Immigrant Overhaul Plan Stalls in Senate

WASHINGTON —  An immigration overhaul plan that only hours before seemed on its way to Senate passage stalled late Thursday, raising the prospect that no action would be taken at least until after the two-week Easter recess that begins today.

At a joint appearance Thursday morning, Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-Tenn.) and his Democratic counterpart, Minority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada, all but declared victory for a compromise plan that would have granted a path to legal status and citizenship for most of the estimated 12 million immigrants now in the United States illegally.

“We’ve had a huge breakthrough,” Frist said.

“We can’t declare victory. But we’ve moved a long ways down the road,” Reid said.

But snags soon surfaced among both Democrats and Republicans -- members of each party were apparently concerned about substantive details of the overhaul plan and potential political fallout from voting on an issue that had provoked strong feelings as well as mass protests across the country.

Looming over the process for some senators was the fact that thousands of Latino and other immigrants have poured into the streets to protest a more restrictive approach to immigration passed by the House in December. Additional rallies are scheduled. How those demonstrations would influence public opinion is not yet clear.

“The momentum can move either way,” said Sen. Richard J. Durbin of Illinois, the second-ranking Senate Democrat. “Who knows what else will face us when we return.”

For most Democrats, who were prepared to support the compromise, the primary concern was that key provisions in the pending Senate bill might be changed or eliminated when House and Senate delegates met to reconcile differences between the two bills. The House version contains what many Democrats say are draconian measures. Members of the conference committee will have wide latitude to shape the measure that goes back to each chamber for a final vote.

Since Democrats are in the minority in both houses, the committee will be dominated by Republicans, making Democrats fearful of being presented with a bill they would find unacceptable but could not stop.

“The biggest concern on the part of the Democrats is how do we preserve this compromise all the way through the process?” said Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.). “There is a lot of experience here with good bills going into conference committee and transforming.”

“I think we’re a long way from getting any kind of compromise that can survive [the House],” said Sen. Ken Salazar (D-Colo.).

On the Republican side, concern appeared to fall into two categories: senators who favored a more restrictive approach to the path to legal status and citizenship, and senators who might support some compromise but wanted to test the waters back in their home states before voting.

The Senate proposal, drafted by Sens. Mel Martinez (R-Fla.) and Chuck Hagel (R-Neb.), offers tiered paths to citizenship for illegal immigrants who entered the country before January 2004 as long as they meet a string of requirements, including learning English. It also includes measures to enhance border security and increase employer sanctions in an effort to stem the tide of illegal immigrants seeking work.

The Hagel-Martinez proposal would differentiate between more-recent arrivals and illegal immigrants who have been in the country for five years or longer. The more recent arrivals would be required to leave the United States as part of the process of legalizing their status; illegal immigrants in the country for five years or more could complete the process without recrossing the border.

Democratic leaders said they were seeking a guarantee from Frist that members of the Senate Judiciary Committee -- who passed a more permissive version of the bill last week -- would be the Senate negotiators with the House.

Congressional procedures require the House and Senate to agree on a joint version of every bill. Known as a “conference report,” it must be approved by both chambers before it is sent to the president.

Some immigration advocates echoed the concern expressed by Democrats.

“In order for this new deal to be acceptable to those of us who advocate on behalf of immigrants, we need assurances that the integrity of the bipartisan breakthrough will hold throughout conference negotiations with the House,” a coalition of groups said in a joint letter.

The groups included the National Council of La Raza, the Asian American Justice Center, the American Immigration Lawyers Assn., the National Immigration Forum, the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) and Unite Here International Union.

But many Democrats made the argument that the Republican bill was better than no bill.

“I voted for the original bill ... that came out of Judiciary Committee, and I believe that is preferable,” said Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.). “But I also think some forward motion on a balanced bill is critical. Right now, it appears this compromise is the only proposal that might provide that.”

President Bush, who has repeatedly called for a guest-worker program but has not offered details on how immigration laws should be overhauled, urged the Senate to complete its work on the bill, but did not weigh in on what the bill should include.

“I’m pleased that Republicans and Democrats in the United States Senate are working together to get a comprehensive immigration bill,” Bush said during a visit to North Carolina.

It was not clear whether the massive street protests in Los Angeles, Chicago, Phoenix and elsewhere in recent weeks might have shifted the political equation for House Republicans. Some remained bound and determined to defeat the Senate approach.

“It’s miserable public policy, and it will be rejected by the House of Representatives,” said Rep. Tom Tancredo (R-Colo.), a leading voice opposing legal status for undocumented immigrants.

Tancredo said he considered any proposal that would offer eventual citizenship to people who crossed the border illegally an amnesty. “I promise you: We are not going to get a majority of the House on an amnesty for 10 million people,” Tancredo said.

But some Republicans who voted four months ago for the bill offered by F. James Sensenbrenner Jr. (R-Wis.) said they would support an approach similar to one in the Senate proposal: a limited guest-worker program and some form of legalization for workers who had been in the United States for a few years.

“A strong and secure border is of the utmost concern for our national security. However, true immigration reform must also provide a framework for immigrants to work in this country legally,” said Rep. Mary Bono (R-Palm Springs). “Many sectors of our nation’s economy depend on a strong workforce that has been served by immigrant populations. It is vital that these immigrants have viable means to work within the law.”

Rep. George P. Radanovich (R-Mariposa), who was one of three California Republicans who voted against the House’s get-tough bill, said of the Senate compromise: “I think it’s doable.”

“It offers the House a pragmatic way out of the enforcement-only way they’ve got themselves boxed in.... It’s a good step,” he said.

Proponents of the Senate bill expressed optimism that more pro-immigrant rallies scheduled for Monday across the country would push more Republicans to support the compromise.

But House GOP leaders gave little indication whether they would soften their legislation, which would make it a felony to be in the United States without a valid visa.

“This is a very, very difficult issue to deal with in American society,” said Rep. John A. Boehner (R-Ohio), the House’s second-ranking Republican. “I think we’re committed to trying to get real immigration reform finished before this fall. But no one should underestimate the challenges we’ll have in trying to get that.”

*

(BEGIN TEXT OF INFOBOX)

Two visions

Highlights of the immigration bill passed by the House, and a proposal before the Senate:

Achieving citizenship

Senate: Illegal immigrants here more than five years may remain working and can ultimately apply for permanent residency and then U.S. citizenship

House: No provision

Temporary status

Senate: Illegal immigrants here for two to five years would have to leave the U.S. briefly and return as temporary workers; after four years they could apply for permanent residency

House: No provision

Short-timers

Senate: Illegal immigrants here less than two years would have to return home and apply for temporary work visas or permanent U.S. residence from there

House: No provision

Special guests

Senate: Creates a guest-worker program for immigrant farmworkers, who could ultimately gain permanent residency

House: No provision

Personnel

Senate: Increases Border Patrol from 11,300 agents to about 25,000 by 2011

House: Authorizes 1,000 new port-of-entry inspectors during the next four years and 1,500 new dog teams in five years

On the border

Senate: Provides for surveillance from unmanned aerial vehicles, cameras and censors

House: Establishes a new physical barrier and high-tech surveillance along the entire border

Workplace

Senate: Establishes a mandatory nationwide program for hiring verification

House: Makes the current voluntary verification system mandatory and increases penalties for knowingly hiring illegal immigrants

Sources: Associated Press, Times reporting