SAN FRANCISCO EXAMINER May 18, 2007 Some see promise, others catastrophe in immigration overhaul plan Fight now focusing on new criteria for permanent residency
A Senate proposal to change the criteria for winning permanent U.S. residency and to allow people already living in the United States illegally to get on track for permanent residency has reshaped the national debate over immigration. The proposal takes some pages from previous bills -- creating a temporary worker program and requiring illegal immigrants to return to their country of origin to apply for residency, in addition to paying fees and a $5,000 fine. But the bill also introduces education and skills as criteria for getting on the path to U.S. citizenship and reduces the importance of applicants' family ties. Demetrios Papademetriou, president of the Migration Policy Institute in Washington, D.C., said the bill is the most promising immigration overhaul proposal in years. "The legalization program is effective," he said. "All 12 million immigrants would be able to apply by January. As for the $5,000 fine, it's significant, but it's OK as long as immigrants would (be allowed to) pay over a long period of time." Agricultural industry representatives applauded the inclusion of a five-year pilot program to create a labor pool for agriculture. "The devil is in the details, but the general agreement is positive,'' said Vito Chiesa, a peach and nut grower in Stanislaus County, who in recent years has been reducing the number of acres of peaches he grows because they are labor-intensive. Doug Mosebar, president of the California Farm Bureau, called farmworkers a vital link in the food supply. "An improved temporary worker program benefits the hard-working people who come to our country in search of jobs, and allows farmers and ranchers to be assured that the people they hire have entered the country legally to pursue those jobs," Mosebar said. But both immigrant rights activists and people who want the United States to tighten its borders saw a lot to criticize Thursday. "This is eerily reminiscent of 1986, when the government awarded amnesty to around 3 million people and pledged to enforce immigration laws afterward," said John Keeley, director of communications at the Center for Immigration Studies in Washington, D.C. "But the enforcement never came." Both Keeley and Yeh Ling-Ling, director of the Diversity Alliance for a Sustainable America, a small immigration-restriction advocacy group in Oakland, warn the plan is unenforceable and costly. "The millions of foreign-born aliens would need education, health care and social services," said Yeh. "This bill will be environmentally, fiscally and politically catastrophic to the U.S." Keeley sees no need for worry, however. "I'm sure the bill will not withstand debate in the Senate," he said. At the other end of the spectrum, immigrant rights groups also expressed alarm. Under the proposal, guest workers could renew their two-year visas twice and be required to leave for a year between each stint in the United States. And, to gain permanent residency, the heads of households who are already here illegally would have to return to their home countries first. "What, go back home?" said Maria Marroquin, director of the Day Worker Center in Mountain View. "This is totally inhuman. I don't know why they're treating immigrants like slaves in this country." Marroquin said she was speaking for herself and not the agency, which matches people with temporary work. Lillian Galedo, executive director of Filipinos for Affirmative Action in Oakland, said being a temporary worker may be as dangerous as working illegally, and she called the shift away from family ties a big problem. Alex Franco, press coordinator of the Movement for an Unconditional Amnesty, a group involved in organizing this month's immigration rally in San Francisco, called the idea of putting more value on education immoral. John Sweeney, national president of the AFL-CIO, assailed the legislation, which he said creates a separate underclass of workers. "Without (offering) a real path to legalization, the program will exclude millions of workers and thus ensure that America will have two classes of workers, only one of which can exercise workplace rights," Sweeney said. Sweeney said the guest worker program will give employers a ready pool of labor "they can exploit to drive down wages, benefits, health and safety protections, and other workplace standards."
|