about the ramifications of the legislation passed by the U.S. House of Representatives last December. The bill, by Rep. F. James Sensenbrenner Jr. (R-Wis.), would make undocumented immigrants and those who assist them felons and erect a 700-mile fence along the U.S.-Mexican border.

"I told God that if he gave me an opportunity as a radio announcer, I was going to help my people," said Sotelo, who himself illegally crossed the border in the trunk of a car in 1986 and gained legal status a decade later. "I think we have to make sure the message went through to Washington, to let them know we're not criminals."

The idea for the march first sprouted in February in the oldest church in Los Angeles: Our Lady Queen of Angels, which has historically served as a sanctuary for undocumented migrants.

The church near Olvera Street has become one of the city's organizing hubs against the House bill, playing a leading role in promoting the Roman Catholic Church's national "Justice for Immigrants" campaign. Cardinal Roger M. Mahony last December appointed a committee to promote the national campaign throughout the 5-million-member Los Angeles Archdiocese.

The coalition of religious, community and civil rights activists meeting at the church had begun planning several small-scale events: news conferences, a petition drive and protest marches to Republican and Democratic party offices.

But when two visitors joined the group in January, the vision suddenly expanded.

Jesse Diaz, a doctoral candidate in sociology at UC Riverside, had worked with day laborers in Pomona and organized marches against Proposition 187, the 1994 state initiative that cut public benefits to undocumented immigrants but was struck down in federal court. Javier Rodriguez, a journalist, had also worked with immigrants and organized black-Latino political alliances.

The two men called for something dramatic: a massive protest march.

"It was time," Diaz said. "The Sensenbrenner bill had passed. We have 10 [million] to 12 million undocumented immigrants in this country, but their voice can't be heard at the ballot box. We felt a march would be a way for them to speak out."

The coalition was initially wary, he said. The group had little money or organization. At the time, none of the big labor or civil rights organizations had yet signed on, such as the service employees union or the Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights of Los Angeles. At the table, aside from the Catholic priests and some Spanish-language journalists, were such groups as the Central American Resource Center, Hermandad Mexicana Latinoamericana, the Pomona Day Labor Center and the Southern California Human Rights Network.

But Diaz and Rodriguez kept pushing. On March 2, the group held a news conference at the church to announce the march and call for political and Spanish-language media to get involved.

On March 13, the group got extensive coverage from KMEX-TV Channel 34, including promos, leading up to a "media breakfast" the next day. Later that day, Rodriguez and other leaders spoke to a producer on Sotelo's program. The day after that, they were on "Piolin Por La Mañana" for four hours, Rodriguez said.

"That was it, man!" Rodriguez said. "They gave us four hours and we went at it. We talked about the need for people to come out."

The next day, Rodriguez and other leaders went on the air with Sanchez of KBUE-FM (105.5) "Que Buena." During that show, Rodriguez said, he proposed that the deejays join together for the cause.

Sanchez called Sotelo and they had an on-air conversation during their programs, Rodriguez said. Later that day, Sotelo would make the calls that would bring the other deejays together on the air.

By March 20, all of the major Spanish-language disc jockeys got together on City Hall's south steps to promote the big march.

"From there, it just blew up," Diaz said.

The deejays did more than publicize the march. Working with the organizers, they also helped develop some ground rules: Marchers had to be peaceful and clean up after themselves.

They were also encouraged to wave American flags.

"We wanted them to show that we love this country," Sotelo said. "Bringing the U.S. flag, that was important. There are so many people who say, 'I'm glad my parents came here and sacrificed like they did for us.' "

By this time, other organizations had begun to join the effort.

Local 1877, which represents janitors, took care of security. The union trained nearly 500 people in how to deal with conflicts and herd marchers along the route, posting nearly two dozen on each block in orange T-shirts donated by an L.A. apparel firm, according to union organizer Ernesto Guerrero.

The union also coordinated the more than 100 buses that dropped off marchers from throughout California, Las Vegas and a few Southwestern cities, he said.

All of the planning paid off. The "Great March of March 25," as some dubbed it, was peaceful.

"I was saying, 'Man, we did it, we did it!' " Sotelo said.

The strong advocacy of the disc jockeys and other Spanish-language media contrasted sharply with other outlets, said Felix Gutierrez, a journalism professor at USC's Annenberg School for Communication.

"The Latino media played it more as how will this affect you, how will it affect your job, how will it affect your kids," Gutierrez said. "They were much closer to their audience, in terms of the direct effect."

Gutierrez lauded the organization behind the event and contrasted it with the angrier assemblies of the Chicano movement of the 1960s, in which he was a media liaison.

By comparison, Saturday's rally was festive, featuring kazoos, mariachi music, cotton candy and families with children. "The messages I heard last week was show up, bring your family, bring your children, don't get pulled into violence, there may be people trying to provoke you," Gutierrez said.

Meanwhile, Diaz and Rodriguez planned to announce today their next major action: a call to boycott work, school and all consumer activities May 1. They are calling it "The Great American Boycott of 2006."

LA Times:Guest-Worker Plan Gets Senate Boost

Guest-Worker Plan Gets Senate Boost

That and a measure to give a shot at citizenship to some undocumented workers will now likely force a GOP showdown on the issue this year.

By Nicole Gaouette and Mary Curtius
Times Staff Writers

March 17, 2006

WASHINGTON — A controversial proposal to give some of the estimated 12 million undocumented immigrants in the United States a path toward citizenship moved forward in a Senate committee Thursday, along with a plan that would allow additional foreigners to enter the country as guest workers — a priority for President Bush, the business community and many Latino groups.

The measures face many hurdles to becoming law and significant opposition in both chambers of Congress, but their progress Thursday makes it increasingly likely that the Republican Party will be forced into a prominent election-year showdown over the most divisive aspects of immigration law.

The advance came when several members of the Senate Judiciary Committee agreed on the two proposals early Thursday, drawing elements from several competing plans. Although the compromise is not assured passage, people following the process said the committee would probably approve it during a vote scheduled for March 27.

The guest-worker measure appeared to have the most clear support. "The votes are there," said Sen. Charles E. Grassley (R-Iowa), who opposes giving permanent status to illegal immigrants.

"There is a very big chance" for the guest-worker plan's success in the committee, said Angelo Amador, director of immigration policy for the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.

In the House, where a large and vocal group of members says a guest-worker plan would only draw more illegal workers to the United States, legislation was approved last year that focused almost entirely on securing the nation's borders and toughening enforcement of illegal hiring. The legislation created no new mechanisms for illegal workers to gain permanent status or for foreigners to become guest workers.

In the Senate, however, many members believe an enforcement crackdown should be paired with measures allowing employers to hire foreign workers legally, an idea that many business groups say is vital to the smooth functioning of the economy. President Bush has been pushing for a guest-worker program for two years.

The prospects in the Senate are more uncertain for the deal to create a pathway for some of the nation's illegal immigrants to gain permanent status and citizenship. Still, supporters said the compromise significantly boosted chances for approval.

In addition to facing opposition in the House, the proposals appeared to become ensnared in the jockeying for the 2008 presidential campaign.

Shortly after Sen. Arlen Specter (R-Pa.), the Judiciary Committee chairman, announced that his panel was nearing agreement on the compromise, Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-Tenn.) said he would introduce a bill that would be limited to border security and enforcement measures.

Frist's move was dismissed by some Capitol Hill observers as an effort to bolster his credentials with conservatives as he prepares for a possible presidential run. By introducing a bill with no guest-worker provisions, they said, Frist was hoping to highlight the difference between his approach to immigration and that of Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), a potential rival and co-sponsor of guest-worker legislation.

Frist told reporters he was acting to ensure that a bill came to the floor in time to be debated and voted on before the Senate recesses for the summer.

House members who favor an enforcement-only approach to immigration said the Senate committee would kill the chances for any legislation to pass if it embraced the guest-worker plan or a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants already in the country.

"If the Senate were to pass such a proposal, we believe it would doom any chance of a real reform bill reaching the president's desk this year," said a letter to Specter signed by 71 House members, 70 of them Republicans.

But a guest-worker plan is a priority for business groups, including many in the agricultural sector.

Joe Colace, a produce grower, packer and shipper in Brawley, Calif., said he could not find enough pickers to harvest his lemon crop in Imperial County in December.

He typically runs eight crews of 25 to 30 workers each, he said, but last year he had to make do with five to six crews of 18 to 20 workers.

"We could not stay up with demand and we were losing ground on a daily basis," Colace said. "The risk is already great enough without having to worry about having enough employees to harvest the crop." The lemons he lost in the fields, he said, cost his company, Five Crowns Marketing, about $100,000.

Colace said he and other growers always tried to hire American workers, but often came up short. Last year he submitted a request for 108 workers to his local unemployment agency, he said, and got two workers in response.

Under the compromise brokered by Specter, foreigners would be able to come to the United States to work for eight years, during which they could apply to become permanent residents if they met a set of criteria.

An approved worker would start with a two-year visa. After that, the worker would have to return to the home country for a year, though the employer could apply for a waiver if it showed that the employee's departure would harm business.

The worker could then return with a three-year visa, which could be renewed once. After that renewal — in the worker's sixth year in the program — the worker or the employer could petition for permanent legal residency, also known as obtaining a green card.

Under current law, gaining permanent legal residency is a step toward citizenship.

The program would be capped at 400,000 visas a year.

Senators also said they would work on including proposals for guest workers aimed exclusively at agricultural workers, which have been put forward by Sens. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) and Larry E. Craig (R-Idaho).

"We're trying to work through the process," said Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas), who said his goal was to "restore the concept of circular migration to future guest workers."

The compromise brokered by Specter also includes a way for people in the country illegally to gain legal status.

Undocumented immigrants could pay a $1,000 fine, undergo a criminal background check and receive a six-year visa that would allow them to travel into and out of the country.

After six years, they could apply for permanent legal residency and eventually for citizenship if they passed another background check, paid another $1,000 fine and back taxes, and showed they were learning English.

Some lawmakers oppose any plan that leads to citizenship, calling it a form of amnesty for people who have broken the law by entering the country illegally.

In a sign of how complicated the issues are, Cornyn, who helped craft the compromise guest-worker plan, said he would "probably end up voting against the bill if it contains amnesty provisions," a reference to the measure that gives illegal immigrants a way to obtain citizenship.

 

Senate Judiciary Committee Begins Debate on the 12 Million but Defers Vote Until After Recess

Cite as "AILA InfoNet Doc. No. 06031669 (posted Mar. 16, 2006)"

Members of the Senate Judiciary Committee finally broached the controversial subject of the undocumented population on day five of the Committee's markup of draft legislation on comprehensive immigration reform, but deferred any votes on the subject until after next week's congressional recess.

Chairman Specter began the day's proceedings by reiterating that it would be a "colossal mistake" for Senate Majority Leader Frist to bring an immigration bill to the Senate floor that had not been completely vetted by the Senate Judiciary Committee. As background, Senator Frist has threatened to bring his enforcement-only legislation directly to the Senate floor unless the Judiciary Committee produces a bill by March 27. Senator Frist could do this using the seldom employed "Rule 14" procedure that permits him to introduce a bill and bypass the committee process so that it goes directly to the Senate calendar. According to Senate sources, Senator Frist's bill would simply take Chairman Specter's proposal and strip out the guestworker plan and the provisions dealing with the estimated 12 million undocumented aliens present in the U.S.

Because Senator Frist apparently will not back off of his deadline, Chairman Specter proposed this morning to continue the Committee's work beyond what was to have been the final day of the markup (today). Unfortunately, the Senate is out on recess next week, leaving tomorrow or Monday, March 27, as the only available options for continued work. Most of the Senators present agreed that meeting on March 27 would make sense, with the exception of Senator Cornyn, who disagreed that bringing the Committee's incomplete bill to the floor would be problematic (clearly an attempt on his part to stave off debate in the Committee on what to do with the undocumented population). However, in a clear rebuke to Senator Cornyn, Chairman Specter responded that the Committee would proceed immediately to debate on the controversial issue of a path to citizenship for the undocumented!

Chairman Specter said that he and Senator Kennedy talked at length yesterday about the issue of the undocumented. He reiterated his concerns about the undocumented workers jumping the line in front of those who have followed the legal channels. He's concerned about 25-year backlogs for 4th preference beneficiaries and other long backlogs. However, he noted his willingness to find a way to put the undocumented on a path to citizenship at the end of the line. Chairman Specter also reiterated that he wants a bill to come out of Committee that can pass the floor and be reconciled with the House bill.

Senator Kennedy argued that the McCain/Kennedy bill will not lead to line-jumping, explaining that the bill's formula would clear backlogs and deal with the lines themselves. In addition, he noted his willingness to accept a 2nd degree amendment to ensure that legal permanent residence would not be granted to the undocumented population until both the current employment-based and family-based backlogs had been cleared. "What really is the alternative," he asked? "Mass deportations? Criminalization and a permanent subclass?"

Senator Kennedy continued by talking eloquently about the pure motives of immigrants who have come to this country, both historically and currently, to make a better life for themselves and their families. He said that we should admire the drive of these people. We should not treat them as criminals but should give them an opportunity. We should bring them out of shadows, have them pay a fine, work, and wait their turn. Senator Kennedy also noted that some 60,000 legal permanent residents currently serve in the U.S. Armed Forces.

Senator Kyl noted that no one on the Committee supports enforcement only, adding that his and Senator Cornyn's proposal would provide a "work opportunity," not a punishment. He said that the Specter "gold card" would be just like a green card but without the right to citizenship. He also opined that people waiting in the family-based backlog don't have the right to be in the U.S. now, so letting undocumented aliens get in line would harm those individuals who have been waiting patiently. At one point, he allowed that it might be OK to give a path to citizenship to high skilled workers but not to low skilled workers.

Senator Cornyn associated himself with Senator Kyl's remarks. "We can't accept everyone in the world who wants to come here," he said. And while he professed agreement with Senator Kennedy about the beneficial contributions and benevolent motivations of the undocumented population, he couldn't seem to get past the "law breaking" issue. "The American people won't accept a program to deal with the undocumented if we haven't finished the bill's enforcement titles," he argued. He also defended the Cornyn/Kyl "report to deport" proposal, noting that it is neither a ruse nor impractical. He added that the intention of the proposal is not to strand people outside of the country as some have accused.

Senator Durbin weighed in by stating that the immigration system has been broken for a long while. He recounted stories about important individuals he knows whose parents were undocumented aliens. He stood in support of the McCain/Kennedy proposal, calling it "tough but fair," and reiterated that we should not be criminalizing undocumented status, as both the Chairman's Mark and H.R. 4437 would do.

Senator Graham noted that many people, including many on the Republican side of the aisle, don't even want to debate this complex issue. For them, rounding these immigrants up and deporting them is the only answer. "Such a proposal is simply not feasible," Senator Graham added. He also noted that half of his family likely would not be able to meet the requirements of the McCain/Kennedy legislation, thereby buttressing the argument that it is no easy give away. "While there are lots of people on talk radio complaining about the undocumented, these folks are out there working," he said. "This is not a 'get out of jail free' card." In addition to those who would deport the undocumented population, there are others who would put them all in jail, he continued, adding that this also would not work. He warned Chairman Specter and others that they shouldn't be trying to avoid criticism on this issue, because they're all going to get it. He agreed that the undocumented population should be put in line behind all those currently waiting in the backlogs but does not believe it is appropriate to force them to leave the country in order to take part in the program, as this would break up families.

Senator Feinstein argued that the DHS would be incapable of handling such a massive program. She was also concerned with what would happen to those who apply for the program if they are unable to pass the requisite background checks. "Could people with minor misdemeanors get status,?" she asked. She requested a letter from Senator Kennedy's staff on the issue. Senator Feinstein also returned to the issue of DHS's processing capabilities, asking for additional information on the subject before the issue is brought to a vote.

Senator Specter indicated that he intends to work through the undocumented issue by beginning with the McCain/Kennedy bill and the 2nd degree amendment mentioned above by Senator Kennedy. He also indicated that there is a deal on the table between Senators Cornyn and Kennedy on the temporary worker (future flows) program.

Senator Feinstein brought up the subject of agricultural workers and wanted to know why they weren't included as part of the guestworker program. Senator Kennedy responded that the reason is because Senator Craig, the chief sponsor of AgJobs, would offer it as an amendment on the floor. Senator Brownback opined that they needed to have staff work out the details of any agricultural program.

Chairman Specter then noted that staff would be working out various details during next week's recess, confirmed continuation of the markup on March 27th, and gaveled the meeting to a close.

 

Yahoo! News Senators near compromise on immigration

 

By Donna Smith

 

Under pressure to produce broad immigration reform legislation by the end of the month, a U.S. Senate panel on Thursday neared agreement on a proposal that would give some of the 12 million illegal aliens living in the country an opportunity to earn citizenship.

 

Although no vote will be held until after a weeklong congressional recess, the Senate Judiciary Committee on Thursday appeared ready to back a proposal by panel member Sen. Edward Kennedy (news, bio, voting record), a Massachusetts Democrat, who has worked on the issue with his Republican colleague John McCain of Arizona.

 

The panel, which is working on comprehensive immigration and border security legislation, will also consider a related proposal that would allow foreigners to enter the United States as legal guest workers and then have a chance to earn permanent status.

 

Republicans are divided over immigration policy, and the Judiciary Committee plan is likely to spark a firestorm from conservatives who oppose regularizing the status of illegal immigrants, saying they would be rewarded after breaking U.S. immigration law.

 

More than 70 members of the House of Representatives led by Rep. Tom Tancredo, a Colorado Republican, fired off a letter to Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter, a Pennsylvania Republican, saying measures the panel was considering "doom any chance of a real reform bill reaching the president's desk this year."

 

But backers cite both economic and security reasons. They say that providing a path to permanent residency and eventual citizenship will avoid creating a permanent underclass of workers and help bring illegal aliens out of the shadows.

 

Sen. Charles Grassley (news, bio, voting record), an Iowa Republican who opposes giving permanent status to illegals, said after the meeting that the panel would probably vote for the Kennedy plan.

 

"The votes are there," Grassley said.

 

NO AMNESTY

 

Kennedy told the committee the proposal was not an amnesty. People seeking legal status would have to pay a $2,000 fine, apply for a six-year temporary status, have a job, pay taxes, learn English and show an understanding of U.S. government.

 

They would not get permanent status faster than the 3 million foreigners awaiting legal entry, he said.

 

"There is no moving to the front of the line, there is no free ticket," Kennedy said. "This is not amnesty."

 

Sen. Lindsey Graham (news, bio, voting record), a South Carolina Republican, quipped that the requirements "probably exclude half of my family."

 

The panel also reached tentative agreement on a guest-worker program sought by President George W. Bush. U.S. business groups favor creating a temporary-worker program to help fill jobs that Americans either cannot or will not do. Both business and labor groups also favor giving current undocumented workers a way to legalize their status.

 

Details will be worked out during the recess, panel members said.

 

The panel is working against a deadline set by Majority Leader Bill Frist. The Tennessee Republican, and possible contender in the 2008 presidential race, said the Senate will take up a bill addressing only enforcement and border security when lawmakers return on March 27. But Frist told reporters if the Judiciary Committee approves a comprehensive bill, it would be considered by the Senate.

 

"I am committed to border security, interior enforcement and addressing the temporary-worker program," Frist said.

 

Whether Congress will finalize immigration legislation before the November congressional elections is unclear. Both Democrats and Republicans are likely to use the issue to gain advantage.

 

The House of Representatives has voted for tough border security and enforcement legislation with no guest-worker program. The two sides would have to work out their differences before a bill could be sent to Bush for his signature.

 

Copyright © 2006 Reuters Limited.

 

Changes in Earliest Issuance and Admission Dates for F, M and J Visas

The State Department has sent a cable to all posts entitled “ Changes in Earliest Issuance and Admission Dates for F, M and J Visas”.

 

R 092051Z FEB 06

FM SECSTATE WASHDC

TO ALL DIPLOMATIC AND CONSULAR POSTS COLLECTIVE

UNCLAS STATE 021872

 

SUBJECT: CHANGES IN EARLIEST ISSUANCE AND ADMISSION DATES FOR F, M AND J VISAS

 

1.      AS ONE OF THE ELEMENTS OF THE RECENTLY ANNOUNCED RICE-CHERTOFF JOINT VISION, PERSONS APPLYING FOR INITIAL-ENTRY F-1, F-2 AND M-1AND M-2 VISAS MAY NOW BE ISSUED THESE VISAS UP TO 120 DAYS BEFORE THE PROGRAM START DATE AS LISTED ON THEIR I-20S.

 

2.      THESE CHANGES APPLY ONLY TO INITIAL-ENTRY STUDENTS. CONTINUING STUDENTS MAY APPLY FOR NEW F OR M VISAS AT ANY TIME, AS LONG AS THEY HAVE BEEN MAINTAINING STUDENT STATUS AND THEIR SEVIS RECORDS ARE CURRENT.  CONTINUING STUDENTS MAY ALSO ENTER THE UNITED STATES AT ANY TIME BEFORE THEIR CLASSES START.

 

3.  OFFICERS MAY ISSUE J-1 AND J-2 VISAS TO EXCHANGE VISITORS, HOWEVER, AT ANY TIME BEFORE THE BEGINNING OF THEIR PROGRAMS.

 

4.  9 FAM 41.61 NOTE 14.2 AND 9 FAM 41.62 NOTE 9.3 WILL BE ANNOTATED TO REFLECT THESE CHANGES, AS FOLLOWS:

 

9 FAM 41.61 N14.2  ENTRY OF STUDENT PRIOR TO ENROLLMENT

(CT:XXXX-XXX;   XX-XX-2006)

 

A. YOU MUST NOT ISSUE A STUDENT VISA TO AN APPLICANT MORE THAN 120 DAYS IN ADVANCE OF HIS OR HER STUDIES AND SHOULD NOTIFY THE APPLICANT THAT HE OR SHE CANNOT ENTER THE UNITED STATES MORE THAN 30 DAYS IN ADVANCE OF THE BEGINNING OF STUDIES.  APPLICANTS CONTINUING ON A STUDENT VISA ARE NOT SUBJECT TO THIS RESTRICTION.

 

9 FAM 41.62 N9.3  ENTRY OF EXCHANGE VISITOR PROGRAM PARTICIPANTS PRIOR TO ENROLLMENT

(CT:XXXX-XXX;   XX-XX-2006)

 

A. POSTS MAY ISSUE AN EXCHANGE VISITOR'S VISA TO AN APPLICANT AT ANY TIME AS LONG AS THE FORM DS-2019 REMAINS VALID.  HOWEVER, THE VISITOR MAY NOT ENTER THE UNITED STATES EARLIER THAN 30 DAYS BEFORE THE INITIAL PROGRAM START DATE.  APPLICANTS CONTINUING ON AN EXCHANGE VISITORS PROGRAM ARE NOT SUBJECT TO THIS RESTRICTION.

 

6.  POSTS SHOULD MAKE APPROPRIATE UPDATES TO CONSULAR WEBSITES AND OTHER INFORMATION SHEETS AS REQUIRED, AND INFORM STUDENTS AND EXCHANGE VISITORS OF THESE CHANGES AT THE TIME OF VISA ISSUANCE.

 

7.  THE JOINT VISION STATEMENT ALSO ANNOUNCED THAT INITIAL-ENTRY STUDENTS MAY APPLY FOR ADMISSION TO THE UNITED STATES UP TO 45 DAYS BEFORE THEIR PROGRAM START DATES, ALTHOUGH DHS MUST PUBLISH A REGULATION TO IMPLEMENT THIS CHANGE.  WE WILL NOTIFY POSTS WHEN DHS IMPLEMENTS THIS CHANGE, WHICH MAY TAKE SEVERAL MONTHS.  UNTIL THEN, POSTS SHOULD CONTINUE INFORMING INITIAL-ENTRY F, M AND J VISA HOLDERS THAT THEY SHOULD NOT ENTER THE UNITED STATES MORE THAN 30 DAYS BEFORE THEIR PROGRAM START DATES.

 

RICE

 

 

Immigration Proposals Include Arizona Fence

--------------------
Immigration Proposals Include Arizona Fence
--------------------

By Nicole Gaouette
Times Staff Writer

March 10 2006

WASHINGTON The Senate Judiciary Committee on Thursday approved proposals to erect double- and triple-layered fencing near Arizona border cities and to sharply boost the number of agents working along the Mexican border as lawmakers worked to overhaul U.S. immigration policy.

The complete article can be viewed at:
http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/front/

la-na-immig10mar10,1,1345475.story?coll=la-headlines-frontpage

Washington Post: Senate GOP Fails to Agree on Immigration

Immigration Bills May Split Republicans
Bipartisan Call for Guest Worker Program at Odds With Push to Secure Borders

By Jonathan Weisman
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, March 2, 2006; A09

The Senate will begin work today on legislation to overhaul the nation's immigration laws and plug its porous borders, but a bipartisan push to create a new guest worker program has put Senate Republicans on a collision course with their counterparts in the House.

The immigration question -- one of the volatile issues in this election year -- has split Republicans as no other issue before Congress. Vociferous opponents of illegal immigration are at odds with business interests and their allies, including President Bush, who are keen on establishing new, legal avenues to bolster the labor force.

Many Republicans, especially those from the West, have said passage of legislation to enforce border security is vital to their reelection, and do not want this merged with other measures that would open up work options for immigrants.

On the other side, supporters yesterday talked up efforts to open new opportunities for migrant workers. "I smell victory in the air," thundered Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass.), at a rally of immigrant hotel workers in Union Station.

Privately, however, voices on both sides concede they would rather see legislation die in Congress than accept the compromises that may be necessary to win passage. Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-Tenn.) wants a bill to the Senate floor by March 27, but aides say the Senate Judiciary Committee could take three weeks just to draft one.

"This is going to be very, very difficult," said Sen. Sam Brownback (R-Kan.), who supports a guest worker program and says immigration is one of the top two or three topics roiling the country. "You've got a lot of emotions on both sides."

"The gap is huge," agreed Rep. Tom Tancredo (R-Colo.), who has been leading the charge for a bill that deals only with border security. "I don't think you can square this circle."

Beginning today, Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter (R-Pa.) will try, when his committee begins drafting the Senate's answer to a tough border security bill that passed the House in December with no guest worker plan. The draft would authorize the hiring of new border agents, the use of unmanned aerial vehicles and other new technologies on the border, expand the definition of "alien smuggling" to combat those who shelter illegal immigrants, and toughen penalties on smugglers and illegal immigrants who repeatedly cross the border.

But the controversy will lie with his new H-2C visa, which could be offered to hotel workers, cleaners, restaurant workers, meat processors and other "essential occupations" by employers who say they could not fill the posts with a U.S. worker. The visa would be good for six years, after which workers would have to return to their home countries for at least a year. The visa would offer no special path toward citizenship or a legal "green card."

Specter said his approach rejects those who simply want to throw all illegal immigrants out of the country immediately, but it also does not offer a permanent reward for those who entered the country illegally.

"We're trying to bring 11 million people out of the shadows, and if you start by saying you're going to kick them all out, who's going to come out of the shadows?" he asked. "But at the same time, you don't want them to benefit from breaking the law, so let them work, but don't move them toward citizenship."

The White House sounded a sympathetic note toward Specter's efforts.

"We're pleased that Chairman Specter is taking a comprehensive approach to immigration reform," said White House spokesman Erin Healy, using the catchphrase for legislation that deals both with border security and employment opportunities.

But Specter's search for a compromise has been rewarded with attacks from both sides of the immigration divide. The editors of the conservative National Review editorialized yesterday that Specter would offer amnesty to more than 10 million illegal immigrants and their families, then create a "permanent underclass" by keeping them in the United States as exploited "non-citizens."

Tancredo called Specter's bill "an unmitigated disaster."

"Words almost fail to describe the threat this bill poses to our national and economic security," he said. "By legalizing the millions upon millions of illegal aliens in the country, Specter makes a mockery of our laws and crushes our already strained legal immigration system."

Kennedy, who wrote a rival bill with Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), called Specter's bill "a non-starter," saying the guest worker program needed to be an avenue toward citizenship and suggesting that the uncapped number of visas in Specter's legislation would be an invitation to exploitation. McCain declared himself "disappointed."

In an election year, when some Republicans fear they could lose their hold on Congress, the issue is equally bedeviling. Republican National Committee Chairman Ken Mehlman has warned his party that an anti-immigrant stand could jeopardize years of outreach to Latino voters, a position seconded by Kennedy in his hunt for GOP support for his bill.

"The people on the other side are going to have to decide whether they want to alienate a whole, growing constituency in this country," he said.

But to Tancredo and his allies, who are facing mounting constituent anger over what they see as a border crisis, such threats ring hollow. Business groups, organized labor and religious organizations may have united to back a broad guest worker program, but opponents say the interest groups are no match for the anger of ordinary voters. Even Specter conceded yesterday that the term "amnesty" has become a political pejorative that will be difficult to escape.

"This issue has now achieved a level of preeminence in the minds of America that it will be a factor in the election -- it has to be," Tancredo said. "The political consequences of failure will be dire."

© 2006 The Washington Post Company