Obama says House can do immigration reform in stages
WASHINGTON — President Obama said on Tuesday that he could support the House taking a piece-by-piece approach to changing immigration policy as long as key elements, such as a “pathway to citizenship” for undocumented immigrants, were included.
The White House had hoped a broad bill to reform immigration rules would be the president's signature achievement this year, but the effort has stalled in the House after passing with bipartisan support in the Senate.
In an interview with Noticias Telemundo, Obama said he could back efforts in the House to advance elements of immigration reform one at a time — rather than all at once as the Senate did — as long as all of his priorities were part of the outcome.
“I'm happy to let the House work its will as long as the bill that ends up on my desk speaks to the central issues that have to be resolved,” he said, citing his priorities of stronger border security, penalties for employers who take advantage of undocumented workers and a pathway to citizenship for immigrants in the country illegally.
“If those elements are contained in a bill, whether they come through the House a little bit at a time or they come in one fell swoop ... I'm less concerned about process. I'm more interested in making sure it gets done,” he said.
Advocates are reluctant to support a piece-by-piece approach out of concern that the elements most popular among Republicans, such as tougher border security, would be passed while the pathway to citizenship would not.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.
- Oregon police dog fired from job
- Immigrants warned of increase in scams
- Tough Texas gets prison results by going softer on crime
- Study touts benefits of full-day preschool
- Tufts center study: It costs $2.6B to get drug to market
- Some in Congress turn down retirement pension, but many cash in
- Boston airport’s ‘naked man’ remains behind bars
- Cathedral may host slave trade museum
- Ferguson angles to avoid fate of riot-torn cities
- With no indictment, chaos fills Ferguson streets
- Feds put brakes on green energy edict of renewable fuel standard