IBJNews

Indiana House speaker questions immigration crackdown

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Indiana's Republican House speaker said Thursday he had concerns about aspects of a proposal calling for an Arizona-style crackdown on illegal immigration moving through the Legislature.

Speaker Brian Bosma said that House leaders were talking with business leaders and looking closely at the bill approved by the Senate and awaiting action by the House.

That bill contains tax penalties for businesses that hire illegal immigrants and allows police officers to seek proof of immigration status if they have a reasonable suspicion a person is in the country illegally.

Bosma said he was uncomfortable with the prospect of foreign citizens in the state on work or education visas being frequently questioned.

"Putting these individuals in a position, having not committed any other crime, of having to prove their legal residency here has given many folks concern," Bosma told reporters. "We have to find a way to deal with the issue that does not give individuals who are here legally very strong third-class residency."

The Indiana Chamber of Commerce has said it worries the bill would hurt the state's business climate, and Indianapolis-based drugmaker Eli Lilly and Co. has raised concerns about possible damage to its ability to attract top workers.

Bill sponsor Sen. Mike Delph, R-Carmel, said he's supporting changes to the proposal but that it would still be "tough but fair."

"This doesn't hurt law-abiding businesses or citizens in the least," Delph said. "People who support following the law shouldn't have any problem with what we're trying to do."

Delph said a proposed amendment to the bill would:

— remove the authority for police officers to verify the citizenship or immigration status of those stopped for other reasons.

— eliminate a requirement that the state police negotiate an agreement with federal authorities so that troopers could enforce immigration laws. Delph said that was being removed because of its possible $5 million cost.

— restore a requirement that the state calculate the costs of illegal immigration and seek reimbursement from Congress.

The bill, which the Senate approved in February by a 31-18 vote, requires most government documents and meetings to be only in English, but the amendment would specify that other languages could be used in public school classes if the student is enrolled in a class to learn English.

Delph said he wanted to have tougher penalties on businesses that knowingly hire illegal immigrants, but that he was compromising to win passage of the law.

"People are going to support illegal immigration and they justify it or they support American sovereignty and they want to crack down on illegal immigration," he said. "There's no way really to hedge on that."

Bosma said he shared frustrations over the federal government not dealing effectively with illegal immigration and believed the crackdown bill would be considered by a House committee, which might take up the changes Delph has proposed.

"There's no deal on this," Bosma said. "People are looking at a lot of different solutions."

ADVERTISEMENT

  • soft on illegals
    Bosma and Daniels are too soft on illegal aliens. There are too many here holding jobs that can be held by American citizens. Just who is supposed to find and deport illegal aliens if not law enforcement? Maybe the Boy Scouts?
  • Immigrant Welcome Bill
    How about introducing a immigrant welcome bill that would provide integration services to legal immigrants like English language training/education, immunization/intro to basic health services, and support federal immigration reform while rejecting all additional burdens desired by Xenophobia advocates.

    No need to mandate E-verify since employers already are required to file a I-9 form and the GAO & CBO have determined the E-Verify Systems if flawed and flags many legal immigrants.
  • Motivation
    The English-only government documents provision just proves that this legislation is motivated by hatred/jealousy/fear, because it will just make it that much HARDER for people (yes, they are PEOPLE) who are already here to attain legal citizen status!
  • Missing the point
    Reading the two earlier comments it seems apparent that fear is driving the dialogue on immigration. Opposition to this measure is not about whether illegal immigrants should or shouldn't be here -- it's about racial profiling. Why do you fear someone who looks different than you?
  • immigrationcrackdown
    what about homeland secutity we are giving them a hand. people that are here legally will also feel safer. bosma and eli lilly need to get back to doing their job. mitch and bosma have done enough to hurt our state
  • Do the Right Thing
    If this legislature accomplishes only one thing in regards to ILLEGAL immigration let it be making E-Verify mandatory.

    It will save Hoosier jobs and Hoosier lives.

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. How can any company that has the cash and other assets be allowed to simply foreclose and not pay the debt? Simon, pay the debt and sell the property yourself. Don't just stiff the bank with the loan and require them to find a buyer.

  2. If you only knew....

  3. The proposal is structured in such a way that a private company (who has competitors in the marketplace) has struck a deal to get "financing" through utility ratepayers via IPL. Competitors to BlueIndy are at disadvantage now. The story isn't "how green can we be" but how creative "financing" through captive ratepayers benefits a company whose proposal should sink or float in the competitive marketplace without customer funding. If it was a great idea there would be financing available. IBJ needs to be doing a story on the utility ratemaking piece of this (which is pretty complicated) but instead it suggests that folks are whining about paying for being green.

  4. The facts contained in your post make your position so much more credible than those based on sheer emotion. Thanks for enlightening us.

  5. Please consider a couple of economic realities: First, retail is more consolidated now than it was when malls like this were built. There used to be many department stores. Now, in essence, there is one--Macy's. Right off, you've eliminated the need for multiple anchor stores in malls. And in-line retailers have consolidated or folded or have stopped building new stores because so much of their business is now online. The Limited, for example, Next, malls are closing all over the country, even some of the former gems are now derelict.Times change. And finally, as the income level of any particular area declines, so do the retail offerings. Sad, but true.

ADVERTISEMENT