Are We a Nation of Immigrants?
In December 2005, the House of Representatives set the stage on immigration reform by rushing an enforcement-only bill, HR 4437, introduced by Congressman Sensenbrenner (R-WI), through the House in only 48 hours. The bill attempts to make the presence of undocumented persons in the United States a crime punishable by jail time, and would immediately qualify 12 million people living in the United States for sentencing. It also criminalizes humanitarian assistance to illegal migrants, putting churches, social service providers, and good Samaritans at risk nationwide. Other mean-spirited provisions include requiring local police forces to enforce federal immigration law, meaning that people who are stopped for speeding or other minor violations could be deported on the spot. And finally, the bill authorizes the construction of 700 miles of fence on the border between the United States and Mexico, which has raised vociferous protests from nations across Latin America and which threatens to destroy residential border communities in the construction process.
When the House of Representatives passed HR 4437, it challenged the Senate to take up the immigration issue and to match their approach. Rather than calling the House’s bluff, the Senate has engaged in reasonable debate on the issue. The Senate Judiciary Committee rushed to finish production of a bill to send to the Senate floor under pressure from Majority Leader, Bill Frist (R-TN), who favors the House approach. The Judiciary Committee bill has a lot to like, and a lot to be concerned about. First, it would allow the current 12 million undocumented workers in the United States to legalize their status and seek citizenship if they desire. It would also create a guest worker program where workers who come into the United States in the future also have the right to pursue citizenship. With these two components of real immigration reform, the Judiciary Committee bill is a bright light in this debate. Additionally, it rejects the criminalization of undocumented workers and humanitarian assistance. It was passed by a committee vote of 12 to 6, with four Republicans – Senators Arlen Specter (PA), Mike DeWine (OH), Sam Brownback (KS), and Lindsey Graham (SC) – voting in favor.
While the Senate’s Judiciary Committee bill meets a lot of our needs in terms of immigration reform, it still takes a counterproductive approach to enforcement issues. The bill would double the number of Border Patrol agents who would patrol already militarized border communities, and it calls for the creation of an “electronic” wall, using technology to create a security zone from the Pacific Ocean to the Gulf of Mexico that would put anyone in its path – including the 6.5 million people who call the border home – under 24-hour surveillance. It also proposes a series of troublesome interior enforcement measures, including more cooperation between local police forces and immigration officials.
The fate of the Senate bill pits many competing Republican interests against themselves. Above all is President Bush’s interest in courting the growing Hispanic population in the country. While the Senate Judiciary Committee’s approach could serve that interest, the House of Representatives approach has already met with the growing ire of Latino voters, who have marched in protest of the House bill across the country in cities like Los Angeles, Chicago, Phoenix, Milwaukee, and Washington, D.C. This dynamic is compounded by the competing presidential ambitions of two senators – Senators John McCain (R-AZ) and Bill Frist (R-TN). McCain is one of the intellectual authors of the Judiciary Committee bill, while Frist supports the House approach. The two senators are using this debate to court their electoral bases - McCain going after moderate Republicans and Independents, and Frist courting the conservative base of the Republican Party.
Whether the Senate turns out a bill that looks like HR 4437 or the Judiciary Committee bill, that final product will still have to be sent to conference with the House bill. The end result of that conference could be stalemate or compromise. Either way, immigration reform is turning out to be the high-stakes game of the 2006 electoral season. Whatever the outcome, it will indelibly mark the Republican Party for years to come. And it will continue to define the United States either as a nation open to the contributions of all, or as a nation that retreats into “Fortress America.”
