The Washington Times
  • Subscribe
  • RSS
  • Mobile Headlines
  • e-edition
  • E-MAIL ALERTS
  • REGISTER
  • LOG IN
  • E-MAIL ALERTS
  • WELCOME
  • Your Profile
  • Log Out
  • Front Page Image
  • Classifieds
  • Autos
  • Real Estate
  • Jobs
  • Special Sections
  • Customer Service
  • Home
  • News
  • Opinion
    • Editorials
    • Commentary
    • Columns
    • Water Cooler
    • Letters
    • Cartoons
    • Books
  • Sports
  • Culture
    • Home & Living
    • Family & Kids
    • Travel
    • Health
    • Washington Visitors
    • Books
    • Auto
    • TV Listings
    • Movie Listings
    • Death Notices
    • Entertainment
  • Communities
  • Rebate Shopping
    • Stores
    • Coupons
    • Daily Double
    • Promotion
    • How It Works
  • Photos
  • Podcasts
    • About Headlines
    • Audio and Radio
    • America's Morning News
  • Politics

    Bachmann: Pelosi has 'eternity' to get votes

  • Politics

    Price tag in hand, Dems prepare for final health care vote

  • Politics

    Kucinich drops opposition to health bill

  • Politics

    Obama dismisses procedural tactics

  • Editorials

    EDITORIAL: Obama surrenders gulf oil to Moscow

  • Politics

    CBO feels crush of health care requests

Friday, March 23, 2007

Immigration bill moves to tighter enforcement

Rate this story

Average 0.00
after 0 votes
Login or register to rate this story

  • Font Size -+
  • Print
  • Email
  • Comment
  • Tweet this!
  • Share
  • Article
  • Comments ()
  • Click-2-Listen

More Stories

  • Nebraska scores again in health care endgame
  • 'Jihad Jane' pleads not guilty in terror plot
  • Bernanke lobbies to keep control of banking oversight
  • Group condemns textbooks about Islam

By

The chief House proponents of a path to citizenship for illegal aliens yesterday also embraced stricter enforcement, arguing they need to move that direction if they hope to pass a bill this year.

They introduced a new immigration overhaul that still grants almost all illegal aliens a path to citizenship, but would also speed up the requirement that they learn English, make them leave the country before they can start the path to citizenship, and make the entire program turn on the government showing it is making progress on border security and interior law enforcement.

With Democrats now in control in the House, the bill marks the first step in a renewed push to get immigration reform passed and says much about how far the debate has come since Congress deadlocked last year and the elections intervened.

"The third time is the charm. The planets are finally aligned to get this done," said Rep. Jeff Flake, Arizona Republican, who is joining Rep. Luis V. Gutierrez, Illinois Democrat, in sponsoring the bill.

Chief among the concessions is what sponsors call a "touch back" provision that requires illegal aliens, before obtaining permanent legal residency that puts them on a path to citizenship, to leave the country and then come back legally -- a standard they could meet by going back to their home countries, or to Mexico or Canada for a day.

That change was a major step, designed to win Republican support.

"We've reached out to make sure we get bipartisan support for this bill," Mr. Gutierrez said, adding that they will need dozens of Republicans to obtain a majority in the House. "I know that on a good day I get 180 Democrats, and that's short of 218, and that's on a good day."

But plenty of Republicans are lining up in opposition, arguing that it is an amnesty because it lets illegal aliens remain and gives them a path to citizenship.

"It's going to get the scarlet letter 'A' branded on the bill, and then the debate becomes who wants to get that brand and go back home and face voters," said Rep. Steve King of Iowa, the top Republican on the House Judiciary Committee's immigration subcommittee.

From the other side of the political spectrum a key Democratic ally, the AFL-CIO, said while the bill is better than an enforcement-only approach such as the bill House Republicans pursued last year, it is not sold. The labor federation opposed the "touch back" provision, and argued that allowing 400,000 more foreign workers a year will hurt U.S. workers.

The measure would:

• Require the Homeland Security Department to certify it has created a secure card for employers to identify legal workers, and to certify border security and interior enforcement are advancing.

• Let illegal aliens here as of June 1, 2006, remain in the country under a six-year work program, paying a $500 fine at the beginning and another $1,500 fine at the end. After six years, if they had maintained a work history and clean criminal record, they could gain a green card, or permanent residency.

• Speed the requirement of proving English skills up to the green card process, rather than at the time they apply for citizenship.

• Allow illegal aliens to obtain in-state tuition at public colleges and universities.

• Allow 400,000 new workers into the country per year, though it would protect American jobs by requiring employers to show they cannot find an American worker and prove the foreign workers wouldn't depress wages. Those new workers would also have a path to citizenship.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, California Democrat, who had supported previous versions of the Flake-Gutierrez bill, has not signed on to this one. Yesterday, she said it was a good "framework" but focused her attention on President Bush, who she said should embrace the new bill's approach.

Parts of the bill are likely to please Mr. Bush, including a path to citizenship for illegal aliens. But last year he embraced the Senate bill that allowed only those who had lived here the longest or, in Mr. Bush's words, had "deep roots," to achieve citizenship. And he has steadfastly rejected giving future foreign workers a path to citizenship.

By moving first, the House sponsors have also highlighted a division in the Senate, where backers are sparring over what to include in their bill.

But Mr. Gutierrez said Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, Nevada Democrat, has carved out the last two weeks in May to have a floor debate on immigration -- which sets a timetable for the Senate Judiciary Committee to act.

Post a comment

There are comments on this article, submit your opinion!

Commenting is disabled for this entry.
If you feel there is still something worth mentioning about this entry please contact the author or the site admin.

Top Stories

Most Shared

  1. EDITORIAL: Obama surrenders gulf oil to Moscow
  2. CBO feels crush of health care requests
  3. KOFFMAN: A prescription for life or death?
  4. EDITORIAL: Obama's medical horror stories
  5. Obama endorses immigration blueprint
More Top Stories »
  1. Medical pot lights up D.C. debate
  2. EDITORIAL: Obama nominee's sympathy for sexual sadists
  3. WOLF: Obama family health care fracas
  4. Tehran aiding al Qaeda links, Petraeus says
  5. Feds defend $450K for art, design shows

Most Commented

  1. EDITORIAL: Obama surrenders gulf oil to Moscow
  2. Tehran aiding al Qaeda links, Petraeus says
  3. E-mails suggested Fort Hood suspect subpar for Army
  4. Kucinich will vote for health care reform
  5. CBO feels crush of health care requests
More Top Stories »
  1. EDITORIAL: Obama's medical horror stories
  2. White House urged to end Israel row on settlements
  3. Napolitano shifts policy on border fence
  4. Obama dismisses procedural tactics
  5. 'Self-executing rule' decried as a 'trick'

Listen to Washington Times Radio

  • America's Morning News

    with John McCaslin

Blogs & Columns

  • Water Cooler

    Catholic Church going easy on pro-choice reps and senators?

  • Belief Blog

    Sayonara to the president's faith-based council

  • Technology

    Ordering iPad is painless, except for the wallet hit

Advertising Links
TWT Store
  • e-edition
  • Print Edition
  • Weekly Washington Times
TWT Affiliates
  • Middle East Times
  • Golf
  • UPI
  • Arbor Ballroom
  • Washington Times Global
  • About TWT
  • Press Room
  • F.A.Q.
  • Work for TWT
  • Advertise
  • Sponsors
  • Contact Us
  • Privacy Policy
  • Site Map

All site contents © Copyright 2009 The Washington Times, LLC.