Obama on immigration overhaul: 'Now is the time'

LAS VEGAS (AP) - Declaring "now is the time" to fix the nation's broken immigration system, President Barack Obama on Tuesday outlined broad proposals for putting millions of illegal immigrants on a clear path to citizenship while cracking down on businesses that employ people illegally and tightening security at the borders. He hailed a bipartisan Senate group on a similar track but left unresolved key details that could derail the complex and emotional effort.
Potential Senate roadblocks center on how to structure the avenue to citizenship and on whether legislation would cover same-sex couples - and that's all before a Senate measure could be debated, approved and sent to the Republican-controlled House where opposition is sure to be stronger.
Obama, who carried Nevada in the November election with heavy Hispanic support, praised the Senate push, saying Congress is showing "a genuine desire to get this done soon." But mindful of previous immigrations efforts that have failed, he warned that the debate would be difficult and vowed to send his own legislation to Capitol Hill if lawmakers don't act quickly.
"The question now is simple," Obama said during a campaign-style event in Las Vegas, one week after being sworn in for a second term in the White House. "Do we have the resolve as a people, as a country, as a government to finally put this issue behind us? I believe that we do."
Shortly after Obama finished speaking, cracks emerged between the White House and the group of eight senators, which put out their proposals one day ahead of the president. Florida Sen. Marco Rubio, a potential 2016 presidential candidate, faulted Obama for not making a citizenship pathway contingent on tighter border security, a central tenet of the lawmakers' proposals.
"The president's speech left the impression that he believes reforming immigration quickly is more important than reforming immigration right," Rubio said in a statement.
House Speaker John Boehner also responded coolly, with spokesman Brendan Buck saying the Ohio Republican hoped the president would be "careful not to drag the debate to the left and ultimately disrupt the difficult work that is ahead in the House and Senate."
Despite possible obstacles to come, the broad agreement between the White House and bipartisan lawmakers in the Senate represents a drastic shift in Washington's willingness to tackle immigration, an issue that has languished for years. Much of that shift is politically motivated, due to the growing influence of Hispanics in presidential and other elections and their overwhelming support for Obama in November.
The separate White House and Senate proposals focus on the same principles: providing a way for most of the estimated 11 million people already in the U.S. illegally to become citizens, strengthening border security, cracking down on employers who hire illegal immigrants and streamlining the legal immigration system.
A consensus around the question of citizenship could help lawmakers clear one major hurdle that has blocked previous immigration efforts. Many Republicans have opposed allowing illegal immigrants to become citizens, saying that would be an unfair reward for people who have broken the law.
Details on how to achieve a pathway to citizenship still could prove to be a major sticking point between the White House and the Senate group.
Obama and the Senate lawmakers all want to require people here illegally to register with the government, pass criminal and national security background checks, pay fees and penalties as well as back taxes and wait until existing immigration backlogs are cleared before getting in line for green cards. Neither proposal backs up those requirements with specifics.
After achieving legal status, U.S. law says people can become citizens after five years.
The Senate proposal says that entire process couldn't start until the borders were fully secure and tracking of people in the U.S. on visas had improved. Those vague requirements would almost certainly make the timeline for achieving citizenship longer than what the White House is proposing.
The president urged lawmakers to avoid making the citizenship pathway so difficult that it would appear out of reach for many illegal immigrants.
"We all agree that these men and women have to earn their way to citizenship," he said. "But for comprehensive immigration reform to work, it must make clear from the outset that there is a pathway to citizenship."
"It won't be a quick process, but it will be a fair process," Obama added.
Another key difference between the White House and Senate proposals is the administration's plan to allow same-sex partners to seek visas under the same rules that govern other family immigration. The Senate principles do not recognize same-sex partners, though Democratic lawmakers have told gay rights groups that they could seek to include that in a final bill.
John McCain of Arizona, who is part of the Senate immigration group, called the issue a "red flag" in an interview Tuesday on "CBS This Morning."
Washington last took up immigration changes in a serious way in 2007, when then-President George W. Bush pressed for an overhaul. The initial efforts had bipartisan support but eventually collapsed in the Senate because of a lack of GOP support.
Cognizant of that failed effort, the White House has readied its own immigration legislation. But officials said Obama will send it to the Hill only if the Senate process stalls.
Most of the recommendations Obama made Tuesday were not new. They were included in the immigration blueprint he released in 2011, but he exerted little political capital to get it passed by Congress, to the disappointment of many Hispanics.
Some of the recommendations in the Senate plan are also pulled from past immigration efforts. The senators involved in formulating the latest proposals, in addition to McCain and Rubio, are Democrats Charles Schumer of New York, Dick Durbin of Illinois, Robert Menendez of New Jersey and Michael Bennet of Colorado, and Republicans Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, and Jeff Flake of Arizona.
Also Tuesday, in another sign of Congress' increased attention to immigration issues, a group of four senators introduced legislation aimed at allowing more high-tech workers into the country, a longtime priority of technology businesses. The bill by Republicans Rubio and Orrin Hatch and Democrats Amy Klobuchar and Chris Coons would increase the number of visas available for high-tech workers, make it easier for them to change jobs once here and for their spouses to work and aim to make it easier for foreigners at U.S. universities to remain here upon graduation.
___
Julie Pace reported from Washington. Associated Press writer Erica Werner contributed to this report.
Potential Senate roadblocks center on how to structure the avenue to citizenship and on whether legislation would cover same-sex couples - and that's all before a Senate measure could be debated, approved and sent to the Republican-controlled House where opposition is sure to be stronger.
Obama, who carried Nevada in the November election with heavy Hispanic support, praised the Senate push, saying Congress is showing "a genuine desire to get this done soon." But mindful of previous immigrations efforts that have failed, he warned that the debate would be difficult and vowed to send his own legislation to Capitol Hill if lawmakers don't act quickly.
"The question now is simple," Obama said during a campaign-style event in Las Vegas, one week after being sworn in for a second term in the White House. "Do we have the resolve as a people, as a country, as a government to finally put this issue behind us? I believe that we do."
Shortly after Obama finished speaking, cracks emerged between the White House and the group of eight senators, which put out their proposals one day ahead of the president. Florida Sen. Marco Rubio, a potential 2016 presidential candidate, faulted Obama for not making a citizenship pathway contingent on tighter border security, a central tenet of the lawmakers' proposals.
"The president's speech left the impression that he believes reforming immigration quickly is more important than reforming immigration right," Rubio said in a statement.
House Speaker John Boehner also responded coolly, with spokesman Brendan Buck saying the Ohio Republican hoped the president would be "careful not to drag the debate to the left and ultimately disrupt the difficult work that is ahead in the House and Senate."
Despite possible obstacles to come, the broad agreement between the White House and bipartisan lawmakers in the Senate represents a drastic shift in Washington's willingness to tackle immigration, an issue that has languished for years. Much of that shift is politically motivated, due to the growing influence of Hispanics in presidential and other elections and their overwhelming support for Obama in November.
The separate White House and Senate proposals focus on the same principles: providing a way for most of the estimated 11 million people already in the U.S. illegally to become citizens, strengthening border security, cracking down on employers who hire illegal immigrants and streamlining the legal immigration system.
A consensus around the question of citizenship could help lawmakers clear one major hurdle that has blocked previous immigration efforts. Many Republicans have opposed allowing illegal immigrants to become citizens, saying that would be an unfair reward for people who have broken the law.
Details on how to achieve a pathway to citizenship still could prove to be a major sticking point between the White House and the Senate group.
Obama and the Senate lawmakers all want to require people here illegally to register with the government, pass criminal and national security background checks, pay fees and penalties as well as back taxes and wait until existing immigration backlogs are cleared before getting in line for green cards. Neither proposal backs up those requirements with specifics.
After achieving legal status, U.S. law says people can become citizens after five years.
The Senate proposal says that entire process couldn't start until the borders were fully secure and tracking of people in the U.S. on visas had improved. Those vague requirements would almost certainly make the timeline for achieving citizenship longer than what the White House is proposing.
The president urged lawmakers to avoid making the citizenship pathway so difficult that it would appear out of reach for many illegal immigrants.
"We all agree that these men and women have to earn their way to citizenship," he said. "But for comprehensive immigration reform to work, it must make clear from the outset that there is a pathway to citizenship."
"It won't be a quick process, but it will be a fair process," Obama added.
Another key difference between the White House and Senate proposals is the administration's plan to allow same-sex partners to seek visas under the same rules that govern other family immigration. The Senate principles do not recognize same-sex partners, though Democratic lawmakers have told gay rights groups that they could seek to include that in a final bill.
John McCain of Arizona, who is part of the Senate immigration group, called the issue a "red flag" in an interview Tuesday on "CBS This Morning."
Washington last took up immigration changes in a serious way in 2007, when then-President George W. Bush pressed for an overhaul. The initial efforts had bipartisan support but eventually collapsed in the Senate because of a lack of GOP support.
Cognizant of that failed effort, the White House has readied its own immigration legislation. But officials said Obama will send it to the Hill only if the Senate process stalls.
Most of the recommendations Obama made Tuesday were not new. They were included in the immigration blueprint he released in 2011, but he exerted little political capital to get it passed by Congress, to the disappointment of many Hispanics.
Some of the recommendations in the Senate plan are also pulled from past immigration efforts. The senators involved in formulating the latest proposals, in addition to McCain and Rubio, are Democrats Charles Schumer of New York, Dick Durbin of Illinois, Robert Menendez of New Jersey and Michael Bennet of Colorado, and Republicans Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, and Jeff Flake of Arizona.
Also Tuesday, in another sign of Congress' increased attention to immigration issues, a group of four senators introduced legislation aimed at allowing more high-tech workers into the country, a longtime priority of technology businesses. The bill by Republicans Rubio and Orrin Hatch and Democrats Amy Klobuchar and Chris Coons would increase the number of visas available for high-tech workers, make it easier for them to change jobs once here and for their spouses to work and aim to make it easier for foreigners at U.S. universities to remain here upon graduation.
___
Julie Pace reported from Washington. Associated Press writer Erica Werner contributed to this report.
Here is a point of view that is not being dicussed or avoided. Titled Al Queda is here; it is how Al Queda members can look hispanic. If illegals can steal names, so can Al Queda. http://www.fhu.com/stream/sunday-large.html
Here is my suggestion:
Â
For any immigrant that wants to be a US citizen, they should be required to complete a minimum of 2 full years of military service before their petition is granted..... No exceptions.
CNN is reporting that mexico welcomes immigration reform.....
Â
Wonder why, they want the trash to leave and prey upon the American system.
Â
Stay in your own country or you will soon find a civil war in the US that will pit legal US citizens against the invaders.
Just remember, they want you to show ID to get on airplane, or learn to fly one, or to buy a gun, but, you don't have to show ID or proof of citizenship to vote for them. A woman I know--an adult with a child--actually believes that Mexicans are brought here against their will to be used as slave labor and not allowed to leave. She quite literally thinks that this has something to do with freeing slaves. Also, she home-schools because she says the schools are overcrowded and underfunded. No, really?!
CBC is reporting that there is a BIG split among the idiots in DC and that it will be very difficult, if not impossible to get this give away thru.
Â
Deport all illegals secure the borders and then have a rational means to allow for legal immigration, however those arrested and deport should never be allowed to return.
Â
Never ever reward anyone for their crimes.
 @FreerideNOT I hate these illegals attitudes. They think they are in titled to have citizenship. Â
There are photos of mexicans at rallies in LA, they stand on the sidewalks flipping the finger while waving the mexican flag. Waving a mexican flag while claiming to have a desire to want to be an American......I call &^^%$%^$%&
Â
This trash does not want to become legal US citizens because they love America and our citizens, they want the United States to become a third world country like mexico.
Â
They know that if they cry loud enough the idiot in DC will take up their cause over the best interests of US citizens.
Â
Just think with this latest, the idiots aunti and uncle will be able to stay in the US despite deportation orders. The village idiot is NOT our friend.
Well i hope people see the big picture here. We have the affordable care act and now amnesty and people wonder why taxes are going up? Â This is the only nation that goes out of its way to help law breakers. Poor children you say? Poor living conditions you say? Sure, thats the case however just because we are in close by doesn't make it acceptable to hop the boarder. There are already amnesty programs for nations so that people can seek "refuge"
Â
For those who actually came to this country legally and waited to gain permanent residency and citizenship, this new reform is  a slap to us all.  People, well the ACLU, was up in arms when AZ went big brother to enforce laws. They should have had such regulations in all states actually but really what we are doing now is just rewarding law breakers. You think the illegals will stop now? That ding in your paycheck, get used to it because its going to be used to PAY for the processing of these 11 million applications. To help these law breakers become legal citizens.
Â
Â
 @toobadsoosad Trillions of dollars (we don't have) will be spent legalizing illegals. Saul Alinsky comes to mind now...and a President who read Saul Alinsky.........."let's all create crisis so we can transform a country".....scary shazit.
 @TimBurr the government likes to blow our tax dollars on initiatives which dont even benefit the tax payers. It goes to bettering the lives of illegals and crooks in corrections.  The members of society who contribute don't reap any benefit. When will people wake up?
Of course "the time is now". The election is over and he's got the Latino vote to placate!
 @jpk Yeah but if he took a good look at the voting polls have or all of the Latinos of Hispanics are illegals.
@NativeAmericanIndian please post your source for such an idiotic claim.
 @Ramsesthegreat  @NativeAmericanIndian Think about it! How am i suppose to post the voting polls for you
Â
Correct! and they were all told who to vote forl
Why don't they just do an INS sweep in every state starting with each city and jobs and or by knocking down doors to find these idiots that are ILLEGALS. It doesn't help when State office that help with Welfare just gives it out to illegals that is where they should start is by stopping the Welfare department from giving out OUR money to them and our health care to. INS SWEEPS is what we really need here and if the had children here i think they should also go with them to.Â
Â
By my thinking Oblahblah is not doing a good job so step down from the house
Â
Perhaps if congress doesn't do the amnesty thing Obama could just Executive Order all the democrat future voters into citizenship. Like he did with the illegal students.
Like he does with everything he wants. His ego is larger than his ears!
 @TimBurr I'm sure that in TimmyLand that's exactly what will happen.
Â
On Earth, he doesn't have that power so it won't happen. The illegal students were given a reprieve from prosecution - they weren't made citizens.Â
 @Max Quinn unlimited reprieve....just in time for the NEW Obama amnesty. Maybe cut your Prozacs in half...mkay?
 @TimBurr Mkay, I'll consider that.
 @Max Quinn  @TimBurr Well, they were given unlimited authorization to hold jobs in the US -- so, almost as good.
 @ThePosterFormerlyKnownAsPhredE  @TimBurr Minus the voting part.
News Alert!!!!!
Â
Yahoo News has a headline   "GOP watch what you say", it seems that the mexicans aka illegals are threatening the GOP and telling them not to use the words illegal or alien or there will be reprecussions later..
Â
Wake up folks the illegals/ la raza are on their way to controling our lives with the help of their puppet and his boys. How did illegals ever get such a foothold in our government.....deport!!!!
 @FreerideNOT The Horror. The Horror.
Â
You must have missed the first paragraph in the article:
Â
"A conservative pro-immigration reform group has issued talking points to Republican lawmakers, telling them to avoid referring to the U.S. citizen children of illegal immigrants as "anchor babies" or calling for the construction of an "electric fence" on the border, among other things."
Â
The group is Hispanic Leadership Network a "center-right group that sent the talking points on Monday..." It's not a threat. It's PR.
Â
Run and hide. Run and hide.
Well maxy:
Â
They are anchors, the illegal parents came here to drop one so that they could try to establish a valid reason for being in the US and get a freeride.
Â
As for the fence, I would add a mine field and machine gun nests to stop the invasion of criminals.
Â
Sad that you support any group that has its basis with criminals. Its people like you that try to undermine/destroy our country and have become the puppets of la raza
 @FreerideNOT BTW, the image I linked too sort of resembles a few St. Paddy's Days that I've celebrated...
 @FreerideNOT Well Freeride, way to keep it rational.
Â
Call them whatever you want. And please run for office as a republican.
Â
Here's how they depicted the Irish in the Nineteenth Century - the first wave of immigrants that would destroy us all:Â http://jake.umwblogs.org/files/2009/03/irish-large.jpg
Â
[had to fix the link... deleted original post]
 @Max Quinn  @FreerideNOT They also said not to refer to the illegals as "illegals". Uh, if the illegals can't face what they are, why do we want them? Cold day before I stop referring to them as illegals.
 @Max Quinn  @FreerideNOT No, I am saying they are two different circumstances. Â
 @TreeWizard  @FreerideNOT Why won't that happen again?
 @Max Quinn  @FreerideNOT There is a difference between the Irish when they came and what we have now.
 @TreeWizard  @FreerideNOT If you are looking for honesty in PR you will have a long search.
This comment has been deleted
Go to Yahoo and it is the top story just below the main topic.
Â
It is a sad time when people that are criminals can intimidate the village idiot and political parties to bow to their demands or else......Sounds like the mexican drug cartel!!!!
 @FreerideNOT Found it.
So what goes along with an amnesty? Looking back to 1986
Â
-2.6 million immigrants received amnesty fraudulently
- government hired outside contractors to handle the amnesty
- "Illegal immigrants were paying off workers to falsify information, grant amnesty for family and or friends, and providing other relevant services."
- amnesty program cost $2.6 trillion for the first year to register immigrants.
- family reunification - 3 million turned into 8 million.
Â
Instead of seeing swift action on overhauling the immigration issue, I'd rather see some swift action on enforcing the existing laws against illegal immigration!
 @jpk I liked the Drone patrol and increased border patrol size. The question becomes if they pass these laws will they enforce them? Or will we be in same spot 15 years from now.
Here's a thought, the village idiot will have the illegals manning the border stations after all they will need jobs. and what better place where they can continue to hold the door open to criminals.
 @TreeWizard  @jpk I do seriously wonder, after they shove this horrible thing into law, and 20 years from now what it will be like if the current exponential trends continue on...
There will still be an unsecured border, the Feds will still not rigorously follow-up and remove visa overstayers, and they will continue to refuse to remove border jumpers, then, some group of senators will say, 'hey, let's just make all these illegal people..."legal" -- that will solve the problem'. (Einstein's very choice words regarding the definition of insanity should be recalled early and often in this context). Â But, at that later date, will we be talking about 'just 90 million' or 'maybe as many as 120 million' illegal aliens. Â
Â
Rome imploded from within.
Â
 @ThePosterFormerlyKnownAsPhredE  @jpk By that time we will have made are official language Spanish. *Sigh* Sad day when you can't trust the Government to enforce the laws.
 @TreeWizard  @jpk It's a completely valid question. Here is one organization's answer to it:
https://www.numbersusa.com/content/news/january-29-2013/2007-vs-2013-hard-find-difference.html
Â
Short answer: 'Yes'.
2007 all over again.
 @ThePosterFormerlyKnownAsPhredE  @jpk wow , they are very similar. I liked the making English official language of 2007. Don't care for the Dream act.
It's easy to stop all illegal immigration, immediately. Just stop hiring them, don't give them anything, not even food stamps. Instead, arrest them for being here illegally. Remove the incentives they have for coming here and they won't come here anymore. You don't even need a fence.Â
For 25 years, our immigration policy has pretty much been "Hey, Come on over an get a job! Careful with the border crossing, but if you make it you can pick veggies, nanny, or how about drywall?" Â
Â
I love it how these proposals have an "easier process for businesses to verify the legal status of workers" - as though that was the problem. Businesses didn't mean to hire all of these illegals who have no legal recourse to address abuses at the work site - no they didn't want to hire these folks, it was just so tough to tell if someone might be here illegally.
Â
Cheap labor. That's the beginning and end of the story. None of these proposals significantly raises the penalties on employers who hire illegals. But they do codify a process in which the cheap labor can keep coming on in.Â
 @Max Quinn Also, E-Verify exists to verify employment authorization today -- right now, this very minute.  There is a small sign-up/training session required, but other than that, it is free, readily available through the Internet, is easy to use, is highly accurate, ... So, in short, any reference to making a NEW employment verification system is obfuscation -- pure and simple.
http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.5af9bb95919f35e66f614176543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=a975ca7c5fed9310VgnVCM100000082ca60aRCRD&vgnextchannel=51e6fb41c8596210VgnVCM100000b92ca60aRCRD
 @Max Quinn 'But they do codify a process in which the cheap labor can keep coming on in. '
Yup. The big amnesty of 1986 also had provisions to 'ensure border security', etc. but they were conveniently separated so as to ensure full agreement and implementation would be a sticky if not impracticable process further on down the road. Â The globalists that contribute to 'the machine' (Dems and Republicans) wouldn't have it any other way.
Â
As an example, in a book by left-leaning pol scientist Michael Parenti, he asked a lobbyist who worked for a fortune 500 corp. about who they contribute to. Â The lobbyist replied (paraphrased, summarized..from memory [hey it's been a while!]..) "What you think we're stupid?!?!? We contribute to both major candidates then we always have a favor we can call on later'.
Â
Dick Morris  former Clinton admin aide/adviser was in town recently and was asked about the illegal immigration situation overall. He said basically, that the Republicans want the cheap labor and the Democrats want the voters. ...Explains why I disassociated from the 2 dooshbag parties quite some time ago.
This is the same as allowing kids who fail in school to keep progressing, without doing the hard work to do it right.
Â
Allowing lawbreakers, criminals to do as they please will never work. Constantly giving amnesty will not work.
Â
How do you get a kid to do their work, and tell them through hard work they will succeed...when they look at illegal aliens getting a bunch of freebies?
Â
One lady was able to purchase a house through habitat for humanity. She had lived in Oregon for well over 30 years...she is now thinking of getting citizenship...and will have her daughter translate for her.
Â
And here we are again!!! In 1986 Regan granted amnesty to 3millon illegals. Iâm surprise how can any one believe that are only 11 million illegals here, for the last 2 decades we know that this numbers had been increase, I believe today we have more the 30 million illegals in USA. Besides, I do not trust any of these guys, I could not believe that any of this senators going to solve anything, they have been lobbing, and money talks baby. This going to be a nightmare for America, just wait 15 or 20 years from now, maybe less, 10 years, and we are going to talking about immigration again, and again, we are going to have more millions of illegals here just because the border is never going to be closed.
The military industrial complex is running the country and they want cheap labor so they tell the presidential puppet what laws they want passed (see ACA). They don't care if the laws are unconstitutional and they don't care if they are trashing the USA. Big business wants cheap imported labor and overseas banks to hold their tax-free profits while America becomes a third-world country. Big business exports jobs overseas and imports cheap labor and US citizens watch their country turn into Tijuana. Any other country in the world people would be arrested and charged for illegally entering the country, but here in America they reward criminal behaviour with free health care, a driver's license, a job and a place in our neighborhood to sell drugs. Who voted for this? No one, except big business and their puppet regime in Washington, D.C. If you don't like it, you can kiss Obama's ****.Â