Senate Close To Compromise On Immigration Reform
Hmm...
I agree with Sen. Specter in that this bill would undoubtedly be better than no bill at all. This is a problem that is reaching the level of a crisis, and we need a solution sooner rather than later.
Here are some specifics about the bill from the article:
When they say "illegal immigrants who have been in the US for more than five years," will this apply to illegall immigrants who jump our border tomorrow? If someone crosses into this country illegally tomorrow will they be granted the opportunity to become legal citizens if they remain undetected for five years? If that's so then this legislation is hogwash and won't do a thing to solve the problems we face. The whole point of reforming immigration is to provide incentive for the illegal immigrants to come here legally. Granting them amnesty if they manage to stay in the country undetected for five years only provides more incentive to illegally immigrate.
The Senate appeared close to breaking the stalemate on immigration reform with a compromise bill that adopts a more restrictive approach to the 11m illegal immigrants in the US, dividing them into three groups that would face different paths to legal status.
Bill Frist, Senate majority leader, called the proposals "a compromise, a negotiated middle ground has been put on the table which says that these 11m people who are here, undocumented people, illegal immigrants, are not a monolithic group".
The compromise bill proposed by Chuck Hagel and Mel Martinez was expected to be endorsed by President George W. Bush. It was welcomed by Senator John McCain, a leading advocate of immigration reform.
Harry Reid, Senate minority leader, said there were still "some obstacles", but added: "I think we're looking like we will be able to dance this afternoon."
The new bill seeks to avoid the appearance of conferring amnesty on illegal immigrants, allowing only those who have been in the US for more than five years to stay in the country to adjust to legal status. Mr Frist said that he was "optimistic after today's vote that with the Hagel-Martinez proposal we can finish a bill that will make America safer and recognises America's interest in legal immigration".
Arlen Specter, chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, said the compromise was "not perfect, the choice we have to make is whether the bill is better than no bill".
I agree with Sen. Specter in that this bill would undoubtedly be better than no bill at all. This is a problem that is reaching the level of a crisis, and we need a solution sooner rather than later.
Here are some specifics about the bill from the article:
Under the Republican proposals, illegal immigrants who have been in the US for more than five years – about two thirds of the 11m - could switch to legal status without leaving the country if they met eight requirements, such as speaking English, having worked for at least three of the last five years and paid all federal and state taxes.
Illegal immigrants in the US for between two and five years can secure a temporary work visa, but must first leave the country. They may apply for legal status later, and have priority over other immigrants applying for green cards. Illegal immigrants in the country for fewer than two years must return home and apply for a temporary worker visa.
When they say "illegal immigrants who have been in the US for more than five years," will this apply to illegall immigrants who jump our border tomorrow? If someone crosses into this country illegally tomorrow will they be granted the opportunity to become legal citizens if they remain undetected for five years? If that's so then this legislation is hogwash and won't do a thing to solve the problems we face. The whole point of reforming immigration is to provide incentive for the illegal immigrants to come here legally. Granting them amnesty if they manage to stay in the country undetected for five years only provides more incentive to illegally immigrate.
Hungry Bear
kbiel
ew
Rob
Chief RZ
