Statement Of Sen. Patrick Leahy
In Opposition To The Isakson Amendment (SA 3961)
And In Support Of The Salazar Amendment (SA 3994) to S.2611
May 16, 2006

The Isakson Amendment is designed to tear apart the interwoven fabric of a bill that many of us have worked so hard in a bipartisan manner to pass in the Senate. 

The Isakson Amendment asserts that there can be no guest worker program and no legalization path for undocumented immigrants currently in the United States until security at the borders is guaranteed.  Sounds good, until you realize that comprehensive immigration reform consists of several interrelated steps, each depending on the rest in order to maximize the prospects of the overall plan to get the job done.  This amendment is a prescription for failure, by ripping a comprehensive plan apart.  That is why this amendment has been described as a “poison pill” that would undermine the bipartisan bill before the Senate.

The Senate recently passed the defense supplemental appropriations bill, a bill that included nearly two billion dollars for border security.  It seems that what Senator Isakson wants the Senate to do is to wait until all of those funds are expended, and then assess our security.  Many of us have been fighting for years to improve border security by targeting more resources for technology on the borders and by adding additional Border Patrol agents.  The Bush Administration repeatedly failed to fulfill Congress’s directives in recent years, but I was pleased to hear the President say last night that he now supports increasing the number of Border Patrol agents by 6,000.  He made a statement last night that was stronger and displayed a stronger commitment than we have heard from him previously, and I hope he plans to follow through on his words.  

The President also spoke about the need to simultaneously implement guest worker programs and a path to earned citizenship for the undocumented.  This is similar to the comprehensive approach that those of us who supported the Judiciary Committee bill, and then the Hagel-Martinez compromise, still believe is necessary to reform our broken system and to secure our borders.  Do Senator Isakson and the supporters of his amendment believe that the President is taking the Nation in the wrong direction?  I find it troubling that with such strong bipartisan support for S.2611 in the Senate, and the leadership of the White House on the core principles of the bill, these Senators refuse to join in constructive efforts to enact comprehensive reform.  From the beginning, many voices outside of the Senate have been intent on bringing down this bill.

Senator Salazar has offered an alternative that supports the principles of S.2611 and that reflects the goals laid out by the President in his statement last night.  I urge all members of the Senate to vote against the Isakson Amendment and for the Salazar alternative.  We must work toward comprehensive solutions that secure our borders and strengthen the Nation, not piecemeal gambits that undermine the efforts of bipartisan progress toward a Senate bill. 

# # # # #