Trying to Close the Barn Door

The Senate okays tough moves to curb illegal immigration

The immigrant, once viewed in the U.S. as a source of new blood and needed labor, has over the past decade become mostly a source of serious concern. Almost 1 million illegal aliens per year are now pouring into the U.S., and their sheer numbers are both straining the capacity of local governments to care for them and, in some cases, threatening the jobs of some Americans, who resent their presence. What the U.S. must do, says Republican Senator John East of North Carolina, "is to gain control of our own borders." To make a start, the Senate held 100 hours of committee hearings and last week approved, by a vote of 81 to 18, the most comprehensive reform of U.S. immigration laws in 30 years.

The Senate's approach to immigration reform accepts the fact that illegal aliens cannot be prevented from entering the country at remote border crossings. The bill, sponsored by Wyoming Republican Alan Simpson, accordingly concentrates on slowing the flow by the new device of holding employers accountable for hiring "undocumented" workers. For the first time, businessmen would face fines (up to $2,000 per illegal employee) and imprisonment (up to six months). As the bill stands, employers with four or more workers would be held responsible for checking and keeping a record of a prospective employee's documents (a U.S. passport, for instance, or a Social Security card) to determine his legal status.

As for the illegal aliens themselves, the Senate offers as much carrot as stick. The bill proposes amnesty for the 6 million or so illegal aliens who are already in the U.S. Those who have been here since January 1977 will be immediately eligible for permanent resident status; those here since January 1980 will be accorded tem porary resident status with the prospect of permanent status after three years. Neither group could collect most federal benefits for several years; the bill also proposes block grants for the states to help defray the costs of absorbing those who are granted amnesty.

Other categories of new arrivals will not fare as well. While the rules governing migrant workers have been relaxed slightly to allow more of these laborers into the country for seasonal work, aliens seeking to prove in the courts their right to refugee or other legal status will no longer be able to use certain measures, like class-action suits, to do so. Other provisions may have the effect of reducing even legal immigration, which totaled some 425,000 people last year. Brothers and sisters of U.S. citizens have been struck from the list of immigrants granted first priority, for instance.

The overall goal of curtailing immigration won heavy support from Senators of both parties, but also brought together an unusual coalition of seven Democrats and eleven Republicans in opposition. Massachusetts Senator Edward Kennedy expressed concern that "we are closing our doors to many who should be welcomed." Civil rights groups and Senate liberals thought that employers would use the sanctions as an excuse to hire fewer Hispanics and other minorities. Conservatives such as Jesse Helms of North Carolina and John Tower of Texas joined the U.S. Chamber of Commerce in arguing that the sanctions would impose an unfair burden on farmers and small businessmen. For all of these reasons, and simply because the Simpson approach is so comprehensive, there is likely to be heated wrangling when the House takes up its companion version next month.

This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so viewer discretion is required.