Here's the truth about my plan for immigration reform

• 

• • 

    Rubio defends 'Gang of 8' immigration overhaul

  • 

    How will Boston bombings impact immigration reform?

  • 

    Senators Call for Immigration Delay

Americans believe in the value of immigration. We are the most generous nation on earth to immigrants, allowing over one million people a year to come here legally. They come here in pursuit of what we recognize as the American dream – the chance to live in freedom and have the opportunity to work hard to make a better life for themselves and their families.

The problem is that our legal immigration system has been broken for decades. It has enabled 11 million people to come here illegally or overstay visas. It is a bureaucratic and inefficient system that does not address the needs of our economy.

All this has further deepened the American people’s mistrust in the ability of their government to perform basic functions.

Leaving in place a broken immigration system -– and the millions of people whose identities are a mystery to us –- is simply not an acceptable option. This must be fixed.

We must do something to end today’s de facto amnesty, and conservative Republicans should lead on this issue.

That is why I am advocating for securing our borders, improving enforcement, modernizing our legal immigration system and changing it so that it prioritizes welcoming people to the U.S. based on skills, not just on whether they have a family member already living here.

And that is why I support a process to identify and register those who are here illegally. They will have to submit biometric data in order to pass multiple national security and criminal background checks, pay $2,000 in fines, pay taxes, and learn English and American civics. They won’t be able to get any federal benefits like welfare or ObamaCare.

Before they can even apply to become permanent residents, they will have to wait at least ten years. They will have to get in line behind those who are trying to come the right way.

They will have to wait until we have a system in place to prevent illegal immigrants from being hired.

They will have to wait until we have a system in place to track people who overstay their visas.

And they will have to wait until we implement plans to spend at least $5.5 billion dollars to secure the border through more border patrol officers, more technology and more fencing.

I thought long and hard before taking on this issue. I understand how divisive it can be. I’ve seen how the left has used it to accuse opponents of their version of reform of being bigots and racists. And I would much rather be having a debate on the more fundamental ways we can grow our economy and get our debt and spending under control. But with or without us, the president and the Democrats who control the Senate were going to bring this issue up.

And I believe conservatives need to fight for the ideas and policies we believe are critical to fixing our immigration system.

The opponents of reform raise important points about not rewarding the violation of the law. I, too, have felt the frustration many feel that our nation’s generosity has been taken advantage of by some.

But policy-making is about solving problems. And to pick the right solution, you have to weigh the realistic alternatives. Deporting all illegal immigrants is not a practical solution. But ignoring the fact that they are here is just as bad.

For example, passing a law that only focuses on modernization and enforcement and leaves for another day the issue of those here illegally is not a good idea. Because as the enforcement measures kick in, millions of people living here illegally will be unable to work and provide for themselves and their families. The resulting humanitarian impact will then force us to scramble to address it. It is better to address it now as part of an orderly and measured process.

The only solution I know that can work is to reform legal immigration in a way that is good for the economy, do everything we can to secure the border, and allow illegal immigrants to eventually earn permanent residency by passing background checks, paying a fine, learning English and waiting at the back of the line for at least 10 years, at the same time that border security and enforcement measures are put in place to prevent this problem from happening again.

The bill I helped write is a good starting point, but it is not a take it or leave it proposition. I am open to any ideas others may have on how to do this, and I’ve been listening to the legitimate concerns people have raised with the expectation that we will be able to improve the bill as this debate continues.

We must do something to end today’s de facto amnesty, and conservative Republicans should lead on this issue. Because without conservatives at the table and in the fight, we are ceding this issue to President Obama and his allies in Congress. And as the last four years have proven, that is never a good idea.

Republican Marco Rubio represents Florida in the U.S. Senate. He is a member of the Senate’s Foreign Relations and Intelligence Committees.

Related Stories

Boston attack could complicate immigration reform

Shouts Punctuate Immigration Hearing

Bombings Should Not Nix Immigration Deal

Over 600 Immigrants Deported By Hospitals

Immigration Reform Shouldn’t Include Taxpayer-Funded Health Care

Senators say bombings should spark immigration reform, not halt process

View the original article here

The only way forward on immigration reform

• 

  April 10, 2013: Activists rally for immigration reform in Los Angeles.AP

• 

  Monday, April 22, 2013: The Rev. Eugene Barnes of Illinois, joins immigration advocates outside the Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on immigration reform on Capitol Hill, in Washington, D.C.AP

• 

  People fill a committee room on Thursday, April 18, 2013 in Montpelier, Vt. A Vermont House committee is hearing testimony on a bill that would allow farmworkers in the country illegally to become drivers. Last week, the Senate gave final approval for a bill to create driver privilege cards for people not eligible to get an enhanced driver's license under the federal REAL ID law. The measure is expected to extend driving privileges to 1,200 to 1,500 immigrants, mostly from Mexico and Guatemala and mostly working on Vermont dairy farms who are in the United States without the legally required immigration papers.(AP Photo/Toby Talbot)

Next Slide Previous Slide

Nearly everyone agrees that we need to fix our nation’s broken immigration system but the way for Congress to get there is through regular order.  

For far too long, the standard operating procedure in Washington has been to rush large pieces of legislation through Congress with little opportunity for elected officials and the American people to scrutinize and understand them.  

Before we hurry to overhaul our immigration laws, we must methodically look at each of the various components that need to be remedied. Immigration reform is too important and complex to not examine each piece in detail.  

Immigration reform is too important and complex to not examine each piece in detail.  

By now, we’ve all learned what happens when Congress rushes legislation and bypasses regular order.  In 2010, the House jammed the 2,700-page ObamaCare bill through Congress without a single hearing or markup on the bill that was ultimately signed into law.  

Americans are now stuck with the consequences of this hasty decision—higher premiums, more taxes, over 20,000 pages in new regulations, and overall bad policy.  Even Senator Max Baucus, the chairman of the Senate Finance Committee and one of the bill’s chief architects, warned last week that he sees ObamaCare as a “huge train wreck coming down.”

Regular order is also important because it allows Congress to reflect on past legislative mistakes and avoid making similar ones in the future.  

For example, nearly 30 years ago Congress passed and President Reagan signed into law the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986, assuring the American people that it would fix our immigration system. 

We were promised tougher enforcement in exchange for the legalization of roughly three million people.  But these promises were never kept and our immigration laws remain broken.  The American people want to know how Congress plans to avoid this similar outcome in the current debate surrounding immigration reform.

Some critics may think the call for regular order is an attempt to kill a larger immigration bill but this could not be further from the truth—the two are not mutually exclusive.  

Regular order will help us get immigration reform right and win the trust of the American people so that we don’t face the same problems we do now down the road. 

While the Senate works its will, through the Gang of Eight’s bill or some other piece of legislation, the House will do the same. 

Once each chamber holds Committee hearings, markups, and passes legislation, the House and Senate can work out their differences.  That’s the American legislative process.  

This process can be long but it allows every representative and senator to have their constituents’ voices heard, rather than solely the opinions of a few members in a working group. And by taking a fine-tooth comb through each of the individual issues within the larger immigration debate, it will help us get a better bill that will benefit Americans and provide a workable immigration system.  

The members of the Senate Gang of Eight have worked hard to produce legislation and their efforts should be applauded.  

While it’s true that many in the House of Representatives have concerns about the Senate immigration bill, we are hopeful that we can produce better solutions.  

The House Judiciary Committee has held numerous hearings on immigration and also plans to hold one on the Senate immigration bill in the coming days to consider its merits and flaws.  

At the same time, we are receiving input from members from both sides of the aisle, as well as stakeholders and other interested parties, in order to reach consensus on many of the issues plaguing our immigration system.  

Consensus has been reached on some issues and the House Judiciary Committee this week will introduce a couple of stand-alone bills that tackle various issues within our immigration system.  

One bill will create a new temporary agricultural guestworker program that meets the needs of farmers so that they can continue growing our crops and providing a reliable food source for Americans. 

 The other helps ensure we turn off the jobs magnet that attracts illegal immigration by requiring all employers to use E-Verify.  This web-based program provides employers with a quick and easy way to check the work eligibility of their newly hired employees.  

Following regular order, the House Judiciary Committee plans to hold legislative hearings on these bills soon so that members can ask questions of the legislation and look for ways to improve them.

The introduction of these two bills doesn’t mean that a broader immigration reform bill isn’t achievable. We hope to reach consensus on more issues but in the meantime these stand-alone bills are a down payment on a larger bill. 

Immigration reform is not an easy task but a solution is not out of reach.  Through regular order we can make sure we get immigration reform right this time so that we don’t have the same problems in the future.  

Republican Bob Goodlatte represents Virginia's 6th congressional district in the House of Representatives. He is chairman of the House Judiciary Committee.

Related Stories

Rubio Turns To Hard Sell On Immigration

Boston Suspects Could Affect Immigration Debate

Senators Sessions & Cornyn: Do Not Stand in the Way of Immigration Reform

View the original article here

Cornyn says Obama budget makes only 'modest progress' toward entitlement reform

Published April 14, 2013

FoxNews.com

• 

A top Senate Republican expressed only guarded optimism Sunday about a potential grand bargain with Democrats based on the budget President Obama submitted that includes entitlement reform but additional tax increases.  

“I give the president credit that he did put (a budget) on the table,” Senate Minority Whip John Cornyn told “Fox News Sunday."

The Texas senator, in charge of wrangling Republican votes in the Democrat-controlled chamber, called Obama’s plan to chain Social Security increased to the Consumer Price Index only “modest progress” toward entitlement reform.

However, the president’s 2014 budget also suggests raising taxes another trillion dollars and is not balanced, he said.

His comments are similar to those made last week by House Speaker John Boehner after Obama released the budget.

The Ohio Republican said Obama wants to hold hostage “modest reforms” for another round of tax increases, referring to increases his party agreed to in December 2012 as part of a deal with Democrats to keep the country from going off the so-called fiscal cliff.

Later on Fox, Sen. Dick Durbin, who counts votes for Democrats in the chamber, said Boehner simply dismissed the plan because the word “tax” was included.

He said Republicans “have to put everything on the table” if they are indeed serious about dealing with the budget deficit.

“For goodness sakes,” Durbin said, acknowledging he has supported the chained CPI concept and that it could be part of the Social Security reform plan if it gives the program long-term solvency.

View the original article here

Jeb Bush: I'm 'in sync' with Senate Republicans on immigration reform

Former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush on Sunday downplayed talk that his immigration plan undercuts Senate Republican efforts and said he’s more focused now on solving the country’s problems than positioning himself for a 2016 presidential run.

Bush, a Republican, said he talked with Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., part of the Senate group working on an immigration reform proposal, who last week criticized Bush for seeming to not support a pathway to citizenship for illegal immigrants, a key part of the bipartisan group’s plan.

Bush told ABC’s “This Week” that Graham was responding to concerns before Bush’s book on immigration was released.

“I told him that I support his efforts and I applaud what he’s doing,” Bush said. “And he concluded, after he heard what the thesis of the book is, that we’re in sync. We’re on the same path.”

Earlier in the day, Bush told “Fox News Sunday” that three months after the last presidential election is too early to announce a candidacy for 2016.

“Maybe it's better to make decisions in the proper context at the proper time,” said Bush, whose father and brother, George, each has been president.

Bush, who passed on 2008 and 2012 candidacies, dismissed the argument that a 2016 run might struggle because of some unpopular public opinion about the previous Bush administrations.

“I don't think there's any Bush baggage at all,” he said. “I love my brother, I'm proud of his accomplishments. I love my dad, and I'm proud to be a Bush. And if I run for president it's not because of something in my DNA that compels me to do it. It would be that it's the right thing to do for my family and that the conditions are right and I have something to offer.”

View the original article here

Without entitlement reform, America could experience a permanent sequester

Parks are closing. Government workers are being furloughed. The Department of Defense is issuing warnings about compromised military readiness. The Department of Homeland Security is making similar claims about border security.

Everywhere you look there is talk about the consequences of the recently imposed automatic federal spending cuts. Although most of these are really cuts in the Washington sense of the word—a slower rate of spending increase—sequestration is designed to make deficit reduction choices on auto pilot when federal lawmakers are unable to make them in real life.

The effected programs are being squeezed because mandatory spending on entitlements was largely taken off the table. This resulted in bigger cuts in everything from military spending to transportation infrastructure investments to national parks. But the sad fact is that this is the fiscal path the country was already embarking upon, with sequestration being just one small part of the problem.

Reforming entitlements before it’s too late would keep Americans from living in a permanent state of sequestration.

That’s because as the Baby Boomers retire, entitlement spending and interest payments will gobble up the entire federal budget, leaving little room for anything else. 

Ten years from now, automatically growing programs like Social Security and Medicare will make up 62 percent of annual spending. The Pentagon budget will be just 12 percent. We’re just seven years away from interest payments on the national debt outpacing defense.

According to an estimate by the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, interest payments and entitlements will consume the entire federal budget by 2025. That means no funds left over for the programs hit by sequestration without substantial additional borrowing.

Conservatives will rightfully be concerned about putting defense on a starvation diet. But many liberal priorities will be hurt too. 

The group Third Way published a paper titled “Collision Course: Why Democrats Must Back Entitlement Reform,” arguing, “as the cost of entitlement programs like Medicare and Social Security has skyrocketed, we’ve spent less and less of our budget educating kids, building roads, and curing disease.

"That means no money for national defense. No money for homeland security. No money to fix the nation’s crumbling bridges and roads. No money for medical research to find a cure for cancer or Alzheimer’s or Parkinson’s diseases," Rep. Frank Wolf (R-Va.) concurred in a March 2012 House floor speech.

The nonpartisan fact-checkers at PolitiFact Virginia rated Wolf’s statement as “true.”

While optimists hope that faster economic growth or reduced health care costs could improve this bleak budget outlook, there is also the potential for things to get worse.

If interest rates rise significantly above their current lows, so will the cost of borrowing. The U.S. government could also face further credit downgrades, such as when Standard & Poor’s stripped Uncle Sam of his AAA bond rating in 2011.

Social Security and Medicare are currently projected to face their own cash crunches soon enough. That means that even as they consume more federal tax revenues, these programs may see a decline in quality as the government struggles to pay for the promises it has made to the nation’s seniors.

By one estimate, nearly one-third of doctors nationwide refuse to accept new Medicaid patients because the government health care program for the poor doesn’t pay enough to cover the costs of treating them. This hasn’t just hurt doctors, who received from Medicaid just 58 percent of what private insurance paid in 2008, but also people covered under the program, as their health care options have dwindled.

If Medicare has to cut its payments to doctors as well, there may be a similar decline in quality health care for senior citizens too. “If caring for Medicare patients is too costly, doctors will simply opt out and care for the disabled and those over 65 will become hard to find,” writes the physician Peter Lipson.”

At a time when the country is changing, spending commitments that were made in a very different bygone era are actually handcuffing politicians and limiting the next generation’s choices.

Reforming entitlements before it’s too late—and before current beneficiaries would be impacted—would keep Americans from living in a permanent state of sequestration.

Sometimes, less is more.

W. James Antle III is editor of the Daily Caller News Foundation and author of the forthcoming book "Devouring Freedom: Can Big Government Ever Be Stopped? Regnery Publishing (March 19, 2013)"

View the original article here

Kerry: U.S. releasing millions in aid to Egypt, but with promise of reform

CAIRO –  Secretary of State John Kerry said Sunday the United States will give Egypt $250 million more in aid, following President Mohammed Morsi's pledges for political and economic reforms.

However, Kerry also said the Obama administration will hold Morsi, who came to power in June as Egypt's first freely elected president, to his commitment.

“The American people want to see the political and economic success of our long-time partners and friends in Egypt,” Kerry said in Cairo. “We look forward to continuing to work closely with all Egyptians. But “it is clear that more hard work and compromise will be required to restore unity, political stability and economic health to Egypt.”  

Kerry is making his first trip to an Arab nation since taking office. And the two days of meetings in Egypt have proven tense and fraught with political peril.

“I expect a lot,” Egyptian Defense Minister Abdul Al-Sisi told Kerry on Sunday.

Kerry replied: "I expect a lot from you.”

The secretary of state met Saturday with Foreign Minister Mohamed Amr, who told Kerry that Egypt expects long-time friend the United States to support the most populous Arab nation during its current economic woes.

Kerry also is meeting privately with some opponents of Morsi’s Islamist government who had refused to meet publicly with the American delegation.

Egypt is still trying to make good on a $4.8 billion loan from the International Monetary Fund. An agreement would unlock more of the $1 billion in U.S. assistance promised by President Obama last year and set to begin flowing with Kerry's announcement.

"The United States can and wants to do more," Kerry said. "Reaching an agreement with the IMF will require further effort on the part of the Egyptian government and broad support for reform by all Egyptians.”

Kerry cited Egypt's "extreme needs" and Morsi's "assurances that he plans to complete the IMF process" when he told the president that the U.S. would provide $190 million of a long-term $450 million pledge "in a good-faith effort to spur reform and help the Egyptian people at this difficult time."

Separately, the top U.S. diplomat announced $60 million for a new fund for "direct support of key engines of democratic change," including Egypt's entrepreneurs and its young people. Kerry held out the prospect of U.S. assistance to this fund climbing to $300 million over time.

Recapping his meetings with political figures, business leaders and representatives of outside groups, Kerry said he heard of their "deep concern about the political course of their country, the need to strengthen human rights protections, justice and the rule of law, and their fundamental anxiety about the economic future of Egypt."

Those issues came up in "a very candid and constructive manner" during Kerry's talks with Morsi.

Syria and Iran also came up, according to officials.

With parliamentary elections in April approaching and liberal and secular opponents of Morsi's Muslim Brotherhood saying they will boycott, Kerry called the vote "a particularly critical step" in Egypt's democratic transition.

Violent clashes between protesters and security forces have created an environment of insecurity, complicating Egyptian efforts to secure vital international aid.

Officials in the Egyptian presidency said Kerry stressed the need for consensus with the opposition in order to restore confidence in Egypt that it can ride out the crisis. Morsi was reported to have expressed the importance of Egypt's relationship with the United States, which is based on "mutual respect," and focused on the importance of the democratic process in building a strong and stable nation.

Kerry made clear that in all his meetings, he conveyed the message that Egyptians who rose up and overthrew Mubarak "did not risk their lives to see that opportunity for a brighter future squandered."

He also told the country's bickering politicians that they must overcome differences to get Egypt's faltering economy back on track and maintain its leadership role in the volatile Middle East.

The U.S. is deeply concerned that continued instability in Egypt will have broader consequences in a region already rocked by unrest.

U.S. officials said Kerry had planned to stress the importance of upholding Egypt's peace agreement with Israel, cracking down on weapons smuggling to extremists in the Gaza Strip and policing the increasingly lawless Sinai Peninsula while continuing to play a positive role in Syria's civil war.

The impact of his message of unity to the opposition coalition seemingly was blunted when only six of the 11 guests invited by the U.S. Embassy turned up for the Saturday session and three of those six said they still intended to boycott the April parliamentary election, according to participants.

Kerry said that the U.S. would not pick sides in Egypt, and he appealed to all sides to come together around human rights, freedom and speech and religious tolerance.

In an apparent nod to the current stalemate in Washington over the U.S. federal budget, Kerry acknowledged after meeting with Amr that compromise is difficult yet imperative.

"I say with both humility and with a great deal of respect that getting there requires a genuine give-and-take among Egypt's political leaders and civil society groups just as we are continuing to struggle with that in our own country," he said. "There must be a willingness on all sides to make meaningful compromises on the issues that matter most to all of the Egyptian people."

The opposition accuses Morsi and the Brotherhood of following in the footsteps of Mubarak, failing to carry out reforms and trying to install a more religiously conservative system.

Morsi's administration and the Brotherhood say their foes, who have trailed significantly behind Islamists in all elections since the uprising against Mubarak, are running away from the challenge of the ballot box and are trying to overturn democratic gains.

From Egypt, Kerry headed to Saudi Arabia on Sunday, with later stops in the United Arab Emirates and Qatar, where his focus is expected to be the crisis in Syria. Kerry is set to return to Washington on Wednesday.

Fox News' James Rosen in Cairo and The Associated Press contributed to this report.

View the original article here