The bill will move most efficiently through the Senate, where there is more political interest in discussing the issue. There, the bill has been referred to the Judiciary Committee, where the process of vetting the bill will begin. In the House, the process is going to be exponentially more difficult. The bill has been referred to five committees for review. In general, the House has been much more reactionary on the issue of immigration, and there is not as much willingness to hold a serious debate on the topic there.

One big kink holds up the bill as far as process goes. Because the bill is in the Senate Judiciary Committee, there is a good chance that it could be pushed off the table for the remainder of the year if the Judiciary Committee gears up for the confirmation of a Supreme Court Justice, which chatter in DC makes sound likely.

This is a massive bill of over 150 pages, with 11 sections. The language of the bill overall looks positive. The biggest problems could come however, in how the language is interpreted and implemented. Below is a quick summary of each of the bill’s sections, with a quick analysis of our concerns and possible points of debate.

Title I - Border Security. Directs the Department of Homeland Security to conduct a comprehensive review of border security and recommendations for an effective plan. They would have one year to carry out the study. A Border Security Advisory Committee would be created, comprised of representatives from border states, law enforcement agencies, and other experts, to advise DHS on the matter. DHS would also be directed to pursue agreements with Mexico and Central American nations to increase and strengthen those countries' ability to secure their own borders.

Analysis: This is a lot better than we had hoped for, in the sense that there is no immediate mandate to increase border security that already exists. However, leaving the analysis in the hands of DHS is like giving the fox the keys to the chicken coop - DHS is unlikely to change their strategy, and would most likely request increases in everything they're doing, rather than truly revising their strategy. Also, in the case of agreements with Mexico and Central America, there are huge problems with migration officials preying on migrants because of a lack of oversight or control - increasing our cooperation with them could make us increasingly complicit in human rights violations south of our own border.

Title II - State Alien Criminal Assistance. Increases the funding for the detention of undocumented migrants, and provides for federal reimbursement of state costs related to processing and trying undocumented migrants in court.

Analysis: If the visa and immigration provisions of the bill move fairly untarnished, this shouldn't be of too much concern. If the immigration sections are gutted and this remains, it could provide for the increased criminalization of migration.

Title III - Essential Visa Worker Program. This is the meat of the bill, which creates a new category of visas for migrants to enter the country. It allows a foreign national to apply for a visa (called an H5-A visa) if they can prove that they have a job offer in the US. They would pay $500 plus processing costs for the visa. The visa is valid for three years, and can be renewed for another 3. Migrants could travel between the US and abroad without restrictions under this visa, and they can change jobs freely within the US under the terms of the visa. These workers would be entitled to all the same worker protections of US citizens.

400,000 of these visas would be available each year, and the process would be flexible to allow additional visas to be granted if this number is met before the end of the year. If a migrant wants to apply for permanent residency, they would be able to do so after 4 years in the program. At that point, they would be required to take English and American civics classes.

The Department of Labor would be required to set up a database to list jobs that are available. The jobs would be available to foreign workers only after they have been made available to US citizens for 30 days.

Analysis: This section has everything that we're concerned about when it comes to allowing for new flows of migrants. This will be the section that is tinkered with the most as debates progress.

Title IV: Enforcement. Requires high-tech visas that can't be forged. Requires the Social Security Administration to develop an "employment eligibility confirmation system" that employers must use to confirm that employees have the proper work authorization. Gives the Department of Labor authority to investigate employers who are suspected of hiring migrants without work authorization.

Analysis: These are reasonable provisions. However, there is currently an employment eligibility test system in use, and it has major flaws recognizing names that don't conform to American standards. For example, two last names, accent marks, etc... Also, there are some fears that the interpretation of this section could lead to renewed workplace raids, which only slap employers on the hand, but deport undocumented workers.

Title V: Promoting Circular Migration Patterns. Facilitates a migrant's ability to go back and forth between their home country, and encourages economic development in home countries to create job opportunities for migrants who want to return home.

Analysis: We wish this section were stronger in terms of committing funds to development in sending countries!

Title VI: Family Unity and Backlog Reduction. Raises the caps on visas for family members of people legally in the US to reduce the long waits currently experienced. Immediate family members of workers would be exempted from these caps.

Analysis: Not much to complain about here, although expect a lot of negotiation here from anti-immigrant advocates who want to limit the number of people entering the country.

Title VII: H5B Nonimmigrants. Another pivotal section, it provides for the legalization of the millions of undocumented workers currently in the US. It would also include the immediate families of undocumented workers. Their undocumented employment must be proven, and there are fairly liberal means for proof, including affidavits from neighbors or colleagues if no employer documents exist. Before an H5B migrant can apply for permanent residency, and eventually citizenship, they must hold this visa for 6 years. The visa is good only for 6 years, and is not renewable. Applicants are subject to a $1,000 fine unless they are under 21 years of age. It also allows for minors to use school attendance to fulfill the work requirement (adapting the Dream Act to this bill). This section would also protect employers who hired undocumented migrants before the bill passed from being sanctioned in any way, partly to encourage them to provide their undocumented workers with proof of employment.

Analysis: This section seems to be well written, but will be one of the major battlegrounds when it comes to negotiation time.

Title VIII: Protection Against Immigration Fraud. This section sets criteria for legal representation of migrants who find themselves in front of an immigration judge. It is aimed at keeping unscrupulous lawyers from taking advantage of migrants.

Analysis: On the surface it looks good, but we need to consult with legal experts before knowing for sure.

Titles IX, X, and XI: These titles ensure civics and English language classes are funded, attempt to increase access to health care for migrants, and sets out how the fees from this program will be spent - mainly funding the other sections of this bill. Only 10% is to be used for border security, while 15% goes to the State Department to meet its requirements (hopefully this will go to development in sending countries rather than increasing border security in other countries). Finally, as a nod to the tireless efforts of our colleagues in Arizona, it exempts humanitarian workers from the aiding and abetting provisions of US law that currently are being used to harass them and prevent the provision of services to undocumented migrants in the desert.

That's the whole enchilada, as it's been referred to in the past! We hope to see vigorous debate on this bill in the upcoming year, and will be providing you with specific action alerts as the bill progresses.