Elise Foley

CBO Estimates Immigration Bill Would Shrink Deficit

2013-06-18T18:10:18-04:00

WASHINGTON -- The bipartisan immigration reform bill currently under consideration in the Senate would shrink the deficit by $197 billion over the next decade and $700 billion during the 10 years that followed, the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office estimated in a report released Tuesday.

The "gang of eight" bill, which lawmakers passed into the debate phase last week, would allow undocumented immigrants a path to citizenship, triggered by improvements to border security. It would also rework the legal immigration system and require more policing of unauthorized immigration within the United States.

The CBO report estimated that the bill, if passed, would lead to a net increase of 10.4 million people living in the United States by 2023. The economic impact is estimated to be largely positive. CBO and the Joint Committee on Taxation estimated that the bill would decrease deficits by $197 billion and cost $22 billion to implement over the 2014-2023 period.

According to the report, over the next decade the bill would lead to a $262 billion increase in federal direct spending, including on Medicare and Obamacare. But it would also increase federal revenues by $459 billion, CBO estimated.

"This report is a huge momentum boost for immigration reform," gang of eight Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) said in a statement. "This debunks the idea that immigration reform is anything other than a boon to our economy, and robs the bill’s opponents of one of their last remaining arguments. Immigration reform is not only the right thing to do to stay true to our nation’s principles, it will also boost our economy, reduce the deficit and create jobs."

White House Press Secretary Jay Carney called the nonpartisan report "more proof that bipartisan commonsense immigration reform will be good for economic growth and deficit reduction."

The report looked beyond the 10-year period the CBO typically considers in estimating the cost of bills, which immigration reform opponents, like Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.), encouraged. The Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank that came under fire for a misleading study that put the cost of the bill at $6.3 trillion over the next 50 years, wrote in a blog post last week that it would be misleading if the CBO only looked at 10 years. The bill's impact changes significantly after the 10-year mark, when some undocumented immigrants would become legal permanent residents and eventually citizens, and when increased security measures likely would already be in place.

The CBO eventually opted to look at a 20-year period. By 2033, the CBO estimated a net population increase of 16 million. With spending and revenues combined, the bill would lead to a $700 billion decrease of the deficit between 2024 and 2033, according to the report.

Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.), another member of the gang of eight, said the CBO score shows his arguments about the economic merits of reform were valid.

"The CBO has further confirmed what most conservative economists have found: Reforming our immigration system is a net benefit for our economy, American workers and taxpayers," he said. "There remain some key areas that need to be tightened up to prevent those who have violated our immigration laws from accessing federal benefit programs. But overall, the CBO report offers encouraging evidence that the status quo is unacceptable and we can end it without burdening our already burdened taxpayers and, in fact, reduce the deficit over the next 20 years."

UPDATE: 6:50 p.m. -- Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.) brushed off the CBO report in a statement after its release.

"The bill’s drafters relied on the same scoring gimmicks used by the Obamacare drafters to conceal its true cost from taxpayers and to manipulate the CBO score. ... [T]he score effectively conceals some of the biggest long-term costs to taxpayers contained in this legislation, including providing illegal immigrants with Medicaid, food stamps, and cash welfare," he said.

Border Fence Amendment To Immigration Bill Fails

2013-06-18T17:18:18-04:00

WASHINGTON -- The Senate voted down amendments on Tuesday to significantly expand border fencing and biometric systems to check entries into the United States, two Republican-proposed measures that could up the cost of comprehensive immigration reform and delay a path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants.

The border amendment proposed by Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.) failed 39-54, with "nay" votes coming from the entire "gang of eight" -- which includes Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), who famously said in a 2010 ad that the government should "complete the danged fence," and Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.), who has called for more border protections in his own bill.

The amendments were among the first to receive votes since the bipartisan bill passed votes last week to move forward to debate. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) said Tuesday that he plans to file for a final vote by Monday, with the goal of passing the bill by the July 4 recess.

Thune and David Vitter (R-La.) offered the two amendments voted down Tuesday, while more narrowly-focused amendments from Democratic Sens. Mary Landrieu (D-La.) and Jon Tester (D-Mont.) passed.

Thune's amendment was most emblematic of the biggest fight over the comprehensive immigration reform bill: whether it should strengthen its border security requirements in an attempt to win over more Republican voters.

His amendment would delay a path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants until the government completed 700 miles of double-layered fencing along the U.S.-Mexico border, an expensive endeavor that opponents said was too drastic. Under the amendment, undocumented immigrants would not gain even provisional status until 350 miles of the fence were completed. The measure would also take a large chunk of the money that the bill would appropriate for southern border security, leaving less for technology and other measures experts say are a better use of the funds.

McCain argued that the border is best secured with a combination of strategies, and noted the gang of eight bill already requires fencing -- though without dictating exactly how much should be built -- and allows border patrol to determine the best approach.

"Fencing is important," McCain said on the House floor a few hours before the vote. "Surveillance is more important."

Rubio released a statement after the vote saying he supports the idea for a fence, but opposed Thune's proposal due to his lack of specificity.

“[H]is amendment does not detail a specific border plan," Rubio said. "Therefore, I opposed his amendment and instead continue to work with my Republican colleagues to arrive at a new measure that improves on the significant border security measures already in the bill."

Vitter's amendment, which failed 36-58, was also criticized as far too costly and likely to delay a path to citizenship. He proposed requiring full implementation of the U.S.-VISIT system at all airports, sea ports and other points of entry, requiring them to take biometric information when foreigners entered the country to help ensure they leave when required. It's an expensive endeavor that the government has tried to implement in the past, without success.

Democratic amendments passed easily. Landrieu's measure to automatically grant citizenship to children adopted from abroad by U.S. citizens passed on a voice vote. It would end a requirement currently in place that parents visit their child's native country ahead of giving citizenship to the adoptee.

Tester's amendment would include tribal government officials in a border oversight task force that would be created in the immigration reform bill. It already includes a number of representatives of the border regions, such as governors of border states, residents and law enforcement. The amendment passed 94-0.

Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), despite voting for the amendment, said fellow senators should note that the border task force doesn't counteract the other problems he has with the gang of eight bill.

"This amendment doesn't fundamentally change the bill," he said. "There is really no opposition to making sure that the tribes have a voice in policy. Of course, this task force doesn't have any real power. ... While the amendment is noncontroversial, members should know this task force is a fig leaf for actual border security."

Gang Of Eight Senators: We Can't Control John Boehner, House GOP

2013-06-18T16:16:43-04:00

WASHINGTON -- Senators working toward immigration reform insisted on Tuesday that House Speaker John Boehner hasn't doomed the effort by saying a comprehensive approach will only get a vote if the majority of his conference supports it. But they said his comments also show that the upper chamber needs to win large support for its bipartisan immigration bill and compel the House to give it a closer look.

"No matter what he has said, there is going to be significant national pressure on the House to do something on immigration," Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) told reporters Tuesday, referring to Boehner. "I'm only worried about what's going to happen here, and I'm not going to say how I really feel about it, okay?"

Boehner said he vowed to his GOP colleagues in a closed-door meeting on Tuesday that he wouldn't have a vote for an immigration bill unless most of his conference supported it.

"[A]ny immigration reform bill that is going to go into law ought to have a majority of both parties’ support if we’re really serious about making that happen," Boehner told reporters after the meeting. "And so I don’t see any way of bringing an immigration bill to the floor that doesn’t have a majority support of Republicans."

The House Judiciary Committee held its first markup on Tuesday on a piecemeal immigration reform bill that focuses solely on enforcement, and will turn on Wednesday to an agricultural guest worker immigration bill. The Senate, meanwhile, is working on a bipartisan immigration reform bill from the so-called "gang of eight" that would address border security and guest workers along with legal immigration and a path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants.

Under the informal Hastert Rule -- which Boehner has broken before -- a speaker vows not to pass a bill when most of his or her own party opposes it, even if it has majority support in the House as a whole.

Senators in the gang of eight argue that a piecemeal approach won't work. If Congress only addresses enforcement, for example, then the issue of undocumented immigrants will largely remain unaddressed, or if it leaves out legal immigration improvements, then there will still be incentives for people to come to the U.S. unauthorized.

Gang of eight member Sen. Bob Menendez (D-N.J.) said Boehner's refusal to go forward with support from a minority of Congress was troubling and indicative of a lack of serious commitment to immigration reform.

"It is amazing and alarming that Speaker Boehner would allow a minority of House members -- who will never, ever support immigration reform -- to dictate the fate of bipartisan, comprehensive reform that an overwhelming majority of the American people want," he said in a statement. "You have to question the Republican leader’s seriousness about real immigration reform if he is willing to put tea party politics ahead of the will of the American people."

Republican members of the Senate group were reticent to criticize Boehner, but conceded that how he handles his conference is not within their control.

"That's his right. He's a dear friend," Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) said. "I'm just saying there will never be a bill signed into law without a pathway to citizenship. Just look at the politics. Why would any president, particularly a Democratic president, sign a bill without a pathway to citizenship when 70 percent support an earned pathway to citizenship?"

Graham also said that Boehner's comments did not concern him with respect to the bill's prospects, despite widespread opposition among House conservatives to comprehensive reform.

"They pass their version, we pass our version, we have a conference," he said, referring to the process in which the House and Senate iron out differences between their bills.

Sens. Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.) and Marco Rubio (R-Fla.), who recently met with skeptical House conservatives to discuss their concerns, told The Huffington Post it was too early to speculate on how the bill will pass the lower chamber when the Senate is still working through its own bill.

"I don't want to comment [on Boehner] -- the best we can do is pass a good bill in the Senate and the House will work its will," Flake said.

Rubio said he wasn't focused on matters outside of the Senate.

"Speaker Boehner and the House will do what the House needs to do, and we respect that," he said. "They have their own opinions and they'll have their own imprints on this. That's the way this process works and it's the way the process should work."

"I'm focused on getting the strongest possible bill out of the Senate with the most amount of support as possible, and I think if we do that, it'll increase the chances that this can pass," he added.

Gang of eight member Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) echoed the views of his Republican colleagues.

"Look, I think that the better we do in the Senate, the more likely the House will be to take up our bill ... but we also know we're going to have to bargain with the House, so we have to be careful," he said. "I've always assumed that we had to get mainstream Republicans in the House to get a bill done."

Boehner's promise doesn't necessarily mean an end to comprehensive immigration reform. Even if the House passed piecemeal legislation, it could be combined later with the Senate bill when the chambers meet to work out their differences, although the final result would need to be approved by the House. Boehner, for his part, wouldn't say whether his vow not to break the Hastert rule also applied to a post-conference bill.

"We'll see when we get there," he said.

UPDATE: 6:05 p.m. -- A Boehner spokesman told the National Review's Jonathan Strong that the speaker's comments also would apply to a conference report after the House and Senate combined bills. Boehner had previously declined to rule out holding a vote on a conference report without the support of a majority of his conference.

Jennifer Bendery contributed reporting.

Ted Cruz Attempts To Add Voter ID To Immigration Reform Bill

2013-06-17T17:43:24-04:00

WASHINGTON -- Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) announced on Monday another amendment to throw a wrench into the Senate's comprehensive immigration reform bill: tying it to voter ID.

The amendment, which he first announced on Twitter, is unlikely to make it into the eventual bill. Cruz voted three times -- once in the Judiciary Committee and twice on the Senate floor -- against moving the "gang of eight" bill forward even for debate, and is considered unwinnable as a "yes" vote for the legislation as a whole.

Still, he has attempted to add his own touches to the bill, such as stripping it of its path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants. The most recent amendment would touch on the equally contentious issue of whether would-be voters should be required to show identification to prove their citizenship before registering to vote.

I'll file amendment to immigration bill that permits states to require ID before registering voters & close this hole in fed statutory law.
— Senator Ted Cruz (@SenTedCruz) June 17, 2013

The Supreme Court ruled earlier Monday that states cannot require people to prove their U.S. citizenship before using a federal voter registration system.

UPDATE: 6:30 p.m. -- Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) announced an amendment later Monday aimed at addressing voter ID issues brought up by the Supreme Court ruling. According to a statement, his "Secure the Vote" amendment is meant to ensure immigrants do not vote until they become citizens -- they are already banned from doing so -- by providing "new procedures to enable states to check that individuals gaining status or a work visa are not illegally registered to vote."

"Not only would this amendment prevent voter fraud, it would also clear up the problem created by today's Supreme Court decision," Paul said in a statement. "My amendment requires states to check citizenship before registering people to vote in federal elections."

Marco Rubio: 'I'm Done' If Immigration Bill Includes LGBT Couples

2013-06-13T14:16:29-04:00

WASHINGTON -- Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) made another threat on Thursday to walk away from his own comprehensive immigration reform bill, this time over an amendment to provide the same immigration benefits to LGBT couples as heterosexual ones.

"If this bill has something in it that gives gay couples immigration rights and so forth, it kills the bill. I'm done," Rubio said on the Andrea Tantaros Show. "I'm off it, and I've said that repeatedly. I don't think that's going to happen and it shouldn't happen. This is already a difficult enough issue as it is."

It's likely not a reason to worry about the bill because a potential vote on such an amendment would almost certainly fail. An amendment from Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) would allow same-sex married couples to petition for green cards for foreign-born spouses in the same way heterosexual married couples can, which currently is banned because of the Defense of Marriage Act. The status quo means many same-sex couples are either forced to live apart or to leave the country to be together, but could be rectified if the Supreme Court overturns the DOMA.

Rubio has repeatedly said he opposes adding LGBT provisions to the immigration bill he drafted with the so-called "gang of eight." His fellow Republican members of the group are similarly opposed and insist it would be a poison pill to the immigration reform legislation.

"If you're going to load it up with social issues, that is the best way to derail it, in my view," Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) said in January.

Democrats seem to be taking Republicans at their word, and even if the amendment comes up for a vote, most advocates have resigned themselves to the likelihood it will fail. Leahy even withdrew the amendment from a vote during the Judiciary Committee hearing in May, at the urging of Democrats in the gang of eight.

Rubio has also said he would vote against his bill if border security provisions are not strengthened.

CORRECTION: -- An earlier version of this story said Marco Rubio is from Arizona rather than Florida. It has been corrected.

John Cornyn Immigration Reform Amendment Decried As 'Poison Pill'

2013-06-12T17:29:35-04:00

WASHINGTON -- Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas) unveiled an amendment on Wednesday that some argue could bring down the comprehensive immigration reform bill by putting in costly and difficult to reach border security requirements.

"It's not possible for us to support [Cornyn's] amendment as it is presently written," Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), a member of the "gang of eight" that drafted the bill, told reporters. "It's a poison pill."

The amendment is meant to strengthen border provisions in the "gang of eight" bill, which passed its first votes on Tuesday to proceed to debate. Whether those provisions are strengthened -- through Cornyn's RESULTS amendment or something else -- will likely prove pivotal to winning over Republicans, including gang of eight member Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.).

It could also hurt the bill, with Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) also calling the amendment a poison pill, and others saying it's simply unworkable.

The debate is one that has been brought up in every discussion of immigration reform: The border must be secured and often, proposals to secure it aren't considered good enough. Cornyn insisted that the bill as written does not have strict enough border enforcement measures.

"Here's the bottom line and the reality," he said on the Senate floor. "Without a border security trigger, immigration reform will be dead on arrival in the House of Representatives. My amendment provides such a trigger, the gang of eight bill does not. ... My amendment is essential to moving this legislation forward and to getting an outcome that ultimately will end up on the president's desk."

He grew testy later when debating the amendment with gang of eight members McCain and Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), calling it "preposterous" that gang of eight members were resisting amendments. Schumer said they are open to other amendments -- just not this one.

"It's not true that this is written on golden tablets," McCain said, adding it's "patently false" to allege they are trying to block changes to the bill.

The gang of eight bill would allow undocumented immigrants to gain provisional status, which would let them remain in the country legally and work. It would later create a path to citizenship -- first a green card, then eventual naturalization -- but only if certain border security measures were met to trigger the plan to move forward.

Cornyn's amendment would add to those triggers by broadening security requirements. While the gang of eight would require 90 percent apprehension of border-crossers and full operational security in high-traffic areas of the border, Cornyn's amendment would extend those requirements to the entire border. The gang of eight bill includes a pilot program for biometric entry and exit systems in airports, but Cornyn's amendment requires biometric systems in all airports and seaports before the path to citizenship can open. It would also call for 5,000 additional Border Patrol agents.

Some border-area lawmakers feel such additional requirements are simply unnecessary. Rep. Beto O'Rourke (D-Texas), who represents the border city of El Paso, said last week that senators from his state -- Cornyn and Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) -- may not realize that provisions meant to strengthen border security could also hurt the state's ability to do business with Mexico.

"It's just such a big state that I want to think that Cornyn and Cruz, those senators, have the best of intentions but maybe just don't understand the dynamic on the border," he told HuffPost in an interview, before Cornyn's amendment was introduced.

McCain, who is also from a border state, railed on the Senate floor against claims that their bill did too little on border security, pointing out the increases in funding and border requirements already in the bill. He told reporters after leaving the floor that the gang of eight will work with fellow Republicans on amendments that allay concerns without killing the bill, and hope to do something soon.

He said he wasn't surprised the debate has turned so much to the border.

"I knew that it would," McCain said. "That's because in some of these people's minds you could have the Berlin Wall and it wouldn't be secure enough."

He and Schumer argued with Cornyn on the Senate floor later on Wednesday that Cornyn's amendment would take up so much funding on border agents that little would be left for more effective methods of surveillance, such as drones.

It's likely that some sort of amendment on border security will make it into the bill, since many Republicans say it is necessary to win their vote. Sen. Mark Kirk (R-Ill.), who surprised observers by voting on Tuesday against moving the bill forward, told Politico he might sign on to the bill if the Cornyn amendment was added.

Sen. Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.), speaking to reporters earlier Wednesday at a Christian Science Monitor event, said he doesn't consider the Cornyn amendment a "poison pill," but doesn't expect it to be approved as written, either.

"It's unlikely that he'll get his amendment as it is, so what we're doing now is trying the different areas that we can agree on," he said, adding that he trusts Cornyn at his word that he would support the bill if his amendment is passed.

But Democrats such as Reid have said they will fight against amendments that make the border triggers to difficult to achieve and therefore undermine the path to citizenship, although he added he is open to some changes on the border provisions. He did not specifically single out Cornyn or other Republicans.

"I am concerned that some who oppose the very idea of reform see these triggers as a backdoor way to undermine the legislation," Reid said on the Senate floor. "And I believe some Republicans with no intention of voting for the final bill -- regardless of how it is amended -- seek to offer these amendments with the sole purpose of derailing this vital reform."

Jeff Flake On Sequestration: Some Lawmakers Relieved To Avoid Cut Decisions

2013-06-12T15:39:38-04:00

Sen. Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.) said on Wednesday that some of his fellow lawmakers are glad sequestration allowed for spending cuts and that government agencies were responsible for making the actual decisions about where to slash funds.

"A lot of members of Congress will publicly complain and moan about the sequester and privately say, well, better somebody else makes a decision than us," he said at an event hosted by the Christian Science Monitor. "Unfortunately, that's what happens."

The mandatory across-the-board cuts from sequestration went into effect on March 1 and have led to massive spending reductions that affect everyone from the elderly, to cancer patients, to children. Congress could have chosen to avert the cuts, but did not. The agencies were left to determine where to cut funding, meaning, as Flake said, members of Congress have kept their hands largely clean of the specific reductions that have gone into effect.

When a reporter stated that pressure seemed to be lower on Congress to bring down government spending because the deficit is shrinking faster than expected, Flake agreed.

"It's amazing what a drop of four- or five-billion dollars a year in the deficit will do," Flake said. "My view is it's still far too large, it's unsustainable. We ought to address it sooner rather than later. But the fact that the sequester went into effect has been another thing that has taken some of the pressure off."

Latino Voters Poll On Immigration Finds Opposition To Border-First Approach

2013-06-11T16:12:49-04:00

A strong majority of Latino voters reject the idea that border enforcement should come before a path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants, according to a poll released Tuesday from Latino Decisions and pro-reform group Presente.org.

The poll, like other surveys on the topic, found strong support -- 81 percent -- for measures that provide a path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants at the same time as they increase border security. But it also found that many Latino voters are unaware of certain parts of the "gang of eight" bill that passed its first hurdle Tuesday on the Senate floor. That bill would immediately legalize many undocumented immigrants, but would also require that certain border security provisions be met before a plan for a path to citizenship could move forward.

Latino Decisions found that 47 percent of Latino voters had heard little or nothing about the bill's measure to increase the number of border agents, while 44 percent said they had not heard about its provision for more fencing along the U.S.-Mexico border. Fifty-four percent of Latino voters had heard little or nothing about the major increase in spending on border enforcement in the bill, according to the poll.

Border provisions are likely to be a major tipping point in the legislation, with Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas) planning to offer what Senate Majority Harry Reid (D-Nev.) has called a "poison pill" to increase hurdles on a path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants.

President Barack Obama said in a speech on Tuesday that the gang of eight's requirements for border security improvements are strong without amendments.

"I know there's a lot of talk right now about border security, so let me repeat: Today, illegal crossings are near their lowest level in decades, and if passed, the Senate bill as currently written ... would put in place the toughest border enforcement plan that America has ever seen," he said. "So nobody's taking border enforcement lightly."

The Latino Decisions/Presente.org poll found support from Latino voters for several provisions in the gang of eight bill that would mark steps on the path to citizenship. A strong majority -- 94 percent -- said undocumented immigrants should be required to go through a background check before becoming legal residents. But most -- 78 percent -- also opposed allowing undocumented immigrants to become legal residents without the chance of becoming citizens. Additionally, Latino voters largely oppose increasing the number of detentions of unauthorized immigrants, according to the poll.

"To be clear, our poll finds that Latino voters are very strong supporters of the current immigration reform efforts," Latino Decisions' Matt Barreto said in an email. "However, as the bill moves to the Senate floor for amendment and debate, this new poll highlights that Latino voters have questions about some portions of the bill they would like to see improved. Most notably, the 13-15 year waiting period to apply for citizenship is seen as far too long, and by and large Latino voters would like to see that period reduced."

Latino Decisions polled 500 Latino registered voters nationwide, and allowed them to answer in English or Spanish. The margin of error was plus or minus 4.4 percent.

Immigration Reform Bill Passes First Test On Senate Floor

2013-06-11T14:50:24-04:00

WASHINGTON -- The Senate immigration reform bill passed its first procedural hurdle on the floor Tuesday in a 82-15 vote, with only Republicans voting to block the bill from moving forward.

All Democrats voted for the bill to proceed. Republican Sens. Chuck Grassley (Iowa), John Boozman (Ark.), Ted Cruz (Texas), Jim Inhofe (Okla.), Mark Kirk (Ill.), Mike Lee (Utah), James Risch (Idaho), Tim Scott (S.C.), Jeff Sessions (Ala.), Richard Shelby (Ala.), David Vitter (La.), Mike Enzi (Wyo.), John Barrasso (Wyo.), Mike Crapo (Idaho), and Pat Roberts (Kan.) voted to stall the bill.

The three senators who did not vote were Sens. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska), Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) and John McCain (R-Ariz.), who is a member of the "gang of eight" that drafted the legislation.

The vote decided whether to proceed to an amend-and-debate period during which lawmakers can continue to mold the final legislative product. The bill still must get another 60 votes to end that period, a decision expected to be made later Tuesday. If the measure makes it through that hurdle, it would then have an up or down vote for final passage. But just because the bill passed the first vote easily doesn't mean its fate is certain.

The gang of eight bill would provide a path to citizenship for some of the estimated 11 million undocumented immigrants currently in the United States, with proposals such as expanding the number of green cards tied to improving border enforcement. The legislation would also rework the legal immigration system and increase measures to police unauthorized immigration within the country. President Barack Obama threw his weight behind the bill earlier Tuesday in a speech at the White House, calling the legislation the best chance Congress has to enact comprehensive immigration reform.

"If you're not serious about [immigration reform], if you think that a broken system is the best America can do, then I guess it might make sense to try to block it," Obama said. "But if you're actually serious and sincere about fixing a broken immigration system, this is the vehicle to do it."

The border provisions are likely to be among the most contentious, with many Republican members -- including gang of eight member Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) -- saying the bill, as written, doesn't have strong enough security measures. Only one Republican outside the gang of eight, Sen. Kelly Ayotte (R-N.H.), has announced she will back the bill.

Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas) voted for the bill to move forward, but has said it needs more border security requirements before he would support its final passage. He plans to present an amendment that would add additional border security requirements, making it even harder for the government to reach the level of security deemed necessary to trigger a path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants.

Democrats have called Cornyn's proposed amendment unworkable, and Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) told reporters on Tuesday that he views it as too costly and too difficult to pass. Among the costs would be the bill's requirement for a biometric entry and exit system to be implemented at all airports and sea ports. The gang of eight bill would create a pilot program for such a plan, but not nationwide implementation.

"It may not be a viable trigger, but I think he's onto something here as far as strengthening the border," Graham said.

Still, the South Carolina Republican said he would support additional border measures to help gain Republican votes. In the end, if the bill only garners a slim majority of Republicans, he said it is unlikely to pass in the GOP-controlled House.

Rubio, who also voted for the bill to move forward, has said he plans to work on further border security amendments and will not support eventual passage unless provisions are added. He announced Tuesday morning that he will push for an amendment to close a loophole and require all undocumented immigrants to demonstrate English proficiency in order to receive a green card.

"We feel positive about the way forward," Rubio told reporters ahead of the vote. "There will be some work to do. I think the good news is what it's going to take, and what it's going to take is providing people certainty that this problem will never happen again, that we won't have another wave of illegal immigration in the future, and I think that's very reasonable and very achievable."

Some hesitant Democrats indicated on Tuesday they may be likely to support immigration reform in the end. Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.), who voted for moving forward, told reporters he is concerned about border security but leaning toward supporting final passage.

"We're looking at that very favorably," Manchin said.

Many of the Republicans who voted to proceed on the bill have not yet said whether they will vote for it. Republican Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) said Tuesday before the vote that he would vote in favor of proceeding, but has many concerns with the language of the bill.

"At the risk of stating the obvious, the bill has serious flaws," McConnell said on the Senate floor. "I’ll vote to debate it and for the opportunity to amend it, but in the days ahead, there will need to be major changes to this bill if it’s going to become law."

UPDATE: 4:57 p.m. -- The bill passed a motion to proceed later Tuesday in an 84-15 vote. Most of the Republicans who initially voted against the bill opposed it again in the second vote, with Lee, Sessions, Vitter, Cruz, Kirk, Boozman, Crapo, Scott, Risch, Inhofe, Enzi, Barrasso, Shelby and Roberts voting "nay."

Sen. Thad Cochran (R-Miss.) voted against the motion to proceed despite voting for cloture earlier in the day, while Grassley voted to proceed despite his previous vote against cloture. Coburn and Murkowski, who were not present for the first vote, supported moving forward on the second vote.

Jennifer Bendery contributed reporting.

CORRECTION: The original article misidentified Sen. Lisa Murkowski, a Republican from Alaska, as representing Maine.

Obama On Immigration Bill: 'This Is The Vehicle' To Fix Broken System

2013-06-11T11:27:10-04:00

WASHINGTON -- President Barack Obama gave a full endorsement of the "gang of eight" immigration reform bill on Tuesday, just ahead of its first vote on the Senate floor.

"If you're serious about actually fixing the system, then this is the vehicle to do it," he said at the White House, flanked by immigration reform supporters, including young undocumented Dreamers to the president and CEO of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, Tom Donohue.

"If you're not serious about it, if you think that a broken system is the best America can do, then I guess it might make sense to try to block it," he continued. "But if you're actually serious and sincere about fixing a broken immigration system, this is the vehicle to do it."

The Senate, by a vote of 82 to 15, moved to begin debate on the immigration bill, with Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) vowing to finish before the Fourth of July recess. Its future after that vote is more uncertain, because many Republicans have said they will vote for cloture but have not committed to supporting the final bill.

One Republican, Sen. Kelly Ayotte (N.H.), joined the four GOP members of the gang of eight to support the bill, and Obama predicted more will sign on in time.

"The good news is that every day that goes by, more and more Republicans and Democrats are coming out to support this common-sense immigration reform bill," he said.

It is likely to face many amendments, which Obama acknowledged. One amendment from Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas), would tighten border security requirements and make a path to citizenship more difficult for undocumented immigrants. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) told Univision such an amendment would be a "poison pill" for the legislation.

Obama did not directly reference the amendment, but said the current bill's border security provisions -- coupled with improvements already made under his administration -- are significant enough.

"I know there's a lot of talk right now about border security, so let me repeat: Today, illegal crossings are near their lowest level in decades, and if passed, the Senate bill as currently written ... would put in place the toughest border enforcement plan that America has ever seen," he said. "So nobody's taking border enforcement lightly."

The president has previously said the gang of eight bill isn't necessarily what he would have written himself, but that it includes most of the measures he wants for reform. His top priorities for reform have been a pathway to citizenship for undocumented immigrants, strengthened border security and interior enforcement, and a streamlined legal immigration system. The bill does not include measures he supports such as inclusion of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender couples in immigration law so they can petition for legal status for foreign-born partners, but the White House has said Obama is willing to sign legislation without that provision.

"This bill isn't perfect, it's a compromise," Obama said Tuesday. "And going forward, nobody is going to get everything they want. Not Democrats, not Republicans, not me. But this is a bill that's largely consistent with the principles that I and the people on this stage have laid out for common-sense reform."

Obama also indirectly knocked House Republicans for voting last week to defund his Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, which allows undocumented young people to remain in the United States so long as they meet certain requirements.

"There's no good reason to undo the progress we've already made, especially when it comes to extreme steps like stripping protections from Dreamers that my administration provided, or asking law enforcement to treat them in the same way they'd treat violent criminals," he said. "That's not who we are."

This story has been updated with the results of Tuesday's Senate vote.

SEIU Launches Immigration Ad Buy

2013-06-11T08:46:51-04:00

The Service Employees International Union made a seven-figure ad buy on Tuesday in support of comprehensive immigration reform, touting it from the perspective of law enforcement, business owners, veterans, Republicans and immigrants themselves.

"Our immigration system is broken," a woman says in one of the ads, which will air on national cable TV, after identifying herself as a Republican. "It doesn’t matter if you are Republican or Democrat, it matters that you are an American," she adds later.

The SEIU has long been advocating for comprehensive immigration reform that includes a path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants. A bill in the Senate that fits that requirement will go for its first vote on Tuesday, with many senators still undecided as to whether they will support its final passage.

SEIU International President Mary Kay Henry will be present later in the morning when President Barack Obama delivers remarks at the White House in support of immigration reform. In a statement, she said the new ads are meant to highlight broad-based support for the issue.

"We're seeing a growing consensus across the country that we need to get immigration reform done and get it done now," she said. "These ads show the breadth of support for commonsense immigration reform and highlight the diverse voices that are integral to moving this debate forward."

Other organizations have also launched major ad buys in support of reform. Crossroads GPS, a conservative group backed by Karl Rove, announced Monday it will spend $100,000 on print and online advertising.

The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee also released ads this week on immigration, going after Republican House members who voted last week to defund an Obama administration program that helps undocumented young people. The DCCC ads target Reps. Mike Coffman (R-Colo.), Blake Farenthold (R-Texas), John Kline (R-Minn.), Joe Heck (R-Nev.), Buck McKeon (R-Calif.), Gary Miller (R-Calif.), Erik Paulsen (R-Minn.), Steve Pearce (R-N.M.) and Frank Wolf (R-Va.).

The ads will air in Spanish and urge constituents to call their representative to "demand that he stand with our young people and not with most extreme members of his party."

Watch all of the SEIU ads here, or the one titled "Now" below.

This story has been updated to include the DCCC ads released this week.

Marco Rubio Lobbies On Immigration Reform Behind The Scenes

2013-06-10T20:36:50-04:00

WASHINGTON -- As efforts to comprehensively reform the nation’s immigration system near the first of several likely Senate votes, behind-the-scenes political machinations are becomming increasingly dramatic.

The bill put together by the bipartisan “gang of eight” faces its first test Tuesday afternoon in the form of a cloture vote, which it will likely clear. Once past that 60-vote threshold, however, the outcome for the legislation seems less certain.

That’s because in recent days, one of the chief Republican gang of eight members, Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.), has soured on the bill, citing insufficient border security measures. In private conversations, Rubio has been making entreaties to try give the bill a more conservative bent, according to sources.

Rubio had privately urged fellow Republican Sen. Kelly Ayotte (R-N.H.) to remain quiet about her support for immigration reform, in hopes that Senate negotiators would amend the bill's border security measures to win her vote, according to three sources, including one Republican Senate aide. Ayotte, a moderate-leaning New Hampshire Republican, decided nevertheless to announce her support for the measure on Sunday, becoming the first Republican outside of the group to back the reform legislation.

Rubio "has not been telling them to vote no," said one Senate Democratic aide familiar with negotiations. "He has been apparently holding people back from declaring support for the bill, while at the same time saying the bill needs changes in order to garner support. My understanding is he told Sen. Ayotte's office to hold back, but she didn't care."

A Republican Senate source confirmed Rubio's lobbying of Ayotte, saying it was "not the first time" Rubio had done something not aligned with the gang of eight’s interests.

A spokesman for Ayotte flatly denied that such a conversation took place. A spokesman for Rubio said he could not confirm the anecdote.

"We’re thrilled to have her support for the legislation," Rubio spokesman Alex Conant said of Ayotte.

The behind-the-scenes persuasion is the latest example of Rubio's delicate play in his push for comprehensive immigration reform. Rubio, a likely 2016 presidential candidate, has served as the conservative spokesman for the bill and has courted fellow Republicans for support. At the same time, he has tried to prove his tough-on-enforcement bona fides recently by insisting that the bill needs additional border security methods in order to pass.

Rubio has not yet said specifically which amendments he would support, but has expressed openness to one set to be offered by Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas) that would restrict undocumented immigrants from moving from provisional status to a path to citizenship unless further border conditions were met. The gang of eight bill already would mandate increased security measures to trigger the path to citizenship, but Cornyn's amendment would up the ante by requiring complete operational control of the border, 90 percent apprehensions of illegal border crossers, nationwide implementation of an employment verification program, and a biometric system to track all entries and exits from the U.S. at airports and seaports. That amendment was called a "poison pill" by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) on Sunday.

Cornyn voted against the gang of eight bill in the Judiciary Committee, and has not yet said whether he will support its final passage.

Republican gang of eight member Sen. Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.) told HuffPost on Monday that he hadn't yet seen the Cornyn amendment language. Asked if he would vote "no" without border amendments, he said, "No, we're working it."

"We're hopeful that we can see it get stronger on the border security side and pick up Republicans," Flake said.

Unlike Ayotte, most Republican senators are declining to say how they will vote on the final bill. Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) voted to support the bill leaving the Judiciary Committee, but has not committed to its final passage. He has said he wants additional amendments to require such things as back taxes to be paid by undocumented immigrants.

"My amendments will make it more palatable, make it so it will pass, hopefully with more votes and hopefully will help us with the House," Hatch told reporters on Monday. "The purpose of my amendments is to get this bill so people can support it. It's not to cause problems -- they're not ideological amendments, as far as I'm concerned, they're amendments to garner more votes."

Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.) said Monday on MSNBC he will wait to see what happens on the amendment process before making a decision. Sen. Saxby Chambliss (R-Ga.) also held back his support, saying last week he will offer amendments.

Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.), who has previously said he believes undocumented immigrants should be eventually allowed to become citizens, said Sunday he wants more border security elements before he would support the gang of eight bill. Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) also said he would like to support reform, but does not think the gang of eight bill would pass without improvements such as Cornyn's amendment.

A few Republicans have announced opposition to the bill in its entirety. Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.) has railed repeatedly against the bill on the Senate floor during the first two days of debate. Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah), originally courted to be a member of the gang of eight, said Friday he will vote against the bill even if it's amended.

"From my perspective, there is no one amendment that can fix this bill," Lee said. "Indeed, there is no series of tinkering changes that will turn this mess of a bill into the reform the country needs and that Americans deserve."

Senate Begins Immigration Debate With Threats To Take Down Bill

2013-06-07T15:03:19-04:00

WASHINGTON -- The Senate kicked off its debate Friday on the "gang of eight" comprehensive immigration reform bill with vows from Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.) and Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) to fight its passage.

"From my perspective, there is no one amendment that can fix this bill," Lee, who at one time worked with the gang of eight on a reform deal, said on the floor. "Indeed, there is no series of tinkering changes that will turn this mess of a bill into the reform the country needs and that Americans deserve."

It was the first series of floor debate on the gang of eight reform bill, which would increase border security, create more interior enforcement, streamline legal immigration and provide a conditional path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants currently in the United States.

The bill will go up for a vote next week on whether it should proceed, and is expected to pass a 60-vote threshold even though it does not yet have 60 votes in support. The issue of whether to support the reform legislation is most complicated for Republicans, many of whom, like Lee and Sessions, say that it provides too little border security and that the path to citizenship would violate the nation's commitment to the law.

Sessions spent the longest time on the floor at nearly two hours, including a back-and-forth with Lee. The Alabama senator acknowledged that polling shows most people support allowing undocumented immigrants to become citizens, but only if paired with more border security and interior enforcement. Sessions added that he believes record deportation figures are skewed.

He said he is prepared to work on the legislation but wants it "in a way that doesn't damage too much the rule of law," although he thinks legalizing undocumented immigrants would violate the law by definition.

"It will damage the rule of law because it's a violation of the rule of law to reward someone who came illegally, give them benefit [for] their act," he said. "If someone robs a bank and you catch them and they've got the money, they have to give the money back. They don't get to keep the money. You don't get to keep the benefits of your activity."

The bill's border elements were also called into question. Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.), a member of the gang of eight, said this week that he would vote against the bill unless more border measures are added, such as an amendment likely to be proposed by Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas) that some consider a poison pill. Sen. Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.) has also said border provisions would be added, but turned and walked away on Wednesday when asked if he would oppose the bill without them.

Democrats were partially on the defense Friday, both discussing the bill's merits and attempting to tamp down concerns from Republicans and skeptical members of their own party. Sen. Bill Nelson (D-Fla.) talked up the strong border security measures already in the bill, which devotes significantly higher resources there and requires improvements to be met before undocumented immigrants can proceed with a path to citizenship.

"This bill includes important things to secure the borders," he said. "Do you think the border is secure now? Well by the way, they're more secure now than they were just a few years ago. They're catching some 60 percent of all of the people that are coming across the border now. But that's not good enough, 40 percent are still coming across. This bill is going to try to take it up to 90 percent."

Some of the border measures involve the Department of Homeland Security making decisions on whether improvements have been adequate, which Lee said he opposes. He compared Congress to Pontius Pilate -- the judge in the Bible who authorized the crucifixion of Jesus -- because the bill gives authority over some decisions to the Department of Homeland Security.

"Members of Congress like first and foremost to wash their hands of things. In the grand tradition of Pontius Pilate, we're sometimes inclined to wash our hands of things and push important decisions off to someone else to make them," Lee said.

There was one awkward moment at the beginning of the discussion, when Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) misspoke about about the bill's bipartisan nature. Sen. Ted Cruz's (R-Texas) office quickly called it a "freudian slip."

"Today Senators will have the opportunity to debate a partisan -- I'm sorry, the bipartisan, wow, pardon me -- immigration bill reported by [the Judiciary Committee]," Reid said.

None of the members of the gang of eight -- four of whom are Republicans -- spoke about their bill, but Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), whose committee approved it in May, argued in its favor.

"We should do what is right, what's fair, what's just," he said. "Immigration reform is an important economic issue, a civil rights issue and a fairness issue. If a majority of us stand together, we stay true to our values and agreements, I believe we can pass legislation to write the next great chapter of American history in immigration."

Jeff Sessions: 'Virtually No One Is Being Deported' Except Criminals

2013-06-07T13:16:17-04:00

WASHINGTON -- Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.) said again on Friday that "nobody" is being deported from the United States -- a nation that expelled a record of more than 400,000 people last year.

"The federal government has reached a point now where virtually no one is being deported except those being convicted of serious crimes," Sessions said on the Senate floor, arguing against the bipartisan "gang of eight" immigration reform bill.

The Obama administration has ramped up deportation levels to record levels, despite also calling for immigration enforcement that would give legal status to some of those being removed. It has also implemented policies that allow some undocumented immigrants to stay, such as Dreamers -- young undocumented immigrants -- who can received deferred action from deportation. The administration has argued that since it doesn't have the resources to deport all undocumented immigrants, it must use practices that focus on serious criminals.

Sessions and anti-reform groups, such as the Center for Immigration Studies, have contended that these policies are selective amnesty and mean the administration is ignoring its responsibility to deport undocumented immigrants. Many members of the House GOP agree, and voted on Thursday, along with three Democrats, to take away the Department of Homeland Security's ability to stop deportation using discretion on cases it views as low priority.

A spokesman for Sessions confirmed the senator does not believe the record deportation numbers were truthful. Since removal numbers include people sent away by Customs and Border Protection, some opponents of comprehensive immigration reform say the numbers have been manipulated to imply interior immigration enforcement is higher than it actually is.

President Barack Obama has acknowledged that deportations include a large number of border removals.

"[T]he statistics are actually a little deceptive because what we’ve been doing is with the stronger border enforcement we’ve been apprehending folks at the borders and sending them back," he said in September 2011. "That is counted as a deportation, even though they may have only been held for a day or 48 hours, sent back -- that’s counted as a deportation."

Steve King Amendment Passes House To Deport More Dreamers

2013-06-06T13:20:24-04:00

WASHINGTON -- The House voted 224-201 on Thursday to end Department of Homeland Security discretion policies that allow it to delay deportations for young, undocumented immigrants and other people deemed low-priority, effectively demanding the government force out Dreamers who came to the United States as children.

The amendment, offered by immigration hawk Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa), was approved mostly along party lines. However, three Democrats -- Reps. John Barrow (D-Ga.), Nick Rahall (D-W.V.) and Mike McIntyre (D-N.C.) -- supported the amendment. Six Republicans -- Reps. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-Fla.), Spencer Bachus (R-Ala.), David Nunes (R-Calif.), Michael Grimm (R-N.Y.), Jeff Denham (R-Calif.), David Valadao (R-Calif.) -- opposed it, while nine members did not vote.

The King provision was added to the Department of Homeland Security spending bill currently being considered by the House. It's almost certain to be opposed by the Democratic-run Senate, or by President Barack Obama, who has expanded the use of discretion in deportation proceedings.

Obama adviser Dan Pfeiffer quickly took to Twitter to condemn the GOP's vote, comparing it to the "self-deportation" immigration plan by the party's failed 2012 presidential candidate, Mitt Romney.

Nearly the entire House GOP just voted to deport the Dreamers, a position to the right of Romney. Is Self-Deportation still the GOP plan?
— Dan Pfeiffer (@pfeiffer44) June 6, 2013

It contrasts with comprehensive immigration reform efforts, which would likely grant a path to citizenship to the same people being granted deportation relief under prosecutorial discretion.

It also comes at a time when Republicans are working to attract more Latino voters; an op-ed on the "American dream" from House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) was published in Spanish-language newspaper La Opinion hours before the vote.

The amendment specifically references two major administrative actions by the president. One was an announcement in 2011 that Immigration and Customs Enforcement would refocus its efforts on the worst of the worst, rather than Dreamers -- young people who came to the U.S. as children -- and others who would likely be eligible for a path to citizenship. His administration also enacted the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program that formalizes a process for Dreamers to remain in the U.S. As of May, nearly 300,000 Dreamers had been granted deferred action.

Republicans argue it is selective amnesty.

King said on the House floor Wednesday that the amendment is necessary to check the administration's deportation discretion.

“Whatever people think of the impending immigration policy here in the United States, we cannot allow the executive branch to usurp the legislative authority of the United States Congress,” King said. "If we allow that to happen in immigration, it could happen to anything.”

Rep. Keith Ellison (D-Minn.) followed King's argument. "So for the gentleman to argue that there is some constitutional infirmity with deferred action, is wrong. He's wrong on the law. He's wrong on his constitutional argument."

Rep. Luis Gutierrez (D-Ill.) gave a forceful defense on the House floor on Wednesday of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program.

"We should not hold children responsible for the actions of adults and of their parents," he said. "We should give them an opportunity and that is what this executive order has done."

House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-Va.) voted for the amendment even though he has said Dreamers should be allowed to eventually become citizens. Rep. Mike Coffman (R-Colo.) also voted for the amendment despite telling constituents in February that undocumented young people should be given a path to citizenship.

United We Dream, an advocacy group of young undocumented immigrants, said in a statement that the amendment is "an outrage and the exact opposite of what our country needs from its political leaders."

"Does Speaker [John] Boehner want to follow Rep. Steve King’s lead and seal his party’s fate as an out-of-touch, extremist party that has forever marginalized the immigrant and Latino community?" the group continued. "Or will the House take a new direction and pass immigration reform that not only stops the deportations of DREAMers and our families but also creates a clear path to citizenship? It’s up to them. DREAMers will not let politicians get away with this."

UPDATE: 4:35 p.m. -- White House Press Secretary Jay Carney issued a statement on Thursday vowing the amendment will not be signed into law. The full statement:

As the Senate prepares to debate bipartisan commonsense immigration reform next week, House Republicans chose to spend today passing an extreme amendment to strip protections from "Dreamers." These are productive members of society who were brought here as young children, grew up in our communities, and became American in every way but on paper. This amendment, sponsored by Representative Steve King, runs contrary to our most deeply-held values as Americans. It asks law enforcement to treat these Dreamers the same way as they would violent criminals. It's wrong. It's not who we are. And it will not become law.

Watch Gutierrez discussing his opposition to the amendment on Wednesday evening: