The Hill: Immigration interests look to new ways to satisfy concerns

The Hill
Immigration interests look to new ways to satisfy concerns
July 11, 2007
By Jim Snyder
 
Mirna Vasquez first came to the United States to work in 1986. She toiled, “without papers,” in farm fields throughout the Southwest, picking oranges, walnuts, or grapes, sometimes in 10-hour stretches and in constant fear federal agents would send her back to Mexico and away from her family.

Now a U.S. citizen with a son who wants to join the Marines, Vasquez was part of a group of 50 farm workers who came to Washington last month to lobby in support of immigration by sharing their own experiences.

The broad immigration measure failed, despite that effort. But Vasquez remains hopeful that one critical component may still pass.

“I’m sad, but I have a lot of faith something can happen,” she said.

The something is the AgJobs Act, a compromise worked out by agribusiness and the United Farm Workers of America years ago that would streamline the visa process for farm workers and provide them a path to legal status.

It is one piece of the “grand bargain” that lawmakers are now breaking up and promoting separately. Agribusinesses, farm labor unions, and the high-tech community in particular are at the forefront of the effort.

Disappointment that the broader bill died isn’t universal among businesses, which in general backed comprehensive immigration reform to ensure a steady labor supply. In some quarters, however, that support was undercut by “heavy lift” provisions such as the requirement that companies certify their workforce consists entirely of legal workers.

“The status quo is OK for some people in the business community,” said Ralph Hellmann, senior vice president of government relations at the Information Technology Institute Council.

“The high tech and agriculture communities are different. Status quo doesn’t work for us.”

Microsoft, for example, has announced plans to open up a facility in Canada in part because of access to foreign workers.
The software maker and other tech companies want a big boost in the number of H-1B visas, which provide temporary work status to foreign workers. Now capped at 65,000 workers, the visas are typically snapped up the day they are offered.

An additional 20,000 foreign-born graduates with advanced degrees from American universities are allowed in. But the industry contends that the total still isn’t sufficient to meet demand.

The industry is also pushing for a higher number of green cards, which grant permanent residency. Under current policy, trained workers on H-1B visas have to go home because the backlog for green cards is so extensive, Hellmann said.

Sen. Maria Cantwell, a Washington state Democrat and former software executive, had planned to introduce an amendment to increase the number of H-1B visas to 130,000, with an escalator provision that could raise the total to 180,000. The amendment would have also allowed more green cards to be issued each year to handle the years-long backlog.

But the broader bill died on a cloture vote before the amendment was offered.

Some members of Congress believe that companies want cheaper foreign labor at the expense of American engineers and software designers. But increasing the number of high-tech workers enjoys support even among the most hardened opponents of comprehensive immigration reform.

Rep. Lamar Smith (R-Texas), for example, introduced a bill yesterday to increase the number of H-1B visas to 195,000 in 2007.

Agriculture groups, meanwhile, are encouraged by Sen. Dianne Feinstein’s (D-Calif.) stated intention of attaching AgJobs to the farm bill, which is up for reauthorization this year.

Farm workers’ unions and agribusiness giants were among the strongest backers of the immigration measure, but in some ways they may face a tougher push than high-tech lobbyists do. The comprehensive bill failed principally because of opposition to a plan to give an estimated 12 million illegal immigrants a path to citizenship.

AgJobs would affect a far smaller pool of workers, an estimated 1.5 million farm workers, but the amnesty issue remains an obstacle.

“This is not forgiveness. This is earned legalization,” said Bruce Goldstein, executive director of Farmworkers Justice.

AgJobs would have allowed farm workers who had worked in agriculture for at least 150 days over the previous two years to apply for a Z-A visa. Workers who had obtained the visa could then earn a green card, or permanent resident status, if they worked at least 100 days per year for five years or 150 days each year for three years and paid a $400 fine.

The workers would come to the United States at federal wage rates set at 2003 levels, and then frozen for three years — a concession labor made to agribusinesses that complained the current visa system is too expensive.

As many as 55 to 70 percent of the farm workers who work in fields are here illegally, said Goldstein.

“Most are undocumented and have very little bargaining power with their employer. They are too afraid to come forward,” he said.

As they redouble their lobbying efforts, agribusiness and high-tech interests are also seeking to shore up ties to Democrats by reversing past campaign giving trends.

Agribusinesses, for example, gave roughly two-thirds of their $18.3 million in donations during the 2006 cycle to Republican candidates. So far this cycle, they have given $1.27 million to Democrats and $1.16 million to Republicans, according to PoliticalMoneyLine, which tracks political spending.

Industries defined as communications and technology-sector have given $1.49 million to Democrats and just over $1 million to Republicans so far. In 2006, Republicans received about 62 percent of the contributions.