Key senators agree on sweeping immigration reform
Updated 7:05 a.m. EST
WASHINGTON A bipartisan group of leading senators has reached agreement on the principles of sweeping legislation to rewrite the nation's immigration laws.
The deal, which was to be announced at a news conference Monday afternoon, covers border security, guest workers and employer verification, as well as a path to citizenship for the 11 million illegal immigrants already in the United States.
Although thorny details remain to be negotiated and success is far from certain, the development heralds the start of what could be the most significant effort in years toward overhauling the nation's inefficient patchwork of immigration laws.
President Obama also is committed to enacting comprehensive immigration legislation and will travel to Nevada on Tuesday to lay out his vision, which is expected to overlap in important ways with the Senate effort.
The eight senators expected to endorse the new principles Monday are Democrats Charles Schumer of New York, Dick Durbin of Illinois, Robert Menendez of New Jersey and Michael Bennet of Colorado; and Republicans John McCain of Arizona, Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, Marco Rubio of Florida and Jeff Flake of Arizona.
In a statement, White House Deputy Press Secretary Josh Earnest said, "As the President has made clear for some time, immigration reform is an important priority and he is pleased that progress is being made with bipartisan support. At the same time, he will not be satisfied until there is meaningful reform and he will continue to urge Congress to act until that is achieved. The President looks forward to redoubling the administration's efforts to work with Congress on this important issue this week."
Several of these lawmakers have worked for years on the issue. McCain collaborated with the late Democratic Sen. Edward M. Kennedy on comprehensive immigration legislation pushed by then-President George W. Bush in 2007, only to see it collapse in the Senate when it couldn't get enough GOP support.
Now, with some Republicans chastened by the November elections which demonstrated the importance of Latino voters and their increasing commitment to Democrats, some in the GOP say this time will be different.
"What's changed, honestly, is that there is a new, I think, appreciation on both sides of the aisle -- including maybe more importantly on the Republican side of the aisle -- that we have to enact a comprehensive immigration reform bill," McCain said Sunday on ABC's "This Week."
"I think the time is right," McCain said.
The group claims a notable newcomer in Rubio, a potential 2016 presidential candidate whose conservative bona fides may help smooth the way for support among conservatives wary of anything that smacks of amnesty.
In an opinion piece published Sunday in the Las Vegas Review-Journal, Rubio wrote that the existing system amounts to "de facto amnesty," and he called for "commonsense reform."
The group says in a statement, "We recognize that our immigration system is broken. And while border security has improved significantly over the last two Administrations, we still don't have a functioning immigration system. This has created a situation where up to 11 million undocumented immigrants are living in the shadows. Our legislation acknowledges these realities by finally committing the resources needed to secure the border, modernize and streamline our current legal immigration system, while creating a tough but fair legalization program for individuals who are currently here. We will ensure that this is a successful permanent reform to our immigration system that will not need to be revisited."
According to documents obtained by CBS News and The Associated Press, the senators will call for accomplishing four goals:
-Creating a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants already here, contingent upon securing the border and better tracking of people here on visas.
-Reforming the legal immigration system, including awarding green cards to immigrants who obtain advanced degrees in science, math, technology or engineering from an American university.
-Creating an effective employment verification system to ensure that employers do not hire illegal immigrants.
-Allowing more low-skill workers into the country and allowing employers to hire immigrants if they can demonstrate they couldn't recruit a U.S. citizen; and establishing an agricultural worker program.
The principles being released Monday are outlined on just over four pages, leaving plenty of details left to fill in.
What the senators do call for is similar to Mr. Obama's goals and some past efforts by Democrats and Republicans, since there's wide agreement in identifying problems with the current immigration system.
The most difficult disagreement is likely to arise over how to accomplish the path to citizenship.
In order to satisfy the concerns of Rubio and other Republicans, the senators are calling for the completion of steps on border security and oversight of those here on visas before taking major steps forward on the path to citizenship.
Even then, those here illegally would have to qualify for a "probationary legal status" that would allow them to live and work here -- but not qualify for federal benefits -- before being able to apply for permanent residency. Once they are allowed to apply, they would do so behind everyone else already in line for a green card within the current immigration system.
That could be a highly cumbersome process, but how to make it more workable is being left to future negotiations. The senators envision a more streamlined process toward citizenship for immigrants brought here as children by their parents, and for agricultural workers.
The debate will play out at the start of Mr. Obama's second term, as he aims to spend the political capital afforded him by his re-election victory on an issue that has eluded past presidents and stymied him during his first term despite his promises to the Latino community to act.
"As the president has made clear for some time, immigration reform is an important priority and he is pleased that progress is being made with bipartisan support," a White House spokesman, Clark Stevens, said in a statement. "At the same time, he will not be satisfied until there is meaningful reform and he will continue to urge Congress to act until that is achieved."
For Republicans, the November elections were a stark schooling on the importance of Latino voters, who voted for Mr. Obama over Republican Mitt Romney 71 percent to 27 percent, helping ensure Obama's victory. That led some Republican leaders to conclude that supporting immigration reform with a path to citizenship has become a political imperative.
Popular in Politics
- IRS scandal highlights leadership vacancies
- Va. GOP candidate: Planned Parenthood "more lethal" for blacks than KKK 856 Comments
- Top Obama officials knew about IRS probe, says WH
- Poll: Most think IRS targeting was deliberate
- Immigration bill would require fingerprinting at 30 airports
- Benghazi-disciplined diplomat a prolific poet
- Obama: "Full focus" is on recovery from Oklahoma tornado
- Michelle Obama decries "slander" that educated blacks are "trying to act white" Play Video
'Cause then you really might know what it's like to have to choose. how easy do you guys think it is to get to the us? do u think this people come here for pleasure or because they are bored. a lot, if not most of them love and apreciate this country more than many us citizens. i hear people crying about how the illegals are a burden on the taxes. like they dont pay tax. you guys really belive that the irs will ever let 11 millions working without paying tax? most illegals are payed with tax deducted checks and if the social security number they are using is fake than they dont get any tax return and no benefits.
you belittle women and attack with name calling and hate. your feeble minded attempt to berate "mrpaul" by calling him "mrspaul" shows you consider women as being second class therefore making it a put-down to refer to a man as being a woman. i feel sorry for your wife, if you even have one.
_________________________________________________
The reference is to the seller of something that smells like fish. The women who post on these boards are usually more rational than those of their male counterparts. Your assumption is wrong. Mrs. Paul sells fish, and Mr. Paul was attempting to sell something that smells similar. You seem quick to assign women as second class in an effort to deflect your own bigotry. Spin away!
Shore up the boarders
Illegals will have to pay a fine and pay back taxes then and only then can they get in line to become citizens.
Reality- Less than 1% of those 11 million illegals will do anything of the kind, why blow a good thing, got here illegally-check, flown under the raider and collected benefits and paid no taxes-check, Obama gave their children amnesty-check, no reason to do anything-check.
The libs at this site are only interested in the additional 11 million Obama voters, could care less about the cost financially and otherwise to this country, they pay nothing anyway.
I was both an employer and a landlord. You can't interrogate these applicants about their status in either case, but merely use the documents they give you.
You can though, look them in the eye and see a dedicated family member who is willing to endure great difficulties in their
quest to raise their loved ones of of permanent poverty.
Racism, excessive naionalism and targeting a paticular ethnic group as being a major cause of our economic problems hasn't exactly been a recipe for success in this century.
"more importantly"....Yes, the "others" (gop) need your votes People of the World...and quick...
But...They will lie to you to your face...look down on you...see you forever as "servants".....and they flip flop on a dime..
Words means nothing when 1 looks at the "history" of this obstructionist disgraceful party of the "rich".....
Give me your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free...so you can Work for next to nothing, All skill levels..abortion for any reason you will be jailed...You will be denied the Privilege of voting (voter suppression)..forced to stand in line for hours....
You will be profiled by bigot sheriffs....
You will be hired on to outfits that pay lazy, dumb, drug using white boys top rates....while you on the other hand may be paid a quarter of that...
You must fight the animal republicans for everything....
On a personal note, having seen, heard, felt how good Peoples are treated and having witnessed the determination and love of this Country for many years..
No doubt you won't fold, nor be fooled by fast talking a$$holes who care only for themselves...
In her crosshairs are Republicans John McCain of Arizona, Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, Marco Rubio of Florida and Jeff Flake of Arizona.
Hahaha!
-Mike Rosen, MBA
Mrs. Paul, you may not like it, as Mike Rosen doesn't, but illegal presence, if the manner of illegal entry can't be proven or if one has an expired visa, carries only civil penalties.
If that sounds like splitting hairs, it's because it is.
Consider this:
You have two people in your house.
One got your permision to enter and is annoying you because he or she just sits ther and talks and talks and talks; the other broke in through a window.
Coming here on a visa and overstaying is not the same as coming here without permission. The person on the visa had to go through a background check, medical exam, and pay fees for that visa - he or she had to provide documentation showing that he or she would not be a "public charge" once he or she arrived in the USA.
The one who entered by sneaking across the border went through no background check, no medical exam for communicable disease (having TB or HIV is an automatic denial for a visa). No documentation showing that he or she had a means to support him or herself while here.
The first one is a civil matter - permission was granted to be here but expired. The person is not a threat since he or she was vetted prior to arrival.
The second one is a criminal matter - the person avoided contact and inspection to prove he or she was not a threat to the United States.
Every person who is not a citizen of the United States is required by law to carry proof of legal presense - whether it is the foreign passport with valid visa or the I-551 ("green card") so this notion that a person cannot be proven how they got here is absurd (everyone who comes here since 9-11 is biometrically scanned at the POE).
Do you get it yet, or, are we still talking past each other?
The Congressional Research Service (CRS), in an Apr. 6, 2006 report entitled "Immigration Enforcement Within the United States," offered the following:
"The INA [Immigration and Nationality Act] includes both criminal and civil components, providing both for criminal charges (e.g., alien smuggling, which is prosecuted in the federal courts) and for civil violations (e.g., lack of legal status, which may lead to removal through a separate administrative system in the Department of Justice). Being illegally present in the U.S. has always been a civil, not criminal, violation of the INA, and subsequent deportation and associated administrative processes are civil proceedings. For instance, a lawfully admitted nonimmigrant alien may become deportable if his visitor's visa expires or if his student status changes. Criminal violations of the INA, on the other hand, include felonies and misdemeanors and are prosecuted in federal district courts. These types of violations include the bringing in and harboring of certain undocumented aliens, the illegal entry of aliens, and the reentry of aliens previously excluded or deported."
There are two different and distinct classes of "illegal aliens:"
1. People who arrived with a visa in their passport, were physically seen by US Customs (i.e. "passport control" if you have ever travelled internationally), overstayed, and are legally considered "out of status" - these people are subject ONLY to a civil penalty. By paying a fine they can apply for "adjustment of status" which makes them legal again (this does not mean they can legally work).
2. People who did not arrive with a visa, avoided all contact with immgration officers, and are living/working in the USA. These people are "undocumented" (aka these are the ones who are really illegal) and these are the ones subject to both criminal and civil penalties under 8 USC 1325 (which is the criminal statute that applies)
http://trac.syr.edu/immigration/reports/251/include/imm_charges.html
As you can see people are prosecuted criminally under 8 USC 1325.
Someone who is "out of status" is governed by 245(i) and 212(a)(9)(b) of the INA.
Someone who sneaks across the border is governed by 8 USC 1325.
Try to learn the difference - if you can't understand the difference then there's no further point to discussing this.