The Senate majority Whip Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) Said in an interview that there was confusion about what the amendment did and regretted having only 60 seconds to debate it due to the fast pace of voting. He fears that passing this amendment in the final bill could prevent checks from reaching the spouses or children of undocumented immigrants currently in line to receive them.
“Neither Biden nor any Democrat is proposing in this package to give money to anyone without documents. The question is: if you are a legal child, citizen of the United States, of an undocumented person, should you receive a check? I say yes, ”said Durbin. He said that when the question is raised again, “it would certainly take some time to try to explain it to those who voted otherwise”.
The issue highlights the challenges that Biden will face in trying to force his first major legislative priority with a tight majority and several vulnerable voters in the vote in 2022. It is not clear whether the immigration clause, if included, would lead to greater opposition against the coronavirus relief package.
“Immigration is still a kind of third track in American politics,” said Domingo Garcia, national president of the League of Citizens of Latin America United. “We still have a lot of work to do to convince many senators in the purple states.”
Republicans are eager to create a wedge among Democrats by choosing them to support their proposals. Senate minority leader Mitch McConnell pointed out on Monday with some satisfaction that “despite objections from some Democrats, the Senate said that illegal immigrants should not receive stimulus checks.”
Senator Todd Young’s (R-Ind.) Proposal Last week would prevent stimulus benefits, such as checks or tax incentives, from going to undocumented immigrants, and the Republican Party may offer a similar proposal during future amendments to the bill. $ 1.9 trillion relief project. Senator John Cornyn (R-Texas) said he expected his party to offer it again at the next opportunity, probably in several weeks.
The latest round of direct payments allowed mixed-status families to have access to some stimulus checks, a departure from last spring’s first round of checks. Senator Jon Ossoff (D-Ga.) Said he spoke to Young on the Senate floor about his amendment, but concluded that “the language was in danger of American children having denied emergency aid during this crisis” and voted against.
Progressives are already apologizing and pro-immigration groups are calling it betrayal. Greisa Martinez Rosas, executive director of United We Dream Action, said the eight Democrats who supported the Young amendment “allowed themselves to be used as a tool to advance the Republican white nationalist agenda”.
Peters and Stabenow “are generally advocates of progressive issues. And we would certainly think they were like that around immigration, ”said Lonnie Scott, executive director of Progress Michigan. “They need to reconsider where they are and apologize to the people affected by that vote.”
When asked about his vote, Peters described Young’s proposal as nothing more than a “sticky amendment” that had no substance behind it. He added that it was irrelevant because “people who are not documented are not part of the [Biden] proposal.”
A spokeswoman for Senator Kyrsten Sinema said the Arizona Democrat “voted to uphold what is currently the law, which does not allow individuals without qualified social insurance to work to receive stimulus payments.” The spokesman emphasized that the amendment does not deny support for mixed-status families.
Democratic senators who voted on the Young amendment also included Senators John Hickenlooper of Colorado, Joe Manchin of West Virginia, Jon Tester of Montana, Maggie Hassan of New Hampshire and Mark Kelly of Arizona. Both Hassan and Kelly are candidates for re-election in 2022. It is not clear whether senators would support the provision or a similar policy in a final package.
Garcia especially questioned Hickenlooper’s vote to restrict access to these future checks because “Colorado is a completely blue state. There is no need for him to lean to the right ”.
“I have no idea why he did what he did. He promised the Latin community that he would be with us on immigration, ”said Garcia.
He planned to try to pressure Hickenlooper directly to ensure that the coronavirus relief bill does not prevent spouses or children of undocumented immigrants from receiving stimulus checks. A spokesman for Hickenlooper told the Denver Post that politically charged votes on budget amendments “the kind of circus that makes Washington so notoriously dysfunctional.”
Other Democrats agreed, citing the non-mandatory status of their votes. The testator said, “Everything we voted for didn’t matter.”
“It would be different if there were actually teeth in something. But there were no teeth in any of that, ”he added.
Still, the issue was controversial enough for the Democratic leadership to seek to remove controversial amendments at the end of last week’s marathon of amendments, including immigration. And there will soon be tougher struggles, including true and mandatory voting for amendments to politics in the Senate plenary in the coming weeks, as Democrats are striving to approve a huge Republican Party vote-free stimulus deal through reconciliation.
It will probably be more difficult to remove these amendments in the next round. And given the Senate’s 50-50 division, just a defection in a vote like this could insert a divisive provision into the bill and interrupt any carefully crafted agreement.
“There are undocumented people who pay taxes. … They also have American children. Therefore, they should receive these checks, ”said Senator Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii).
Asked what she thought of the vote of eight Democrats who supported the Young amendment, Hirono replied: “I don’t agree with them. That’s what I think. “