SACRAMENTO BEE

April 8, 2006

Analysis: Migrant measure stalls in Senate

The reform package's fate is uncertain after it is stymied by

partisan maneuvering and lawmakers break for two weeks.

By Michael Doyle -- Bee Washington Bureau

WASHINGTON - The collapse Friday of an ambitious immigration bill leaves behind winners, losers and the generally befuddled - and that's just in Congress.

Well beyond Washington, as well, political and practical ramifications will be rippling from the Senate's failure to close a deal that many thought was near. In what may sound like a familiar refrain, the next two weeks will be crucial in determining whether the Senate can resurrect the legislation that's currently infirm.

"I hope, during these two weeks, that cool minds will ensue and that we will be able to work on this legislation further," Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., said.

Immigrant rallies set for Monday could crank up pressure. But with a Senate calendar already crowded, and the internal and external politics only becoming more complicated, some believe the immigration bill's moment may well have passed for this Congress.

"I think it's unlikely," Senate Minority Whip Richard Durbin, D-Ill., said when asked if the immigration bill will survive. "We had a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity."

Feinstein and Durbin were two of an estimated 65 senators from both parties who appeared ready to approve a wide-ranging immigration overhaul after nine days of debate. Nonetheless, Democrats mustered only 38 votes Friday morning, failing to cut off a filibuster before starting a two-week April recess.

The filibuster vote had less to do with the bill's substance than with the broader Senate maneuvering.

The 478-page bill is now going back to the Senate Judiciary Committee, where its chairman, Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pa., promised to finish rewriting the package by May 4.

Specter doesn't yet have a commitment from Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist that the rewritten bill will then return to the Senate floor for action.

Phil Martin, a University of California, Davis, agricultural economist and longtime immigration analyst, suggested the longer senators think about it, the more problems may arise.

"I would not be optimistic," said Martin, a former member of the congressionally established Commission on Agricultural Workers.

This inaction may serve Democratic political interests. In part, it would avoid handing President Bush a high-profile bill-signing ceremony later this year. With the Senate silent, moreover, the Republican congressional voice on immigration remains a House bill that would designate 11 million to 12 million illegal immigrants as felons.

In a vote last December that's now paying political dividends, House Democrats ensured the felony provision would remain part of the House bill for now. Until the Senate acts, Specter noted, it's this punitive view that many will associate with Republicans.

"We're making them live with the consequences of their bill," said Rep. Dennis Cardoza, D-Merced.

Immigration reform advocates among civil rights groups and labor unions remained optimistic that legalization will prevail. The advocates said Friday they will continue to organize marches as well as lobby politicians during the recess. Citing polls, Frank Sharry of the National Immigration Forum and others expressed confidence that divided public opinion has swung in favor of a comprehensive approach.

This includes more enforcement and employer sanctions, combined with legalizing most undocumented workers and making sure more visas are available to meet demand for labor.

The most crucial compromise, legalizing roughly 85 percent of the illegal immigrants now in the United States, was not the cause of Friday's train wreck. So far, at least, this component remains intact.

"This is not about the solution coming apart," insisted Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina. "It's about the (Senate's) process coming apart."

Specifically, Frist and Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid clashed ceaselessly over the underlying rules governing the bill. Two issues, in particular, stymied the Senate.

Democrats demanded that the Senate Judiciary Committee's 10 Republicans and eight Democrats be named as Senate negotiators to work out differences with the House. The Democrats wanted the strongest possible hand in dealing with the House's strict border-security bill.

Frist rejected the proposal as an infringement on his leadership.

Reid said Democrats further wanted to limit the number of amendments to three, fearing an overly protracted debate. Frist insisted on offering 20 amendments out of the roughly 400 introduced. Democrats aggressively exploited Senate rules to block any amendment.

"There has been one huge problem," Frist said, "and that problem was created by the Democratic leadership."

Some Democrats feared, though, that they would be set up on politically embarrassing votes. One amendment, for instance, would have forced senators to decide whether to deny legalization benefits to felons or individuals convicted of three misdemeanors.

Key compromises may also become less palatable under renewed scrutiny.

The core compromise would grant illegal immigrants different rights depending on their length of residency. Those present more than five years could pay a $2,000 fine, meet other requirements and obtain legal residency. Those present for less than two years would have to leave. Those in between could stay, but only after first checking in through a port of entry.

Feinstein, for one, was already backpedaling from the three-tier legalization plan after saying she was "generally supportive" on Thursday. By Friday, Feinstein was cautioning that the plan could lead to a "much more complicated scenario in terms of enforcement."