Immigration Reform Not Amnesty; Thune Votes Against Fairness, Savings

On the day when we celebrate the greatest nation of immigrants, it is fitting that we descendants of immigrants discuss how we deal with today's immigrants.

The U.S. Senate passed a bipartisan immigration reform bill last week. The big deal in S. 744 is Registered Provisional Immigrant status, the "path to citizenship" for illegal immigrants. Conservative opponents have branded this program amnesty. I've even bandied the term about to provoke discussion.

But amnesty it ain't. Amnesty has no hoops; Amnesty is Jimmy Carter saying to Vietnam draft dodgers, "Come on home, no penalty!" Amnesty is President Grant violating treaty, calling off the troops, and letting white folks illegally occupy the Black Hills.

S. 744 has hoops. Let's review what S. 744 requires illegal immigrants to do to become legal American residents:

1. Illegal immigrants who came here before December 31, 2011, can apply for RPI status. Nobody watching CNN International now and thinking we're going soft on immigration can hop the border tomorrow and take advantage of S. 744.
2. To apply for RPI status, an immigrant must pay a $500 fine plus fees, pass a background check (felony conviction? no RPI for you), and prove they've paid all applicable taxes.
3. Initial RPI status is good for six years. To renew, RPIs submit to the above process all over again, including another $500 fine plus fees. Plus, renewing RPIs must prove they've held a job and are keeping themselves above the poverty line. Immigrants quite literally have to work for RPI status.
4. After ten years, may apply to adjustment of status to permanent residency. RPIs must pay another $1000 fine plus fees, submit to another background check, and prove again they've paid all their taxes (how many of you have been audited by the IRS three times in ten years?). RPIs must prove they are learning English, holding a job, and keeping themselves at 125% of the poverty level or better.
5. After thirteen years, RPIs who do all of the above and keep their noses clean may apply for citizenship.

That's not amnesty; that's an obstacle course. Or, more accurately, it is the "tough but fair" path to citizenship that 74% of South Dakotans support.

S. 744 is no free pass, but some legal immigrants understandably grouse that we're still giving lawbreakers a break. The new RPI process is better than prison or deportation. But S. 744 includes fairness for legal immigrants: it allows no RPIs to get permanent residency until we've cleared the huge backlog of 4.4 million green card applicants. In other words, nobody jumps the queue.

Thirty-two senators found reason to vote against S. 744, including our junior Senator John Thune. He grumbles that the bill spends too much and does too little. Logically, Senator Thune must want the bill to do more but cost less. That's the GOP's general approach to labor, but it's also wishful thinking.

The original bill called for Homeland Security to develop a plan for border security, including more fencing, before opening up registration for RPI status. Senator Thune wanted to actually build the fence (350 miles of it) before starting the program. The Senate killed that idea.

However, the Senate did approve a "border surge." Instead of adding 3,500 border agents, S. 744 now spends $38 billion to double the Border Patrol to nearly 40,000 agents, armed with all sorts of drones and surveillance technology (how's that for bigger government?) The amended Senate bill does more and thus costs more, cutting the first-decade deficit savings of the bill from $197 billion to $135 billion. What would Senator Thune rather do, spend $285 billion deporting every illegal immigrant?

Even with the bigger spending on border security, the immigration reform bill remains a budget plus for Uncle Sam. Don't forget, immigrants are younger than the general population. Put them on the legal payroll, and they pay more taxes, just when we need more young workers to cover Social Security and Medicare for all of our increasingly creaky Baby Boomers.

S. 744 is practical and fair for immigrants. It also saves the government money and boosts our economy. John Thune didn't vote against immigration reform because it spends too much. His colleagues amended it to spend more money on exactly the border security priorities he says he wants, along with a mandate that all employers use E-Verify to check prospective employees' immigration status (yes, big business, Thune likes E-Verify, too). Thune and 31 Republican colleagues voted against immigration reform because they don't want to share the Land of Opportunity with any more immigrants who come here and vote Democrat. (But wait: Mexicans aren't necessarily Democrats! The Republicans just make them that way by treating them poorly.)