I believe Bush will be likely to side with the angry Repubs instead of 'staying the course' on immigration and supporting a bill. As you mention on your blog, the Repubs are in revolt now and the anger will grow not subside.

Bush has to keep the Repubs with him to sustain his position on the war, exec. authority, and moves by the Dems against his administrations unlawful actions. He will fold to the right.

So, you might be correct that a new Dem. Pres. won't want to take on an messy battle that will be purely partisan in 09, with the '10 and'12 Congressional elections ahead.

But the Dems are going to have a very hard time, maybe impossible, in staying together (as will the Repubs.) on this issue. Immigration is becoming another third rail not to touched, like Social Security.

Perhaps the Dems need to package immigration reform with some other legislation (such as trade agreements and minimum wage, unionization reform, education/retraining reform, etc.) to get an omnibus bill that contains something each power group needs.

Holding it for the next administration and Congress is actually a great opportunity for the Democrats to enlist Hispanics in their camp for the foreseeable future.

Ezra,

I 'sketched' a plan for your consideration. And I agree with JackD above.

By addressing immigration reform over a period of several years, Hispanics will remain in the Democratic Party fold, even if Bush were to use his veto pen.

The Democrats need only to show that they are willing to go to the mat on immigration. In contrast, the GOPers utilized their "magic carpet ride" in last year's election and which was never addressed by our fellow Democrats.

Jaango

Ezra's post makes this sound like the Tax Reform Act of 1986 [only this time with both chambers controlled by Democrats]. The '86 Act carried many suspicious antecedents as it worked through committee, but proved to be very good legislation that likely could not have been accomplished under all-Democratic auspices.

Well, okay. But going into 2008 the Republican hitmen will make a lot of noise about how the liberal elitists sold out Amuricun workers to the multi-culti lobby-- oh, and did you know they want to take yer hard earned money (if yer still making any) to put their kids through bilingual ed, thereby dividing the country and bringing about the end of Amuricun civilization?

The final version better have a shit pile of labor protections.

What "populism" is this again?

Is that $500 figure for the fine a typo? I thought I heard $5000.

"The final version better have a shit pile of labor protections."

In fact, rework it so much it becomes the "Labor Protection Act."

Then goto 2008.

"But going into 2008 the Republican hitmen will make a lot of noise about how the liberal elitists sold out Amuricun workers to the multi-culti lobby-- oh, and did you know they want to take yer hard earned money (if yer still making any) to put their kids through bilingual ed, thereby dividing the country and bringing about the end of Amuricun civilization?"

And how does that change if the Democrats don't pass this bill?

For that matter, given that Old Man Surge is likely to be, if not a principal author, then a vocal supporter, at least one of the major GOP candidates won't be able to attack on this at all. Mitt Romney will attack unless he thinks defending the plan makes more sense. And Giuliani -- well, he won't get the nomination, so who cares what he thinks?

I doubt that this deal is going to hold together, but I would prefer that the Republicans have the responsibility for killing it. It's a good strategic issue for Democrats now, because it divides the Republicans more than us, and when coupled with Bush's great unpopularity it could lead to loss of support the Republican Party will suffer from for a decade.

The problem is it's not actually a realistic path to legalization for most of the 12 million undocumented immigrants. Multi-thousand dollar fines, plus a trip to Mexico, all for an 8-year minimum wait? The part of this bill with real teeth is the increase in enforcement. The guest worker program is only part of the problem. In El Diario's words, passing this would be a "step backwards".
http://www.eldiariony.com/noticias/detail.aspx?section=25&desc=EDITORIAL&id=1642799

The people who get clobbered by the unchecked influx of illegal immigrants are the bottom half of the US population. They are the people who are displaced in the workplace by cheap-er labor. It isn't fair--in fact, it's cruel--to tell them to "get a better education" when they have all that they can handle now.

The cold, hard fact is that many people aren't intellectually equipped to be computer programmers, electrical engineers, or architects, or some other cerebral enterprise. There is absolutely nothing wrong with that; it's the way the world works.

But they are very well equipped to be carpenters, roofers, landscapers, masons and a host of other jobs that once paid enough for a person to earn a decent living.

When that labor market is flooded with immigrant labor--most of it illegal--then the wages of everyone goes down. That too, is the way the world works, for if there is an excess of any good or service, then the unit price will fall.

It seems to me that one very necessary starting point is to make it unprofitable for anyone to hire--no, EXPLOIT--an illegal immigrant.

That could be accomplished by imposing very heavy fines on employers, corporations or individuals, who hire illegal immigrants.

Despte the comments of Ezra's sources, I don't buy that this deal will hold together; instead I think we have a case of a camel (as horse designed by committee) that no one will really love, while people who despise its parts will have a field day ripping it to shreds. Bush may have nothing to lose, but every other Republican does, and they will, if anything that looks like this becomes law. And for Democrats, I don't know how anyone can be suckered into thinking anything here is really the best set of ideas out there, when so much of what's proposed is just so damn dreadful. I think what we may see, by mid-summer, is the crashing realization of Republicans that even they have to stop trusting Bush. After that, all bets are off, and I don't think Bush will really have any lasting accompishments here on out, except failures.

Uncontrolled, illegal immigration, yet another infringement on our rights by the gov't. Add it to the ever-growing list of violations:
They violate the 1st Amendment by opening mail, caging demonstrators and banning books like "America Deceived" from Amazon.
They violate the 2nd Amendment by confiscating guns during Katrina.
They violate the 4th Amendment by conducting warrant-less wiretaps.
They violate the 5th and 6th Amendment by suspending habeas corpus.
They violate the 8th Amendment by torturing.
They violate the entire Constitution by starting 2 illegal wars based on lies and on behalf of a foriegn gov't.
Support indy media.
Last link (unless Google Books caves to the gov't and drops the title):
America Deceived (book)

Actually, the best part of this bill is its change in emphasis from family "reunification" to skills-based immigration. The current family reunification orientation is absurd. Brother of a US citizen from the Phillipines? Wait FIFTY YEARS for your number to come up. In an age of cheap air travel, family reunification should no longer play the major part in determining who comes here. If we eliminate some of the automatic family categories -- adult children of US citizens, siblings of US citizens -- we could do one good, dramatic family-oriented thing, and that is to offer immediate immigrant status to the spouses and minor children of permanent residents, who now must sometimes wait years to reunite with the husband/wife father/mother in the US.

I really don't understand the objection to guest-worker programs. You get the opportunity to come here for awhile and earn some big bucks to take home with you at a later date. Because you are legal, employers can't take advantage of you by paying sub-standard wages, no benefits, etc. So you have to go home eventually. So what?

There's nothing "fair" about immigration, period. It's not "fair" that those of us who were born here were born here. It's not "fair" that just because you have a relative in the US you should get preference over someone who has needed skills and education.

I think the Democrats may make a big mistake getting too far to the left on this issue. There are a lot of liberals like me who are uncomfortable with uncontrolled immigration (I care about numbers and skills, couldn't care where people come from) and who are concerned that mass immigration of the unskilled is hurting, in particular, African-Americans by undercutting wages and the willingness (necessity) of employers doing on the job training, simply because they can use cheap imported labor.

Yes, we've "always been a country of immigrants." So what? There are 300 million of us now, California has been ruined, we face water shortages througout the West... We need to control immigration so that our population doesn't continue to grow so rapidly. It would be nice to let anyone who wants to, to come here. But we need to face reality -- there are literally billions of people who would like to come here. I don't blame them. But I don't want to live in a US that has 400, 500 million people in it. It's crowded enough as it is.

I think Ezra's got it right. The Prez is pushing this bill and it will be hard for Hillary or whoever to go it alone. We need the cover Bush provides. As for overcrowding America, our replacement ratio of births/deaths is just about enough to stay even these days. And don't look now, but the US population is rapidly aging. If we were smart we'd encourage immigration by young people trained in health care fields. Someone's going to have look after us boomers in our dotage.
(Of course I’m all in favor of keeping out the Irish and Italians. You’ve got to draw the line somewhere.)

"The cold, hard fact is that many people aren't intellectually equipped to be computer programmers, electrical engineers, or architects, or some other cerebral enterprise. There is absolutely nothing wrong with that; it's the way the world works."

Well, yeah, except that another part of the Bill apparently screws tech workers over (again), too.

"(Of course I’m all in favor of keeping out the Irish and Italians. You’ve got to draw the line somewhere.)"

All in favor of giving back Christopher Hitchens, say "Aye!"

Aye aye!

Aye aye! And Charo, too!

The Next to Last Pope

As for overcrowding America, our replacement ratio of births/deaths is just about enough to stay even these days. And don't look now, but the US population is rapidly aging. If we were smart we'd encourage immigration by young people trained in health care fields. Someone's going to have look after us boomers in our dotage.

It is absolutely amazing that somebody could say something so stunningly ignorant.

The truth is because of unsustainable high rates of immigration among a high birth rate population the United States is setting itself up for another population explosion.

Check out www.numberusa.com or
www.capsweb.org

As far as a shortage of nurses. This is another case of completely unfounded and dishonest "SHORTAGE SHOUTING" by big healthcare. The Senate immigration bill has heinous clauses in it allowing for importation of hundreds of thousands of "non-immigrant" indentured temporary foreign "medical technicians" under a essentially unlimited expansion the the hated middle class H1-B labor arbitrage visa. This is simply a sneaky way of enacting the repeatedly rejected and despised H1-C nursing visa.

There is no shortage of nurses. Every year 50,000 highly qualified applicants to state college nursing programs are turned down due to a lack of public funding for increased enrollment slots. In fact lots of young American males and females today would love to become nurses today because they believe these careers would be save from outsourcing.

The problem with the Nursing profession is that that Big Healthcare has been attempting to bribe Congress into helping them hold down nursing wages and lower working conditions.
Big Healthcare is fighting to make the 12 hour work day - 36 hour work week the nursing industry standard with much lower benefits. The Nursing unions are fighting like hell to prevent this from happening.

The major problems the nursing profession faces is retention of older qualified nurses due to high job stress, long hours, being worked off the clock, under staffing and scheduling and on call issues.
Because of these issues many nurses with families have no choice but to either go to work at less demanding doctor's offices or leave the profession.

Another major problem is age discrimination with major hospital corporations preferring to hire younger lower payed workers instead of older higher payed experienced
nurses.

In short this immigration bill would do the same damage to the nursing profession that has been done over the last 17 years to the IT and Engineering professions by the
evil H1-B visa and NAFTA.

Remember Karl Rove has repeatedly promised K-Street that he would love to help them bust the Nursing and even Teaching professions. This immigration bills has all sorts of clauses it through a radical expansion of the H1-B visa that could allow this to happen.

No buddy this immigration bill is completely evil. It was written by corrupt corporate lobbyists and no progressive Democrat in his or her right mind should support it.

While I have no doubt that this "bill" will be an unmitigated disaster if passed, I take great solace in the fact that Congress is controlled by Harry and Nancy, who can't even get bills that passed both Houses enacted into law. (How many of the Dems 100 hour agenda items have been passed? Zero) I can only pray that their incompetence will prevent this monstrosity from ever getting to Bush's desk.

I can also take solace in the fact that the GOP base is infuriated and livid over this. While GOP senators may be able to ignore the base, the GOP Reps cannot and will not risk their political lives on a bill that is being championed by Teddy Kennedy. Nancy has said that she will not bring any immigration reform bill to the floor of the House that has less than 70 votes from the GOP. A week or two's worth of exposure of the deficiencies contained within this bill will hopefully ensure that no GOP Representative will vote for this comprehensive piece of crap that has passed out of the bowels of the Senate.

"While GOP senators may be able to ignore the base, the GOP Reps cannot and will not risk their political lives on a bill that is being championed by Teddy Kennedy."

It sounds like it should not have been championed by Teddy Kennedy.

My social conservative, pro-life Republican capital gains tax repeal seeking ass is *thrilled* that Democrats are so simple.

Most of the comments I'm seeing are set against this bill. Is anyone for it? And why?

I'm serious—why would Americans want this bill? Why would Democrats want this bill? (Other than the "more immigrants = more Democrats" argument.)

"I'm serious—why would Americans want this bill? Why would Democrats want this bill? (Other than the "more immigrants = more Democrats" argument.)"

US workers DON'T want this bill. All this bill is about is flooding the US with cheap foreign workers and plenty of them to drive US wages down closer to third-world standards. The wages of construction workers actually FELL during the building boom. We need to enforce the laws now on the books and prosecute companies that hire illegal aliens.

Put aside all the "liberal" talk and cover stories--

When did the Democratic Party become the party of Management?

"He needs the accomplishment."

Bush is doing this for sense of "accomplishment?"

This sounds like Demo party disinfo trying to distance themselves from the fact that they are on the same page as Bush.

The party of Truman and Roosevelt, and even Clinton, has become the party of management with the fig leaf cover of charity and correct-liberal thinking. Upper Middle Class values (and cheap labor needs) have become Democratic values.

(Of course I’m all in favor of keeping out the Irish and Italians. You’ve got to draw the line somewhere.)

Actually, most would be European immigrants are in fact kept out now. Not too many Italians or Irish these days, but tons of Russians, Romanians, Poles have immigrated to Britain. The reason we don't get them here is that chain migration favors the third worlders. I know you all love those little, submissive brown folk, but at least get your facts straight.

"The reason we don't get them here is that chain migration favors the third worlders. "

And if this bill becomes law, in the future chain migration will favor poorly educated, unskilled, non-English-speaking third-worlders. Just what we need! What is the point of spending time, money, and energy "fighting poverty" and then importing it wholesale from the third-world? We may as well give up.

How can we create "affordable housing" while pouring more and more poverty-level people into already over-crowded areas?

How can we "leave no child behind" in school while making "education" more and more ESL and special ed and less and less good science, math, and technology courses?

And finally how are we going to explain to the descendants of slaves - you remember them? - whom affirmative action was created to help that they now have competition from people who broke into this country illegally AND their extended families AND who outnumber them?

"Most of the comments I'm seeing are set against this bill. Is anyone for it? And why?"

Who would be for this piece of cr*p: Cheap labor-seeking contractors and meatpacking companies, illegal immigrants who want to stay and enjoy our medicare and social security bennies without having had to go through the hoops of legal immigration. Oh, and the immigration lawyers, who get to process the next 60 Zillion applications for the Z-visa.

Who would be against this: Any working taxpaying American sick and tired of a bill that will bring perhaps an increase of 100 million to our population in the next generation, most who will get more in social benefits than they can pay in taxes, defunds fencing *already promised last year*, and will cost taxpayers $2.5 trillion (numbers from Robert Rector).

Labor unions should be livid and if they are not, they are being as cowardly and craven as the Democrats, thinking much much worse social conditions for working Americans are an acceptable tradeoff because they might get some more 'clients' for their organizations. Feh.

This bill imports 3rd world poverty, harming Mexico's economic development as well as the US.

The Jordan Commission (remember Barbara Jordan) had some immigration proposals back in 1995; they proposed keeping immigration restricted, enforced, and with simpler set of visas. Her ideas are not found in this bill, with the exception of the end of 'chain migration' ie unlimited family migration.
suggest restrictions now, though, and the name-calling starts.
So we have the irony of the cheap-labor-lobby minions calling some conservative Republicans 'bigots' for putting forth ideas that Barbara Jordan endorsed. Oh, the irony!

Sorry Ezra, but you're just as full of it as Bush is. What you're advocating is wrong. It is little more than the biggest corporate welfare scam we have ever seen. Nothing in what even you advocate helps eliviate poverty or protects workers from exploitation, it actually only serves to create the same dismal, mired perpetually in poverty conditions that exist in Mexico and elsewhere, here, forever ending a worker's ability to lift themselves up out of poverty.

We have a serious long term unemployment and underemployment problem in the US, among American citizens. We have hunger and privation. Perhaps those of you not educated in those realities should take the time to get out in the real world, in impoverished American communties so you can actually put a human face on the subject.

If you refuse to accept the MSM's corporate spin on Iraq, how can you accept their spin on the subject of poverty and the economy? There are no jobs Americans won't do, and not enough American workers are myths, and they worked well among the affluent elites, especially on the left who are disconnected from poverty in America.