Tweet
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/05/27/op...=1&oref=slogin
Editorial, New York Times
An Immigration Victory
Published: May 27, 2006
Americans should be proud of what the United States Senate did this week. It passed an ambitious bill that could lead to the most far-reaching overhaul of immigration laws in the nation's history. It did so after months of thoughtful debate and through a bipartisan compromise, a creature that many thought had vanished from Capitol Hill. The bill has many flaws, but its framework is realistic and humane. At various low points in the debate, this outcome could scarcely have been imagined, but the near-impossible happened on Thursday, by a vote of 62 to 36.
The Senate has given the cause of immigration reform a lot of momentum, which it will need since it is now heading for a brick wall: the House of Representatives.
The House Judiciary Committee chairman, James Sensenbrenner Jr., in the role of head brick, called the Senate bill "a nonstarter" the morning after it passed. Discussing the odds of reconciling the House and Senate legislation into one bill, Mr. Sensenbrenner struck a tone of deathly pessimism. The chambers had once been miles apart, but now they were "moons apart or oceans apart," he said, grasping for words to convey the vastness of his gloom, and the ferocity of his bargaining stance.
But why was he so down?
The House's immigration bill is tough on security. But so is the Senate's. The House wants 700 miles of new fencing on the Mexican border; the Senate wants 370, with another 500 miles of vehicle barriers. That looks like mere miles apart to us.
But when you add the real crux of the debate "” the future flow of temporary workers and a path to citizenship for the nation's shadow population of 11 million to 12 million illegal immigrants "” things do get tricky.
Many polls show that the American public has moved decisively toward favoring a comprehensive immigration solution: tightening security and giving illegal immigrants a chance to seek the burdens and benefits of citizenship. But those in the Sensenbrenner camp are clinging to a fantasy that only a clenched fist will set the nation's immigrant problems right. They have refused to treat illegal immigrants as anything but outlaws, and oppose the Senate bill's citizenship path. They speak with the sullen defeatism of those who have dug into their positions and can't climb out.
It is hard to understand what "” besides election-year pandering and xenophobic hostility "” motivates their unwillingness to bend toward the flexible, sensible policy that immigrants, their families and their advocates, many business organizations and labor unions, and a majority of the Senate are seeking.
Is it their fear that the United States as we know it is on the brink of disintegrating under a flood of poor people looking for work? That dread was expressed this month in a much-buzzed-about report from the Heritage Foundation. It warned that the Senate bill would increase the United States population by 103 million in 20 years. An uproar followed, and led to an amendment that shrank the bill's guest-worker quotas. The foundation then revised its estimate down to 66 million.
But that is still a staggeringly ridiculous sum, considering that Mexico's entire work force is only 43 million. We suppose it is possible that every last worker south of the border could move here, bringing family members and pets, but Mexico and Central America would have to be depopulated to make the conservatives' nightmare come true. To the reality-based community, thankfully, the Senate bill is not a nightmare.
It is a rough draft of what could end up as a profound achievement. There is a huge gap between the House and the Senate, but it can be bridged, and President Bush should bridge it. The coalition that passed the Senate bill has handed Mr. Bush an opportunity to lead the country to a better place. He should spend every last shred of his political capital and skill to take it.
Editorial, New York Times
An Immigration Victory
Published: May 27, 2006
Americans should be proud of what the United States Senate did this week. It passed an ambitious bill that could lead to the most far-reaching overhaul of immigration laws in the nation's history. It did so after months of thoughtful debate and through a bipartisan compromise, a creature that many thought had vanished from Capitol Hill. The bill has many flaws, but its framework is realistic and humane. At various low points in the debate, this outcome could scarcely have been imagined, but the near-impossible happened on Thursday, by a vote of 62 to 36.
The Senate has given the cause of immigration reform a lot of momentum, which it will need since it is now heading for a brick wall: the House of Representatives.
The House Judiciary Committee chairman, James Sensenbrenner Jr., in the role of head brick, called the Senate bill "a nonstarter" the morning after it passed. Discussing the odds of reconciling the House and Senate legislation into one bill, Mr. Sensenbrenner struck a tone of deathly pessimism. The chambers had once been miles apart, but now they were "moons apart or oceans apart," he said, grasping for words to convey the vastness of his gloom, and the ferocity of his bargaining stance.
But why was he so down?
The House's immigration bill is tough on security. But so is the Senate's. The House wants 700 miles of new fencing on the Mexican border; the Senate wants 370, with another 500 miles of vehicle barriers. That looks like mere miles apart to us.
But when you add the real crux of the debate "” the future flow of temporary workers and a path to citizenship for the nation's shadow population of 11 million to 12 million illegal immigrants "” things do get tricky.
Many polls show that the American public has moved decisively toward favoring a comprehensive immigration solution: tightening security and giving illegal immigrants a chance to seek the burdens and benefits of citizenship. But those in the Sensenbrenner camp are clinging to a fantasy that only a clenched fist will set the nation's immigrant problems right. They have refused to treat illegal immigrants as anything but outlaws, and oppose the Senate bill's citizenship path. They speak with the sullen defeatism of those who have dug into their positions and can't climb out.
It is hard to understand what "” besides election-year pandering and xenophobic hostility "” motivates their unwillingness to bend toward the flexible, sensible policy that immigrants, their families and their advocates, many business organizations and labor unions, and a majority of the Senate are seeking.
Is it their fear that the United States as we know it is on the brink of disintegrating under a flood of poor people looking for work? That dread was expressed this month in a much-buzzed-about report from the Heritage Foundation. It warned that the Senate bill would increase the United States population by 103 million in 20 years. An uproar followed, and led to an amendment that shrank the bill's guest-worker quotas. The foundation then revised its estimate down to 66 million.
But that is still a staggeringly ridiculous sum, considering that Mexico's entire work force is only 43 million. We suppose it is possible that every last worker south of the border could move here, bringing family members and pets, but Mexico and Central America would have to be depopulated to make the conservatives' nightmare come true. To the reality-based community, thankfully, the Senate bill is not a nightmare.
It is a rough draft of what could end up as a profound achievement. There is a huge gap between the House and the Senate, but it can be bridged, and President Bush should bridge it. The coalition that passed the Senate bill has handed Mr. Bush an opportunity to lead the country to a better place. He should spend every last shred of his political capital and skill to take it.
Comment