Login

Register | Forgot Your Password? | Close
People shout out against the Strengthen and Fortify Enforcement Act in the hall outside the House Judiciary Committee hearing on Capitol Hill in Washington, Tuesday, June 18, 2013. The committee in the Republican-led House is preparing to cast its first votes on immigration this year, on a tough enforcement-focused measure that Democrats and immigrant groups are protesting loudly. (AP Photo/Carolyn Kaster)

WASHINGTON (AP) - Sweeping immigration legislation moving toward a vote in the Senate would boost the economy and reduce federal deficits, the Congressional Budget Office said Tuesday, at the same time it would bestow legal status on an estimated 8 million immigrants living in the United States unlawfully.

In an assessment that drew cheers from the White House and other backers of the bill, Congress' scorekeeping agency said the measure would reduce federal red ink by $197 billion across a decade, and $700 billion in the following 10 years as increased taxes paid to the government offset the cost of government benefits for newly legal residents.

The White House quickly issued a statement saying the report was "more proof that bipartisan commonsense immigration reform will be good for economic growth and deficit reduction." Several members of the "Gang of Eight" senators who drafted the legislation also hastened to welcome the news.

The assessment came as the pace of activity increased at both ends of the Capitol on an issue that President Barack Obama has placed at the top of his domestic agenda.

Challenged by protesters chanting "shame, shame," House Republicans advanced legislation to crack down on immigrants living illegally in the United States, at the same time the Senate lurched ahead on a dramatically different approach offering the hope of citizenship to the same millions.

Republican Rep. Trey Gowdy of South Carolina said the bill moving through the House Judiciary Committee was part of a "step by step, increment by increment" approach to immigration, an issue that can pit Republican against Republican as much if not more than it divides the two political parties.

California Democratic Rep. Zoe Lofgren predicted there would be "millions of American citizens taking to the street" in protest if Republicans pressed ahead with the bill. The measure permits state and local authorities to enforce federal immigration laws and requires mandatory detention for anyone in the country illegally who is convicted of drunk driving.

Despite the protests, approval by the committee was a foregone conclusion. The panel's chairman, Rep. Robert Goodlatte, R-Va., said future bills would require companies to make sure their employees are living in the United States legally, create a program for foreign farm workers who labor in the United States and enhance the ability of American firms to hire highly skilled workers from overseas.

Those steps and more are already rolled into one sweeping measure in the Senate, a bipartisan bill that Obama supports and that appears on track for a final Senate vote as early as July 4.

The CBO said in its report and accompanying economic analysis that the legislation would raise economic activity in each of the next two decades, in part because of the legal immigration fostered by the measure, and also because millions of workers currently in the country illegally would join the legal workforce and pay taxes.

Not all the forecast was as favorable, though. CBO said average wages would decline through 2025 as a result of the bill, and that unemployment would go up slightly.

One critic quickly seized on the impact on pay. "It's going to raise unemployment and push down wages," Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., said of the bill. He added: "The impact will be harshest for today's low-income Americans. Meanwhile, the 21 million Americans who can't find full-time work will have an ever harder time getting a job and supporting their families."

Supporters of the bill saw it differently.

Sen. Chuck Schumer, a New York Democrat and part of the Gang of Eight, said the CBO report "debunks the idea that immigration reform is anything other than a boon to our economy, and robs the bill's opponents of one of their last remaining arguments."

Sen. Marco Rubio, a Florida Republican and a co-author of the bill, said in a statement that the budget agency confirmed that "reforming our immigration system is a net benefit for our economy, American workers and taxpayers," although he said he hopes for changes before it comes to a final vote.

The report was issued near the end of a day of skirmishing on the Senate bill.

Thhe Senate rejected a move by Sen. John Thune, R-S.D., to require the installation of 350 miles of fencing along the U.S.-Mexico border before legalization can begin for anyone currently in the United States illegally.

Similarly, the Senate rejected a proposal by Sen. David Vitter, R-La., to prevent legalization until a biometric system is in place to track people entering or leaving the country through air, sea or land points of departure.

Those proposals were overshadowed by a larger debate over the types of border security requirements the legislation should contain. Republicans generally want to toughen the existing measure, particularly since the bill includes a 13-year path to citizenship for immigrants in the country illegally â(EURO)" a provision that sparks opposition from voters who could be influential in GOP primaries in next year's mid-term elections.

Sen. John Hoeven, R-N.D., told reporters that he and others want the government to demonstrate an ability to apprehend the vast majority of those attempting to enter the country illegally before anyone already present can take the first step toward possible citizenship.

Democrats have previously been unwilling to consider proposals along those lines, arguing they could postpone legalization for years if not longer. As drafted, the bill gives the government six months to develop a plan to achieve border security, but does not hold up legalization while it is being tested for effectiveness.

It was unclear what, if any, compromise is possible on that point. Agreement would greatly increase the bill's chances for passage with a large bipartisan vote.

The measure was drafted by a bipartisan Gang of Eight and represents a series of political trade-offs among senators as well as outside groups like business and labor, growers and farm workers. In addition to border security and a path to citizenship, it includes an expanded number of visas for highly skilled workers prized by the technology industry and a new program for low-skilled workers. It also features a top-to-bottom overhaul of a decades-old system for parceling out visas to future legal immigrants, reducing the importance of family ties while emphasizing education, job skills and youth.

Any talk of compromise in the House appeared distant as Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, sought to reassure conservatives who have expressed fears he will allow legislation to come up this summer that they oppose and Democrats support.

One official who attended the closed-door meeting quoted the Ohio Republican as saying he has no intention of allowing a bill to come up that would violate the principles of the GOP majority and split its ranks. The speaker also made clear that legislation must satisfy Republican concerns about border security, according to the official.

___

Associated Press writer Andrew Taylor contributed to this report.


(Copyright 2013 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.)

Associated Press,

share this story:
facebook

149 Comments   |   Join the conversation »
  • Add A Comment 
  • Abuse
    Steve wrote...
    Food for thought
    Immigration agents have been left with no recourse but to sue their own Department, simply so that they like any other law officers will be allowed to do their job. The first task for every media agency in the country ought to be to study this lawsuit, to listen to the long documented complaints of ICE agents and to review the record of stymied attempts at congressional oversight of DHS. What good are promises of future enforcement when the Administration covertly undermines those laws now in place?
  • Abuse
    Steve wrote...
    The cost
    Creating a path to citizenship for so many illegal aliens would result in significant costs to state, local and federal governments. An often cited 2004 study that illegal immigrants paying taxes and getting access to such social services as Medicaid or food stamps would cost taxpayers $29 billion annually. Illegal aliens create a large deficit is not their heavy use of social services but their lack of education, which results in low paying jobs and small income tax contributions. If you think Obamacare is screwed up now just wait and see if Amnesty is passed.
  • Abuse
    1redcav wrote...
    Just say NO
    to amnesty!
  • Abuse
    Michoacan wrote...
    Steve throws his support behind a union
    which fights for what it sees as better working conditions. Oddly, he doesn't support other unions that want better and safer working conditions. Still, it's good to see his change of heart in backing the working man and collective action.
  • Abuse
    gilbert armenta wrote...
    It really is reassuring
    to hear all these people continuing to want to fight this. What that means is the GOP will continue to lose and ultimately be incapable of much of anything. Keep up the good fight you hardline GOPers, that's worked very well these past few years.
  • Abuse
    wrote...
    Have the GOP considered
    That Mitt Romney was the problem at the ballot box? This is an action which is doomed to failure. Current illegals have no desire to "pay" for their citizenship, as this bill basically requires. It will fail.
  • Abuse
    Steve wrote...
    The illegal are counting on Obama
    He is their Moses...leading them to the promised land.
  • Abuse
    Steve wrote...
    CIR will turn out to be a joke
    completely watered down by Obama and nothing will happen.
  • Abuse
    wrote...
    Please define "Border Security"
    Talk about a nebulous term ~ does anyone have a definition of Border Security? The border with Mexico runs 2,000 miles from Baja California through Texas - would a 2,000 mile fence make the "border security" advocates happy - and any enterprising person can tunnel under or climb over a fence. So how about guards every 200 ft. for 2,000 miles - that would require 50,000 border guards times 3 (150,000) working in 8-hr. shifts. Would the individual states (California, Arizona, New Mexico, Texas) work that into their budgets?
  • Abuse
    Steve wrote...
    Border security is not
    difficult. Washington makes if difficult.

World Class Arizona

  • Go Daddy

    World Class People. World Class Company. Go Daddy is a Fortune 100 "Best Companies to Work For."
  • Avnet

    World Class People. World Class Company. Here's information on a Fortune 500 company from Arizona.

Voice For A Better Arizona