Posted on 07/13/2006 7:03:04 AM PDT by Mr. Silverback
By the looks of things, it seems that compromise on the contentious issue of immigration is unlikely, if not impossible. The House’s position has been hard-line: We have to stop illegal immigration before we even consider ways we could process illegal immigrants into America properly. Some members have even demanded the wholesale deportation of all illegal immigrants, which would virtually stop the American economy in its tracks.
The Senate has taken what’s regarded as a more moderate approach: securing the borders and establishing a guest-worker program so that people who have been here for a while can establish their residence. President Bush’s position on the debate has been, in my opinion, comprehensive and responsible.
Yet here we are in July, and instead of ironing out their differences, the House and the Senate are holding dueling hearings across the country.
While getting agreement is hard to imagine, the basis for a good compromise exists. It addresses the important issue of border security while also offering a humane way of dealing with illegal immigrants already living in the United States. It even has a role for Christians who, after all, are commanded to care for the strangers in our midst.
The author of this compromise is Representative Mike Pence (R) of Indiana. I have known Pence for several years and regard him as one of the brightest young stars in the House. He is a serious Christian who is committed to integrating faith and public service.
What Pence is proposing is a two-step process. The first step is to secure the borders. His proposal would include the enforcement measures passed by the House last December.
Once the Secretary of Homeland Security certifies that the borders have been secured, illegal aliens will become eligible to apply for guest-worker visas. Pence’s proposal requires them to leave the country and apply for these visas at what he calls “Ellis Island Centers.”
These visas entitle them to work in the United States for six years. After the six years, the worker “must decide whether to return home or seek citizenship. But he will do so under the normal rules and regulations of our naturalization laws.”
Pence wants Christians involved in the process and is proposing some faith-based programs so the churches can help people with their paperwork, can teach them English, and integrate them into the communities.
I think that his plan, which has gained interest in the White House and support on both sides of the Capitol, provides the basis of a good compromise. I would modify his requirement that people leave the country to apply for guest-worker visas—I think that could be done in federal facilities around the country and save money and time. And the criteria for certifying border security must be objective and reasonable. But these things can be accomplished.
The point is that this is a good proposal that gets us out of the deadlock and promotes security and respect for the law in a humane and workable fashion. And it addresses the issues of workers without demonizing them.
I hope you will get behind Pence’s proposal and call your senators and congressman. Given the contentious quality of the immigration debate, what is needed is support for people like Mike Pence, for whom faith and public service go hand-in-hand.
Take action:
Please call your congressman and senators and urge them to vote for the Pence Plan: No Amnesty Immigration Reform. Call 202-224-3121. Visit www.house.gov and www.senate.gov to learn how to reach your two senators and congressman directly.
If anyone wants on or off my Chuck Colson/BreakPoint Ping List, please notify me here or by freepmail.
If the Senate plan passes, the sound of the gavel coming down at the end of the session would be the sound of our civilization committing suicide.
BreakPoint/Chuck Colson Ping!
If anyone wants on or off my Chuck Colson/BreakPoint Ping List, please notify me here or by freepmail.
I stopped reading right there since I knew where the rest of the article was going....
susie
Why does everyone always talk about compassion for the illegals, compassion for Mexico's citizens? How about some good old compassion for the American taxpayers?
I am sick to death of all this compassionate conservatism. They have compassion for everyone except the people footing the bills.
Go back and keep reading. Though he has some blatatnly dumb stuff in the first couple of paras, this column is an endorsement of Pence's plan.
Sorry but the pence plan is another stealth amnesty. No deal.
From NRO:
The latest “middle ground” proposal comes from Rep. Mike Pence (R., Ind.). Pence, who has solid conservative credentials as head of the House Republican Study Committee, offered what he billed as “The Real Rational Middle Ground on Immigration Reform” at a Heritage Foundation speech last month. Since there’s no actual bill to look at, we have to judge from Rep. Pence’s speech and other materials what the program would be like.
It starts out well enough. In seeking an alternative to amnesty, on the one hand, and mass deportations, on the other, he laid out a four-step plan. The first step is securing the border, and he included the entire enforcement bill passed by the House in December (with two minor modifications) in his measure.
Step two is to reject amnesty. That also sounds good, until you remember that Senators Kennedy and McCain also deny their amnesty plan is an amnesty. As do Senators Hagel and Martinez. And President Bush. They all deny that they support amnesty because, as the president says, the only thing that constitutes amnesty is “automatic citizenship,” whatever that is.
Pence has a broader definition of amnesty:
Amnesty is allowing people whose first act in America was an illegal act to get right with the law without leaving the country. Allowing twelve million illegal aliens to stay in our country instead of leaving and coming back legally is amnesty, no matter if fines or back taxes are paid, or how it is otherwise dressed-up or spun by its proponents. The only way to deal with these twelve million people is to insist that they leave the country and come back legally if they have a job awaiting them.
This is exactly the same as the “touchback” gimmick in the Senate amnesty bill, which would require illegal aliens who have been here between two and five years to cross the border to be enrolled in the permanent “temporary” worker program and then immediately return to their homes and jobs.
That brings us to the third step: the guestworker amnesty. Yes, amnesty. Or, if you prefer, legalization. Or normalization. Or regularization. Or earned adjustment. Or whatever is the euphemism du jour. The fact remains that the guestworker program in the Pence plan is explicitly designed to allow all illegal aliens to keep their jobs and domiciles in the United States without interruption.
The congressman is quite explicit on this point. In explaining the need for speedy processing of the guestworkers, he says:
No employer in America wants to lose employees for an extended amount of time. No worker who is earning money to feed and clothe a family can afford to be off the job for long. … And, an illegal alien currently employed in America will be willing to take a quick trip across the border to come back outside of the shadows and in a job where he does not fear a raid by Immigration and Customs Enforcement. In fact, I envision employers working with placement agencies to make sure that their long-time illegal employees get their paperwork processed, background checks performed, and visas issued so that they will be back on the job quickly.
In the 1950s, this process was called — in official U.S. government publications — “drying out the wetbacks.” Whether it’s called an amnesty instead, or is given some other label, the point is to let all illegal aliens stay legally.
But maybe the amnesty is time-limited? And in fact, part of Pence’s “no amnesty” claim is that the guestworker visa would be limited to a total of six years. This would be an encouraging requirement, except that, in the congressman’s words, “At that point, the guest should decide whether to return home or enter the separate process of seeking citizenship.” If legal immigration quotas are to remain in force, then these formerly illegal, now “temporary,” workers will have to leave, en masse, six years from now, which is precisely the mass deportation the congressman said (correctly) is unworkable. On the other hand, if these workers will be able to receive permanent residency outside the current limits, as they would be under the Senate amnesty bill, then this plan is the very “path to citizenship” that Rep. Pence made a big show of condemning. It’s unclear which of these is true, but it’s undeniable that the plan is either dishonest or amateurish.
Step four really takes the cake: a promise — really, truly, cross-my-heart-and-hope-to-die — to enforce the ban on hiring illegals in the future. Pence himself says that since every illegal alien will be legalized, employers wouldn’t need to hire illegals, but that enforcement will be phased in nonetheless. This is exactly the bait-and-switch Congress perpetrated in 1986 — legalization first, enforcement later (i.e., never). It is for this reason that the House, animated by a “fool me twice, shame on me” skepticism, has insisted on “Enforcement First.”
There are plenty of other reasons to dismiss the Pence plan as unserious: by not calling for an end to automatic citizenship at birth, it makes the “temporary” claim meaningless; his gimmick of having the private sector screen the workers misses the point that they will still need to use (and receive security clearances for access to) the very same databases that the FBI and Department of Homeland Security use now; and to get “temporary” workers, employers will merely have to attest that they tried to hire Americans, rather than using objective measures to determine need, like rising wages or low unemployment in the specific occupation in question.
In fact, I didn’t write about this plan when it was announced because I didn’t think it possible that anyone could take it seriously. I was wrong. Though the Pence amnesty plan hasn’t been widely covered, it has received support, or at a least respectful hearing, from insiders who will affect the final outcome of any bill. It’s no surprise, for instance, that amnesty supporters like Dick Armey, John Fund, and Michael Barone have had nice things to say about it (not to mention several newspaper editorial pages), but even supporters of Enforcement First, like Rep. Jim Sensenbrenner and Newt Gingrich, have been more receptive of the plan than a close reading of it would warrant. It’s also ironic that Pence’s speech was delivered at the Heritage Foundation, given that his plan appears to violate Heritage’s “permanent principles” on immigration; it will be interesting to see what Heritage has to say about the plan.
In the end, the Pence Amnesty wouldn’t go down with the public any better than the string of other amnesty plans that have been proposed over the past couple of years. As Peggy Noonan wrote last week about the public’s suspicions regarding immigration plans: “they think — they assume, at this point, reflexively — that slithery, slippery professional politicians are using and inventing complications to obfuscate and confuse. ... Americans don't trust ‘comprehensive plans,’ because they don't trust the comprehensive planners.”
There’s only one way Congress and the president can earn back the public’s trust on immigration: Enforce the law — comprehensively, confidently, unapologetically. Then, after several years have passed and enforcement mechanisms are in place and working, and the illegal population has shrunk through attrition, Washington will have proven that, this time, it’s not lying about immigration.
Until then, no deal.
— Mark Krikorian is executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies and an NRO contributor.
Sorry, I still don't buy this. There would certainly be localized pain from such an effort, but "stop the American economy"? Puh. LEEZE.
This column is about the Pence plan; is the Pence plan good or bad. Let's talk about particulars, because the rest is just jawing.
Here a good thing to decide (but no one talks about and neither the Senate or House bill addresses). How many Mexicans/year should we be letting in? If they think the answer to that is as many who want to come, let's get that on record and discuss it. It's the core question in the whole issue and NO ONE DISCUSSES IT!!!
Good posts!
The Pence plan is somewhat similar to what Japan does: if you come to Japan on a tourist visa, find a job and decide to stay/work, you have to get your paperwork in order and then "hop out" of the country and back in under the auspices of a work visa application. But Japan's work visas are generally good for 1 year only, and you need to "buy" a re-entry permit if you want to go home for a visit and come back.
Actually, Jeff Sessions has made some detailed comments on the immigration targets in the Senate plan, and those targets are 100% nuts.
Anyone who makes a statement like this, and believes it, is just beyond stupid!
An Immigration Compromise: Showing Compassion, Upholding the Law
Considering that the title of the article ABOUT the Pence plan is all about compassion........I'd say my comments are right on target......but thanks anyway. ;)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.