Immigration Bill Shapes Up in the Senate

WASHINGTON — After days of emotional, sometimes stinging debate on immigration policy, it appears all but certain the Senate next week will pass a bill with the kind of broad changes backed by President Bush.

And though the fate of the final legislation might not be determined for months, the Senate’s progress in its debate has heartened those who favor a sweeping approach to rewriting immigration laws.

The key to likely passage of the Senate bill has been a bipartisan alliance of lawmakers that has thwarted efforts to limit or kill the legislation’s guest worker measure and its legalization provisions for undocumented immigrants.

Within that group, a core of moderate Republicans also has backed measures to toughen the legislation. Those steps, they hope, will make the Senate’s approach more palatable to House GOP leaders, who advocate the enforcement of current immigration laws and the enhancement of border security before considering other measures.

The Senate approved an amendment Wednesday that would add 370 miles of fencing and 500 miles of vehicle barriers along the U.S.-Mexico border. And in a nod to those who emphasize the perceived need for immigrants’ cultural assimilation, the chamber passed a measure Thursday to declare English the national language of the U.S.

On a tactical level, these steps are meant to increase the chances that some form of the legalization and guest worker provisions will survive negotiations over a final bill between the Senate and the House, which passed an enforcement-only immigration measure in December.

Still, House conservatives continue to criticize the Senate’s effort. They include Rep. F. James Sensenbrenner Jr. (R-Wis.), the main author of the House bill.

Sensenbrenner spokesman Jeff Lungren said his boss “has been saying that he is disappointed that most of the senators have been listening to the interest groups instead of the public” in crafting its bill.

Meanwhile, some Senate conservatives insist changes to its bill may make little difference.

Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas), who strongly opposes the guest worker program and the legalization measures in the Senate bill, predicted that “ultimately, this bill will be written in conference committee.”

That could result in a measure that more closely resembles the House version.

For now, though, backers of broader overhaul are optimistic.

“It was an incredibly successful week for our comprehensive solution to immigration,” said Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.). “We have huge momentum ... for keeping the comprehensive nature of the bill intact.”

Graham pointed to a 66-33 vote that defeated an amendment to strip legalization provisions from the bill.

“If you want a look at a final passage vote, that number is your best predictor,” Graham said. “We’ve got a long way to go, but the really tough votes are behind us. I’m really pleased.”

The tough votes Graham referred to included defeat of an amendment that would have required the Department of Homeland Security to certify that the U.S. borders were secure before guest worker or legalization programs could be put in place.

Had it passed, the proposal would have essentially given the Senate bill the same focus on enforcement that marks the House bill.

“I think our coalition worked effectively together,” said Sen. Ken Salazar (D-Colo.).

Along with Salazar, Democrats who belong to the alliance propelling the bill include Sens. Edward M. Kennedy of Massachusetts and Richard J. Durbin of Illinois.

The Republicans include Graham and Sens. John McCain of Arizona, Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania, Mel Martinez of Florida, Mike DeWine of Ohio, Chuck Hagel of Nebraska and Sam Brownback of Kansas.

These lawmakers and about 10 others from both parties convene “every morning, every day at lunch and every night. Without these meetings this would not be happening,” Graham said.

“We’ve created quite a bond among ourselves that transcends partisan politics.”

Their shared commitment to the bill’s key elements has withstood occasions when the group hasn’t acted in concert.

For instance, the alliance’s GOP members voted for the national language; the Democrats did not.

“I think that was a very unfortunate amendment,” said Salazar. “It will cause tremendous division in the country, and it also did among our colleagues.”

Graham viewed it as a good addition to the bill. He called it important that “the Senate stress that you have to learn competency in English.”

Some Democrats in the alliance voted against the amendment to put fencing along the U.S.-Mexico border; the Republicans backed it.

Ken Lundberg, a spokesman for Martinez, suggested that the fence amendment would help draw support in the Senate and aid the bill’s final passage.

Martinez’s “primary focus has been on achieving comprehensive reform,” said Lundberg. That begins with getting a bill out of the Senate, he said.

Graham said the fence measure would boost confidence in the legislation outside the Senate.

“A lot of people out there who support a compromise solution believe we’re serious about securing the border, but they’re a little skeptical,” he said.

The fence measure, in Graham’s view, should quell such doubts.

He added, “I hope the House realizes the Senate is as serious as they are” about border security.

Critics of the Senate bill reject that contention. And one of its staunchest foes, Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.), questioned Friday whether all of the bill’s public supporters genuinely backed it.

In comments on the Senate floor, Sessions said he believed some of his colleagues were banking on negotiations with the House to produce legislation more to their liking.

“It’s a sad day when those who are supporting this legislation are reduced to quietly going around and suggesting that, ‘Don’t worry about it being so bad, we just have to do something and maybe the House of Representatives will save us,’ ” Sessions said.