New York Times
By Julia Preston and Ashley Parker
June 12, 2013
As debate started on Wednesday on amendments to the Senate immigration bill, border security emerged as a focal point, with supporters and doubters agreeing that those provisions would have to be strengthened to attract more votes, especially from Republicans.
“In order to bring conservatives to this cause, those who want immigration reform must understand that a real solution must ensure that our borders are secure,” said Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky, a Republican who is one of those conservatives.
Mr. Paul, a libertarian close to the Tea Party movement, said he supported the bill’s purpose of creating a pathway to legal status for illegal immigrant workers, but would not vote for it without tougher border provisions.
The eight senators who wrote the overhaul bill say they are open to changes, but not to altering its core: a path to citizenship for 11 million immigrants now in the country illegally, with a sequence of border measures, known as triggers, along the way.
“The bottom line for us is we need to make sure the pathway is real,” said Senator Michael Bennet of Colorado, a Democrat who is one of the eight, “and that people can be assured that whatever trigger or gating items are in place are ones that don’t make the pathway to citizenship a fantasy.” Mr. Bennet spoke at a breakfast hosted by The Christian Science Monitor.
The debate got off to a rocky start with a dispute between Senator Harry Reid of Nevada, the majority leader, and several Republicans, including Senator Charles E. Grassley of Iowa, over how many votes would be required to pass an amendment.
The current bill would give the Department of Homeland Security six months to present plans to extend border fencing and achieve “effective control” of the Southwest border, defined as continuous surveillance along its length and 90 percent effectiveness in stopping illegal crossings. Once those plans are presented, illegal immigrants could apply for provisional status. The bill includes $4.5 billion in border financing in the first five years.
If the security goals had not been met after five years, a commission would be created to ensure border officials met them. After 10 years, provisional immigrants could apply for permanent residency — the first step toward citizenship — if the border plans were fully operational, the fencing was completed, mandatory electronic verification for new workers was in place nationwide and an electronic exit system checked foreigners departing through airports and seaports.
An important test for the bill was an amendment filed Wednesday by Senator John Cornyn of Texas, whom other Republicans are watching closely. It would require certification from Homeland Security and the top federal auditor that his border goals had been met for one year before provisional immigrants could start the path to citizenship.
Democrats denounced Mr. Cornyn’s amendment as a “poison pill” to cripple the bill. But Senator Jeff Flake of Arizona, a Republican who is one of the eight authors, said at the breakfast with Mr. Bennet that he believed Mr. Cornyn was looking “to improve the bill” and that they were working to find a compromise.
Mr. Grassley offered an amendment that would require Homeland Security certification of effective control of the entire Southwest border six months before any illegal immigrants could apply even for provisional status.
“Border security first. Legalize second,” he said.
Mr. Paul said he would offer an amendment that would require Congress to vote to approve border security levels annually for five years while illegal immigrants gradually received work visas.
For more information, go to: www.beverlyhillsimmigrationlaw.com
No comments:
Post a Comment