Word from some people in DC is that in the absence of a bi-partisan comprehensive immigration reform bill from NY Senator biometric Chuck Schumer and Lindsey Graham, some Democrats may move forward presenting a proposal of their own. This is being done to placate the immigration reform advocates who have been criticizing the lack of real, good faith action on the part of federal lawmakers and by the looks of what I have seen from the proposal ,also to placate and attract Republicans and others who are so fixated on the enforcement agenda that has been dominating current immigration policy and practice in the U.S.

Before I get into the nuts and bolts of what is in the proposal. My Democratic D.C. sources have confirmed that indeed there is a Democrat only written proposal on the table for the purpose of engaging Republicans who have demanded to see something on paper and the purpose of the proposal is to move the CIR debate forward.

The alleged proposal calls for enforcement efforts along the U.S./Mexico border (cuz no one is really talking about Canadians) and throughout the country to be beefed up before the human rights of the millions of undocumented are even to be looked at.

Among the alleged enforcement proposals are increasing the number of I.C.E agents, increasing the number of border patrol officers, increasing the number of I.C.E workplace inspectors and resources (read increase the number of workplace raids), increasing border security tech along the border, and increasing the number of immigration courts NOT to ensure equal protection under the law or the due process of immigrants but rather to expedite deportations, which we already know are at record numbers under Obama.

If this is the legislative starting point that everyone has been demanding and that advocates will accept with marches and “si se puedes” then count me out of “that” movement.

Even after the initial benchmarks are met, according to the alleged proposal, additional security measures along the border need to be met before there is any inkling of help for the undocumented families and workers in the U.S. The additional security measures propose point to looking at those crossing the borders not just as criminals but as combatants thanks to the call for Department of Defense equipment at the border and allows for the head of Homeland Security to call the National Guard to the border when deemed necessary. The alleged proposal also buttresses itself using the “war on drugs” defense, calling for increased DEA agents along the U.S./Mexico frontera.

And really, the further I read into this alleged proposal, I don’t know if I should cry or laugh at how the Democrats must take us for pendejos. The mention of “America’s best values and traditions” is placed in the context of preserving national parks and wildlife and turning over the undocumented to law enforcement and protecting the property and legal rights of those on the border. There’s even a shout out to the Native American population who are promised reimbursement for damage caused by “illegals” and law enforcement efforts to capture them.

The alleged proposal especially wants to seek out those that overstay their visas and sanction countries who do not aide in keeping “dangerous” individuals out of the U.S.

And yes, of course, all foreigners will be required to provide biometric information and the alleged proposal calls for biometric id cards to be used solely for the purpose of employment eligibility. Maybe we aren’t too far from that microchipping that Iowa Republican congressional candidate Pat Bertroche wants to do since the undocumented are akin to dogs.

In an attempt to address the complaints associated with the unreliability of E-Verify, a new biometric based employment verification system will be implemented, called BELIEVE (as in “believe us we’re the government”).

The usual platitudes are paid to due process and protecting the children of the detained but overwhelmingly the alleged proposal places enforcement, ratcheted up to military levels, at the forefront.

Other points of interest to some include eliminating per country employment immigration caps, AgJobs, guest worker visas, an employment based immigration commission, setting an 8 year deadline to clear current immigration backlogs, counting spouses and children of legal residents as immediate family, permits permanent partners of legal residents and citizens to obtain legal status (this language is vague pero can it be assumed that this includes lgbt couples?), and protections for children and others with special, undefined humanitarian considerations.

In order to be eligible to be considered for legal permanent residence there is an English language requirement. Additionally the proposal adopts DREAM Act language.

While the inclusion of certain protections and inclusion of DREAM Act language is good, the majority of the 26 page proposal is dedicated to enforcement. I understand the desire for political efficacy but from a human rights standpoint, making immigration reform contingent on MORE enforcement is problematic to be nice about it. I anxiously await the response from immigration reform advocates.

Is this what we have been fighting for? Is this the “reform” that will best serve our communities?