There is a tendency in immigration debates to begin with the specifics of proposed legislation. However the principles that cover the public interest purposes of any immigration reform bill, the processes by which they are debated and adapted, and the legislative principles that frame the effort are very important. They are the foundation on which the specifics of a viable immigration reform bill will have to rest.
Here in abbreviated form, to be further developed in a later CIS publication, is a proposed set of legislative principles.
Immigration Reform Legislative Principles:
- Immigration reform legislation should be done in understandable parts. Immigration reform is a very complex undertaking. Large, complex, omnibus bills are unnecessary, likely to multiple unintended consequences, and promote public lack of understanding and therefore mistrust.
- The most basic and essential Archimedean foundation for viable immigration reform agreement in the public's interest is easily stated. It is the trade-off of legalization for the number of illegal migrants who can legitimately qualify for that status with the implementation of real and effective enforcement measures.
- If more than one immigration reform measure is passed in the House it should be part of a sequential strategy; that is, one bill is passed, sent to the Senate, passed, and then sent on to the president for signature. Repeat as necessary.
- Senate-House conferences without stringent and ironclad protections for the substantive and procedural integrity of any bills sent to the Senate should be declined. So should any procedure in which the House and Senate must vote on, without an ability to change, any House-Senate conference committee report.
- Each immigration reform bill should be written clearly and transparently. It should be accompanied by a formal statement of the "Intent of Congress" that makes clear the purpose and meaning of the bill's various elements, thus providing a guide for administrative and legal interpretation after the bill is signed into law.
- Congress, and especially the House, cannot simply write a bill and turn it over to the Executive Office for rule writing as to its implementation. Some formal or informal mechanism must be found to be part of, and oversee the rule writing process, so that the rules written to enforce the bill actually reflect the intent and legislative language of the bill.
- Not every immigration policy issue must be solved at the same time.
- Do not get ahead of public. One of the ways to help restore the public's faith and confidence in the government is to bring them into and along on the immigration debates.
- The basis of any compromise is rough and real reciprocity. Those on the left and right must be willing to make hard, difficult choices.
- Supporters of immigration reform bills in the public interest had better prepare to answer tough accusations against them. Moreover, they will have to do more than simply answer charges. They will have to be willing and able to push back — fairly and courteously, but hard if necessary
The specifics of the immigration reform in the public interest, even those focused on the narrow trade-off between legalization and enforcement require more detail and explanation, and for that reason are not amenable to a blog format. They will be presented and explained in more detail in a forthcoming CIS publication.
Next: Let Illegal Migrants Choose their Status? A Bad Idea