The bill was assigned to the House Public Policy Committee for consideration. I had numerous conversations with Committee Chairman Trent Van-Haaften and other House members, and it became apparent that simply not hearing the bill was not a political option for the House Democrats, given that their caucus could not be put in a position as the sole source of obstruction on the issue. They did, however, intend to make substantial changes.

The Public Policy Committee hearing on February 13th was eventful. Chairman Van Haaften and other committee members questioned Senator Delph on the generalities and the specifics of SB 335 for ninety minutes, after which public testimony was taken for ninety minutes as well. I testified on behalf of the GIA in opposition to the bill, which led to a request by WXIN Fox 59 News to interview a member that has had to deal with labor shortages and the H2B program. John Wolski of Ski Landscape gave the interview. Videos of the coverage of my testimony and the feature interview of Mr. Wolski can be viewed on the GIA website at www.greenindustryalliance.com.

A second Committee hearing was held on February 18th to amend and vote on the bill. Amendments changed the bill drastically, making it tougher in some respects but lenient on other points. The committee voted the amended bill out of committee by a 7-4 margin. Reps. Matt Bell, Vanessa Summers and Earl Harris voted “no” on the bill due to their underlying opposition to the proposal. Rep. Eric Turner also voted “no”, but his belief was the bill needed to be stronger. Rep. Turner’s “no” vote was very important procedurally, and this is where the fireworks began.

Rep. Turner filed a “minority” report that would have changed SB 335 to include a prohibition of providing state funded benefits to illegal aliens, including certain healthcare expenses and educational benefits (incidentally, Rep. Turner had a stand-alone bill on this issue during the 2006 session that was defeated on the House floor after garnering only 17 “yes” votes). House rules state that a minority report filed by a minority member of the House must be considered by the full House prior to the adoption of the majority committee report (the version filed by the Committee Chairman which contains the language passing out of Committee).

Though Rep. Turner’s language failed to garner much support in 2006, even from members of his own party, times have changed. After speaking with several House members, we learned that if Rep. Turner’s “minority report” was called for consideration on the floor, a large majority of the House Republicans would vote in favor of it. This unity would then force the House Democrats to unify and vote against it. Though this is generally how minority reports are treated, in this case the Democrats’ vote against Turner’s minority report would certainly be used as a campaign piece this Fall, claiming that Democrats had voted against the “toughest immigration reform language in the country.”

To avoid this situation, Chairman Van Haaften never signed the majority committee report and never requested that it be adopted by the House. Because SB 335 was never called down on the House floor, Rep. Turner never had the opportunity to call his minority report and SB 335 effectively died.

To keep the issue alive, however, the Democrats filed their immigration language- the language passing out of the Public Policy Committee- as an amendment into SB 345, a bill regarding labor and safety. The amendment was filed four minutes before the filing deadline on February 21, allowing the Republicans no time to respond in kind with their own version of immigration language (Rep. Turner’s minority report language). The only thing the Republicans could do to prevent the Democrats from having their way on the bill exclusively was to leave the floor, breaking the quorum necessary to conduct business, and end business for the day.

In response to this “walkout,” the Speaker “recessed” business for the day until the following Monday at 10:00. The decision to “recess” instead of “adjourn” is vital in that business conducted on that Monday would in effect be nothing more than an extension of the prior Thursday’s business. This prevented the Republicans from filing their own version of an immigration amendment on SB 345.

While the Republicans spent significant time complaining about the way the Democrats had manipulated the procedure when the amendment was finally called for consideration, it was approved by a voice vote and SB 345 was the new immigration bill. The bill was heard for final passage on February 28, and after heated debate, was passed on a 66-33 vote. Aside from the immigration language, SB 345 originally contained pro-union language on employee claissification that the Senate couldn’t agree to, so they dissented to the bill, sending it to conference committee.

Conferees for conference committees must be assigned while the House is in session, and because the House only met three more times before the end of session, the bill collected dust for a week following the Senate’s dissent, sending a clear signal from the House Democrats that they did not intend to negotiate. Publicly, the Speaker of the House, Pat Bauer, announced that the Senate should just agree to the House version, knowing full well that they never would.

The House met in session on March 13, and finally announced its conferees. The Senate immediately scheduled a committee hearing for that afternoon, but it was made clear during the brief hearing that compromise was not going to occur, and the House Democrat conferee, Rep. Scott Pelath, was not even in the room during the hearing. The conference committee report was never signed, and there was not another vote taken on the bill, resulting in the issue dying for this year.

Senator Delph proclaimed his desire to come back next year with a tough bill on immigration and blamed lobbyists in the business community for the death of the bill. He was extremely angry about the manner in which the issue died. Although the outward appearance is that the bill died as a result of typical procedural pitfalls, the real story is that many legislators were uncomfortable about the unintended consequences the new law might bring.

The business community including the GIA, the Indiana Chamber of Commerce, the Indiana Manufacturers Association, Indiana Builders Association and the Indiana Restaurant & Hotel Associations are organizing a coalition to be prepared in a comprehensive manner for immigration reform next legislative session.                                     -Mike Leppert