WASHINGTON (WP)
Saturday, May 14, 2005 -
Immigration legislation
introduced Thursday by Sens. John McCain (R-Ariz.) and Edward M.
Kennedy (D-Mass.) is not the first, and may not be the last, attempt
to forge a realistic, comprehensive and bipartisan national
immigration policy. In the last Congress, Sen. Chuck Hagel (R-Neb.)
and Senate Minority Leader Thomas A. Daschle (D-S.D.) also tried it,
and others have introduced bills containing similar elements. But
there are reasons to hope that this bill will move further. The
authors have struggled, with one another and with widely varying
advocates, to find compromise answers to some of the more difficult
immigration issues.
The bill requires new investment in
border security and technology. But it also allows employers to hire
foreigners under a temporary visa program if they can prove they are
unable to hire American workers for the same job. Visa-holders will be
able to change jobs (which the discredited bracero guest-worker
programs of the past did not allow); will be able to apply to stay
(eliminating a potential source of new illegal immigration), and will
be issued tamper-proof identity documents (ending the use of faked
Social Security
numbers).
Most controversially -- but
ultimately sensibly -- the bill allows illegal immigrants already here
to regularize their status, but not easily; they would have to go to
the end of the line, and that only after paying a hefty fine, staying
employed for a prescribed period and paying back taxes. The bills'
authors argue that this is not an amnesty, because it requires a
recognition of wrongdoing. They also argue that establishing the
temporary visa will prevent a new pool of illegal immigrants from
arriving because it will become politically realistic to fine
employers who continue to employ illegals. Most of all, this provision
for illegal immigrants makes sense because any legislation that does
not deal with the approximately 10 million illegals will ultimately
result in more lawbreaking.
Although the politics of
immigration are convoluted -- this is an issue that divides both
parties -- this law has some political points in its favor. While the
White House may not want to pile immigration onto its plate next to
Social Security, the McCain-Kennedy bill does resemble the policy the
president outlined more than a year ago, so it should attract his
support. Border state politicians are clamoring for change, because
smuggling and trafficking have contributed to lawlessness and a real
sense of crisis along the border. Politicians from states that never
had major immigration issues in the past, including Maryland and
Virginia, have lately struggled with everything from the question of
driver's licenses for illegals to the need for seasonal workers on the
Chesapeake Bay: They want change, too. Most of all, though, pressure
is coming from security agencies and law enforcement. The illegal
immigrants' underworld is a source of illegal documentation and
criminality, and the de facto open borders are an invitation to
terrorists.
There are legitimate
concerns about the long-term impact of a law such as this on American
workers. But the economic impact is more complicated than some
immigration opponents claim: Experience has shown that immigration
creates jobs and growth over time, and countries with low immigration,
such as Japan, aren't exactly an advertisement for their policies.
There are also legitimate concerns about social cohesion. But legal
workers are much easier to assimilate than illegals, and the proposed
bill requires would-be citizens to know English and civics. This is a
case where common sense and hard-nosed security concerns point in the
same direction, and this bill could lead the way.
