House Immigration Bill Is Said to Offer 3 Paths

bigdreamer2010 · 04-02-2013, 08:43 PM

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/03/us...hape.html?_r=0

Quote:

WASHINGTON — In the shadow of a bipartisan Senate group preparing to roll out broad immigration legislation next week, shortly after Congress returns from its holiday break, a bipartisan group of eight House members is readying its own bill.

In contrast to the Senate plan — which would provide one clear, if difficult, path to citizenship for the 11 million illegal immigrants already in the country — the House legislation will most likely offer three distinct paths to legal status.

Young immigrants in the country without legal papers, who often call themselves “Dreamers,” and low-skilled agricultural workers would qualify for an expedited road to legal status, people familiar with the negotiations said. The Dreamers should not be punished for being brought illegally to the country by their parents, House aides said, and the members agreed that the agricultural workers perform crucial work for the economy.

In an opinion article in The Los Angeles Times on Sunday, Representative Raúl R. Labrador, a Republican member of the group from Idaho, more explicitly laid out the path for Dreamers: “Those who entered the U.S. as children, through no fault of their own, will be allowed to have a pathway to citizenship.”

The second group to receive a path to legal permanent residence would be immigrants who have either a family or an employment relationship that would allow them to apply for legal status, except that they have already entered the country illegally. Currently, most of those immigrants would have to return to their home country for either 3 or 10 years before they would be eligible to reapply.

The House bill would most likely relax or waive those barriers. Immigrants would then have to return to their home country to apply for legal status, aides said, but could do so only after completing a series of hurdles including paying fines and back taxes and learning English, aides said.

The remaining illegal immigrants could apply for “provisional legal status” if they came forward and admitted breaking the law, paid fines and back taxes, and learned English, much as they could under the Senate plan, aides said. This status would allow them to live, work and travel in the country legally, and they could then apply through regular channels for a green card after 10 years and citizenship 5 years after that.

This comprise seems to mollify both sides: Republicans could reassure their base that illegal immigrants would not receive a special path to citizenship, while Democrats are satisfied because the plan would allow for the option of citizenship down the road.

A Democrat in the House group, Representative Luis V. Gutierrez of Illinois, wrote last month in The Orange County Register: “It seems that the Republican bottom line when it comes to how to legalize undocumented immigrants in the U.S. is that we do not create a ‘new special path to citizenship’ for only undocumented immigrants outside the paths we make available to all immigrants.”

“On the Democratic side,” he added, “we want to make sure we do not preclude anyone from citizenship who would be legalized under immigration reform.”

The House group is still debating what benefits, if any, immigrants would receive during their provisional legal status, though a Republican with knowledge of the talks said the group had agreed that no government-subsidized benefits would be included. The group is also discussing what border security standards would need to be met before any path to legal permanent residence could begin.

Another sticking point is a guest worker program. Though the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the A.F.L.-C.I.O., the nation’s largest federation of unions, have reached an agreement that the Senate group is adopting, Republicans in the House group remain wary of the deal.

Aides to the House group have been meeting during the recess, and the members hope to release their bill before the senators officially announce theirs. Though some senators have promised to unveil their bill next week, staff members on the House side remained skeptical.

“If they do, I will be shocked,” one said. “If they do, I will buy them all dinner.”

Severity · 04-02-2013, 08:50 PM

For some reason the third option seems better than the second.

swordfish · 04-02-2013, 09:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Severity

For some reason the third option seems better than the second.

Nop.
Second option apply directly for a green card and citizenship in 5 years, third option is for a provisional status and citizenship could be 15 years apart.

AlexanderMQ · 04-02-2013, 09:04 PM

This is the gang of 8 bill preview or is this another bill?

swordfish · 04-02-2013, 09:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AlexanderMQ

This is the gang of 8 bill preview or is this another bill?

Quote:

the House legislation will most likely offer three distinct paths to legal status.

Did you read the article?

IamAman · 04-02-2013, 09:12 PM

Shit, again, I don't qualify for either if they have an age limit on the Dreamers.

1. If there is an age limit, I can't say I'm a dreamer - sure, been here since 10, 27 years and counting, but can't get any relief.

2. I can't say I'm a farm worker because except for picking Apples at an Orchard as a child for fun, or tomatoes in a backyard garden, I'm not a farmer.

3. I can't admit to being here illegally because I would be perjuring myself because I'd be admitting to something that was not my fault to begin with.

If this thing passes, I will be paying my lawyer enough for him to buy a new car for his mistress.

VeryNicePerson1 · 04-02-2013, 09:15 PM

Wow, the House gives a variety of 3 choices...and they seem better than I thought. I was worried that it would be only 1 way and it would be not as good as the Senate's (thinking like 20 years+ for GC/USC and bigger fines.

But, the Dreamers (and now Ag Job workers) pathway is still vague with only a description of "will not be punished and will have their own special expedited way". I guess we have to wait until April 8th to start seeing the full details.

VeryNicePerson1 · 09:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by IamAman

1. If there is an age limit, I can't say I'm a dreamer - sure, been here since 10, 27 years and counting, but can't get any relief.

I am also hoping for no age limit as well, and the way this article brings up the Dreamer relief portion...it has a "broad sweeping reform" feel to it...as in it seems to describe it in a way to giving all young arrivals through no fault of their own the expedited relief.

EDIT: Nevermind, I re-read that portion again and it can also be interpreted as referring to currently being a young immigrant (Whatever age range they perceive as young...). Nevertheless, hoping for the best for everyone.

Quote:

Originally Posted by IamAman

2. I can't say I'm a farm worker because except for picking Apples at an Orchard as a child for fun, or tomatoes in a backyard garden, I'm not a farmer.

Same.

Quote:

Originally Posted by IamAman

3. I can't admit to being here illegally because I would be perjuring myself because I'd be admitting to something that was not my fault to begin with.

Well this option could be a last resort, because if said person doesn't fall under Dreamer relief anymore (because of say an age limit) then they would go with this process and consider themselves part of the older undocumented crowd anyway, and have to deal with it because thats the only category CIR gives them access to.

Also, thinking about it. This 3rd option could be better for certain Dreamers/Young Arrivals. Imagine if part of the Dreamers expedited process is a mandatory 2-4 years of college or military service (ala The Dream Act). If a Young Arrival truly doesn't want anything to do with college or military they can settle for provisional status for the 10 years. I'm pretty sure they would be able to get well paying jobs anyway, the same as other High School graduates etc.

RJD · 04-02-2013, 09:27 PM

good to see dreamers will receive a special treatment, I'm hoping they don't mean currently under 18 kids will only benefit from the 1st option..politicians can be cheeky guys like that

VeryNicePerson1 · 04-02-2013, 09:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RJD

good to see dreamers will receive a special treatment, I'm hoping they don't mean currently under 18 kids will only benefit from the 1st option..politicians can be cheeky guys like that

I would be happy for all those who benefit under it even if it is an age cap of 18...that being said...an age cap of 18 would be criminal!!!...lol...

S	M	T	W	T	F	S
			1	2	3	4
5	6	7	8	9	10	11
12	13	14	15	16	17	18
19	20	21	22	23	24	25
26	27	28	29	30	31

They need you!

Forum links

Resources

Join our list

National calendar of events

July

House Immigration Bill Is Said to Offer 3 Paths