APRIL 9, 2006
(revised 4/20/06)
-- We feel a
mixture of sadness, anger, and relief about the past
couple of weeks' activities in the U.S. Senate
on immigration reform. As has been widely
publicized, on
Thursday and Friday, April 6 and 7,
the Senate voted against efforts to move forward on
three separate immigration reform proposals and left for
two weeks in a stalemate.
Two of these
proposals -- the bill that came out of the Judiciary
Committee on March 27 and a
"compromise" hammered together by Senators Mel
Martinez (R-FL) and Chuck Hagel (R-NE) that was
similar to, but less generous than, the
committee-passed bill -- were "comprehensive": a
mixture of wonderful and awful ideas. They combined
a path to legalization for many undocumented persons
living in the U.S. and a reduction in immigration
backlogs with a new guest worker program and a host
of new, often punitive "enforcement" measures. The
third bill that was prevented from proceeding on
Friday had been introduced earlier by Majority
Leader Bill Frist (R-TN) and contained only the
enforcement measures from the other two bills.
Regrettably, last week's
procedural wrangling has been mischaracterized in the
media, making it difficult for even a careful observer
to avoid inverting many of the players and their
motives. Missing from much of the coverage were
the following facts:
The two
comprehensive bills not only contained a path to
legalization for undocumented immigrants, but also
included a number of measures that would undermine the
spirit and effectiveness of the legalization provisions,
eroding the rights of current and future immigrants.
Numerous amendments that sought to severely weaken the
legalization provisions were introduced and, if brought
to a vote, could have passed as part of the Senate bill.
The bill that would
have emerged from the Senate would almost certainly have
been transformed into something much less generous and
more punitive when reconciled with
HR 4437, the
Sensenbrenner bill, by a House-Senate conference
committee appointed by Senator Frist and House Speaker
Dennis Hastert.
Given these challenging circumstances, pro-immigrant
senators and advocates were faced with a tough choice about
which reasonable minds could -- and did -- disagree: whether to
permit the "compromise" legislation to move forward and, in
all likelihood, to pass the Senate in a form less friendly
to immigrants. On Thursday, April 6, several of the most influential
national immigrant advocacy organizations released a
statement asking the senators not to agree to any
such compromise absent "assurances that the integrity of the
bipartisan breakthrough will hold throughout conference
negotiations with the House."
Unfortunately, the specific
procedural assurances sought in the statement that would
have been necessary to protect any deal through to the end
were not forthcoming. As a result, the Democratic
leadership refused to agree, and the compromise was
defeated. In the intervening days, some have questioned the
motives of Senator Harry Reid (D-NV) and the Democratic
leadership for turning down the compromise. Obviously, the
Democratic leadership has complex motives for its choices,
as do all politicians involved in this highly politicized
election year debate. But we at NILC believe strongly that
the Democratic leadership made the right call this time,
from a strategic and substantive perspective, despite
knowing that they would be criticized for doing so.
NILC was one of the first
national organizations to push for a legalization program,
and we have been amazed at the progress that has been made
towards that goal in recent weeks as a result, largely, of
the historic outpouring of idealism, hope and opposition to
HR 4437 that has been manifested in city after city over
the past month. Like our colleagues and friends around the
country, we hunger for sane options for undocumented workers
and their families who suffer unjustly under the current
system. We also understand that when a broad-based
legalization program is achieved it will not be tied up in a
neat package with a bow.
But the sad truth is that
the same House of Representatives majority is in place that
voted for HR 4437, as is the Senate that acquiesced in
enacting the
REAL ID Act a year ago. The House majority and
many senators have a vastly different vision of immigration
reform than ours, one that entails criminalization of
immigrants, miles of fences, internal checkpoints, further
militarization of the border and the interior, imposition of
a national ID system, deportation and detentions without due
process, and more. The hard reality confronting
the the Democratic leadership as it made its decision was
that it is far more likely that legislation resembling HR
4437 would emerge from any conference committee than any
kind of comprehensive proposal. We wish things were
different, and we recognize that some for whom we have great
respect may disagree, but we believe that the risk of bad
legislation emerging from such a conference would have been
too great under the terms offered by Senator Frist last
week.
Next Steps
On Friday, April 7, Senator Arlen
Specter (R-PA), chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee, introduced a version of the compromise bill
and vowed to take it up in committee when Congress returns
from two weeks of recess. However, it is not clear at this time
whether there will be enough will on either side to actually
take up the bill.
If not, the prospect remains that a punitive-only bill could
reemerge later in the year, perhaps as an amendment to some
other must-pass legislation. It is also possible that some
smaller, more positive pieces may move forward in the absence
of comprehensive immigration reform, such as the
DREAM Act
or AgJOBS. On Thursday, in the middle of all of the hoopla
in the Senate, the DREAM Act was quietly reintroduced in
the House.
Rallies and marches have
been planned for tomorrow, April 10, in more
than 60 cities across the U.S. The theme of these rallies
is, "'We are America,' regardless of where we are born. We
deserve to be treated with respect and deserve a chance to
become citizens of the country we love." It is now even
more important that this "national day of action" be
successful. For more information about the exciting April
10 events in your area, click
here. |