Immigration Debate Gears Up

Laura Meckler, Wall Street Journal, January 28, 2013

Millions of illegal immigrants would be given a path to citizenship under provisions of an immigration overhaul fashioned by a bipartisan group of senators, an opening shot in what promises to be a fight in Congress this year.

The legislative framework, released Monday, also would add federal agents and equipment to strengthen the borders and tighten work rules to ensure employers hire legally.

The unveiling comes before President Barack Obama plans to set out his own, similar principles in a speech Tuesday in Las Vegas. Mr. Obama repeatedly has said revamping the immigration system is one of his top priorities, while Republicans—smarting from the overwhelming Hispanic support of Mr. Obama in November’s election—also have identified the issue as of major importance.

Still, the Senate proposal could face stiff opposition in the Republican-controlled House. Many Republicans oppose any path to legal status for illegal immigrants, viewing it as a reward for lawbreaking. Other Republicans have signaled they are comfortable with a legal status short of citizenship, but immigration advocates view that as an unacceptable second-class status.

Under the Senate framework, most people in the country illegally now could qualify for legal status and work permits, provided they meet certain standards, including a background check and paying back taxes. They eventually could qualify for citizenship, but most would have to wait until certain border-security improvements were met and a new system put in place for tracking whether people who enter the country legally on temporary visas leave on time.


The agreement provides a variety of other provisions. Among them: alleviating the backlog of people waiting to immigrate legally; awarding green cards to those who earn doctorates from U.S. universities in science, technology, engineering or math; stiff fines and possible criminal penalties for employers that fail to verify workers’ legal status; and creation of a program to fill low-skilled jobs that employers can’t get Americans to take.


The provisions don’t address some smaller and potentially contentious aspects proposed for an overhaul, such as whether gay and lesbian Americans would have the right to sponsor their noncitizen spouses or partners for citizenship. Also unclear is whether immigrants with temporary legal status, but not citizenship, could quality for health-insurance subsidies under the 2010 health-overhaul law.


The group hopes to have a bill by March that could move through the Senate by August. That would allow House consideration and negotiations between the two chambers during the fall. {snip}

In recent years, with the U.S. economy weak, illegal immigration has slowed to a trickle. But many in Congress, particularly Republicans, worry that after legislation is passed, there will be a fresh wave of illegal crossings as the economy rebounds.

To combat that, the framework proposes increased technology, infrastructure and personnel, including more unmanned aerial vehicles, to apprehend unauthorized entrants. It calls for stronger prohibitions against racial profiling and more training of border-patrol agents.


Those brought to the U.S. as children or agricultural workers would face a quicker path to citizenship. But most others wouldn’t be able to apply until it was determined that the new border measures and visa-check system were in place.


Once the enforcement measures are complete, people with probationary status could earn permanent legal residence, which can lead to citizenship, if they pay taxes, learn English and meet other requirements. They wouldn’t be able to earn a green card until all those waiting on the day the legislation is passed get theirs.

That meets a GOP demand that people who came to the U.S. illegally don’t earn special treatment. But to address Democratic concerns that the line is prohibitively long, the framework calls for reducing those backlogs.

The outline also provides for businesses to hire new immigrants for low-skill jobs if they can show they were unsuccessful in recruiting Americans. Those who do well eventually would be able to earn green cards.

Left unresolved is how many workers would be allowed in each year. {snip}


Topics: , ,

Share This

We welcome comments that add information or perspective, and we encourage polite debate. If you log in with a social media account, your comment should appear immediately. If you prefer to remain anonymous, you may comment as a guest, using a name and an e-mail address of convenience. Your comment will be moderated.
  • Puggg

    What do they mean precisely by “securing the border?” Do they mean electrified fences and troops, or they mean useless drones to show us what we already know is happening, and which is useless anyway because many “illegal aliens” are visa overstayers and not border jumpers?

    • The__Bobster

      Securing the border = erecting a fence you can step over.

      • RisingReich

        Or it’s erecting a fence that allows Mexicans and other undesirables IN, but keeps us White “Reparation Slaves” in to keep feeding the beast.

    • George White

      They will NEVER secure the border. We’re too broke to pay for what that would really cost. Obama will surely never do such a thing because it isn’t in HIS interests, which are far different than the interests of the American people.

      • Bill

        We are paying the Army whether it is in Afghan or in Iraq or wherever. Recall them and put them on the border with their guns facing southward. Give them orders to fire warning shots first, but if they see an invader “coming through the wire” despite warnings, shoot to kill. If the Mex army approaches and fires at our troops defending OUR border, let the war begin. Let NOBODY through coming from the South, but let any who want to go through heading back South to their real homeland. We can do it financially IF we wanted to. We don’t because we have a black pretender in the Oval office staffing our courts and our Justice department with confirmed non-white socialists, and the “opposition” party is fully in thrall to the treasonous Chamber of Commerce and composed of too many idiots who see more blacks and browns as a possible voting block instead of the very real means to ensure Dem Marxists stay in power forevermore.

        • Non Humans

          Might I add leave the bodies, as well. They will form a wall and a warning themselves.

  • bigone4u

    Nothing good will come of this and much that is bad will. However, the coalition of people of color allied with white cultural Marxists will see to it that it becomes the law of the land. I am now declaring myself to be a stranger in a strange land. I must be a character in a science fiction story, one who has entered a perverse, evil parallel universe. One from which there appears to be no escape other than death.

    • E_Pluribus_Pluribus

      “However, the coalition of people of color allied with white cultural Marxists will see to it that it becomes the law of the land.”

      No they won’t. Bush couldn’t push similar “comprehensive immigration reform” through in 2007 when he had a Democratic Senate and House.

    • RisingReich

      Death may be a larger part of the equation than both sides see at the moment.

    • NM156

      The House will not pass anything resembling amnesty, so relax, Mr. Stranger in a Strange Land. Every call to the Senate however, will be important, a public verdict on immigration itself. The outrage in 2006 and 2007 by the public, as expressed in phone calls during the Senate deliberations, which melted down the Senate switchboard in ’07, was a beautiful thing. Doom and gloom means not acting when you should. It’s also an illusion.

      • George White

        We are not helpless. Calls and letters do matter, in the aggregate. Even the dumbest politician knows that the media is a megaphone for lies, but phone calls and letters from an outraged public is pure TRUTH.

        • Conan

          Those politicians are bought and paid for.

          We went through this when California voted for proposition 187 and it was overturned by a judge. Writing and calling will make no difference whatsoever.

          • kjh64

            Well, calls and such it did stop George Bush’s attempt at amnesty 5 years ago. Of course our polticians are bought and paid for too, that’s the problem and why it makes it so hard.

  • The__Bobster
    • Someone did some credible math. The $155 million Adelson “wasted” on Romney is about the extra expense Adelson’s casino would incur if the wages of his entry level workers’ wages increased by even $1 an hour. I believe that Adelson wanted to buy Romney to make sure that Romney was sufficiently bought-and-paid-for just in case he won, just to keep his own labor costs cheap. However, Obama won the election, meaning Adelson won, i.e. an open borders politician won.

      All a cheap labor power play.

      I doubt Adelson is really that interested in Iran to spend that kind of money.

    • JohnEngelman

      What allies? The Republican Party exists in order to advance the economic interests of the employer – investor classes. Employers and investors benefit from open borders.

  • A newspaper today asked the question, if we give amnesty to all the illegals in the country today, what do we do with all the illegals who are going to come tomorrow?
    As Reagan’s “one-time-only” amnesty has proven, all you’re going to do is cause a rush over the border of others waiting for the next “one-time-only” amnesty.

    And you can be sure, they’ll sign this deal before there are any guarantees or systems in place for border security.

  • Jefferson

    North Korea’s borders are a million times more secure than the U.S border, even though nobody actually wants to immigrate to North Korea.

    I wish the U.S government cared as much about keeping our borders secure as the North Korean government does about their borders.

  • George White

    We can stop this. get on the phone to the Senate and the Congress. Write letters and emails. Give to NumbersUSA and FAIR or the organization of your choice. DO SOMETHING besides whine that nothing can be done. I spend every spare moment fighting this. The MAJORITY of white Americans do NOT want amnesty, trust me.

    • IstvanIN

      Neither of NJ’s “Senadors” is white and both hate America, won’t do me any good.

      • George White

        You don’t just contact your own. I do mass mailings and massive calling. I’ve run through the Senate many times now, and I’m nearly through the House. I send probably…50 letters per week. On average. You have to hammer them. It’s the only way.

        • Garrett brown

          This. I sign any pro white petitiosn I see that are proposed on whitehouse gov every morning. I’ve been copying and pasting pro second amendment letters to my senators and governor every day for 3 months. If we do nothing but complain the we lose. Start fighting for your country or it won’t be ours anymore.

      • Garrett brown

        So you just lay over like a pathetic dog and stay behind a computer screen… Makes sense. Sites even have entire letters written out and links to who you send them to. It’s very easy to stand up for what you believe in with sites like FAIR. Use them.

    • mobilebay

      I’m with you, George. I’ve done the same for years. I can count on my Texas Congressman, but he’s only one. We must get more on our side. I don’t trust any or them, however. It’s going to take a concerted effort on everyone’s part to make sure this citizenship folly goes no further. I wonder if politicians realize they want to give our most precious birthright – citizenship – to people whose first act was to break our law. I’m sure they do, so the only other reason they could have is they just don’t care.

  • China, Japan and Germany must just be laughing their ***** off.

    • IstvanIN

      China and Japan, in Germany “DDR” Merkel has flushed the toilet.

    • Garrett brown

      Not sure what you’re reading on Germany but they’re even more pro immigration than we are.

  • Dave4088

    The Republicans rolling over and playing dead on immigration won’t win them Hispanic support or siphon off votes from the Democrats. The die is cast. The Republicans can either face facts and attempt to increase white support by opposing free trade, overturning affirmative action legislation, deporting illegals, enacting a moratorium on legal immigration and militarizing the border, or recast themselves as Democrats on hot button issues and risk losing more support among their white base thus ensuring their demise as a national party.

    We know common sense never prevails with the GOP, so it’s only a matter of time before we are a one party state and elective despotism dominated by anti-white, ultra left wing extremists.

    • JohnEngelman

      Actually it will be a one party state dominated by the business community.

  • mobilebay

    “We must secure the border!” This is the phrase most often repeated by politicians and as meaningless as “We are a nation of immigrants.” When they say either one, they’ve done their duty and will then get on with handing out citizenship like so much Halloween candy. Another worn out term is “We can’t deport 11 million illegals.” No one says why not. Eisenhower did. What they really mean is “We never intended to deport them. They will vote democrat and will bring in 50 of their closest relatives who will do the same thing. Democrats forever will be their battle cry. The saddest part is after being king of the world, we have been conquered by third world criminals who just walked in, aided and abetted by our own government.

    • George White

      Yes, we could easily deport them. E-Verify would do it. No jobs; they leave. Romney had it right.

      • Bill

        He had it right as a CANDIDATE. He immediately reversed himself once he WAS the nominee for Pres. And he lost because of that and retreating on “strong” positions while a candidate but revising his position once the nominee. He pretended to be a conservative while asking for the nomination, then once he got it, he proved himself the Neo-Con we all knew he was.

        • Except now I know Romney never even believed it when he said it.

          I will say that the criticism he took when he said “self-deportation” (borrowing Kris Kobach’s favored phrase) was undeserved. Most laws self-enforce because people willingly follow them in fear of someone else enforcing those laws upon them. And the more vigorously and publicly a law is enforced, the more likely it is that the average person will self-enforce. Self-deportation is merely an illegal alien willingly following immigration law, nothing more nothing less. It doesn’t happen often because real immigration law isn’t enforced often.

          Unlike tax laws.

  • Okay, I know some of you want me to, and I guess I’ll have to do it.

    Eat a whole crow-flavored humble pie.

    No, I still don’t like her, I never will. But she has what is thus far the best concise body blow against Rubio’s “but it’s not amnesty” amnesty “but it’s not yet a bill” bill:

    • NM156

      She needs the s**t kicked out of her before she’s allowed to even put a foot back in the union hall, as it were. Why the epiphany now? Demographics? That’s news only to her.

      • Like I said, I’ll never like her again, for what she did to Todd. And her main fault, even in this otherwise good column, is that she’s more concerned about the Republican Party than white people. And she trusts Ted Cruz more than I think anyone should…yet. I’ll never really trust him at all, because of his Indo gene line, but I will be happy as long as he keeps voting right.

    • George White

      Brilliant piece and totally devastating to Rubio’s stupid plan. Rubio is Latino first and American second, the same way Colin Powell is black first and American second. ALL of the non-whites stick together like glue. It’s only the dumb gringos who turn their backs on one another and allow this race replacement to go on.

  • NM156

    The real enemy is white liberals, who are far more flaky on immigration than I ever imagined. They must be the demographic that flips and flops on these ludicrous, inexplicably inconsistent polls on immigration. Take, for instance, this recent article on about a proposal to get rid of birthright citizenship and notice the reaction of the vast majority of commenters, aghast at the attempts by evil Republicans to stop foreigners from walking across the border to give birth to unassimilable welfare babies: If anyone in my extended family came out and expressed themselves as these liberal kooks do about birthright citizenship without solicitation at a family party, I would dump a bowl of mashed potatoes on his or her head.

    • George White

      I’m with you on that. The white liberal race traitors make my skin crawl. I wish they would all get raped by hordes of blacks. Then again, they might just LIKE getting raped by hordes of blacks.

      • Bill

        They are insane enough they would consider it “atonement” for their white privilege and racism and blame US as to why they got mugged, raped, etc. With liberals somebody or something must ALWAYS be to blame, except the obvious person, race or policy which causes the problem.

    • ATBOTL

      More whites are conservative than liberal. If the corporate interests were not corrupting the GOP, we would not be talking about any amnesty.

      • JohnEngelman

        Excuse me. the Republican Party exists in order to advance corporate interests. What has the GOP done for the religious right? Nothing. What has the GOP done for American employees? Nothing.

        • veritas_lux_mea

          Although the Republican Party has many faults and consistently betrays the interests of its base, it’s inaccurate to say it has done nothing. It has consistently opposed abortion and gay marriage. It has also served a very important role as a check on the power of the far left in this country. If there was no Republican party and the left was allowed to run wild, I’m certain this country would have even more affirmative action, less gun rights, less freedom of speech, much higher taxes, more government programs and spending, i.e. much more wealth transfer from whites to blacks, and a host of other anti-white legislation. I bet this website would even be in danger of being shut down if the left had its way. The left is thoroughly anti-white and anti-freedom. I don’t understand at all how a racially-conscious person such as yourself can support them. That being said, you’re right in saying the Repubs main goal is to advance corporate interests. Like many, I would like to see them destroyed and replaced with something else.

          • JohnEngelman


            I support the Democrats with reservations because I am in favor of many things you are opposed to.

            Ronald Reagan had the opportunity to over turn the Roe v. Wade decision by appointing Supreme Court justices who would vote to over turn that decision. He did not, because he really did not care about abortion. As governor of California he signed a law legalizing abortion there.

            I used to be against the Roe v. Wade decision. Then I read “Freakonomics: A Rogue Economist Explores the Hidden Side of Everything,” by University of Chicago economist Steven Levitt and New York Times journalist Stephen J. Dubner.


            Freakonomics argues that the Roe v. Wade decision is the main reason for the decline in violent crime in the United States that began in 1991. The kind of females who are most likely to have abortions are most likely to give birth to boy babies who grow up to be violent street criminals.

            Now I am in favor of free abortion on demand. The cost of an abortion is much less than the cost of trying to educate those who cannot be educated, paying for their Aid to Families with Dependent Children checks, and controlling them in the criminal justice system.

            I do give the Republicans and the Reagan administration credit for one thing. Since 1980 the prison population has tripled. That, in addition to legal abortion, is the reason the over all crime rate has declined by one third since Ronald Reagan was elected.

          • Bill

            I don’t know where you get your statistics, but the overall crime rate has NOT declined over the years since Reagan was elected. Moreover, the ones having abortions are mostly WHITE women, hence our rapidly declining status as majority. Finally, in general, black women keep having babies because it increases their welfare payments, despite “reform” in welfare. The only black women having abortions, in general, are the whores made to so so by their pimps. As usual, you write and come across very intelligently, but seem to quote facts and statistics not in evidence and completely at odds with common observation. Admission to supporting Democrats, as a white person, makes you part of the problem. Not our counselor to be taken to heart.

          • JohnEngelman

            My statistics on crime come from FBI, Uniform Crime Reports. In 1980 the total crime rate in the United States was 5,950.0 per 100,000 inhabitants. In 2011 it was 3,295.0. In 1991 the rate of violent crime was 758.1 per 100,000 inhabitants. In 2011 it was 386.3.


            According to information from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, in 2004 black women had 47.2 abortions per 100 live births. White women had 16.1 abortions per live births.


          • Bill

            Both faulty reporting agencies. Thought so. FBI crime stats include hispanics as whites. Moreover, have you forgotten that the FBI is now run by Eric my people Holder and Obamanation? The same people that refuse to enter clear hate crimes against whites by blacks as a hate crime, stating ONLY whites can be perpetrators – never victims – of a hate crime. The same people who state that last year was the year more deportations occurred than ever before? At the same time they have enacted one amnesty after another through illegal executive orders, and about whom line border patrol agents are fed up catching them only to have Obama release them, and they being told to NOT catch them? You really have drunk the cool aid, have you not? CDC is a progressive political arm now most often spouting “findings” akin to progressive agendas. What you are doing is akin to believing the weather man’s prediction rather than LOOK OUT THE WINDOW. Your sunny day, if you opened the door, would appear to be rain.

          • JohnEngelman

            FBI, Uniform Crime Reports does not print a breakdown by race. What it does report is that the crime rate has declined by 1980 and the rate of violent crime has declined since 1991.

            FBI, Uniform Crime Reports is the most credible source of crime data in the United States. If you reject FBI, Uniform Crime Reports in favor of what feels true to you I am afraid you are beyond the range of a rational debate.

          • For the record, the aborticide-as-crime-reduction thesis advanced in Freakonomics is controversial, and hardly settled sociology. The reason for that is that race stats on aborticide are unreliable, because they’re all over the map.

          • veritas_lux_mea

            I’m ambivalent on abortion. On the one hand, it depresses the white birth rate, but on the other hand it depresses the non-white birth rate even more, while also reducing dysgenic fertility for everyone, like you said. I only brought up gay marriage and abortion because you said the Republicans hadn’t done anything for the religious right, which isn’t completely true. And Bill, all the evidence and studies I’ve seen suggest that blacks and browns get abortions at substantially higher rates than whites.

          • JohnEngelman


            My point stands that the GOP has done nothing for the religious right. Republican politicians, especially including Ronald Reagan, have mouthed the concerns of the religious right, but they have not advanced its agenda.

            Thirty-three years after the election of Ronald Reagan prayer and Bible reading is still illegal in public schools. Abortion is still legal. The gay rights movement has continued to make advances.

  • DudeWheresMyCountry?

    “Tighten work rules to ensure employers hire legally” Legally? They would be legalizing everyone so are they saying they expect another wave of illegals that they will have to distinguish from everyone else? If it wasn’t so tragic it would be truly laughable. Our government is the best example of, “with friends like this who needs enemies?”

  • JohnEngelman

    “The biggest concern has always been that when workers are brought in, it lowers wages for everybody,” said Eliseo Medina, secretary-treasurer of the Service Employees International Union.

    Randy Johnson, lead negotiator for the Chamber of Commerce, said Friday that the existing number of visas needs to go up. “If an employer goes through a tight process and can’t find an American worker, they ought to have access to a temporary-worker program that works,” he said.

    – Laura Meckler, Wall Street Journal, January 28, 2013

    This right here is the crux of the issue. A high rate of immigration benefits American employers – who have been doing very well since the election of Ronald Reagan in 1980 – while reducing opportunities and wages for American employees – most of whom have not been doing very well.

    Both political parties have been complicit on this. Republican politicians solicit the votes of white employees, but they obey their rich contributors.

    If American employers stopped looking for “the perfect candidate” and if they were willing to pay decent wages and train new employees and give them learning curves they would find plenty of employable candidates.

  • mobilebay

    In re-reading the above article, the incongruity of the second paragraph just hit me. It states that part of the plan is to ensure that businesses hire “legal” workers. If that clause were truly implemented, then all the illegals would be without work and we would continue to cough up even more welfare goodies, as well as having millions of new citizens without means of a livlihood and able to bring in more dependent people. Is this insane? Yes! We can deport 11 million. That will be a start on the ones here.

  • kjh64

    Immigration isn’t enforced now. Does anyone really think this “amnesty lite” will be enforced?

  • curri

    USA is finished, we have to move towards nullification and eventually secession. To get a foot in the door get your local governments to adopt PR with a low threshold. It’s the only system that the Israeli govt has used ever since 1948-so anyone opposes it is an anti-Semite. Also call illegal aliens “illegal infiltrators” like they do in Israel.

  • Jackryanvb

    Please contact lower level Congressional staff of any and all Senators in any state you have ever lived. Just say your from such and such a place. Be polite and try to engage the staff member in an intelligent conversation, don’t rant or lecture or make threats. Here’s Rand Paul’s staff names, please contact his state and national office and say you worked hard on his father campaigns, like a lot of Rand Paul’s issues, but that he now needs to show leadership and get out in front to defeat this mass amnesty of illegals.

    “Doug Stafford joins Paul’s office as chief of staff with more than a dozen years of conservative grass-roots activism experience, including Campaign for Liberty and, most recently, the National Right to Work Committee. Cayce Moffett will serve as Stafford’s assistant.

    William Henderson will be deputy chief of staff and legislative director. He worked in the office of Jim Bunning, Kentucky’s outgoing Republican senator, for the past 11 years, most recently as legislative director and counsel and staff director of Bunning’s Banking Committee subcommittee.

    Louisville lawyer Jim Milliman will be state director for Paul. He has counseled several conservative candidates and advanced conservative causes for many years, Paul’s statement said.

    Rachel McCubbin, who will be Paul’s deputy state director, worked in state operations for Bunning as a field representative in the 1st Congressional District in Western Kentucky.

    Moira Bagley will be Paul’s communications director. She most recently served in the same post for the Republican Party of Kentucky.

    Other positions Paul filled included Kentucky district and field representatives. They are: Bobette Franklin, director of constituent services; Bernie Kunkel, Northern Kentucky; Bryan Mills, Eastern Kentucky; Ryan Hogan, Bowling Green; and Dan Bayens, Lexington.

    For his Washington, D.C., office, Paul appointed Seana Cranston and Rachel Latta as legislative assistants; Luke Mroz, Breck Farking and Brett King as legislative correspondents; Carolyn Moffa as staff assistant; and Orlando Watson as press assistant.”
    Read more here: Rand Paul announces staff appointments | U.S. Senate Election |

    • One helpful hint in that stead: Compliment the staffer for his or her boss for being the only serious politician to advocate a moratorium so far, then gently explain to him or the staffer that we don’t need to trade it off for anything, that we can have our cake and eat it too on the immigration issue.