GovernmentExecutive.com

As the May 14 date for a Senate immigration floor debate looms closer, negotiations on a bipartisan bill remain fluid, and some aides and lobbyists are questioning whether it will be ready in time.

GOP aides said bipartisan staff talks broke down last week because of a misunderstanding on how Democrats would handle a set of Republican principles. Republican and Democratic senators are scheduled to meet again Tuesday, which could give them the opportunity to settle the dispute and begin drafting legislation.

There is no agreement on core issues such as whether illegal immigrants can earn citizenship without leaving the country or whether family-based immigration should be limited to children and spouses, ending so-called chain migration. But Democratic and Republican aides said the talks continue in good faith.

On Friday, 15 Republican senators wrote to Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., to ask for one week to review any immigration legislation before it goes to the floor. The letter was spearheaded by Sen. Jim DeMint of South Carolina. Signatories included Sens. John Cornyn of Texas, Sam Brownback of Kansas and Jeff Sessions of Alabama, who were involved in the immigration debate last year.

Brownback, the sole signatory who voted for the Senate bill last year, is less involved in the current negotiations. Cornyn has been heavily involved in talks about a bipartisan measure this year, but he is uncertain that he ultimately will support the Senate bill, according to aides.

The administration and supporters of last year's Senate bills are pinning their hopes on Sen. Jon Kyl, R-Ariz., although Kyl's involvement is more aligned with the administration's latest proposals and less with a broad bipartisan bill, according to sources.

One GOP aide said the purpose of the DeMint letter is to emphasize "minority rights" in a complicated debate. Last year, even though the immigration bill was on the Senate floor for several weeks, lawmakers were still uncertain what it contained on final passage.

Last year's bill changed dramatically from the committee-passed measure so senators would lift their objections to a floor debate. Republicans are worried that a similar circumstance could occur this year, and their anxiety is heightened by the increasingly likely prospect that the bill will go directly to the floor without committee consideration.

"Even those who are close to the discussions don't know what's shaped up," the aide said.

A Democratic leadership aide declined to comment on whether Reid would make the legislative text available before the floor debate. But, the aide pointed out that both Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff and Commerce Secretary Carlos Gutierrez have devoted considerable time to discussing an immigration bill with Republicans and Democrats over the last several months.

COMMENTS

• Why should illegal immigrants be allowed to earn citizenship without leaving the country? They have already subverted the law that required them to have a visa before entering the country or have ignored the law requiring them to depart when their visa expired! Why not reward them for it and make the illegal immigration problem even worse by giving them an incentive to keep thumbing their noses at us! Apparently the short-sighted democrats do not want to help solve the illegal immigration problem. Let's keep taking two steps forward and then five steps back because of a small minority of complainers who aided and abetted their illegal spouses. If you are going to be in politics, you are supposed to do what is best for the MAJORITY. Neal Baker Posted May 16, 2007 10:46 AM
• Last year's Senate bill would have allowed a lawful permanent resident to bring their relatives under the age of 21 to the US. What happened to the legal adult age of 18 which all US citizens abide by? Can the US support the relatives of 12 million immigrants even under the age of 18 let alone up to the age of 21? Why don’t we just make Mexico another state? That would give Mexico new Highways, new Hospitals and Medical centers, bring their Education system up to American standards, and access to all our Social Services. But wait, they already have many of these benefits here in the US as an illegal immigrant. To CVO: My ancestors came from Ireland through Ellis Island, NY, LEGALLY and became American citizens. You failed to mention most of the Mexicans are in the US illegally and making demands they have not earned. B Schell Posted May 15, 2007 8:46 AM
• To the self-righteous poster who complained about how hard it is to get a tourist visa to visit the U.S. from south of the border, consider this - the reason it is so hard is because most prospective "visitors" have no intention of seeing Disneyland, or going shopping, but plan to stay in the U.S. once their visas have expired, thus adding to the millions of illegals already here. That's why these tourist visas are difficult to obtain, in an attempt to separate the true tourists from future overstays. And regarding the renaming of U.S. cities with Spanish names, no thanks, we'll keep them as they are, just like we'll keep California, New Mexico, Arizona, Nevada, Colorado, and Texas! GovExec.com reader Posted May 3, 2007 11:14 AM