I think I have decided NO on the Immigration Bill

I am one of those who has been voting "Undecided" in the poll about the new immigration bill. On the one hand, I agree very much that the current system is broken, both for legal immigrants and for illegal immigrants, and I am not against the idea of a limited amnesty to clear the slate and let us begin again anew. On the other hand, I have found it hard to break through the long list of options here and get an idea of what is really being done. I am a great believer that we are a nation of immigrants (unless your ancestors were amerindians) and that the willingness to accept anyone who is willing to work hard and embrace our culture is one of the things which has made America great.

The arguments against this bill by most Conservatives have not been convincing to me. Those who claim amnsesty can not work and point to the 1986 bill, seem too hide-bound to me. Those who claim it can't work because we have too many imigrants already, seem to have a limited vision. And those who claim we have too few whites in the country already seem rascist to me. The arguments against the bill by Liberals are even less convincing. Those who claim it is splitting up families are ignoring the reality of immigration - that it is a grand gamble and that by breaking the law by entering a land outside its system you are placing yourself outside its protections. And those who claim that it is punishing unskilled workers don't seem to understand that we are not compelled to take anyone who wants to come. It is reasonable to favor those will skills we need.

The arguments for the bill have likewise been unconvincing. Most say simply "We need to do something, and this is the only bill that could possibly pass." They point to a provision for everyone in the bill. What is telling to me is that few to none are pointing anything and saying "This will work." They are just saying "It is the best we can do." I am a great believer in compromise as an engine of democracy, but not compromise for its own sake.

Peggy Noonan has finally made a compelling argument to me. And it is tellingly simple. The bill is too complex to work, and too complicated to enforce. And she is right. I have a friend whose in-laws are legal immigrants, here for political assylum. They have been caught up in the immigration system for years, and every few years have to live in fear for their lives as a judge combs through the REAMS of immigration law to figure out if they are still allowed to stay. If they go back, they die. Simple as that. But not so simple for a judge, who has to decide if their deaths are enough to justify staying here. It should be simple.

There, a decision is made. I can't vote on this myself, but I hope my representatives are listening.

What is all this about an Immigration Bill?

The poll has been up since yesterday, so it is only fair that we actually post a story about this. The new "bipartisan immigration bill" has finally made its way out of negotiations, and it appears both sides are equally unhappy with it. Sometimes that is the sign of a good compromise. Sometimes that is the sign of a DOA bill. We shall see. What has been hard to find is a good summary of the thing without all of the commentary that is already being flung at it with words like "Amnesty" or "Discrimination" or "Criminalization". The White House has their own summary from their daily press briefings, which you are welcome to read. However, it was long, pedantic, and overly focussed assuming you already know a lot about immigration reform. This summary is a lot more clear to me.

Illegal aliens who "come out of the shadows" by applying for a Z visa would have to pass a background check, remain employed, and avoid criminal behavior, the White House said in a lengthy summary of the legislation released on Thursday.

A Z visa will allow people who sneaked into the country illegally before Jan. 1, 2007, to "live, work and travel freely." But to get a Z visa, illegal aliens will be required to pay a $1,000 fine, "meet accelerated English and civics requirements," stay employed, and renew their visa every four years...

The bill says future immigrants will be selected based on the "skills and attributes" they bring to the United States," including their educational background, their ability to speak English, their job skills, and family ties to the United States.

The bill also ends "chain migration," in which a majority of green cards go to relatives of U.S. citizens....

"To relieve pressure on the border and provide a lawful way to meet the needs of our economy, the proposal creates a temporary worker program to fill jobs Americans are not doing," the White House said.

"Guest workers" would be limited to three two-year terms, and they'd have to spend at least a year outside the United States between each term.

While I applaud Congress and the White House for giving this a try, I have a feeling the bil is DOA at this point in the election cycle. Quite clearly, this Congress is more interested in talking about what the White House does wrong than in making any progress before the 2008 elections. However, this bill may go down in history as the start of the grand debate among the American people - raising the visibility of the issue and forcing the NEXT Congress and President to act.