'Amnesty' tag rouses foes of immigration bill

WASHINGTON -- When organized opponents of the immigration bill being debated in the US Senate want to rally the troops, get the e-mails churning, and the congressional switchboards lighting up, they almost invariably invoke the "A-word."

On websites and in speeches and news releases, critics of the legislation attack it as a form of "amnesty." They argue that it would reward 10 million to 12 million immigrants who entered the United States illegally and would encourage others to sneak in, too.

When organized supporters of the bill respond, they consistently deny that it offers anything remotely like amnesty, or blanket forgiveness. Instead, they use the "L-word," describing an orderly process of legalization that would take at least eight years. The process would include a series of temporary visas, payment of hefty fees, and a return by the head of the family to his or her native country before applying for permanent residency.

But despite arguments by supporters that the bill involves fines, waiting lists, and background checks, and despite polls showing most Americans favor some form of legalization, the specter of amnesty has persistently haunted the debate -- and could jeopardize the bill's chances for passage.

"Anything that allows illegal immigrants to stay and become legal is amnesty," said Jessica Echard, executive director of the Eagle Forum, a conservative group based in Alton, Ill. "We're not saying they should deport everyone. We are saying let's turn off the spigot, start enforcing laws on the border and in the workplace. Then we will see the illegal population shrink on its own."

Opponents are able to successfully invoke amnesty in part because of the historical record: The US government has offered seven amnesties to various categories of illegal immigrants in the past 20 years, benefiting 5 million people. In some cases, the amnesties were linked to political debates in the United States or conflicts in the immigrants' home countries.

Supporters of the proposed legislation say its provisions are entirely different from earlier laws. For one thing, they say, the requirements for becoming legal were much less burdensome and costly under the amnesty laws.

"It is stunning how potent this piece of the debate has become and fascinating that such a poisonous term is being used this way, because nobody is proposing anything that even resembles an amnesty," said Cecilia Munoz, with the National Council of La Raza, a group that strongly supports a legalization program. "We are giving people a chance to earn their legal status, not giving it away."

In the 1986 amnesty, close to 3 million illegal immigrants, most from Mexico or Central America, were allowed to become permanent residents if they could prove they had lived in the United States for at least four years. Amnesties in 1994 and 1997 allowed another 1.5 million to stay in the country.

According to the Center for Immigration Studies, a group often critical of liberal immigration policies, the 1986 amnesty carried a hefty price tag, including more than $100 billion in social assistance programs and services over 10 years, and job displacement of an average of more than 187,000 US citizens and legal immigrants each year.