Proposed immigration law in the US: Eyewash or real deal!
Sexual Assault Law: Law or Assault?
Should the law interfere in child-raising?
Ex-Immigration Boss colluded with US embassy, Wikileaks reveals
The Economic Consequences of Anti-Immigration
C.I.A., F.B.I., and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement Targeting Law-Abiding Muslims
Immigration has always been a bone of contention for the U.S. political elites. No matter what leaders try to do, their actions are closely watched and scrutinized. Building consensus has always been tough. But closed-door negotiations can do wonders. This is apparent from the new immigration proposal, which has been agreed to by some of the leading U.S. senators after three months of secret negotiations with Bush's cabinet officers. Most liberal of Democrats have joined hands with the most conservative Republicans and drafted a proposal seeking to legalize illegal immigrants. Yes, you heard it all right; the proposal seeks to act on the predicament of illegal immigrants in the country by granting them legitimate status.
Draft proposal
There are some 12 million immigrants living in America. The unlucky souls linger in the shadows for fear of being deported. Let us see what the new proposal seeks to realize.
• First and foremost, the proposal seeks to legalize the illegal immigrants by issuing a 'Z Visa,' provided they can prove that they landed in the United States before 1st January, 2007. For the visa, they need to come forward and pay fines to the tune of $5,000. Heads of households need to return to their native countries first and then apply for permanent residency.
• A guest worker program, under which 400,000 temporary workers would be granted a 'Y Visa.' This would last them for two years and then require them to go home before they could return.
• A departure from the existing family-based immigration system to one based on points. For the fist time, leaders seek to grant green cards by rating workers based on their skills and degrees rather than their family connections.
The draft proposal seeks to strengthen some provisions for implementing the proposed legislation. The number of Border Patrol Agents would be increased, border fencing would be improved, and a high-tech worker identification program would be put into practice.
Political support
President Bush, while announcing the agreement said:
The agreement reached today is one that will help enforce our borders but, equally importantly, it will treat people with respect. This is a bill where people who live here in our country will be treated without amnesty but without animosity.
To hail the proposal as a potential breakthrough, which to some extent it is, would be erroneous. There appears to be consensus amongst the political heavyweights on either side, but within parties, cracks are beginning to appear.
The presidential elections are just around the corner. Immigration has the potential to make or mar a candidate's entire political career. Aspirants for Bush's job within the Republican Party have already come out against the deal. Several leaders have castigated the plan as 'wrong approach' to the problem. Democrats, on the other hand, have taken to criticize the regulatory mechanisms within the agreement. Their leaders are referring to the economic fallouts of the proposed deal and are seemingly unhappy with the ditch of family-based visa regime.
Catch-22 or a workable solution?
The beauty of democracy lies in its ability to build not only consensus but also to give rise to conflicting opinions. This proposed legislation is one such paradoxes of democracy. While there are points, which will please some pressure groups but there are others that will certainly displease others. Let me state some of the American qualms:
• 1986 encore: President Ronald Reagan had initiated an 'amnesty' program in 1986. Floated with an idea that it would end the problem of illegal immigration, it achieved the opposite. Today, the number of illegal immigrants has trebled from what it was back then.
• Wage fears: Citizens hold immigrants responsible for driving down wages in their economy. Since immigrants usually belong to labor abound low wage economies, they get ready to work at extremely poor wages. This exacerbates the conditions for American workers.
• Discrimination: The agreement appears to be against those who respect the laws and apply for visas through proper channels. It would encourage more people to skip the regular process of naturalization and instead enter U.S. illegally. And what about the 220,000 immigrants deported over past 12 months. Would they be asked to come back?
• Cost factor: Researchers have already shown that the amounts which the state would need to spend for social security of the legalized immigrants could stretch up to trillions of dollars.
Illegal migrants, too, seem to have some misgivings about the Senate deal.
• Expensive: The hefty fines application fees, which they are being asked to pay under the new agreement seem to be beyond the wages of most of the migrant workers.
• Fear factor: Migrants would be asked to return to their home countries before they can apply for a permanent citizenship. Many fear that this may just be a red herring to deport them, as their applications to return would most likely be rejected.
• Point system: The replacement of family based system for a point system would make the reunification of the migrant families complex. What is the use of applying for a citizenship if you cannot bring your family over?
The criticisms pouring in from all quarters for the bipartisan deal are a bit premature. After all, it has not even gone for debate yet. Monday will see the opening of the debate on the bill and some amendments are surely on the cards. Nancy Pelosi, House Speaker, has already said that she won't table the bill unless 70 Republicans support it. Selling of the deal to either side is difficult. If the deal becomes a law, it would be the biggest change to immigration law in almost two decades.
You can bet your bottom dollar that Bush will try to push the deal through the Congress. This is arguably his last chance to leave a positive political legacy. It would be really interesting to see what, if any, effect the Presidential race has on the final outcome of the immigration deal.
Can the Congress afford a stalemate on this mega sensitive issue any longer?
Image: [1], [2]
