Why House Republicans blocked 'military amnesty' for illegal immigrants

A bill offering citizenship to immigrants in the US illegally, but who serve in the military, was rejected by a House committee. The panel also rejected legislation that would have opened the US military academies to young immigrants brought to the country illegally.

House Republican leaders on Wednesday blocked any votes on immigration legislation, raising doubts about the prospects for election-year action on overhauling U.S. laws.

The Rules Committee voted early Wednesday against allowing votes on a measure offering citizenship to immigrants here illegally who serve in the military. The panel also rejected legislation that would have opened the U.S. military academies to young immigrants brought to the country illegally.

Republican Rep. Jeff Denham of California has pressed on the citizenship measure, and Democratic Rep. Joaquin Castro of Texas had backed the military academies measure. Both lawmakers had offered their legislation as amendments to the sweeping defense policy bill that the House is considering this week.

The Senate passed a comprehensive bill last year that would have bolstered border security, remade legal worker programs and offered a path to citizenship to the estimated 11.5 million people now living here illegally. That bill remains stalled in the Republican-led House where its leader, Speaker John Boehner, has attributed the inaction to distrust within Republican ranks about President Barack Obama's commitment to enforce any border restriction law.

Despite a wide coalition of business, labor, religious groups, farmers and others pushing for an immigration overhaul, many individual Republican House members who represent largely white districts have been unmoved. That's particularly true in an election year amid concerns about angering core party voters who regard granting a path citizenship to immigrants in the U.S. illegally as amnesty.

Denham's measure was widely popular among supporters of overhauling the immigration system and was seen as perhaps the likeliest area for compromise on the divisive issue.

It was co-sponsored by 50 House members, 26 Democrats and 24 Republicans. But an outspoken minority remained staunchly opposed to it.

Copyright 2014 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistribute

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.