EMM responds to proposed immigration bill
Episcopal News Service. May 21, 2007 [052107-03]
As the United States Senate began debating a compromise immigration-reform bill May 21, Richard Parkins, director of Episcopal Migration Ministries, offered an assessment of the proposed bill.
Information about the major details of the bill is available here.
The full text of Parkins' statement follows.
Our church through the efforts of Episcopal Migration Ministries and the Office of Government Relations has been a staunch advocate of a version of comprehensive immigration reform which regrettably is not fully expressed in the compromise bill that now frames the immigration debate. While no one expected to get an ideal bill, considering the principles for which we and other faith-based advocates espoused, the result is disappointing.
We applaud the granting of a pathway to legal status for the 11 million or so undocumented workers now in our midst and the hoped-for enactment of the Dream Act which opens up educational opportunities for deserving immigrant youth. These are important gains.
However, we have a generous guest workers' program generous in terms of visa numbers but no provision for protecting worker rights or offering workers a chance at permanence if they meet certain standards. We have consistently advocated for a new approach to bringing in workers which would go beyond treating them as temporary guests. Moreover, the elimination of a mechanism for permanent residence could result in temporary workers remaining to work given the community roots that they have established and the ongoing need for their labor.
While acknowledging the breakthrough in converting marginalized workers into members of a legal workforce, we are concerned that the legalization program lacks an adequate family unity vehicle for those who legalize. We are also concerned that the proposed $5,000 applicant's fee could be a considerable barrier to many who would otherwise be eligible for permanent status.
Of paramount importance to the faith-based community has been the protection of family unity as a cardinal principle of any reformed system. Tragically, family unity suffers greatly in the proposed bill. In addition to an inadequate provision for family unity in the legalization scheme, the draft severely reduces the number of visas for such relative categories as adult children, the parents of adult children and siblings. Also, the introduction of a point-based worker system as a means for deciding how future family members enter the U.S. contradicts the notion that family unity is itself an inherent value of our immigration system.
We had always assumed that any new immigration legislation would address border enforcement. However, the proposed bill significantly increases certain types of enforcement initiatives. It recommends a significantly expanded border patrol, more walls and fences, and a further curtailment of due process for the immigrants who seek to appeal unfair treatment.
As the debate goes forward, we shall seek a legislative response which is more faithful to the principles of immigration reform which our Church has set forth resolutions of the Executive Council and most recently in its more comprehensive resolution emerging for our 2006 General Convention (A017).
There may come a time when we shall have to assess whether we have gained sufficient benefits for our marginalized brothers and sisters to accept the imperfections of a so-called immigration reform bill. For the time being our collective advocacy must be targeted to bringing forth legislation which is truly comprehensive. We must also recognize that it is with this Congress that we have the best chance of achieving anything approaching a reformed system. We have been advised by Congressional staff and other political pundits that if we fail to produce a bill at this point, it could well be 2009 before the issue can be revisited. Let's hope that this historic moment will be the occasion when we make changes in our immigration system which features compassion, humanity and practicality as defining principles.