In Congress, a harder line on illegal immigrants

[peejay 327]

In Congress, a harder line on illegal immigrants

Rhetoric could hurt the GOP in its endeavor to grab a share of the growing Latino vote

By SUZANNE GAMBOA

WASHINGTON — The end of the year means a turnover of House control from Democratic to Republican and, with it, Congress' approach to immigration.

In a matter of weeks, Congress will go from trying to help young, illegal immigrants become legal to debating whether children born to parents who are in the country illegally should continue to enjoy automatic U.S. citizenship.

Such a hardened approach — and the rhetoric certain to accompany it — should resonate with the GOP faithful who helped swing the House in Republicans' favor. But it also could further hurt the GOP in its endeavor to grab a large enough share of the growing Latino vote to win the White House and the Senate majority in 2012.

Legislation to test interpretations of the 14th Amendment as granting citizenship to children of illegal immigrants will emerge early next session. That is likely to be followed by attempts to force employers to use a still-developing web system, dubbed E-Verify, to check that all of their employees are in the U.S. legally.

There could be proposed curbs on federal spending in cities that don't do enough to identify people who are in the country illegally and attempts to reduce the numbers of legal immigrants. Democrats ended the year failing for a second time to win passage of the Dream Act, which would have given hundreds of thousands of young illegal immigrants a chance at legal status.

House Republicans will try to fill the immigration reform vacuum left by Democrats with legislation designed to send illegal immigrants packing and deter others from trying to come to the U.S.

Democrats, who will still control the Senate, will be playing defense against harsh immigration enforcement measures, mindful of their need to keep on good footing with Hispanic voters. But a slimmer majority and an eye on 2012 may prevent Senate Democrats from bringing to the floor any sweeping immigration bill, or even a limited one that hints at providing legal status to people in the country illegally.

President Barack Obama could be a wild card.

He'll have at his disposal his veto power should a bill denying citizenship to children of illegal immigrants make it to his desk. But Obama also has made cracking down on employers a key part of his administration's immigration enforcement tactics.

Hispanic voters and their allies will look for Obama to broker a deal on immigration as he did on tax cuts and health care. After the Dream Act failed in the Senate this month, Obama said his administration would not give up on the measure. "At a minimum we should be able to get Dream done. So I'm going to go back at it," he said.

The president has taken heavy hits in Spanish-language and ethnic media for failing to keep his promise to address immigration promptly and taking it off the agenda last summer. His administration's continued deportations of immigrants — a record 393,000 in the 2010 fiscal year — have also made tenuous his relationship with Hispanic voters.

John Morton, who oversees Immigration and Customs Enforcement, said in a recent conference call that there are no plans to change the agency's enforcement tactics, which are focused on immigrants who commit crimes but also have led to detaining and deporting many immigrants who have not committed crimes.

The agency also will continue to expand Secure Communities, the program that allows immigration officials to check fingerprints of all people booked into jail to see if they are in the country illegally. Both illegal immigrants and residents can end up being deported under the program, which the Homeland Security Department hopes to expand nationwide by 2013.

Many of those attending a recent gathering of conservative Hispanics in Washington warned that another round of tough laws surrounded by ugly anti-immigrant discussions could doom the GOP's 2012 chances.

Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, a possible 2012 candidate, cited Meg Whitman's failed gubernatorial bid in California despite her high spending. When 22 percent of the electorate is Latino, candidates can't win without a vigorous presence in the Hispanic community and a "message that is understandable and involves respect," Gingrich said. Even so, Gingrich was unwilling to call on his fellow Republican senators to drop their opposition to the Dream Act, saying the legislation should not have been considered without giving lawmakers a chance to amend it.

The next Congress will be populated with many newcomers elected on a platform of tougher immigration enforcement. They'll have ready ears in Republican Rep. Lamar Smith of Texas, who will chair the House Judiciary Committee, and Rep. Steve King of Iowa, who is expected to chair the committee's immigration subcommittee.

That's a recipe for more measures aimed at immigration enforcement, including requiring businesses to use E-Verify rather than eyeballing paper documents to check workers' citizenship and legal residency status.

"I've already told the business community it's going to happen," said Beto Cardenas, executive counsel to Americans for Immigration Reform, a coalition of business leaders who support overhauling immigration laws. Changes to immigration law contained in appropriations and authorization bills, where immigration enforcement hawks are likely to tuck some measures, would also be tough to reject.

But more controversial measures such as attempts to deny citizenship to children of people who are in the U.S. without permission could be tempered by GOP leaders aware of the need to curry more favor with Hispanic voters.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/40810941/ns/politics-capitol_hill

[Ban Hammer 13,407]

it's all about pandering for the vote. i don't expect anything to change.

[ready4ONE 5,400]

it's all about pandering for the vote. i don't expect anything to change.

One man's pandering is another man's speaking to the needs of the people he/she hopes to represent.

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

One man's pandering is another man's speaking to the needs of the people he/she hopes to represent.

If no action results then its pandering.

[Danno 1,228]

I suspect the failure of even the Dream act to get any traction is sign enough, the country is ripe for a new tone with immigration.

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

Now we will get the Republican BS regarding "illegal immigrants". The issue is not and never has been "illegal immigrants" The issue is businesses hiring undocumented workers at lower than minimum wage and avoiding federal and state worker protections in order to save money. That's it. There IS nothing else to the issue. Illegals come here to work for money. Small businesses (and some big businesses) hire them to avoid the labor laws in place in this country. in fact they use illegals to undermine the very laws and regulations that keep workers safe and employed fairly. The benefit outweighs the risk.

When will someone, ANYone punish severely people that hire illegals? When the economic opportunites dry up, the illegals will leave and American employers will be forced to hire Americans and legal immigrants at prevailing wages and benefits.

The Democrats wanted to make them legal and give them a path to citizenship so they can vote for Democrats. Republicans want to keep them underground so they can't complain and can be abused and work cheap for Republicans, but the "problem" will not go away under either party.

[james&olya 1,121]

Now we will get the Republican BS regarding "illegal immigrants". The issue is not and never has been "illegal immigrants" The issue is businesses hiring undocumented workers at lower than minimum wage and avoiding federal and state worker protections in order to save money. That's it. There IS nothing else to the issue. Illegals come here to work for money. Small businesses (and some big businesses) hire them to avoid the labor laws in place in this country. in fact they use illegals to undermine the very laws and regulations that keep workers safe and employed fairly. The benefit outweighs the risk.

When will someone, ANYone punish severely people that hire illegals? When the economic opportunites dry up, the illegals will leave and American employers will be forced to hire Americans and legal immigrants at prevailing wages and benefits.

The Democrats wanted to make them legal and give them a path to citizenship so they can vote for Democrats. Republicans want to keep them underground so they can't complain and can be abused and work cheap for Republicans, but the "problem" will not go away under either party.

[mawilson 2,133]

But it also could further hurt the GOP in its endeavor to grab a large enough share of the growing Latino vote to win the White House and the Senate majority in 2012.

The usual racist BS. As if Latinos are in favor of illegal immigration just because they are Latinos.

[james&olya 1,121]

The usual racist BS. As if Latinos are in favor of illegal immigration just because they are Latinos.

Isn't it true that latinos here legally, esp recent immigrants, are often the harshest in their attitudes to undocumented workers?

[spookyturtle 9,466]

Now we will get the Republican BS regarding "illegal immigrants". The issue is not and never has been "illegal immigrants" The issue is businesses hiring undocumented workers at lower than minimum wage and avoiding federal and state worker protections in order to save money. That's it. There IS nothing else to the issue. Illegals come here to work for money. Small businesses (and some big businesses) hire them to avoid the labor laws in place in this country. in fact they use illegals to undermine the very laws and regulations that keep workers safe and employed fairly. The benefit outweighs the risk.

When will someone, ANYone punish severely people that hire illegals? When the economic opportunites dry up, the illegals will leave and American employers will be forced to hire Americans and legal immigrants at prevailing wages and benefits.

The Democrats wanted to make them legal and give them a path to citizenship so they can vote for Democrats. Republicans want to keep them underground so they can't complain and can be abused and work cheap for Republicans, but the "problem" will not go away under either party.

What Gary said.

[peejay 327]

The usual racist BS. As if Latinos are in favor of illegal immigration just because they are Latinos.

These people didn't just materialize out of nowhere during the last 30 years. Lots of people have failed to connect the dots or wish to ignore the obvious. A huge chunk of Latinos have benefited from illegal immigration for decades and owe their present situation to the benefits of illegal immigration. Seven illegal alien amnesties and subsequent reward of chain migration policies to bring their relatives here after being amnestied for starters. 80%+ of illegal aliens presently in the USA are Latinos. Amnesties and TPS overwhelmingly rewards mostly Latinos for illegally immigrating. That is a fact. Latinos have come to expect that they will be rewarded for illegally immigrating. Either through past multiple amnesties or arbitrary Temporary Protected Statuses that has rewarded them with residency and work authorization for over a decade. Not so temporary is it? Who do you think stands to benefit the most from these amnesties and recent TPS's that the Dumbocrats are trying to shove up the arses of the American people right now? I'll give you 3 guesses and the first two don't count.

Of course not all Latinos are in favor of illegal immigration, but most are or sympathize with it for obvious reasons and motives stated above. The Dumbocrats wouldn't be pandering to the illegal alien cheerleaders already eligible to vote if the sentiment was not there in large enough numbers to for them to get some sort of self serving gain from it. We all know why the Dumbos are pushing to protect and eventually amnesty tens of millions of illegal aliens already here with citizenship and voting rights. I just haven't been able to figure out why so many Americans believe in and support this madness. They must be stupid, gullible, ignorant, or they don't give a sh*t. I see no good in these foolish policies for the vast majority of Americans.

[Rebecca Jo 1,962]

I suspect the failure of even the Dream act to get any traction is sign enough, the country is ripe for a new tone with immigration.

Oh, Danno, are you buying into that GOP hopey-changey stuff?

[luckytxn 2,264]

It is nice to see that the GOP woke up enough to try to make sure the criminals do not get legal status. It will be even better if they decide to go after the ones that hire them with very harsh penalties. Penalties harsh enough to mean bankruptcy and even possible prison but doubt they will do any of that.

[james&olya 1,121]

It is nice to see that the GOP woke up enough to try to make sure the criminals do not get legal status. It will be even better if they decide to go after the ones that hire them with very harsh penalties. Penalties harsh enough to mean bankruptcy and even possible prison but doubt they will do any of that.

You really think the GOP would ever go after these employers? The ones that donate money to their campaigns? Really? No, I didn't think so. We all know who the politicians actually work for. And it isn't you and me!!

[peejay 327]

You really think the GOP would ever go after these employers? The ones that donate money to their campaigns? Really? No, I didn't think so. We all know who the politicians actually work for. And it isn't you and me!!

No more than the Dumbocrats will actually try to go after illegal aliens. Because right now their strategy is to protect them until they get back into power to amnesty them.

I'm a conservative and, as such, I lean toward the Republiclowns way more than I do toward the Dumbocrats. However, I'm not naive and I remain an independent looking out for my own interests. I trust neither of these parties and know well their histories and lies.