YAKIMA (Washington) HERALD-REPUBLIC

September 28, 2006

Editorial

Immigration reform shouldn't be held captive by politics

The chances for any meaningful reform of the nation's immigration laws grow increasingly dim in a session of Congress that is bogged down in election-year partisan posturing and institutional rivalry between the House and Senate.

The House approved a new photo ID plan last week, including a provision to require Americans to show proof of citizenship in order to vote, and the Senate moved to build a 700-mile fence along the Mexican border in showcase votes billed as majority-party Republican attacks on illegal immigration before the midterm elections.

Unfortunately, reform legislation must pass both houses of Congress to be enacted into law and the Republican leadership in the House and Senate have been sparring for some time over differences in approach, a standoff that has stymied broader measures to include the likes of a guest worker program and smoother path to citizenship for undocumented workers.

The Senate wants a fence and the House is holding out for better identification procedures. At least the latter has merit.

Among House members voting for the proof-of-citizenship measure was 4th District Congressman Doc Hastings, who was quick to qualify his vote in an e-mail from his congressional press office.

"Only citizens should vote," Hastings said. "The right to vote of all Americans is diminished if ineligible and illegal votes are cast."

No quarrel with that. Two of the basic requirements to be eligible to vote in this state are that a person has to be a legal resident of the state and a citizen of the United States.

But Hastings cautioned that the measure could be unfair to participants in all-mail elections because it would mandate that voters photocopy their driver's license and mail the copy in with their ballot.

"This places a heavier burden on mail voters than poll voters," Hastings said in comments on the House floor. "It creates a higher hurdle for mail voters to get their vote counted. And it raises serious questions about personal privacy and the potential for identity theft."

No quarrel with that, either. We wonder, though, if Hastings has such legitimate concerns about suspect photo copies, then why vote for the bill just to expedite it? He said he has assurances that vote-by-mail systems in Washington and Oregon would be addressed in any future talks with the Senate, and we trust he'll follow through to make sure it happens. The legislation is flawed without those safeguards and without them Hastings said he will oppose the bill on final passage, as he should.

Vote-by-mail is here to stay in the Pacific Northwest. All Oregon counties use the mail ballot and since the Legislature authorized similar voting, 34 of 39 Washington counties have opted for all-mail elections. In Hasting's 4th District, eight of 10 counties use the mail ballot, including Yakima County.

As Democrats in Congress continue to look for fodder to use against Republicans in congressional campaigns, they pulled up short in the House on the photo ID requirement in statements reported by The Associated Press:

But Democrats assailed the legislation, saying it could hurt minorities, the poor and the elderly — groups that tend to vote Democratic — who might have trouble producing a photo identification.

"This bill is tantamount to a 21st century poll tax," said Democratic Whip Steny Hoyer, D-Md. "It will disenfranchise large number of legal voters."

That tired old practice of using minorities, the poor and elderly as political foils just doesn't measure up to any standard of common sense in this instance. We're not convinced they would have any more trouble producing photo ID than anyone else — if they are legally entitled to vote.

In the meantime, true immigration reform languishes and hopes for any meaningful action this year have been pretty much dashed in this Congress. Maybe congressional elections can bring new commitments to bear in January.