New York Times
By Ashley Parker
April 18, 2013
It was drafted by a bipartisan Senate coalition, has the strong backing of the White House and activist groups, and draws on deep public support from those who see it as helping to solve one of the nation’s most difficult problems.
But advocates of the Senate’s new immigration proposal say it differs in many respects from the gun control legislation defeated this week, despite surface similarities that illustrate how a measure with substantial advantages and widespread backing can still founder on Capitol Hill. On Thursday, they formally began seeking support for the proposal from the public and Congressional colleagues.
Reminded anew of the pitfalls that await high-profile measures, the bipartisan group of eight senators that assembled the immigration legislation is determined to avoid the mistakes and hazards that doomed the measure to expand background checks for gun buyers.
As they unveiled their measure at a news conference, the senators mustered an impressive display of unity from business and labor, conservatives and liberals, and members of the various faith-based communities. They offered a bipartisan backdrop determined to say: not only is this immigration bill different from the one that failed in 2007, but it is very different from the bipartisan gun legislation.
Asked why the group expected it to fare better, one member, Senator John McCain, Republican of Arizona, turned and pointed to what he called “one compelling reason” — the assembled crowd of nearly two dozen supporters behind him.
“When you look at the representatives of business, labor, the religious community, Hispanic community — across the board — this is a coalition,” he said. “This is why we will succeed, because of this broad-based, dedicated support for this legislation.”
Mr. McCain joked, “I never thought I’d be standing with Richard Trumka,” referring to the president of the A.F.L.-C.I.O., the nation’s largest federation of unions.
Group members and their aides insist the moment is right for overhauling the nation’s strained immigration system. The 2012 election, they say, in which President Obama won with 71 percent of the Hispanic vote, has created a climate in which Republicans are willing to make concessions that could lead to a broad immigration overhaul.
And instead of having a powerful interest group like the National Rifle Association lobbying lawmakers to stand firm against any new gun control bill, aides say they already have two major and often combative groups — business and labor — on board. The agreement between business and labor also represents a stark change from 2007, when the two groups could not reach an agreement, and labor groups were internally divided as well.
Finally, both Democrats and Republicans insist the current bill can offer something to many: a clear path to citizenship that excites Democrats and immigration advocates, and tough border security measures that placate Republicans and allow them to reassure their conservative base that the estimated 11 million illegal immigrants already in the United States would not be rewarded for breaking the law.
“The border security triggers are strong but achievable,” said Senator Charles E. Schumer, Democrat of New York and a member of the group. “The path to citizenship is tough, but it is accessible. Yes, our bill does secure the border first, but it treats the situation of those living in the shadows as an equally urgent priority.”
Still, getting the immigration bill passed in the Senate — let alone through the Republican-controlled House and onto the president’s desk — will be a monumental challenge. Opposition to the legislation began almost as soon as it was filed, around 2 a.m. Wednesday, after the group’s carefully choreographed rollout was derailed by the Boston Marathon bombings.
The Federation for American Immigration Reform, which has called for reducing levels of illegal immigration, organized a two-day summit meeting of nearly four-dozen conservative talk radio hosts from around the country. The hosts descended on the nation’s capital to broadcast their concerns to listeners back home that the new bill amounted to “amnesty.” (During the 2007 effort, the organization was credited with helping crash the Congressional servers with calls from angry constituents.) Senators Jeff Sessions of Alabama and David Vitter of Louisiana, both Republicans, held a competing news conference during which they denounced the bill. And NumbersUSA, a group that seeks to reduce immigration, has begun poring over the bill to enumerate how it believes the legislation could hurt American workers.
“There are a lot of parallels between our type of outreach and the N.R.A.,” said Rosemary Jenks, the director of government relations for NumbersUSA. “We’re both grass-roots organizations with very large memberships, and the goal is always to make sure members of Congress are hearing directly from their constituents.”
The bipartisan group’s news conference on Thursday was only the first step for the senators, who have already been pressing their case privately and will continue to do so publicly in the coming weeks. The Democratic senators briefed immigration advocates on the details of the bill on Wednesday, and they did the same with their fellow Democratic senators at a lunch on Thursday. Senator Marco Rubio, Republican of Florida and a member of the bipartisan group, made appearances on talk radio on Thursday, and his office set up an “Immigration Reform Facts” page on its Web site to dispute false claims about the bill.
On Friday, the Senate Judiciary Committee will hold a hearing on the new legislation, and it has scheduled another for Monday.
In some ways, the failure of gun legislation could ultimately work in the favor of an immigration overhaul. On Thursday, Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. told gun control advocates that several senators had told him they could not vote to support both gun control and immigration: they had the political bandwidth for only one tough vote.
No comments:
Post a Comment