A streamlined hiring process for temporary and seasonal agricultural workers under the Federal H-2A program is being proposed by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security. "These proposed changes are designed to provide an efficient and secure program for farmers to legally fulfill their need for agricultural workers within the law rather than outside the law," says Michael Chertoff, department secretary, in a written statement. The DHS says simplification of the H-2A program will provide farm employers with "a more orderly and timely flow of legal workers."

The proposed modifications to the rule including relaxing current limitations on the ability for employers to petition for multiple, unnamed agricultural workers. Other changes would extend from 10 to 30 days the time a temporary agricultural worker may remain in the U.S. after the end of employment. The proposed rule also reduces from six to three months the time a temporary agricultural worker must wait outside the U.S. before he or she is eligible reenter the country under H-2A status. Additionally, under the proposed rule H-2A workers who are changing from one H-2A employer to another may begin work with the new petitioning employer before the change is approved by the government, provided the new employer participates in the federal electronic verification program. The proposed rule is available at www.dhs.gov for public comment and will soon appear at www.regulations.gov under docket number "USCIS-2007-0055" until 60 days after publication in the Federal Register.

HERNDON, Virginia - Issameldin Mohamed, a native of Egypt, explained that he was not entirely sure that suing the U.S. government was a good idea. "In (Egypt), if you sue the government, there's something wrong here," he said, pointing to his head to indicate how foolhardy it would be. But Mohamed, 45, of Owings Mills, Md., was out of patience, having waited the better part of 10 years to obtain citizenship. Since 2005, he had passed his citizenship test, and was waiting only for his name to be cleared in a government background check. Finally, after filing a lawsuit in October at U.S. District Court in Baltimore that named Department of Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff, FBI Director Robert Mueller and other top government officials as defendants, his naturalization application was approved. On Dec. 14, he became a citizen. "I believed it only when they called my name and gave me my certificate," Mohamed said.

Mohamed and an increasing number of immigrants have decided to sue in federal court to force the government to take action on their citizenship applications. At the U.S. District Court in Alexandria, roughly 100 lawsuits have been filed in 2007 demanding action on stalled citizenship applications. That represents roughly 8% of the entire civil docket at the courthouse, which is among the busiest in the nation. The lawsuits cite federal law requiring agencies to act on a petition within 120 days after it has been reviewed. Rarely do the lawsuits go before a judge, according to a review of court records. Usually, the plaintiff agrees to drop the case after receiving assurances that it will be resolved quickly and favorably.

Morris Days, an attorney with the Maryland-Virginia chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations, has helped Mohamed and 15 others file similar petitions at federal courthouses in the region in recent months. Days said six already have received citizenship papers or are about to, and he is optimistic that all the applications will be approved. The holdup invariably is the name check, Days said. Muslims are particularly vulnerable to delays, he said, because names of innocent immigrants get confused with those on terror watch lists. Days noted that Mohamed worked for several years as an armed security guard and was permitted to carry a firearm but, as a non-citizen, was barred from voting. The delays cause real harm for people, he said. Certain jobs are off limits to non-citizens, adopting a child can prove difficult and people are often separated from their families. Delays of two, three or four years are not uncommon, he said.

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, or USCIS, the federal agency responsible for processing citizenship applications, has acknowledged that hundreds of thousands of applicants have experienced unacceptable delays because of backlogs in the background checks, which are conducted by the FBI. Spokesman Chris Bentley said 90% of the background checks are completed within six months, but that still leaves a current backlog of 150,000 cases that have been pending six months or longer. An ombudsman for the agency says the numbers are even worse - that nearly a third of name checks have been pending for more than a year. At the Alexandria courthouse, most of those who have filed petitions have Muslim or Middle Eastern names, though a few Chinese and Hispanic names are in the mix.

Bentley acknowledged that Arabic names can be cumbersome in terms of completing background checks because of the language differences, confusion over common names and a lack of interpreters. "All the variations of a name have to be checked," he said. "We empathize with the people whose applications are being delayed, but we are committed to doing the name checks properly." Mohamed said he never was given an official reason for his delays, but he knows what the problem was. "I am a Muslim. My name is Mohamed," he said. For years he watched colleagues at work from European countries receive their citizenship papers while his application was lost in the bureaucracy. "I started to lose hope," he said.

Shazia Naz, 34, of Fairfax, also received her citizenship earlier this month after suing the government in July in federal court in Alexandria. She had passed her citizenship test in February 2006 but never received final approval; immigration officials told her the delay was because of her name and the inability to complete the background check. She said it would have cost her as much as $5,000 to hire an immigration lawyer, but she filed the suit herself with assistance from the Council on American-Islamic Relations. The day she received the call that her application had been approved, she took the citizenship oath at a ceremony in Fairfax. "I thought that if I didn't go right away, who knows what might happen" to stall the process again, said Naz, a native of Pakistan.

Bentley acknowledged that there has been a big jump nationally in the use of federal lawsuits to prompt action on citizenship applications. In California, for instance, the American Civil Liberties Union has filed a class-action lawsuit complaining that the checks are taking too long. In the last year, Bentley said, USCIS has stopped expediting cases in which lawsuits are filed because of the volume. But Days said he is confident that the lawsuits are the only thing that jarred USCIS into action on behalf of his clients. "If you file the suit and do the right things, they will relent," he said.

A top investigator in the internal affairs office of the Citizenship and Immigration Services has been convicted of harboring an illegal immigrant who was his girlfriend. The investigator, Lloyd W. Miner, 49, of Centreville, was convicted by a jury at the federal courthouse in Alexandria. He faces a maximum sentence of 10 years in prison. His girlfriend, originally from Mongolia, was also convicted of conspiracy to commit identification fraud. At the time of his arrest this year, Mr. Miner was the assistant chief of internal affairs investigations for Citizenship and Immigration Services, part of the Department of Homeland Security.

WASHINGTON - The Senate today rebuffed a measure that would grant legal status to hundreds of thousands of young illegal immigrants if they attend college or join the military. Supporters of the DREAM Act fell eight votes short of the 60 needed to keep the legislation alive, with Texas GOP Sens. Kay Bailey Hutchison and John Cornyn splitting over the bill. Cornyn voted against the measure on a key test vote while Hutchison worked behind the scenes with the legislation's chief sponsor to find ways to make it more palatable to Republicans.

"I don't want to hold out false hope," Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., said when asked if he'd try to bring his legislation up again this year. "We did our best today." After the implosion in the Senate last June of a sweeping immigration bill backed by the Bush administration, advocates decided to offer smaller measures in hopes of limiting the opposition that derailed legalization for most of the estimated 12 million illegal immigrants in the country. The DREAM Act was first out of the chute, presented by supporters as a targeted bill designed to help children who played no part in their parents' decision to come here illegally.

"What good does it do anybody to prevent these young people from having a future?" said Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev. "It harms children who have done no wrong, and in the long run greatly harms our country." But opponents insisted the legislation was nothing more than an amnesty program which they claimed could open the door to citizenship for the students' parents and other relatives. The White House also opposed the measure.

"I do not believe we should reward illegal behavior," said Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky. "It is our duty to promote respect for America's immigration laws." The legislation, officially known as the Development, Relief and Education for Alien Minors Act, would allow hundreds of thousands of illegal immigrants under the age of 30 who came here under age 16, and have lived here at least five years, to attain legal status, and eventually citizenship, if they complete two years of college or serve in the military for at least two years. Cornyn complained that the legislation contained "gaping loopholes," including not requiring that illegal immigrants graduate from college, granting them access to federal student loans and limiting investigation of possible application fraud.

"If my colleagues who support this measure are committed to solving America's immigration crisis and the plight of illegal immigrants, then the focus of this Congress should be on passing a comprehensive reform bill that addresses all of our pressing immigration matters, including securing our broken borders and the needs of American businesses for more workers," Cornyn said. The Migration Policy Institute, a nonpartisan immigration research organization, has estimated that the DREAM Act could provide immediate conditional legal status to 360,000 high school graduates under the age of 24 and help 715,000 currently in school.

Illegal immigrants who are victims of violent crimes in the U.S. can now apply for special visas, seven years after Congress offered protection against deportation to those who cooperate with law enforcement agencies. The U.S. Citizen and Immigration Services is finally starting to process the visas this week, agency spokeswoman Marilu Cabrera said. The long delay occurred largely because the agency drafted rules for issuing the so-called "U" visas before it became a division of the then-new Department of Homeland Security, she said. Consequently, the rules had to be reviewed again. Then the Department of Justice had concerns, she said. "It is legally very complex, and so it went back and forth for a while," Cabrera said. The 2000 Victims of Trafficking and Violence Protection Act established the visa to encourage illegal immigrants to report crimes against them in return for the right to remain in the United States and eventually apply for permanent residency.

"This is an extremely important visa for individuals who have been victims of a crime," Cabrera said. "It is helpful for the government that we get information and cooperation so we can solve these crimes and prevent future crimes. For the person, it gives them peace of mind and an opportunity for a new life." The law authorized up to 10,000 "U" visas every year. The visas are good for up to four years, and visa holders who are in the U.S. continuously for three years can apply for permanent residency. Critics are concerned about that provision. "I would much prefer that we used it as a temporary visa, not an immigrant visa - something that allowed a person to testify but didn't give them the jackpot of a green card," said Mark Krikorian, executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies, which favors limits on immigration.

Ed Hayes, the Kansas director of the Minuteman Civil Defense Corps, is more vigorous in his opposition to the program. He argues that there are many more American victims of crimes committed by illegal immigrants than illegal immigrants who are crime victims. "If they are here illegally, they broke the law," Hayes said. "If they become a victim, I am sorry for them. They should testify and then go home." Since the law was passed, 8,301 petitioners and their families have been granted interim relief from deportation while awaiting publication of the "U" visa rules. They now have 180 days to apply for the special visas. Among those who qualified for deferred action was Eleuterio Rodriguez Ruiz, who said he hopes to get a visa that will allow him to travel to Mexico to see his parents.

"More than anything I came to this country to find a better standard of living, maybe even buy a house," he said in Spanish in a phone interview from Sacramento, Calif., where he works as a field hand harvesting fruit. The 30-year-old Mexican citizen was one of seven people held at gunpoint at an Arizona rest stop by an Army reservist as they were crossing illegally into the United States. Rodriguez Ruiz said he cooperated with authorities, who subsequently filed aggravated assault charges against Sgt. Patrick Haab. The county attorney later dropped the charges, citing a state law that allows citizens to make an arrest when a felony has been committed.

The delay in the "U" visa program led a coalition of civil rights groups to file a class-action lawsuit in 2005 against Citizen and Immigration Services and Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff. "We intend to continue the fight for immigrant crime victims. ... Because it was a largely poor, vulnerable population with no political clout, it took seven years," said Peter A. Schey, lead counsel in the lawsuit. Schey wants Citizen and Immigration Services to allow more than 10,000 annual "U" visas to compensate for the delay.

He also opposes restrictions giving victims only six months to apply for the visa and the requirement that petitioners be certified as crime victims by a law enforcement agency or prosecutor. "Hundreds of thousands of law enforcement agencies will not see fit to certify them. They don't know about it, don't want to get involved or don't care," Schey said. Angela Ferguson, an immigration attorney in Kansas City, Mo., who has handled about 50 deferred action cases for "U" visas, doubts the program will change immigrants' attitudes toward police. "I don't think it is going to help them trust law enforcement more," she said. "The fear is being stirred up everywhere - the fear of racial profiling, the rumors, the raids. I have people for the first time coming into my office and saying they are giving up and leaving."

Fairfax County Sheriff Stan G. Barry, who runs Virginia's largest jail, has decided to begin screening inmates for immigration violations and working with federal authorities to deport those illegally in this country. Fairfax officials have resisted involving their police force in immigration enforcement but said they have no problem with Barry's initiative because his deputies will be screening people who have already been arrested.

"I think if you break the law, and you're already here illegally, you are not welcome in this county," Fairfax Board of Supervisors Chairman Gerald E. Connolly (D) said. "I think we have to be strict about that." The partnership with federal Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials will give Fairfax deputies instant access to federal immigration databases. It also will allow the sheriff's office to schedule deportation hearings for suspected illegal immigrants and give deputies the authority to set "immigration bonds" that must be paid in full -- in cash -- before inmates are released. "We're not going to go out actively looking for people," said Barry (D). "We're targeting people that are not obeying the rules of society."

Of the 27,000 people who were housed in the Fairfax jail last year, Barry estimated that 4,300, or 16 percent, were suspected of being here illegally. Advocates for Virginia immigrants have criticized the use of local police to enforce federal immigration law but are less critical when immigration checks are performed in jails. Deputies will undergo special training on screening inmates. Virginia legislators will consider a measure next year to require jails to do immigration status screening. A coalition of immigrant groups is seeking to limit the screening to jails, and only after a conviction.

"Fairfax County has been a leader in trying to maintain the trust of the immigrant community," said Tim Freilich, legal director of the Virginia Justice Center. "We hope that any . . . agreement that is entered into by Fairfax County will protect the confidentiality of immigration status of all victims and witnesses and that there will be close tracking of racial and ethnic data of the people screened." Fairfax Police Chief David M. Rohrer said he generally supports the sheriff's initiative, though he has concerns about whether the immigrant community will feel comfortable reporting crime. "I want victims and witnesses to feel free to contact police," Rohrer said, "and not be afraid that the first question is going to be, 'What is your status?' "

In the spring, Barry traveled to Charlotte to study the program in the Mecklenburg County jail. Sheriff Jim Pendergraph implemented the federal program last year, and in less than 18 months the jail has placed 2,839 people into deportation proceedings, said Sgt. Daniel Stitt of the Mecklenburg County Sheriff's Office. "The citizens love it," said Pendergraph, who announced this week that he is leaving Charlotte to become ICE's top liaison between federal and local police and sheriffs on immigration matters. Thirty-three local agencies across the country, mostly in county jails, have formed such partnerships with ICE, spokesman Richard Rocha said, and 70 local agencies have pending requests. He said 26,000 people have been identified by local agencies for possible deportation in the last two years. The program does not allow local authorities to make immigration arrests unless a federal immigration detainer has already been issued.

When defendants are booked into the jail, they will be questioned about their nationality and citizenship. If a person cannot show that he or she is in this country legally, a deputy will enter the person into the federal system and schedule a deportation hearing. When the county charge is resolved, or bond is posted, the person is released. He or she then must prove legal status at the deportation hearing, or a detainer is entered, setting the stage for deportation. If a deputy determines that the person has no ties to the area and has a criminal history, a second, cash-only immigration bond is set to ensure appearance at the deportation hearing. Experts said this was not unusual in the federal immigration process. In Charlotte, "everybody gets an immigration bond," Stitt said. "There's nobody on release anymore." Barry said the program should save Fairfax money by relieving police of repeatedly arresting some violators for petty offenses and by deporting convicted criminals. It also will provide an incentive for those here illegally not to get arrested, he said.

Arlington, VA - Elected officials in northern Virginia's most famously liberal county have strongly criticized their counterparts elsewhere in the region over efforts to crack down on illegal immigration. Tuesday's rebuke from Arlington County came as Prince William County considered how to implement an anti-illegal immigration resolution passed over the summer. Prince William Police Chief Charlie T. Deane presented the county board with his plan for checking the immigration status of people detained by police for misdemeanors and traffic violations. The Prince William board passed a resolution in July instructing police to check the immigration status of all violators if there is probable cause and instructing county staff to look at what kind of county services could be denied to illegal immigrants. Neighboring Loudoun County followed suit with a similar resolution seeking to deny services.

The Arlington County Board on Tuesday called the efforts "politically inspired" and "irresponsible." The five board members, all Democrats, unanimously backed a resolution calling on elected officials elsewhere to "promote the integration of immigrants" instead of enacting rules they said would be divisive. They said the county would continue to prosecute illegal immigrants who commit crimes and report them to federal officials. But they said they would do so in a way that treats all residents "with human dignity and respect." "We will not engage in divisive tactics," said the board's vice chairman, J. Walter Tejada, a naturalized citizen who was born in El Salvador. "I was never more proud to be an Arlingtonian than I am today." At Prince William County's board meeting Tuesday, Deane presented his plan for stepped-up immigration enforcement.

Some supervisors expressed concern about the cost of having police check the immigration status of people detained for shoplifting, traffic violations or other misdemeanors--projected to be about $14.2 million over five years. In the past, such checks had been limited to people suspected of more serious crimes. The American Civil Liberties Union of Virginia criticized the proposal, saying it implies that everyone in the county must carry proof of legal residency at all times. The group also expressed concern that the policy may be unconstitutional because it would allow police to extend someone's time in detention while they investigate immigration status.

Employers are facing strict requirements in immigration law when House Bill 1804 goes into effect. The Mayes County Bar Association held a seminar where speakers Mark Leblang and Sebastian Lantos highlighted some of the changes and issues which employers may encounter. Employers are responsible for providing I9 forms on each employee. The complete I9 must be provided on each employee and identification documents must be checked by the employer. The I9 must be kept for up to one year after the employee is no longer employed by the company. Under federal law at this time, Leblang said employers are not required to verify identification forms like social security cards. "In fact, unless you verify everyone's documents, Americans and foreign people alike, it's discrimination to do so," said Leblang, adding there are some differences in state law. He said if an employer gets a "No-Match" letter, stating the social security number does not match the person, the employer is on notice and an I9 form will not protect the employer from an audit. If the employer continues to employ the immigrant and doesn't straighten out the paperwork, the employer can face penalties.

Leblang said Tulsa and Oologah have passed ordinances recently making it illegal to deal with anyone who is undocumented. Leblang said this isn't out of the ordinary since local and state governments across the country are passing similar laws to deal with immigration since the federal government hasn't adequately addressed the issues. "Immigration laws, traditionally, are federally controlled ... it's not a state, local or municipal issue," said Leblang. "But, when the federal government doesn't take action - when they let the system spin so far out of control - more and more states, more and more municipalities are deciding for our own benefit, for our own public safety, we need to make our own laws." "Had congress really taken immigration reform into hand," said Leblang. "The state of Oklahoma never would have had a house bill like this come out in the first place."

Leblang referred to House Bill 1804, which will take effect Nov. 1, 2007. Sebastian Lantos explained understanding the dynamics of these laws and their effects on the community is important. Lantos said the responsibility of modernizing the laws goes to congress. "We are caught in the middle of bad laws," said Lantos. The state law is mirrored after a federal law, but Lantos said the problem may arise depending on how the law is interpreted. Both Lantos and Leblang said the state law contains language which leaves the law open to interpretation. "The question is how will it be enforced," said Lantos.

The law deals with harboring and transporting illegal immigrants, issuing identification cards, verifying immigration status of persons who have been arrested and verification of immigration status with public employers, contractors and subcontractors. The employment portion of the law goes into effect July 1, 2008. The verification of immigration status of workers only applies to public employers and contractors, not private employers. Leblang clarified the responsibility of a private employer verifying the status of the contracted worker only applies to the contractor immediately hired by the employer. Verifying the status of the subcontractors falls under the responsibility of the contractor.

But again, Leblang said the effect on employers is yet to be seen depending on how literally the law is interpreted. He said a verification system is important to protect the employer from any recourse the government may have if an undocumented worker is discovered. "I'm sure none of you check the status of your independent contractors," said Leblang. "You check on their reputation and the quality of work they've done, but you don't check their immigration status because you're not required to. But under this law, you are."

Leblang said HB 1804 has many good benefits, but the outcome depends on how the law is interpreted. An audience member asked whether a private employer's responsibility in verifying an employee's immigration status is met when the social security card and identification card are verified to satisfy the I9 requirement. Leblang said if a private employer verifies the I9, they have satisfied their requirements under the law, but he clarified that he wouldn't want to take a chance and would use a verification system since the cost is relatively inexpensive in comparison to what could happen if an undocumented worker is discovered.

MidAmerica Industrial Park Administrator Sanders Mitchell explained the industrial park employs independent contractors on a regular basis. He asked what is his responsibility in verifying the status of the contractor. Leblang said the industrial park only has to verify the status of the contractor directly employed. The contractor must verify the status of all subcontractors and are responsible if something is discovered, not the industrial park. "You just have to deal with your tier," said Leblang. "You don't have to be responsible for everyone down the line. That would be an impossible task." "We've got probably four or five hundred jobs going vacant right now in the industrial park," said Mitchell. "We need the Mexican labor."

Leblang agreed. "Even in congress on both sides of the fence, everybody agrees that we need workers. Everybody agrees that the economy could not survive without them," said Leblang. "The issue is what do we do with the illegal workers here." "Somewhere along the line the federal congress is going to have to do something," said Leblang. "They're going to have to reach a compromise ... because the system doesn't work the way it is now ... the law needs to be reformed."

The sudden backlog reduction efforts by Citizenship and Immigration Services Offices during the past month have resulted in the use of almost 60,000 Employment numbers. As a result of this unexpected action it has been necessary to make immediate adjustments to several previously announced cut-off dates. All Citizenship and Immigration Services Offices have been notified of the following:

• Effective Monday July 2, 2007 there will be no further authorizations inresponse to requests for Employment-based preference cases. All numbers available to these categories under the FY-2007 annual numerical limitation have been made available.

• Employment preference numbers will once again be available to these chargeability areas beginning October 1, 2007, under the FY-2008 annual numerical limitation.

WASHINGTON - JUNE 28, 2007 - The Senate killed President Bush's plan to legalize millions of unlawful immigrants. Supporters of the plan in the Senate were 14 votes short of the 60 needed to clear the way for final passage of the legislation, which critics assailed as offering amnesty to illegal immigrants. Senators in both parties said the issue is so volatile that Congress is highly unlikely to revisit it this fall or next year, when the presidential election will increasingly dominate American politics. A similar effort collapsed in the congress last year, and the House has not bothered with an immigration bill this year, awaiting Senate action.

On Monday, June 11, 2007, Moona Shakil presented an overview of immigration law to the Family Law Section of the Fairfax Bar Association. Ms. Shakil answered questions on a wide range of issues, including the conditional green card and VAWA (Violence Against Women Act of 1994). Ms. Shakil was asked to make the presentation to help explain immigration elements of domestic relations cases.

Key elements of the bipartisan immigration measure that failed a crucial test vote in the Senate Thursday night:

Allows illegal immigrants who were in the country as of Jan. 1, 2007, to come forward, pay fees and fines, pass a background check and receive an indefinitely renewable four-year Z visa to live and work legally in the U.S.

Allows Z visa holders to get on a path to citizenship after an approximately eight-year green card backlog is cleared if they pay fines, hold down jobs and learn English. Heads of households would have to return to their home countries to apply.

Creates a new temporary worker program that would allow up to 200,000 guest-workers per year to enter on two-year Y visas that could be renewed twice, provided they returned to their home countries for a year between each stint. Sunsets the program after five years.

Prevents the Y and Z visa programs from taking effect until security and enforcement triggers are met, including adding 20,000 border agents, 370 miles of fencing, 300 miles of vehicle barriers, and a new worker verification system to prevent the hiring of illegal workers.

Creates a new employment-based point system for new immigrants to qualify for green cards based on their education and skill level, and eliminates or limits visa preferences for family members of U.S. citizens and legal permanent residents.

Includes a special, less burdensome path to legal status for undocumented agricultural workers and high school graduates who came to the U.S. illegally with their parents.

WASHINGTON - Following a comprehensive review of more that 3,900 public comments, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Service (USCIS) announced today a final fee structure that includes benefits for some families with children and also expands the availability of fee waivers and exemptions.Click here for full press release

WASHINGTON - Republicans and Democrats were nearing a deal Tuesday on a sweeping immigration overhaul that would give millions of illegal immigrants a chance at legal status but strictly limit future arrivals from staying in the U.S. In a hopeful sign for a potential deal, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., postponed until Monday a vote that had been scheduled for today on bringing up an immigration measure that passed the Senate last year. Senators and White House officials negotiating into the evening said an elusive compromise was in sight. It was unclear whether the talks would result in a breakthrough or a meltdown. "Eighty-twenty!" said an upbeat Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., one of the key players in the talks, giving strong odds of a deal he said could be announced as early as today. The Senate bill had the support of most Democrats but was opposed by a majority of Republicans, who had promised to block it. The Monday vote, designed to pressure negotiators into reaching a new deal, was shaping up as a highly partisan start to the already intense debate over immigration. Delaying it gave the weeks-long set of closed-door bipartisan talks, slated to continue early Wednesday, more time.

Negotiators led by conservative Sen. Jon Kyl, R-Ariz., and liberal Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass., were scrambling to piece together a compromise that could command broad support, melding the GOP's preference for get-tough enforcement measures and limits on future immigration with Democrats' desire for a more welcoming approach. The proposed agreement would allow illegal immigrants to come forward and obtain a probationary "Z visa" and - after paying fees and fines of up to $5,000 and returning to their home countries - ultimately try for permanent residency, which could take between eight and 13 years. The process couldn't begin until border security improvements and a high-tech worker identification program were completed. A new temporary guest-worker program would also have to wait until those so-called triggers had been activated. And all but the highest-skilled temporary workers would have to return home after work stints of two or three years, with barely any opportunity to apply for permanent legal status or ever become U.S. citizens. Only 10,000 green cards annually would be available for guest workers, and they would be awarded on a "points system" that favors higher-skilled and better-educated immigrants.

"We're trying to make sure that people who are temporary workers don't melt into society and put down roots. Temporary means temporary," Graham said. Negotiators were still weighing the particulars of the guest-worker program, including the length of the visas and whether to allow workers to renew them multiple times. In perhaps its most contentious change, the proposed plan would radically shift the entire immigration system from one heavily weighted toward family ties toward one with preferences for those with advanced degrees and sophisticated skills. Family connections alone would no longer be enough to qualify for a green card, although senators were still haggling over how heavily points for family ties would be weighed. U.S. citizens would see their ability to bring foreign-born parents to the U.S. limited. Temporary workers could not bring family members unless they accepted a shorter-term visa and could show they would not become primarily dependent on government benefits.

Talks between US lawmakers and President George W. Bush's administration have produced the outlines of a "grand bargain" on the politically red hot issue of immigration reform, a Republican senator said Tuesday. "We have come to an agreement on what we have called a, quote, 'grand bargain', unquote, which is the outline of an immigration bill," said Senator Arlen Specter (news, bio, voting record), the top Republican on the Senate Judiciary committee. But he said the final text of the compromise still had to be worked out and called on Democratic Senate Majority leader Harry Reid (news, bio, voting record) to postpone the opening of a debate on the issue scheduled for next week. Reid however said that debate would start as scheduled and would go on for two weeks, saying there was no issue apart from healthcare, Iraq and high gas prices which more concerned the American people. Signs of a long-awaited breakthrough on immigration came a week after tens of thousands demonstrated in cities across the United States demanding an overhaul of immigration laws and greater rights for an estimated 12 million illegal workers. President George W. Bush has appealed for comprehensive immigration reform, proposing tougher security measures along with the creation of a temporary guest worker program and allowing a way for some undocumented immigrants to eventually become US citizens. Bush recently urged Congress, now controlled by a Democratic majority, to adopt immigration reform by the end of the year, before the 2008 presidential campaign kicks into high gear and makes discussion of the issue difficult. Specter said talks between lawmakers from both parties and US administration officials had forged a consensus on key points.

There was agreement to bolster security on the US border, including fencing near major cities, he said. "We want to provide fencing to protect the major metropolitan areas," the senator said. On the pivotal issue of legalizing illegal immigrants, which derailed attempts last year to adopt reform, Specter said the negotiators had rejected the idea of "amnesty." Specter said a guest-worker program would be postponed until security measures and other steps were taken to stem the flow of illegal immigrants. "We're dealing with a temporary worker program until we have solved the problem of securing the border and providing for identification," he said. To win eventual legal residency, illegal immigrants would have to meet conditions such as paying back taxes and attaining a proficiency in English, he said. Another senior Republican who has been closely involved with intense negotiations on the proposed reform, Senator Lindsey Graham (news, bio, voting record), said he was optimistic, but that it was still a 50/50 chance whether the bill would make it through the Senate. A congressional source meanwhile said on condition of anonymity that "a bunch of sticking points" still remained in the legislation.

USCIS announced on May 4th that the H-1b Masters cap has been reached for FY 2008.

Regular H-1b Cap Reached for FY2008:

USCIS announced on April 3rd that the H-1b cap has been reached. USCIS announced on April 12, 2007 that it has conducted the random selection process to determine which H-1b petitions subject to the cap would be accepted for processing. USCIS will return all petitions not randomly selected for processing, with the fees. Final notification of those petitions is expected to occur in May 2007.

Technology companies may face a shortage of skilled workers later this year after U.S. immigration services reached its annual quota for visa applications in one day. "Clearly there is a need for science and engineering talent in this country that is not being met by home-grown talent," said William Morin, director of government affairs for Applied Materials Inc., the world's biggest supplier of equipment for making microchips. These are people who are going to develop the next big thing, and you're driving people offshore. It boggles the mind that we would come to this point," Morin said. The Citizenship and Immigration Services received a record of more than 150,000 applications for the H-1B visa on Monday, nearly double the number of visas it can grant for the fiscal year beginning October 1, 2007. Individuals cannot apply for the visa. The employer must apply or submit a petition on the worker's behalf. The visa is good for up to six years. The government will grant 65,000 visas to those who hold the equivalent of an undergraduate degree and possess the technical expertise in a specialized field, such as engineering and computer programming. Another 20,000 visas will go to people with advanced academic degrees who have technical expertise.

CHOSEN BY LOTTERY
The agency will review the petitions to ensure that all applications are correct. After that, applications will be compiled, and individuals will be chosen by a computerized lottery system. "It's a very fair process, so everyone who submitted their application has the same shot," Chris Rhatigan, a spokeswoman with the immigration agency said on Wednesday. "This process could take a couple of weeks, and then they will notify the individuals." Rhatigan was unable to say how soon the visas would be issued due to the volume of applications received. Last year, the cap was reached at the end of May. "What stronger signal could be sent for the need for immigration reform in the high-skills area than this?" Morin said. Margie Jones, U.S. immigration manager at Intel Corp., the world's biggest maker of microchips, said, "Each year the cap has been reached earlier and earlier and earlier. By hitting it the first day, it means it is severely under-rated how many we need." Intel employs about 90,000 people worldwide, and about 4 percent of the firm's U.S. workforce are foreigners with work visas, she said. "If the cap is truly reached, that means there are no (visas) available until 10/1/08," Jones said. "It will impact hiring." Applications can be resubmitted April 1, 2008 when H-1B visas become available for the following fiscal year.

The chief House proponents of a path to citizenship for illegal aliens yesterday also embraced stricter enforcement, arguing they need to move that direction if they hope to pass a bill this year. They introduced a new immigration overhaul that still grants almost all illegal aliens a path to citizenship, but would also speed up the requirement that they learn English, make them leave the country before they can start the path to citizenship, and make the entire program turn on the government showing it is making progress on border security and interior law enforcement. With Democrats now in control in the House, the bill marks the first step in a renewed push to get immigration reform passed and says much about how far the debate has come since Congress deadlocked last year and the elections intervened. "The third time is the charm. The planets are finally aligned to get this done," said Rep. Jeff Flake, Arizona Republican, who is joining Rep. Luis V. Gutierrez, Illinois Democrat, in sponsoring the bill. Chief among the concessions is what sponsors call a "touch back" provision that requires illegal aliens, before obtaining permanent legal residency that puts them on a path to citizenship, to leave the country and then come back legally -- a standard they could meet by going back to their home countries, or to Mexico or Canada for a day. That change was a major step, designed to win Republican support. "We've reached out to make sure we get bipartisan support for this bill," Mr. Gutierrez said, adding that they will need dozens of Republicans to obtain a majority in the House. "I know that on a good day I get 180 Democrats, and that's short of 218, and that's on a good day." But plenty of Republicans are lining up in opposition, arguing that it is an amnesty because it lets illegal aliens remain and gives them a path to citizenship. "It's going to get the scarlet letter 'A' branded on the bill, and then the debate becomes who wants to get that brand and go back home and face voters," said Rep. Steve King of Iowa, the top Republican on the House Judiciary Committee's immigration subcommittee. From the other side of the political spectrum a key Democratic ally, the AFL-CIO, said while the bill is better than an enforcement-only approach such as the bill House Republicans pursued last year, it is not sold. The labor federation opposed the "touch back" provision, and argued that allowing 400,000 more foreign workers a year will hurt U.S. workers.

The measure would:

• Require the Homeland Security Department to certify it has created a secure card for employers to identify legal workers, and to certify border security and interior enforcement are advancing.
• Let illegal aliens here as of June 1, 2006, remain in the country under a six-year work program, paying a $500 fine at the beginning and another $1,500 fine at the end. After six years, if they had maintained a work history and clean criminal record, they could gain a green card, or permanent residency.
• Speed the requirement of proving English skills up to the green card process, rather than at the time they apply for citizenship.
• Allow illegal aliens to obtain in-state tuition at public colleges and universities.
• Allow 400,000 new workers into the country per year, though it would protect American jobs by requiring employers to show they cannot find an American worker and prove the foreign workers wouldn't depress wages. Those new workers would also have a path to citizenship.
  

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, California Democrat, who had supported previous versions of the Flake-Gutierrez bill, has not signed on to this one. Yesterday, she said it was a good "framework" but focused her attention on President Bush, who she said should embrace the new bill's approach. Parts of the bill are likely to please Mr. Bush, including a path to citizenship for illegal aliens. But last year he embraced the Senate bill that allowed only those who had lived here the longest or, in Mr. Bush's words, had "deep roots," to achieve citizenship. And he has steadfastly rejected giving future foreign workers a path to citizenship. By moving first, the House sponsors have also highlighted a division in the Senate, where backers are sparring over what to include in their bill. But Mr. Gutierrez said Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, Nevada Democrat, has carved out the last two weeks in May to have a floor debate on immigration -- which sets a timetable for the Senate Judiciary Committee to act.

WASHINGTON -- Senators Edward M. Kennedy and John McCain have all but abandoned plans to cosponsor a comprehensive immigration reform bill this year, as McCain faces tough questions from conservatives on the presidential campaign trail about his support for immigrants' rights. Kennedy, frustrated by the slow progress of his negotiations with McCain, is instead considering filing a bill on his own, modeled largely on the measure endorsed by the Senate Judiciary Committee last year. McCain is continuing to talk to Kennedy about immigration proposals, but the Arizona Republican has not committed to supporting Kennedy's approach. The erosion of the unlikely political partnership that brought the liberal Kennedy and the conservative McCain together on immigration suggests a tough road ahead for passing a sweeping immigration measure this year. Further complicating efforts to find consensus, a group of Republicans is working with the White House to draft an alternative bill. McCain's hesitancy about joining Kennedy on the same issue they worked together on in the previous Congress also speaks to an emerging dynamic in the Republican presidential race. McCain has encountered anger from hard-line immigration foes on the campaign trail, particularly over an aspect in last year's bill that would have allowed most undocumented immigrants to work toward citizenship. Former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney, one of McCain's rivals for the GOP nomination, has been especially sharp in his condemnation of McCain's approach to immigration. Senator Jim DeMint, a South Carolina Republican who is supporting Romney's candidacy, said McCain appears to be learning that Republicans won't accept proposals that allow undocumented immigrants to gain legal status until the borders are secured. "That's an important position for the Republican Party," DeMint said. "We're certainly not going to start off with any kind of expanded visa program, or any kind of normalization of those who are here." A McCain spokeswoman said the senator has not deviated from his fundamental position on immigration. Though he and Kennedy remain at odds over key points, McCain continues to believe that the matter must be handled in a comprehensive measure that includes border security and addresses the estimated 12 million undocumented immigrants now in the United States.

"We would love to come to some sort of an agreement," said Eileen McMenamin, a McCain spokeswoman. "There are places where they disagree, but the senator's been really focused on getting some sort of workable solution." Indeed, McCain hasn't changed his immigration rhetoric on the campaign trail. On Sunday in New Hampshire, he told reporters traveling on his campaign bus that he still supports the basic framework he has long described as vital to addressing the challenging of immigration. "We have to have a comprehensive approach to reform, which means a temporary worker [program] as well as securing our borders, as well as addressing the 12 million people who are here illegally, in both in a comprehensive and humane fashion," he said. Kennedy, a Massachusetts Democrat, expressed confidence that immigration reform will move forward, even if McCain's name isn't attached to the bill. He added that he remains committed to working with McCain. "We'll have a bipartisan bill, and I think at the end of the day that Senator McCain will be part of it," Kennedy said. "There's still hope. . . . It's never fast enough as far as I'm concerned, but we understand that time is not necessarily an advantage." Supporters of the bill acknowledge that the issue must be dealt with by this summer, since it will become politically untenable in an environment dominated by 2008 presidential politics. Last year, the Senate passed a proposal -- modeled on one introduced jointly by Kennedy and McCain -- that included new border security measures as well as a temporary "guest worker" program, a longtime goal of the Bush administration. The measure also included provisions that would have given most undocumented immigrants a chance to work toward citizenship if they pay fines and back taxes, maintain steady employment and clean criminal records, and learn English. But the bill died in the House, where conservative foes prevented it from coming up. This year, Kennedy and McCain had planned to jump-start the debate by reintroducing their bill, and indicated in recent weeks that their bill would be released imminently. Their negotiations, however, stalled repeatedly, and were complicated by McCain's travel on the presidential campaign, according to Senate aides. Most recently, according to aides, McCain objected to a provision favored by Kennedy that would require guest workers to receive the prevailing wage for the industry and region they work in; a similar provision was part of last year's bill. The delay has frustrated Democrats, several of whom suggest privately that McCain is concerned about his standing among conservatives and does not want to again support a bill with Kennedy, a well-known liberal icon. The failure of McCain and Kennedy to agree on a bill has complicated the legislative picture on Capitol Hill. Two House members, Democrat Luis V. Gutierrez of Illinois and Republican Jeff Flake of Arizona, were expected to unveil a proposal today that closely tracks Kennedy's plan. In the Senate, a group of Republicans has been meeting with Bush administration officials to craft an alternative proposal.

Advertisement DALLAS -- Texas legislators have sent to Gov. Rick Perry's desk a bill that allows people to use deadly force against attackers outside their homes under a much broader range of circumstances than current law allows, including in defense of their cars or businesses. There is little doubt Mr. Perry will sign the bill, which broadens the scope of self-defense claims in homicide cases, because it passed unanimously (30-0) in the Texas Senate last week and by a 133-13 margin with no debate in the House on Tuesday. And he publicly has praised the Legislature for passing it. The self-defense legislation, proponents claim, strengthens a resident's right to defend his home and harkens back to the state law before it was changed 33 years ago. The bill has been called the "Castle Doctrine," from the age-old feeling that a man's home is his castle and that he has a total right to defend it. Opponents, including some prosecutors, claim the new legislation, which for the first time includes the right to protect oneself in a vehicle and the workplace, fosters a "shoot first and ask questions later" mentality.

"With the enactment of this bill, law-abiding Texas citizens can defend themselves against criminal attack in their home, car or business without having to worry they will be prosecuted," said Republican Rep. Joe Driver of Garland, the lead sponsor in the House. In 1973, in revising the state's criminal code, the Legislature made it mandatory for a person under criminal attack to retreat "if a reasonable person would do so" under similar circumstances. A dozen years ago, the state body amended that, adding that a victim need not retreat if the confrontation occurred in his home. A spokeswoman for Mr. Perry, Krista Moody, yesterday called this legislation "an important move to ensure Texans have the right to defend themselves when it counts the most." The National Rifle Association strongly backed the legislation, along with most Republicans in the Legislature. "Law-abiding citizens now have the choice to defend themselves and their families in the face of attack, knowing their decision will not be second-guessed by the state of Texas," said Chris W. Cox, chief lobbyist for the NRA. A secondary facet of the bill protects a person from being sued by his attacker, or the attacker's family, for injuries if the shooter was deemed to have been acting in self-defense. A third element is troublesome to some prosecutors and gun-control advocates. The bill would protect a person acting in self-defense if he or she was not breaking the law at the time, did not provoke the attack or had reason to believe that the other person wanted to rape, kidnap, kill or rob him. Rob Kepple, executive director of the Texas District and County Attorneys Association, said he worried that the bill might "create a new presumption of self-defense" that might aid criminals. He called the bill a solution looking for a problem. Texas is not the first state to broaden its self-defense exception in recent years. In 2005, Florida passed a "stand your ground" law that permits licensed adults to use their firearms to defend themselves and others against serious or life-threatening attacks. State Sen. Jeff Wentworth, the San Antonio Republican who guided the bill through his chamber, said he never liked the previous wording that required a victim to retreat.

"I do not believe that the law should require me to wait and decide if someone who is breaking into my home or office or attempting to hijack my car intends to harm me or a member of my family," he said last year. "The law," he added, "should allow me to use immediate force to protect myself, my family and my property without fear of being charged with a crime or being sued." Another bill, one that would let employees keep concealed weapons locked in their vehicles at work, cleared the Senate Judiciary Committee this week, but might have some difficulty gaining passage. Bill Hammond, president of the Texas Association of Business, said that bill violates an employer's property rights and go against the employer's legal duty to maintain a safe workplace. "Easy access to a weapon could create a serious problem in the workplace," he said.

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell says Republicans are trying to craft a "bipartisan solution" to illegal immigration -- generating concern among party members who consider President Bush's goal to be amnesty. Mr. McConnell, echoing Mr. Bush's optimism for overhauling immigration law to include citizenship opportunities for illegal aliens, said senators are trying to pull Republicans "together behind our proposal." "There's a pretty broad desire to have an accomplishment, to do something, even among members who voted against final passage last year. There is still a lot of sentiment that a comprehensive bill would be the right thing to do," said Mr. McConnell, Kentucky Republican. Mr. Bush last week told foreign leaders he sees reasons for optimism and said that "the mood in the Congress seems like it has changed" in favor of completing a broad bill that includes a path to citizenship -- the linchpin of an agreement he hopes to strike with congressional Democrats, who call it "earned legalization."

He said his goal is to have Senate Republicans settle on a "coherent" position first, then approach Senate Democrats, particularly Sen. Edward M. Kennedy of Massachusetts, who likely will be the chief sponsor of the main Senate bill. Mr. Kennedy said his bill will be based on the one the Senate passed last year when Republicans controlled Congress. That plan also provided for enhanced border security, a guest-worker program and a path to citizenship for illegal aliens. House Republicans refused to vote on it, arguing that granting citizenship to illegals amounts to amnesty and a reward for law-breaking. The House should be an easier sell for Mr. Bush this year, with Democrats now in control. Some rank-and-file House Republicans worry their leaders will have a change of heart under pressure from the White House and support the Democrats. "It is very disconcerting to me because I don't know where the leadership is on this," said Rep. Tom Tancredo, Colorado Republican and outspoken critic of amnesty for illegal aliens "If the president is going to weigh in on this, I don't know what [Majority Leader John A. Boehner] and the rest of my leadership are going to do," Mr. Tancredo said. "We are going to be defense more than offense." The House Republican leaders say they remain opposed to granting citizenship rights.

"Leader Boehner opposes amnesty, led the charge against the Reid-Kennedy amnesty bill last year, and continues to oppose amnesty," said his spokesman, Brian Kennedy, referring to Sen. Harry Reid, Nevada Democrat, now the Senate majority leader. "There has been no change in his position." Minority Whip Roy Blunt, Missouri Republican, also remains opposed to any immigration plan that doesn't make border security a priority or that provides a path to citizenship for illegal aliens. Numbers USA, a group advocating reduced levels of legal and illegal immigration, says the White House for weeks has been quietly telling member of Congress that it has "critical mass" of Republican support for the immigration plan in both chambers and leadership has "signed off on it." "I do not believe it is true," said Rosemary Jenks, the group's government-relations director. "I believe they want it to be true, and they are saying it is true in hopes of making it so." She said the noise the White House is making is a "good reminder that this is not what the public wants in any way." Rep. Brian P. Bilbray, California Republican and chairman of the Immigration Reform Caucus, is concerned about a repeat of the 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act, which granted amnesty and a path to citizenship for illegal aliens but failed to stem the tide of illegal immigration. "There is a lot of pressure from the White House," said Kurt Bardella, Mr. Bilbray's spokesman. "There is this anything-is-better-than-nothing attitude -- whether or not it is good public policy."

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) is proposing a new fee structure that ensures appropriate funding to meet national security requirements and customer service needs, and modernizes an outdated business infrastructure. The proposed new fee structure is built around a foundation of Strategic Pillars designed to enhance and sustain a secure and efficient immigration system. Those pillars are, Enhancing the Security and Integrity of the Immigration System, Improving Service Delivery, and Modernizing Business Infrastructure.

On this page, you can learn about USCIS' plans for the next few years, based upon this new fee structure, see a message from USCIS Director Emilio Gonzalez, and read the proposed rule of the new fee structure.

Customers who have an application and/or petition which has been filed with USCIS but has not yet been decided (also known as a 'pending' case) should notify USCIS of any change of address as soon as possible after moving. The law requires nearly all non-U.S. Citizens1 to report a change of address within 10 days of moving by completing a Form AR-11. Abiding by these legal requirements and completing the necessary forms does not update an address on any applications or petitions pending with USCIS. Non-citizens with pending cases must do both.

Senators and lobbyists are putting the final touches on a comprehensive immigration-reform bill that includes an easier citizenship path for illegal aliens and weaker enforcement provisions than were in the highly criticized legislation that the Senate approved last year. Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, the Massachusetts Democrat who ardently supports citizenship rights for illegals, will introduce the bill as early as next week, according to Senate sources knowledgeable about the negotiations. If the Senate Judiciary Committee can make quick work of the bill, it could be ready for floor action in April. Mr. Kennedy drafted this year's bill with help from Sen. John McCain, Arizona Republican, and outside lobbyists. Mr. McCain and the outside groups share Mr. Kennedy's support for increased immigration and leniency for illegals already in the country. Among the most active participants have been the Essential Worker Immigration Coalition (EWIC) and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. Both groups support giving current illegals a path to citizenship and increasing the flow of foreign workers into the country. "It's good for the country," EWIC immigration lawyer Laura Reiff said of Mr. Kennedy's bill. In particular, EWIC and the chamber have taken a leading role in drafting the section of the bill dealing with work-site enforcement, Senate staffers say. Lobbyists in both organizations have shuttled around Capitol Hill drafts of those provisions, which are supposed to impose sanctions on businesses that hire illegal aliens, according to internal e-mails obtained by The Washington Times. "That's putting the fox in charge of the henhouse," one Senate lawyer said about the pro-business chamber's involvement in drafting the punishment of employers.

One of those e-mails obtained by The Times invited Democratic immigration staffers to a briefing in early January with "key stakeholders" to discuss workplace-enforcement provisions. The invitation listed six such "stakeholders," including the chamber and EWIC. The other groups attending the meeting, according to the e-mail, were the American Civil Liberties Union, the National Immigration Law Center, the National Council of La Raza and the Service Employees International Union. Not included in that meeting or any of the early meetings, according to several Senate aides, were key Republican senators or their staff who crossed the aisle last year to support "comprehensive" immigration reform that most Republicans considered a form of amnesty. "We have been held out of any discussions," said Sen. Sam Brownback, one of those who supported last year's major immigration bill. "Our staffs have asked to be involved, but they were kept out." Even Sen. Arlen Specter, the Pennsylvania Republican who as chairman of the Judiciary Committee last year ushered the immigration bill through the Senate, has been left out of the process of drafting the bill. Mr. Specter said yesterday that he and Mr. Kennedy have discussed the need to get a bill done this year but not any details. Mr. Specter has twice complained to Mr. Kennedy, most recently at a meeting last week, that the Republican senator's staff had been left out of negotiations. "I raised the issue again, and a Kennedy staffer said there was nothing in writing" as legislation, he said. "Neither my staff nor I have seen any draft." Last week, aides and Republicans said, Mr. Specter, Mr. Brownback and others were invited to a meeting where they got their first briefing on the nearly completed bill. Other Republicans invited included Sens. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, Chuck Hagel of Nebraska and Mel Martinez of Florida.

Laura Capps, a spokeswoman for Mr. Kennedy, said he has been working with "many senators and members of Congress to draft the new bill." "The bipartisan coalition behind the bill remains strong and intact." The one Republican who all agree has been part of the negotiations from the start is Mr. McCain, who is running for his party's presidential nomination. This worries Republicans who say that Mr. McCain is the last Republican they want representing their interests in negotiations with Mr. Kennedy over immigration legislation. Mr. McCain and Mr. Kennedy have long embraced the same goal of giving illegal aliens a direct path to U.S. citizenship despite having broken laws to get here in the first place. Both men also denounce the view held by most Republicans that the federal government should first secure the border with Mexico and begin enforcing current laws before addressing other immigration issues such as what to do with the more than 10 million to 12 million aliens already here. Who has been in and out of negotiations this year signals to Republicans that Mr. Kennedy will introduce a bill that more resembles the original McCain-Kennedy bill than the compromise that was ultimately approved last year. As much as conservatives dislike last year's compromise bill, they consider it some improvement over the original bill because it lowered the number of new foreign workers permitted into the country each year and slightly narrowed the pool of illegals who would be granted "amnesty." "If it's back to the old version without the changes we made last year, I don't think I could support that," Mr. Brownback said. Ms. Capps said she expects Mr. Kennedy to introduce his bill "in the next few weeks." Majority Leader Harry Reid, Nevada Democrat, is "committed to getting something done this year," his spokesman said.