Senator Grassley of Iowa
released his Senate floor speech on the Senate floor on Feb 04.
It is a long speech, but it can be summarize in two points. (1)
Reagan immigration reform (IRCA) in the 1980s was a failure because
the legalization program failed to ensure border security and
block of flood of undocumented immigrants from the Southern border
before legalization of undocumented immigrants was implemented.
(2) This time around, the border security must be achieved and
assured before implementation of legalization of undocumented
immigrants.
Senate Gang of 8 had initially proposed making secure borders as a precondition for legalization of undocumented immigrants. This is also the
point of key conflict with the President's immigration reform
framework. In fact, this is the key difference between the Republican
party and the Democratic party on the legalization portion of
CIR.
NBC online news site carried an opinion of a leading immigration
law professor discussing two yardsticks: Objective vs. Subjective
measure yardsticks. Obviously, the bargainers should use and
find objective yardsticks to thaw the ice.
The opinion is so interesting
that we have decided to cite the relevant portion of the report
in full as follows:
Cornell University Law
School professor Stephen Yale-Loehr, an immigration law expert,
said one possible compromise between the two sides would be an
enforcement mechanism based on objective criteria, like
a certain number of Border Patrol agents along the border or
amount of money spent on security.
But he said that if Republicans
insist on a subjective measure, such as whether a poll
finds the majority of Americans think the border is secure, or
whether Republican governors of border states agree the border
is secure, common ground will be much more difficult to find.
Asked about the political feasibility of objective measures in
a final immigration bill, Yale-Loehr said, “I would hope
that an objective one would satisfy the conservatives enough
that they could live with it while not antagonizing the other
side too much.”
This analysis should give at least a starting point and guidance for
CIR power players of the White House, the Senate, and the House!