[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

The Doctor is In the House [Two and a half hours early?]

Trump Walks Into Gun Store & The Owner Says This... His Reaction Gets Everyone Talking!

Here’s How Explosive—and Short-Lived—Silver Spikes Have Been

This Popeyes Fired All the Blacks And Hired ALL Latinos

‘He’s setting us up’: Jewish leaders express alarm at Trump’s blaming Jews if he loses

Asia Not Nearly Gay Enough Yet, CNN Laments

Undecided Black Voters In Georgia Deliver Brutal Responses on Harris (VIDEO)

Biden-Harris Admin Sued For Records On Trans Surgeries On Minors

Rasmussen Poll Numbers: Kamala's 'Bounce' Didn't Faze Trump

Trump BREAKS Internet With Hysterical Ad TORCHING Kamala | 'She is For They/Them!'

45 Funny Cybertruck Memes So Good, Even Elon Might Crack A Smile

Possible Trump Rally Attack - Serious Injuries Reported

BULLETIN: ISRAEL IS ENTERING **** UKRAINE **** WAR ! Missile Defenses in Kiev !

ATF TO USE 2ND TRUMP ATTACK TO JUSTIFY NEW GUN CONTROL...

An EMP Attack on the U.S. Power Grids and Critical National Infrastructure

New York Residents Beg Trump to Come Back, Solve Out-of-Control Illegal Immigration

Chicago Teachers Confess They Were told to Give Illegals Passing Grades

Am I Racist? Reviewed by a BLACK MAN

Ukraine and Israel Following the Same Playbook, But Uncle Sam Doesn't Want to Play

"The Diddy indictment is PROTECTING the highest people in power" Ian Carroll

The White House just held its first cabinet meeting in almost a year. Guess who was running it.

The Democrats' War On America, Part One: What "Saving Our Democracy" Really Means

New York's MTA Proposes $65.4 Billion In Upgrades With Cash It Doesn't Have

More than 100 killed or missing as Sinaloa Cartel war rages in Mexico

New York state reports 1st human case of EEE in nearly a decade

Oktoberfest tightens security after a deadly knife attack in western Germany

Wild Walrus Just Wanted to Take A Summer Vacation Across Europe

[Video] 'Days of democracy are GONE' seethes Neil Oliver as 'JAIL' awaits Brits DARING to speak up

Police robot dodges a bullet, teargasses a man, and pins him to the ground during a standoff in Texas

Julian Assange EXPOSED


Immigration
See other Immigration Articles

Title: Deal May Legalize Millions of Immigrants
Source: Associated Press
URL Source: http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.c ... /05/17/national/w150745D89.DTL
Published: May 17, 2007
Author: Associated Press
Post Date: 2007-05-17 22:53:16 by Brian S
Keywords: None
Views: 241
Comments: 18

(05-17) 18:47 PDT WASHINGTON (AP) --

In a striking reach across party lines, the White House and key lawmakers agreed Thursday on a sweeping immigration plan to grant legal status to millions of people in the country unlawfully.

Sealed after months of secretive bargaining, the deal mandates bolstered border security and a high-tech employment verification system to prevent illegal workers from getting jobs.

President Bush said the proposal would "help enforce our borders but equally importantly, it'll treat people with respect."

The compromise brought together an unlikely alliance of liberal Democrats such as Sen. Edward M. Kennedy of Massachusetts and conservative Republicans such as Sen. Jon Kyl of Arizona on an issue that carries heavy potential risks and rewards for all involved.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., said debate would begin on Monday, but he cautioned, "I don't know if the immigration legislation is going to bear fruit and we're going to be able to pass it."

Almost instantly, the plan brought vehement criticism from both sides of the immigration issue, including liberals who called it unfair and unworkable and conservatives who branded it an overly permissive "amnesty."

The proposal constitutes a far-reaching change in the immigration system that would admit future arrivals seeking to put down roots in the U.S. based on their skills, education levels and job experience, limiting the importance of family ties. A new class of guest workers would be allowed in temporarily, but only after the new security measures were in place — expected to take 18 months.

"This is a bill where people who live here in our country will be treated without amnesty but without animosity," Bush said.

Kennedy hailed it as "the best possible chance we will have in years to secure our borders and bring millions of people out of the shadows and into the sunshine of America."

Kyl said the measure wasn't perfect, "but it represents the best opportunity that we have in a bipartisan way to do something about this problem."

It was clear, however, that many Republicans and Democrats were deeply skeptical. Reid said it needed improvement.

"I have serious concerns about some aspects of this proposal, including the structure of the temporary worker program and undue limitations on family immigration," Reid said.

Conservatives on both sides of the Capitol derided the deal as "amnesty" for illegal immigrants, using a politically charged word that figured prominently in campaigns across the country last year.

"I don't care how you try to spin it, this is amnesty," said Sen. Jim DeMint, R-S.C.

The proposed agreement would allow illegal immigrants to come forward and obtain a "Z visa" and — after paying fees and a $5,000 fine — ultimately get on track for permanent residency, which could take between eight and 13 years. Heads of households would have to return to their home countries first.

They could come forward right away to claim a probationary card that would let them live and work legally in the U.S., but could not begin the path to permanent residency or citizenship until border security improvements and the high-tech worker identification program were completed.

A new crop of low-skilled guest workers would have to return home after stints of two years. They could renew their visas twice, but would be required to leave for a year in between each time. If they wanted to stay in the U.S. permanently, they would have to apply under the point system for a limited pool of green cards.

The program drew fire from liberal groups that said it was unworkable. They had joined Democrats in pressing instead for guest workers to be permitted to stay and work indefinitely in the U.S., and ultimately earn the chance to stay.

"Without a clear path to permanent residence for a healthy share of the future temporary workers, we run the risk of reproducing the widespread illegality that this bill is designed to address," said Frank Sharry, the executive director of the National Immigration Forum.

Sen. Byron Dorgan, D-N.D., said he would try to kill the temporary worker program because it would bring in a potentially unlimited stream of immigrants to compete with Americans for jobs and depress wages.

In perhaps the most hotly debated change, the proposed plan would shift from an immigration system primarily weighted toward family ties toward one with preferences for people with advanced degrees and sophisticated skills. Republicans have long sought such revisions, which they say are needed to end "chain migration" that harms the economy.

Family connections alone would no longer be enough to qualify for a green card — except for spouses and minor children of U.S. citizens. Strict new limits would apply to U.S. citizens seeking to bring foreign-born parents into the country.

The issue quickly became a subject of debate among presidential candidates in both parties, exposing divisions among Republicans.

Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., who led the charge last year to push through an immigration overhaul, called the deal "the first step" and urged moving it forward before the politics of 2008 made such action impossible.

"We all know that this issue can be caught up in extracurricular politics unless we move forward as quickly as possible," said McCain.

Mitt Romney, another Republican presidential hopeful, issued a statement calling the plan "the wrong approach," saying it conferred "a form of amnesty" on illegal immigrants. "That is unfair to the millions of people who have applied to legally immigrate to the U.S.," the former Massachusetts governor said.

Former Republican Sen. Fred Thompson of Tennessee, who is weighing a presidential bid, said the measure should be scrapped in favor of one that secures the border.

"With this bill, the American people are going to think they are being sold the same bill of goods as before on border security," Thompson said in a statement.

Democratic Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois said the compromise needs work.

"Without modifications, the proposed bill could devalue the importance of family reunification, replace the current group of undocumented immigrants with a new undocumented population consisting of guest workers who will overstay their visas, and potentially drive down wages of American workers," Obama said in a statement.

http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2007/05/17/national/w150745D89.DTL

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 15.

#4. To: Brian S (#0)

Ron Paul was right, remove the incentive for them to come. He missed hitting the true source of the problem, and that is NAFTA.

BTP Holdings  posted on  2007-05-17   23:17:52 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#6. To: BTP Holdings (#4)

Ron Paul was right, remove the incentive for them to come. He missed hitting the true source of the problem, and that is NAFTA.

Or make it pay for us and them.

Last year, NPR had a series about the social conservatives and one woman, a strawberry farmer in Plant City, Fla., said we should round them up and deport them all. Except HER illegals. "I'd go bankrupt without these people," she said. That cracked me up. Greed or hate? Hate or greed? Decisions, decisions.

This is a complex problem that has no solution I have heard yet. We're already losing a lot of our fruit crop on the West Coast because migrant workers are afraid to come into the U.S. after all the ICE raids.

There's gotta be some solution, but damned if I can come up with one. The best I can think of is if a company just cannot find American workers, they can pay a fee that goes into social security and their workers pay tax on their earnings, with no special consideration for citizenship.

Then, we invest some of that tax money in improving our visa departments in other countries so people can come and go without a tortuous routine, so they'll WANT to go home for part of the year, knowing they can come back for jobs AMERICANS DON'T WANT.

Since I work in the food business, I know that no restaurant would get a dish washed if they had to rely on Americans. But to let immigrants take over construction and factory jobs is just suicidal. And they are. Go by a construction site in non-union areas, and see if you can find a carpenter who speaks English.

Even here in Chicago, which is bigtime union, the immigrants are hired for the day labor jobs, the non-union jobs, and the unions are going nuts not out of greed but because they might get killed because these guys don't understand "watch out for that crane."

BTW, part of the "do jobs Americans won't" chant is that the employers make the jobs so unpleasant that only an illegal will do it without complaining. Working in a meat plant used to be if not pleasant, not actually unpleasant. Now they have sped up the lines so much that the job is physically exhausting. They can afford to burn through employees because they know even hungrier people will show up and work harder for even less.

The Mexicans are now actually "spoiled." They know how to get lower-stress jobs now. So the Guatamalans and Salvadorans and Nicaraguans are replacing them. It's exploitative.

There's a reason why the meat industry moved to places like Arkansas and Kansas where there was no native workforce. Iowa has a 1 percent unemployment rate. They know they can't find workers without illegals.

NAFTA, in the abstract, is a good idea. But no one was thinking about ramshackle Mexican trucks with bald tires doing 80 down our side roads. Or shipping U.S. jobs a few miles south to save a few bucks. Some people make money on the deal, but it ain't the average guy in the U.S.

Mekons4  posted on  2007-05-17   23:51:20 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#14. To: Mekons4 (#6)

NAFTA, in the abstract, is a good idea. But no one was thinking about ramshackle Mexican trucks with bald tires doing 80 down our side roads. Or shipping U.S. jobs a few miles south to save a few bucks. Some people make money on the deal, but it ain't the average guy in the U.S

I beg to differ. I and millions of others joined w/Perot/Buchanan/Nader to fight this mess b/c we saw the exact scenario you describe. For our efforts we were ushered out of the GOP and into political exile. NAFTA was purchased with our tax dollars for the benefit of the multinationals. To this day I despise people who think NAFTA, GATT-WTO was a worthy concept.

Jethro Tull  posted on  2007-05-18   7:22:26 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#15. To: Jethro Tull (#14)

To this day I despise people who think NAFTA, GATT-WTO was a worthy concept.

I agree wholeheartedly.

Anyone that believes you can export industry and jobs while importing the unemployed and uneducated isn't capable of having an original thought in their empty head.

noone222  posted on  2007-05-18   7:35:44 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


Replies to Comment # 15.

#16. To: noone222 (#15)

Little did we know back then that NAFTA/GATT---> WTO would be their economic gateway to the physical integration of America. All this open border scheme done in contemplation of the NAU. Ron Paul best develop the hide of an armadillo, because they’re coming hard and fast. I wouldn’t be surprised if they discovered child porn on his hard drive.

Jethro Tull  posted on  2007-05-18 09:41:25 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


End Trace Mode for Comment # 15.

TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest


[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register]