Immigration reform: where things stand now

As congressional negotiators approach their self-imposed targets of early April to lay out immigration reform legislation, some notorious sticking points appear to be more well-settled than others.

3. “Path to citizenship” and border security

Jonathan Alcorn/Reuters/File
Fabiola Santiago, an undocumented UCLA student with a master's degree in public heath, attends a graduation ceremony for UCLA 'DREAMers,' or DREAM Act students, at a church near the campus in Los Angeles in this 2012 photo.

The two most emotionally and politically charged issues are often linked together as two sides of the same immigration reform bargain: Immigrant advocates will get legalization for many of those in the country illegally, while border hawks will get ramped-up measures to stem illegal immigration.

Legislators are expected to offer beefier border security as well as the implementation of a long-awaited system for better tracking the entry and exit of those who come to the US legally. As many as 4 in 10 of the nation’s undocumented population are estimated to have come to America legally and then overstayed their visas.

Lawmakers would love a Border Security Index – a single number that would loop in all the various factors that constitute a secure border. How many attempted border crossings are stopped? How many tons of drugs interdicted? How high is the crime rate along the border?

But Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano recently said that isn’t happening.

Instead, lawmakers are going to have to take a more qualitative approach to certifying that the border is secure. Options could include a council of Southwest border state leaders tasked with the job or annual congressional votes certifying a secure border.

The certification question is key because both the House and the Senate are not expected to offer those in the country illegally any permanent status before the border is certified as secure. (Before such point, however, unauthorized immigrants would likely be able to gain a legal status after paying a fine and meeting other eligibility criteria that would allow them to work.)

Once a certification procedure is in place, the next question would be how lawmakers get undocumented immigrants to citizenship.

For young people brought into the US by their parents (a group known generally as DREAMers, after the long-stalled DREAM Act that would give them legal status), both chambers appear to be willing to allow these young people a special route to citizenship. Agricultural workers are also likely to get similar special treatment.

For everyone else, however, there’s a general if unspoken consensus that a unique road to citizenship available only to the undocumented won’t be part of the final bill. Instead, lawmakers are trying to decipher how to fit millions of people through a new and improved legal immigration system.

“Those who entered illegally as adults will only be allowed to participate in the new and improved guest worker and visa programs,” said Rep. Raul Labrador (R) of Idaho, a key immigration negotiator, in an op-ed in the Los Angeles Times on Sunday.

This issue is that the current pipeline for legal immigration handles only about 1 million new permanent residents per year. Squeezing as many as 10 million potential citizens through that pipeline could take more than 20 years – a prospect that many immigration advocates say is unacceptable.

Only the compromises in the final legislation will show how lawmakers plan to thread that policy needle.

3 of 3

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.