Three New Americans

First Called to Duty, Then Citizenship

Immigrants Fought for the United States Before It Was Truly Their Country

By Brigid Schulte
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, May 22, 2007; Page A01

In a crowd of nearly 100 eager faces of newly sworn-in citizens on the grounds of Mount Vernon yesterday, three men in the front row stood out. Their black shoes shone to glossy perfection. Their backs were ramrod straight. One wore the crisp white uniform of the Navy. Another, the drab khaki of the Marines and a third, the dress uniform of the Army. Two had campaign ribbons from serving in Iraq or Afghanistan.

Until yesterday, the sailor, the Marine and the soldier were among more than 40,000 "green card" service members -- non-citizens serving in the U.S. military. After swearing to defend the Constitution, Petty Officer Reginald Cherubin, 30, Marine Sgt. Brian Joseph, 38, and Army Sgt. Jeremy Tattrie, 24, joined another group: the more than 26,000 service members who have become U.S. citizens since the Iraq war began and the Bush administration expedited the citizenship process for military members. Seventy-five service members have received their citizenship posthumously since then.

Navy Petty Officer Reginald Cherubin, left, from Haiti, Marine Sgt. Brian Joseph, from St. Vincent, and Army Sgt. Jeremy Tattrie of Canada had been among the more than 40,000 non-citizens in the U.S. military until yesterday, when they became U.S. citizens in a ceremony at Mount Vernon. (By Melina Mara -- The Washington Post)

It was the sight of Iraqis pulling down Saddam Hussein's statue in 2003 that led Tattrie, a Canadian by birth who was then in college in Florida, to join the military.

"I felt the call to duty," he said, clutching one of the small American flags that immigration officials had just passed out. "I just felt the urge to serve my country." Even though when he enlisted, the United States wasn't, technically, it.

The three were sworn in as the military and the country are engaged in a vigorous, divisive debate about what place immigrants should have in the armed forces and society at large.

The ceremony at George Washington's home took place as lawmakers on the other side of the Potomac River began debating a controversial immigration bill that would, among other provisions, grant legal status to virtually all undocumented workers, create a temporary worker program and tighten border controls.

The bill also calls for allowing the military to be a path to citizenship for a limited number of undocumented immigrants -- those who were brought to the United States when they were younger than 16 and have been living here for at least five years.

The ceremony also came as some military experts want to open the armed forces to undocumented immigrants and foreign recruits to fill the ranks as the Army and Marines plan troop increases.

Critics fear a flood of recruits lured solely by the promise of legal status. "A very large number of non-citizens could change the purpose of the military from the defense of the country to a job and a way to get a foot in the door of the United States," said Mark Krikorian, executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies, which advocates restrictions on immigration. "It becomes a kind of mercenary thing."

Others argue that a liberalized policy could improve the armed forces. Margaret Stock, an immigration lawyer, Army officer and law professor at West Point, noted that during wartime, military brass can already sign up undocumented immigrants, some of whom have received citizenship.

"I think that it's great for the military to allow people to enlist who are qualified to be in the military," Stock said. "Having papers doesn't tell me whether someone's qualified or not."

Official military policy is to accept legal permanent residents with green cards, although Congress in January 2006 gave military leaders wartime powers to enlist anyone they deem "vital to the national interest."

At Mount Vernon yesterday, the three military men remained stoic as they were swarmed by photographers and TV cameras and held out by federal officials as the best that immigration has to offer.

"There's too much immigrant-bashing going on," said Dan Kane, a spokesman for the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Service. Featuring the three military personnel "sends a powerful message that immigrants make a meaningful contribution to the United States."

Legal permanent residents serving in the military were given the right to apply for citizenship immediately by a wartime executive order signed by President Bush in 2002. In peacetime, permanent residents in the military are required to wait three years.

Nonetheless, there has not been a rush to obtain citizenship, according to Emilio Gonza***, USCIS director. "After the executive order, we have not seen hordes of people joining the military," he said. "These people don't join the military just to become citizens. These people joined the military because they wanted to serve."

Cherubin, who immigrated in May 1999, joined the Navy a few months later and is based at Anacostia Naval Station, was the first to be called to receive his citizenship papers yesterday.

After high school in Haiti, there was nothing for him. He just waited for the day when his father, already in the United States, would call and say his visa had come through.

"When you live in a country like Haiti, you don't think about your future," Cherubin said. "You live day by day. The biggest dream you could possibly have is coming to the United States."

Cherubin joined the military so he could go to college. It wasn't until the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, that he found a sense of purpose to his life in the Navy. An aviation planner, he was deployed to an aircraft carrier and readied F-18 hornets for bombing runs over Afghanistan.

"To be part of that, to be among the first people over there fighting back, it was a beautiful feeling," he said.

During the ceremony, Glenda Joseph slipped to the front row to snap a photo of her husband. She'd been after him to get his citizenship for the 14 years they'd been married. He'd always wanted to but procrastinated. Then he was deployed for 10 months, running convoys throughout Iraq, and there was no time.

Based in Quantico, Joseph is an aviation assignments monitor and is charged with moving 10,000 Marines around the globe. He moved from St. Vincent to Brooklyn, N.Y., with his family when he was 6. He's been in the Marines for 16 years, has earned two bachelor's degrees and is working on a master's degree.

It was time to make it official.

"At least," he said, "now I'll be able to vote."

Fact Sheet: Immigration Fact Check: Responding to Key Myths

White House News
In Focus: Immigration

1. MYTH: Ending the current green card backlog would result in 900,000 new residents per year on top of current numbers.

FACT: The current proposal aims to end the green card backlog in eight years. However, this does not mean that 3.5 to 4 million people over the current number will be admitted into the country. The backlog will be cleared in two ways:
240,000 green cards are being shifted from other priorities within the existing green card pool. This is important – it does not represent an increase in the number of green cards given, it is simply a reallocation of green cards that are authorized for issuance within the current system.
Separately, the number of green cards will be temporarily increased by 200,000 for each of the eight years after the enactment of the bill. This is an increase, but it does not mean 200,000 applicants plus their spouses and children. It is 200,000 new people total.
FACT: About 15 percent of family-based green card recipients are already residing in the U.S. on temporary visas or illegally. Thus, only about 170,000 additional individuals per year are entering the country.
2. MYTH: The border security and employer enforcement triggers can be waived. It has been asserted that the bill contains the following language: "b) Subsection (a) of this section shall apply only if the President certifies within 180 days of enactment that the border security and other measures described in such subsection can be completed within 18 months of enactment, subject to the necessary appropriations."

FACT: This is false. This language is not in the bill currently, but was in an earlier draft. Instead, the bill contains a sense of Congress that all triggers can be met in 18 months. All triggers must be met before the guest worker program or the Z visa program could begin.
3. MYTH: Z visa applicants (current undocumented) do not have to pay fines.

FACT: Z visa applicants will have to pay a $1,000 fine for heads of households and an additional $500 fine for each dependent (spouses and children). There will also be a processing fee of up to $1,500 and a $500 state impact assistance fee. The $1,000 is not the cost of the visa, but rather a fine for having broken the law. The processing fee will take care of the costs of the visa. The fines and fees are not the only hurdle – applicants must be employed, pass background checks, pay processing fees, and agree to meet accelerated English and civics requirements to get their Z visas.
FACT: A Z visa holder wishing to remain in the country under their Z visa indefinitely would still have to renew their visa every four years. Renewing the Z visa means more processing fees (again, up to $1,500 each time). The financial liability for Z visa holders starts to add up very quickly if holders choose to remain in this status instead of pursuing Legal Permanent Resident (LPR) status.
4. MYTH: DHS only has only one day to complete background checks.

FACT: Obtaining Legal Permanent Resident (LPR) status is a multi-step process that includes thorough background checks with no guarantees. It can be broken down into three parts: probationary period, Z status, and LPR.
1. Probationary Period. The undocumented worker comes out of the shadows to acknowledge they have broken the law. In order to obtain probationary status, they must show they are employed and pass a preliminary background check. There is a provision in the bill that says DHS has one day to find a “disqualifying factor,” but that is not the end of the process. That is a very short term way of ensuring that if someone comes out of the shadows and admits their illegality, they will not be deported while the process is ongoing and can continue working while the full background check is completed. At any time if something pops up, the applicant becomes deportable, and will never have a chance at Z status and certainly not LPR status.

2. Z Status. If they have passed the hurdles above, the undocumented worker is considered for Z status. At this stage they must pay their $1,000 fine ($1,000 is just for a head of household – there is an additional fine of $500 for each dependent) and processing fees; are subject to updated background checks to make sure they have not committed crimes while in probationary status; agree to meet English and civics standards as a condition of renewal; and show employment. There is no one day “Treatment of applications” in this process. One must complete or agree to all of the above before they are able to achieve Z status.

3. LPR Status. Here, there is another $4,000 fine and more processing fees. More background checks are also conducted in order to make sure that the applicant has kept his or her record clean. The applicant will have had to have stayed employed and met the English and civics requirements. They will have to make an application from their home country, go to the back of the line, and demonstrate merit under the new green card points system. Then, and only then, will the undocumented worker obtain a green card.

5. MYTH: A Rasmussen poll shows Americans support an enforcement-only approach.

FACT: The plan proposed in Rasmussen’s poll does not include many of the components included in the actual plan. Rasmussen asked respondents: “A different proposal has been made that also includes a fence along the Mexican border, more border patrol agents, strict penalties on anyone who hires illegal aliens. This proposal, however, would also offer illegal aliens a path to citizenship if they pay back taxes and other fines. Would you favor or oppose this proposal?”
FACT: The process is much more onerous than the text of Rasmussen's question suggests. In order to have an opportunity for citizenship, undocumented workers will have to pay a total of $5,000 in fines, pass multiple background checks, complete accelerated English and civics requirements, go back home to apply in their home country, demonstrate merit in the new merit-based green card system, AND go to the back of the line behind those who applied lawfully.
FACT: A recent bi-partisan poll conducted by The Tarrance Group (R) and Lake Research (D) that did include more components of the plan found 75 percent of American voters said they would favor a plan that: provides resources to greatly increase border security; imposes much tougher penalties on employers who hire illegal workers; allows additional foreign workers to come to the U.S. to work for a temporary period; creates a system in which illegal immigrants could come forward and register, pay a fine, and receive a temporary work permit; and provides these temporary workers with a multi-year path to earned citizenship, if they get to the end of the line and meet certain requirements like living crime free, learning English, and paying taxes. Only 17 percent opposed this plan.
6. MYTH: The bill will impose a huge new tax on businesses that follow the law.

FACT: Companies are held liable if their contractors and subcontractors hire undocumented workers. However, the Department of Homeland Security will create systems to help ensure these burdens can be met by employers who want to follow the law through the Employment Eligibility Verification System (EEVS) and other procedures.
FACT: This bill seeks to help employers verify the status of workers. Enforcement of the paperwork fines will be targeted against those employers trying to avoid the law and hire illegal workers. The law includes a provision for the Secretary of Homeland Security to send a pre-penalty notice where he believes there may be a violation, and the employer can avoid a penalty by showing mitigating circumstances (e.g., good faith compliance).
FACT: This bill does not seek to put the sole responsibility for legal hiring practices on the government OR the private sector. The bill is designed to have participation from the business community so the government can easily determine which employers are knowingly violating the law.
7. MYTH: The bill does not crack down on employers who violate the law.

FACT: In the bill, fines for hiring an illegal worker are $5,000 maximum per illegal worker for the first offense, $10,000 maximum per illegal worker for the second, and $25,000 maximum per illegal worker for the third.

Fact Sheet: Border Security and Immigration Reform Agreement Overcomes 1986 Mistakes Bipartisan Proposal Requires Tough Border Security And Worksite Enforcement Measures

White House News
In Focus: Immigration

The Bipartisan Border Security And Immigration Reform Agreement Addresses And Overcomes Failures Of The 1986 Immigration Reform And Control Act. The 1986 Act failed because it gave a complete pardon (amnesty) to 3 million illegal immigrants as part of an automatic path to citizenship, did not provide the resources necessary to secure the borders adequately, relied on an employer verification system with only limited capability to detect ID fraud, provided inadequate penalties for employers who knowingly hire illegal immigrants, and made no provisions to meet future labor needs of U.S. employers in a growing economy.

In Contrast, The Bipartisan Border Security And Immigration Reform Agreement:

1. Does not offer amnesty to illegal immigrants already here; 2. Contains much tougher border security triggers that must be in place and operational before the Z visa and temporary worker programs take effect; 3. Requires that a sophisticated Employment Eligibility Verification System (EEVS) capable of rooting out fraud be ready to process all new hires before the Z visa and temporary worker programs take effect; 4. Substantially increases penalties on employers for knowingly hiring illegal immigrants; and 5. Creates a temporary worker program to relieve pressure on the border and provide a lawful way to meet our economic needs.

1. No Amnesty

Illegal Immigrants Already Here Must Acknowledge That They Broke The Law And Pay A Fine. In order to obtain a Z visa granting temporary legal status, workers in the country before January 1, 2007, must acknowledge that they broke the law, pay a $1,000 fine, pass criminal background checks, remain employed, and maintain a clean record.


Z Visa Workers Must Pay An Additional Fine, Learn English, And Meet Other Requirements To Apply For A Green Card, And Cannot Receive One Until Years In The Future. Z visa workers must apply at the back of the line and wait until the current backlog is cleared, pay an additional $4,000 fine, complete accelerated English requirements, maintain employment, leave the U.S. and file their application in their home country, and demonstrate merit based on the skills and attributes they will bring to the United States.


The 1986 Act Created An Automatic Path To Citizenship That Provided Green Cards After Just 18 Months, But Satisfying The Requirements In This Proposal Will Take Most Green Card Applicants More Than A Decade.
2. Strengthening Border Security

Tough Border Security Benchmarks Must Be Met Before The Z Visa And Temporary Worker Programs Go Into Effect. These triggers include constructing 370 miles of fencing and 200 miles of vehicle barriers at the border and finishing doubling the size of the Border Patrol since the President took office - a goal previously set by the President and already well on its way to achievement.


The Department Of Homeland Security Is On Track To Build 150 Miles Of Fence By The End Of September 2007 And To Build 370 Miles By The End Of Calendar Year 2008. Currently, about 86 miles of fence have been built along the border, with 64 additional miles planned by the end of September 2007.


We Have Expanded The Border Patrol From About 9,000 Agents In 2001 To More Than 13,000 Agents Today, And By The End Of 2008, We Will Have More Than 18,000 Agents On The Job.
With Enhanced Enforcement, We Have Already Seen A Tremendous Change At The Border. The number of people apprehended for illegally crossing our Southern border is down by nearly 27 percent in 2007 from this point in 2006.

The 1986 Act Provided Only About 4,000 Agents For The Border Patrol. By contrast, we will have more than four times that number of Border Patrol agents in place before the Z visa and temporary worker programs go into effect. In addition, improvements in infrastructure and technology at the border make border enforcement more achievable now than it was 20 years ago. For example, today, we have in place:

5,290 sensors on the southern border
687 night time cameras on the southern border

449 day time cameras on the southern border

1 Unmanned Aerial System (UAS) in Southern AZ
3. Putting A Workable Employer Verification System In Place

An Employment Eligibility Verification System (EEVS) Must Be Ready To Process New Hires Before The Z Visa And Temporary Worker Programs Go Into Effect. Employers will be required to verify the work eligibility of all employees using the EEVS, and all workers will be required to present stronger and more readily verifiable identification documents.

The EEVS Will Require Presentation Of A Limited Range Of Highly Secure Government IDs, Which Will Be Checked Electronically Against Federal And State Databases. When a worker presents an identification document to obtain employment, the EEVS will perform an electronic check against Federal and State databases. The Social Security Administration will be asked to confirm whether the name and Social Security number presented by the worker are a "match" in its files. Furthermore, the EEVS will use links to the U.S. State Department and individual State Departments of Motor Vehicles to provide employers with the digital photograph associated in government databases with the ID presented. Once employers have direct access to the original photograph associated with an ID, it will be much harder for illegal immigrants to fool them with fake documents.

The 1986 Act Relied On A Verification System That Did Not Have The Capacity To Detect ID Fraud. More than two dozen documents are acceptable under the 1986 system, and employers are not legally required to verify the documents' authenticity.
4. Increasing Penalties For Employers Who Knowingly Hire Illegal Immigrants

Employers Who Hire Illegal Workers Will Face Stiff New Criminal And Civil Penalties. The maximum civil fine for hiring illegal workers will rise from the 1986 level of $2,000 to $5,000 for first offenders and from the 1986 level of $10,000 to $25,000 for three-time offenders. The maximum criminal penalty for a pattern or practice of hiring illegal workers will increase 25-fold, from $3,000 per alien to $75,000 per alien.

5. Creating A Temporary Worker Program

By Creating A Lawful And Orderly Channel For Foreign Workers To Come To America On A Temporary Basis, The Temporary Worker Program (TWP) Will Help Reduce The Number Of People Trying To Sneak Across The Border. The TWP will help meet our economic needs by allowing workers to enter the country legally on a temporary basis to fill jobs that Americans are not doing.

TWP Workers Can Come To The U.S. Only On A Temporary Basis. To ensure that "temporary" means "temporary," workers are limited to three two-year terms, with at least one year spent outside the United States between each term.

The TWP Will Allow U.S. Law Enforcement To Focus More Of Its Resources On Apprehending Violent Criminals And Terrorists Who Pose A Threat To Our Security

The 1986 Act Failed To Address Our Economy's Need For Immigrant Labor. Further illegal immigration was encouraged by this lack of a legal avenue to meet the labor needs of U.S. employers.

Immigration anxiety is cultural

POSTED: 1:46 p.m. EDT, May 21, 2007
By Ruben Navarrette Jr.
Special to CNN

SAN DIEGO, California (CNN) -- On Thursday, senators announced a rather remarkable bipartisan compromise on immigration reform that combines border enforcement, a guest worker program, a path to legalization for illegal immigrants, tougher employer sanctions, and an education/skills-based point system for future immigrants.

The same day, the Census Bureau reported what many Americans already know: The United States is becoming a Hispanic nation. Hispanics are the nation's largest minority with 44.3 million people and they account for almost half the growth in the U.S. population. Meanwhile, since 2000, the white school-age population dropped 4 percent, and the white population shrank in sixteen states.

The stories are connected. Anti-illegal immigration crusaders claim their worries are entirely practical -- tied to border security or the cost of entitlements or the fact that illegal immigrants supposedly depress wages for the low skilled.

(That reminds me. Memo to the low skilled: "Grow up. Stop complaining. And go get more skills. Then you won't have to suffer the humiliation of being driven out of the market by folks with a sixth-grade education who are here illegally and don't even speak English.")

But I digress ...

As someone who has written about immigration for more than 15 years, and heard from hundreds of thousands of readers along the way, I can tell you that most of the anxiety over illegal immigration is cultural. People worry about changing demographics, the encroachment of Spanish, the fear that the country is becoming Hispanic-ized, etc. One sociologist called it "cultural displacement" -- the fear that your children will grow up in a world different than the one you grew up in, with fewer advantages, where they will have to work harder for what they accomplish.

One of the more fearful members of Congress is Rep. Brian Bilbray, R-California. Last year, while campaigning, he told a largely white audience near San Diego that if we don't end illegal immigration, one day our children would live in a world where instead of electing to take Spanish in high school, they'll have to take Spanish. Bilbray now heads the House Immigration Reform Caucus. That's where members of Congress come together at regular meetings and complain about illegal immigration while counting the campaign contributions they collect from businesses back home, many of which undoubtedly profit from hiring illegal immigrants.

Last week, Bilbray popped up on one newscast after another and milked his 15 minutes. He opposes the Senate plan, which he calls -- wait for it -- amnesty. But, like most of the critics, he offers no alternate piece of legislation to solve the problem over which he claims to be worried sick.

The Senate compromise isn't perfect. But it's bold and thoughtful, and it's a start. It also did something that's very significant -- dividing traditional allies and uniting traditional adversaries.

If the deal crumbles, we'll return to the status quo. Illegal immigrants will still come to the United States do jobs that Americans won't do. And employers will still hire them. Nothing will change. No one will be punished or held accountable. There's a word for that. I know -- wait for it: amnesty.

Ruben Navarrette Jr. is a member of the editorial board of The San Diego Union-Tribune and a nationally syndicated columnist. You can read his column here.

Ailing Texas Politician Makes His Bed at State Capitol to Block Anti-Illegal Immigrant Voting Bill

Tuesday, May 22, 2007

AUSTIN, Texas — Against his doctor's advice, a stooped and feeble Sen. Mario Gallegos arrives at the Texas legislature each day, just to make sure lawmakers do not take up a bill requiring voters to show identification proving they are not illegal immigrants.

And when the rigors of the job start to wear on the Democratic lawmaker, whose body is trying to reject a liver transplanted four months ago, he retires to a hospital-style bed — donated by a Republican colleague — in a room next to the Senate chamber.

From there, he can be summoned at a moment's notice should his vote be needed to keep the bill from reaching the floor.

In a life-and-death drama playing out in the legislature, Gallegos is putting his health at risk to block a measure he and others say could prevent many minorities and the elderly from taking part in elections in Texas.

"If there was enough votes to block, I promise I wouldn't be here," he said from his bed, his slumped shoulders and tired, jaundiced eyes making him look much older than his 56 years. The once-burly lawmaker is now thin and his skin hangs loose.

The Republicans pushing the voter ID bill say illegal immigrants are voting in Texas elections and must be stopped. But Democrats say thousands of legal residents will lose the right to vote because they lack proper identification. Opponents of the measure — including Gallegos, a Mexican-American — say minorities, the elderly and the poor are less likely than others to have driver's licenses or other documents.

In the Texas Senate, bills cannot move forward unless 21 of the 31 senators vote to bring them up for debate. The Democrats hold 11 seats, just enough to block a bill if they stick together.

Gallegos, a recovering alcoholic whose liver was ruined by drinking, received the transplant two weeks into the five-month legislative session that ends on Monday. He returned to the Capitol 13 weeks later just to stop the voter ID bill.

Now he is dealing with symptoms of organ rejection and the exhaustion of the job.

He is taking medication to keep the organ rejection under control. But his doctors say he should be resting and should be within 100 miles of the hospital where he received the transplant in case something goes wrong. The state capitol in Austin is about 160 miles from his hospital in Houston.

Most of Gallegos' Houston-area constituents are black or Hispanic, and about a quarter of them live in poverty. About one in five speak little or no English.

So the retired firefighter starts his mornings with 10 pills and a visit to the legislature's nurse to check his blood glucose levels. He visits the nurse for similar blood tests twice more throughout the day, and periodically gives himself shots of insulin.

Then it is another seven pills before crashing into bed at his Austin apartment at about 8 p.m.

When the Senate is in session, he sometimes retires to his bed in the sergeant-at-arms' office, where it is quiet enough to get some rest.

"I just want to take care of him," said Republican Sen. Robert Deuell, who provided the bed and is also a family physician. "He's going to come one way or another, so I just figured I'd make it easy for him."

It is a far cry from the past eight sessions Gallegos spent in Austin, before his heavy drinking led to an intervention by his Senate colleagues. He quit drinking and went into rehab last spring.

Under what is known as the Luna Precedent, named for a lawmaker who was hospitalized in the 1990s, legislators can ask for 24-hour notice that a bill is about to come up. Gallegos was given such notice early this month. But lawmakers can invoke the Luna Precedent only once during a session.

Gallegos' Republican colleagues agreed not to bring up the bill last Friday when he was in Houston for a biopsy that determined his liver was not infected. That act of courtesy followed days of rancor over Republican Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst's unsuccessful effort to push the bill through when another Democrat came down with the stomach flu.

Deuell said waiting was "just the decent thing to do."

"I hope he lives, but if for some reason he wouldn't, I couldn't in good conscience have him die thinking he failed," he said.

I suggest that you go to Mexico and do research on the subject.

quote:

Originally posted by CollegeStudent:
Hey all. I am a senior college student. I am writing my thesis on the exploitation that illegal mexican workers experience because of their lack of rights. I would appreciate if anyone knows of any books or other sources that address this topic. I have a lot of stuff, but I am looking for a primary source, like a personal account, to help focus my paper. Thank you.

Also, I am going to try to anonymously interview some illegal workers for their stories. I feel like this may be a diffucult thing to do, so I would appreciate any help in that area. I live in the Charlotte are if that helps at all.

Thanks again.

Guest worker program survives

A bid by Democrats to throw out a key part of the Senate immigration overhaul is defeated. More fights are brewing.
By Nicole Gaouette, Times Staff Writer
May 23, 2007

Immigration Reform Bill

WASHINGTON — A controversial bill that would overhaul the nation's immigration system survived its first major test Tuesday, when the Senate overwhelmingly defeated a bid by two Democratic senators to eliminate a key component: a program to allow foreign workers into the country temporarily.

The amendment — the first in the debate and the first of a number of attacks expected from liberal lawmakers — sparked a contentious exchange over whether the temporary worker program would depress the wages of Americans.

Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.), who cosponsored the amendment with Sen. Byron L. Dorgan (D-N.D.), criticized the temporary worker program as "a way to keep our workers down, keep them weak and, in my view, destroy the middle class."

Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass.), a principal author of the bill, countered that a temporary worker program would protect wages for American workers.

"We are trying to take illegality out of the equation," he said.

The debate laid bare disagreements among Democrats on immigration. Although many conservative Republican senators oppose the bill, most Democrats on the left are trying to strike a difficult balance. They hope to change the bill but think it could offer the best chance in years to address illegal immigration.

The intensity of the debate signaled steep challenges for the bipartisan group of senators who wrote the bill and were working to protect its core features, which they think are essential to draw enough votes to pass.

The vote was delayed by about 3 1/2 hours because Senate leaders wanted to be sure they had enough support. For several hours, they could only determine that it would be "very close," a senior Democratic aide said.

In the end, the amendment was defeated, 64 to 31. Boxer and 28 other Democrats voted for it. Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), who helped draw up the bill, joined most Republicans in voting against the amendment.

Feinstein said she was not "a big fan" of the temporary worker program but felt bound by a pledge that the bipartisan coalition made to defend its bill. That coalition, dubbed the "grand bargainers" because of trade-offs at the heart of the bill, met in the afternoon to discuss how to kill the amendment.

The immigration overhaul bill would improve border security and workplace enforcement, raising fines for employers who hired illegally and requiring them to verify that employees were legally eligible to work.

It would also create a way for illegal immigrants to become citizens, provided that they paid fines and fees and fulfilled a number of other requirements. In exchange for that Democratic priority, Republicans were able to reduce the role of family reunification as a criterion for future immigration and create a point system that rewards education and skills.

One of the bill's more controversial provisions is the temporary worker program. It would allow as many as 600,000 foreign citizens to work three two-year stints with breaks in between. But it would not allow them to remain in the U.S. after that.

Business groups waded into Tuesday's debate, an indication of how important they considered the temporary worker program.

The National Restaurant Assn., which opposed the amendment, notified lawmakers that it would be watching how they voted. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce wrote senators urging them to vote against the amendment. Both organizations think it is crucial to establish a legal way for certain businesses to deal with persistent labor shortages.

The chamber also urged a "no" vote on an amendment expected today from Sen. Jeff Bingaman (D-N.M.) that would cut the number of participants in the temporary worker program to 200,000 a year.

Unions are split on the issue. Some say a temporary worker program would exploit immigrants and depress Americans' wages. Others see immigrants as the backbone of their future membership and applaud worker programs, but insist that the bill allow participants to remain in the country.

Eliseo Medina with the Service Employees International Union said the bill would promote more illegal immigration unless it was amended to allow temporary workers to become citizens.

"If they are going to be limited in this way, many of them will simply overstay their visas and add themselves to a new undocumented pool," he said.

Democrats hope to amend other parts of the bill that they dislike. Sens. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) and Robert Menendez (D-N.J.) are set to unveil an amendment today that would target the shift away from a family-based immigration system. Their measure aims to lift limits in the bill that would prevent legal permanent residents from bringing their spouses and minor children to the U.S.

Immigration: Questions and Answers

By Joel Havemann, Times Staff Writer
May 23, 2007

As Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) put it, the current system — which has allowed about 12 million people to live in this country illegally — "is broken and badly in need of a fix." Most of the country seems to agree.

Why is it taking so long for Congress to act?

Because there is no consensus on what the fix ought to be. Some advocate sealing the borders and shutting off the flow of illegal immigrants before anything else is done. Others, especially business interests, argue that the economy cannot function without a large, dependable flow of immigrant workers. Designed as a compromise, the Senate proposal has so many provisions packed into its 326 pages that most everyone can find something to dislike.

What would the proposal do about the 12 million illegal immigrants already here?

It would immediately grant probationary legal status to those who entered the country before Jan. 1, 2007. After meeting certain criteria — such as paying fines, having a good work history and passing an English proficiency test — those immigrants would be able to gain citizenship within an estimated 12 years.

Would the proposal amount to amnesty for illegal immigrants?

By definition, amnesty means wiping the slate clean. The Senate proposal would offer people here illegally a chance to become legal, but would impose complicated requirements.

Those who entered the U.S. before the Jan. 1 cutoff would be eligible for a special "Z visa" if they have a job and pay $5,000 in fees and penalties. Visa holders would then travel to their native countries, where they would pay an additional $4,000 penalty and apply for permanent U.S. residency. The spouse, elderly parents and minor children of a successful applicant could be granted permanent resident status.

Is there a guest worker program to fill jobs that employers say they can't find enough Americans to do?

There is. Workers who are matched with employers through an electronic database would get a two-year visa, renewable twice — provided that workers spent at least a year in their native countries between each two-year stint in the U.S.

Guest workers could be accompanied by spouses and children only if they were able to prove that their income exceeded the poverty rate by at least 50% and their family members had health insurance. If guest workers choose to bring their families, they would forfeit the right to additional two-year stints. Non-seasonal guest workers would be capped at 400,000, whereas seasonal farmworkers could enter in unlimited numbers.

Would the Senate proposal make it harder for people to cross the border illegally?

It would, and this is the least controversial part of the proposal. The government would hire 6,000 Border Patrol agents, on top of the 12,000 now in place. Another 370 miles of fence would be built on the border with Mexico, along with 200 miles of vehicle barriers.

The proposal mandates 27,500 detention or prison spaces be made available along the borders. And it calls for the deployment of four unmanned aircraft to patrol the southern border and the construction of 70 radar and camera towers.

Border Patrol agents would collect "biometric" data, such as fingerprints and eye prints, to verify the identity of border crossers. They would be allowed to cross-check identity documents with the Social Security Administration and the Internal Revenue Service.

Historically, the rules governing quotas of legal immigrants have given priority to reuniting families. Would the Senate agreement make any changes?

It would give greater emphasis to job specialties and less to family ties. Would-be immigrants currently can apply for a green card no matter their skills. The new system would be tilted toward more skilled workers. Applicants would get extra credit for education, fluency in English, math and science backgrounds, and other factors.

What chance is there that such a complicated stew will become law?

The odds for passage of an immigration bill are probably better than last year, but it is far from a sure thing. The Senate got the ball rolling Monday by voting, 69 to 23, to debate the issue. Last year the Senate passed an immigration bill, only to have it die in the House — which was then in Republican hands. Both the House and Senate are now controlled by Democrats. But opposition and support for this proposal cross party lines.

Source: Times staff writer Joel Havemann

U.S. raids Missouri poultry plant, workers arrested

Wed May 23, 2007 11:37AM EDT

U.S. News
By Carey Gillam

KANSAS CITY, Missouri (Reuters) - Federal immigration officials were interrogating and beginning deportation proceedings for about 100 workers seized at a Missouri poultry-processing plant who are suspected of working in the country illegally, an immigration official said on Wednesday.

Agents with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) arrested workers at George's Processing Inc. in Butterfield, Mo. on Tuesday as part of an ongoing criminal investigation into identity fraud, Social Security fraud and a variety of immigration-related violations.

Most of those arrested are from Mexico, Guatemala, Honduras and El Salvador. Many were being held in county jails in Kansas City, Wichita and St. Louis pending hearings before federal immigration judges, said ICE spokesman Tim Counts.

Some of the workers have been allowed to post bond and be released, including some who act as primary caregivers for children, Counts said.

The raid and follows the earlier arrests of five individuals connected to the case, including four who have pleaded guilty to charges that include identity fraud and social security fraud.

The management of the poultry plant have not been charged, said Counts. He said the investigation is continuing.

Officials at George's Poultry did not return calls.

The ICE was established in March 2003 as the largest investigative arm of the Department of Homeland Security. An ICE report issued in April showed more than 2,700 illegal aliens arrested through the fiscal second quarter of 2007, on pace to exceed the 3,667 arrests made in 2006.


© Reuters 2007. All rights reserved.

Debate Raging, Mexico Adds to Consulates in U.S.

By RANDAL C. ARCHIBOLD
Published: May 23, 2007
The NYTimes

On the surface, there was nothing extraordinary about a certain government office in Little Rock, Ark., the other day as paperwork was signed, names were called, fees were paid, waits were endured and computer keyboards went tap, tap, tap.

Michael Stravato for The New York Times
Mexico opened a consulate in Little Rock, Ark., last month. More Photos »
Just the workaday humdrum of official government business — the government of Mexico, that is, in yet another new consulate, the country’s 47th in the United States.

Mexico’s consulates function as a safety net of sorts, issuing passports and identification cards that facilitate banking and offering assistance when Mexican immigrants, an estimated 11 million, run into trouble.

Increasingly, they are also acting as influential free agents in a broken immigration system that Congress is trying to overhaul. As the consulate that opened last month in Little Rock illustrates, the Mexican government is following its citizens far from the border into the growing quarters of Latino migration, much of it illegal.

Since 2000, consulates have opened in places where immigration from Mexico has soared, including St. Paul; Indianapolis; Kansas City, Mo.; Omaha and Raleigh, N.C.

“They have every right to open one up,” said State Representative Jon Woods, a Republican from northwest Arkansas who won office last year on a platform that included combating illegal immigration. “But the problem I have with it opening up is it blatantly screams that illegal immigration is a problem in Arkansas. That’s the main reason it opened up.”

Under the bill being debated in Washington, legal status would be offered to most of the 12 million illegal immigrants in the United States, while border security would be strengthened and penalties for employers of illegal immigrants would be increased. Yesterday, the Senate voted to keep a provision in the bill that would allow hundreds of thousands of temporary foreign workers to enter the country each year.

Rafael Laveaga, a spokesman for the Mexican Embassy, declined to comment on what effect the legislation might have on consulates, though his government has said it supports efforts to increase legal immigration and has called the current bill “an important step toward the approval of comprehensive immigration reform this year.”

A recent analysis of census data suggested that Arkansas had the country’s fastest-growing Hispanic population this decade, set at 70,000 in 2005, a 48 percent increase over five years. At least half of the newcomers were illegal immigrants, according to the analysis commissioned by the Winthrop Rockefeller Foundation from the Urban Institute and released last month.

Consulate officials in Little Rock acknowledge that the 6,000-square-foot piece of Mexican territory occupying a former medical clinic serves all Mexican citizens, regardless of immigration status.

“We can’t interfere with the laws of the United States, but the consulates are certainly involved when individuals’ rights are not exercised or are violated or when there are cases of families that have been separated, with the parents deported and the children remaining here,” Arturo Sarukhan, the Mexican ambassador to the United States, said in a speech on April 25 at the opening of the consulate in Little Rock.

Roberto Gonzá***, 20, a construction worker living here illegally, waited recently in the lobby for the identification card the Mexican government issues known as the “matrícula consular.” The card is honored in the United States by many police agencies, employers and — most important — by banks, which are used by countless immigrants to send billions of dollars home every year. But it is a lightning rod for critics of illegal immigration, who see it as a demonstration of the Mexican government’s helping its citizens live in the United States illegally.

“I will be able to open bank accounts, pay water and light bills, have an easier life here with the consulate and the documents they give,” said Mr. Gonzá***, one of more than 200 people who have received a card since the consulate opened.

Andrés Chao, the Mexican consul in Little Rock, looks past the criticism. Mr. Chao, a career diplomat who has worked in New York City and in The Hague, said he was glad to be in Arkansas at a time when the Mexican immigrant population, while small, was growing rapidly.

“This is like the birth of a community,” Mr. Chao said, driving around town and pointing at the number of businesses catering to immigrants.

For Mr. Chao, the going has been smooth. The consulate has served about 50 people a day, and he says he expects the number to grow as word spreads that it is open.

The opening of the Little Rock consulate follows the one in St. Paul, which opened in June 2005. In New Orleans, where growing numbers of Mexican immigrants are working on post-Hurricane Katrina construction, plans are in the works to reopen a consulate, which closed for budget reasons nearly five years ago. There are 539 foreign consulates in the United States, and Mexico has more than any other country. (After Mexico, Canada has 19, Japan 17 and Britain 12).

Michael Stravato for The New York Times
The ID cards are recognized by some banks and police agencies.

A Slice of Home In addition to issuing identification cards and passports, the consulates perform the usual consular functions: assisting citizens who are arrested, helping arrange the return to Mexico of the dead and fostering trade and cultural ties.

But Mark Krikorian, executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies, a public policy institute in Washington that is opposed to illegal immigration, said the spread of Mexican consulates and their advocacy of the identification card amounted to an end run around American immigration laws.

Mr. Krikorian said Mexico went further than other countries that issue such cards, including the United States, by lobbying banks and law enforcement agencies to recognize the cards as valid identification, knowing full well that most legal residents would not need such a card.

The Mexican government in the past few years has issued nearly three million of what it calls a high-security version of the card, which is accepted by more than 160 banks and recognized by 1,100 police departments.

“These consulates are not like most other countries’ consulates,” Mr. Krikorian said. “They are not there simply to help their countrymen if there is a problem with law enforcement or to promote Mexican business in the United States.”

The card was “one of the major areas of activity” at consulates, he said, adding, “The point being to ‘document’ the undocumented and make an end run around Congress.”

The Bush administration has not blocked use of the cards, saying in a policy statement in 2004 that banks must have “flexible standards” in deciding what identification to accept.

Mexican government officials said they were only serving the needs of a growing population. The 11 million Mexican-born immigrants living in the United States, as estimated by the Pew Hispanic Center, account for about 10 percent of all Mexicans.

Jorge G. Castañeda, a former foreign minister of Mexico and a professor at New York University, said Mexico had long had an abundance of consulates in the United States, including more than 10 on or near the border, where cultural bonds and conflict run deep.

“Why don’t other countries have more? Because they don’t have a border like we do,” Mr. Castañeda said. “It’s pretty straightforward. And other consulates are in large metro areas where there are very important Mexican communities.”

Before the consulate in Little Rock opened, people in Arkansas who sought Mexican consular services had to go to Dallas, a five-hour drive, not an easy trip for the many immigrants who lack cars or have limited time off from work.

The study by the Urban Institute found that the vast majority of illegal immigrants in Arkansas were from Mexico, with a smattering of Central Americans. Most poured in to work at chicken processing plants and fill construction and service industry jobs. A small percentage moved into professional jobs, the analysis found.

It estimated that a little more than half of all new immigrants in Arkansas were there illegally, but Randy Kapps, the lead demographer on the study, said it was impossible to be precise.

It was no coincidence, Mr. Chao said, that Mexico chose to open a consulate in the state that is home to Wal-Mart and other businesses with which it would like to strengthen ties. Former Gov. Mike Huckabee and former President Vicente Fox of Mexico promoted trade, in addition to the immigrant population, as important selling points when they broached the idea of a consulate here four years ago.

“There is a lot of investment in Mexico from Arkansas businesses and a lot of opportunity,” Mr. Chao said, sipping water bottled by a company that wants to expand into the Mexican market.

But the heart of the mission here, he said, is serving people like Ramiro Givara, a 31-year-old construction worker who dropped by the consulate the other day and walked out with a freshly minted identification card.

“This is so much easier for us,” Mr. Givara said. “It is like having part of Mexico here.”