Commentary: Immigration bills ignore Lady Liberty

U.S. Customs patrol at the border with Mexico. Image via the Migration Policy Institute
U.S. Customs patrol at the border with Mexico. Image via the Migration Policy Institute
2

 

By Barbara Franz

The House of Representatives will vote on two GOP-backed immigration bills this week.

Republican leaders have been working for weeks on this legislation, tailored to meet the so-called four pillars of the Trump administration’s demands for any immigration bill seeking the president’s signature.

These pillars include a pathway to citizenship for former Dreamers (Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, DACA recipients), an end to the diversity visa lottery program, curbs on family migration, and $25 billion for the Mexico border wall.

Barbara Franz
Barbara Franz

The Border Security and Immigration Reform Act of 2018 was introduced on June 14, 2018.  According to the New York Times, it stemmed from weeks of negotiations between Republican conservatives and moderates, with the objective of bridging the gap between them.

Within hours of that bill’s release last Thursday, Heritage Action for America, the political arm of the conservative Heritage Foundation, said it would urge lawmakers to oppose the measure, deriding it as “amnesty.”

A conservative proposal, the Securing America’s Future Act (H.R. 4760), was crafted by House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.).

The Heritage Foundation and other conservative think tanks support Goodlatte’s bill, which proposes abolishing the visa lottery, and curbing family reunification by eliminating visa categories for married children of United States citizens and siblings of adult citizens.

Goodlatte’s bill also seeks to authorize $30 billion for wall funding and extra border agents. And it aims to undermine sanctuary policies by making jurisdictions that refuse to cooperate with immigration authorities liable for crimes committed by undocumented immigrants they release.

This measure would mandate E-Verify, requiring all employers to certify that their workers are in the country legally. It also would narrow grounds to apply for asylum, eliminating protections for the vast majority of unaccompanied minors and, unilaterally, declaring Mexico a safe third country.

The result: A steep reduction in the number of people permitted to seek humanitarian protection in the U.S.

Goodlatte’s bill also would provide Dreamers — children brought to the U.S. by undocumented parents– with a temporary three-year legal status that could be renewed indefinitely. It would not result in a path to citizenship, however. 

For militant conservatives such as Mark Krikorian, executive director of the Conservative Center for Immigration Studies, a renewable, three-year, non-resident status would “codify Obama’s lawless DACA amnesty.” 

Rep. Judy Chu (D-Ca.), chair of the Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus, asserted that Goodlatte’s bill attempts to erase America’s diversity. 

She emphasized that the bill is “feeding into Donald Trump’s desire to make American white again.”  It has no humanitarian, optimistic or progressive features; rather, it’s based on old staples of American nativism: Fear-mongering, racism and xenophobia.

The compromise bill, the Border Security and Immigration Reform Act, is not much better.

This nearly 300-page document is considered a moderate alternative to Goodlatte’s bill. It includes a carrot for moderate Democrats and Republicans that is a red flag for militants like Krikorian: Legalization status for former Dreamers.

Under the proposed bill, Dreamers would be able to apply for six-year renewable legal status, assuming they meet certain criteria, including having been under 16 when they entered the United States.

A new merit-based visa program would give them a pathway to citizenship — though the program would be open to other immigrants as well.

This approach may be designed to appease conservatives who might construe any “special pathway” to citizenship for undocumented immigrants as amnesty. The program would include a point system based on qualifications like education level, military service and employment.

Through this program, Dreamers could obtain green cards, and eventually citizenship.

Otherwise, the compromise is quite similar to Goodlatte’s bill. Both draft bills would curb family-based immigration, eliminating visa categories for married children of United States citizens and siblings of adult citizens.

Like Goodlatte’s bill, the compromise bill would eliminate the diversity visa lottery, which is intended to bring immigrants from underrepresented countries to the U.S. In recent years, nearly 50 percent of lottery recipients were African.

The compromise measure also would beef up border security, containing $25 billion to build a wall on the border with Mexico. The humanitarian issue of DACA visas is held hostage to the partisan funding of the wall: A provision allows the government to cancel DACA visas if the wall funding is rescinded.

Another piece of the compromise bill targets moderates who might consider voting for it as the lesser of two evils.

Showing they can think on their feet, Republicans responded quickly to the widespread unpopularity of the family separation policy at the borders,  inserting a prohibition of such practices.

The summary of the bill states that “alien minors apprehended at the border must not be separated from their parent or legal guardian” while in the custody of the Department of Homeland Security.

It’s a devil’s bargain for moderate Democrats and Republicans: In exchange for protection of Dreamers, and for modification of the wrenching separation policy, they must swallow hard-line changes to much of the immigration system.

This is not a difficult choice, if we remember the principles upon which this republic was built: Humanitarianism and opportunism, multiculturalism and tolerance.

First, if it became law, the draft compromise bill radically would reduce family reunification inherent in the American immigration system.

Between 60- and 70 percent of all lawful permanent immigration to the United States in the past decade has family-based roots.

As I’ve stated here before, chances are that some of your ancestors entered the country this way.

Second, eliminating the diversity visa lottery program would make immigration to the U.S. “wither again.”

And third, it would eradicate the asylum system that has been in place since 1980, further moving the United States away from the principles of humanitarian aid and protection for persecuted and oppressed individuals in the world.

This compromise bill is no compromise. It would lead to the demise of the current immigration system and further diminish America’s standing in the world.

The U.S. no longer is considered a beacon of hope for the subjugated and tyrannized. Instead, our domestic and foreign policy is dangerously close to becoming associated with the persecutors and despots.

Remember Emma Lazarus:

“Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free…”

MORE COLUMNS BY BARBARA FRANZ

Editor’s note: The opinions expressed above are the author’s, and do not necessarily reflect those of this publication.

If you’ve read this far… you clearly value your local news. Now we need your help to keep producing the local coverage you depend on! More people are reading Morristown Green than ever. But costs keep rising. Reporting the news takes time, money and hard work. We do it because we, like you, believe an informed citizenry is vital to a healthy community.

So please, CONTRIBUTE to MG or become a monthly SUBSCRIBER. ADVERTISE on Morristown Green. LIKE us on Facebook, FOLLOW us on Twitter, and SIGN UP for our newsletter.

2 COMMENTS

  1. This is not a solution…
    Under activist pressure, Trump signed an executive order that he claims ends family separation at the U.S. border. His solution is to create family jails.

    It’s unclear what the impact of this executive order will be, but it still leaves in place the zero-tolerance policy that is causing family separations at the U.S. border.

    He’s trying to create family jails to hold immigrant children and parents indefinitely. This is state-sponsored child abuse. It means more cages for indefinite periods of time for immigrant families INCLUDING children.

    We must take action:
    Contact Congressman Rodney Frelinghuysen and tell him to vote NO on bad immigration bills.

    Trump’s cruel and oppressive immigration policies are a threat to us all, no matter where we come from.

    Make a call. Show up at a demonstration in support of immigrant families. Increase the pressure.

LEAVE A REPLY