The Democrat-controlled State, Veterans, & Military Affairs committee voted yesterday to introduce limited measures at immigration reform in what should prove to be the first skirmish in an on-going election-year battle over the state’s response to voter’s concern on the issue.

The House committee heard testimony from over three dozen citizen and lobbyist witnesses on ten Republican-sponsored bills. The bills sought legislation that ranged from limiting government services to illegal aliens, such as in-state tuition, to getting tough on those who knowingly employ illegal aliens. In the end, only two GOP bills were approved for the appropriations committee: HB 1306 which would audit the state’s implementation of the “Secure and Verifiable Identity Document Act,” an act intended to limit government services to only those who can produce secure and verifiable identity documents; and HB 1131 which prohibits bail-bondsmen from posting bail for those who have an immigration status issue.

Of the rest of the bills, six were killed along strict party-line votes, one was withdrawn at the request of its sponsor and one was tabled for further action later next week. The tabled bill, HB 1343, sponsored by Jefferson County Rep. Bill Crane (R), would require contractors doing business with the state to certify that they do not employ illegal aliens.

“I expected those results,” said Rep Dave Schulteis- (R) -Colorado Springs of the party line votes that killed six of the Republican bills, three of which were sponsored by him. “The Democrats keep talking about coming out with a package [aimed at immigration reform], but I haven’t seen it,” he concluded adding that the issue was not just going to go away because of yesterday’s votes of the Democrats on the committee.

For both parties immigration reform will likely be a hot campaign issue with Republicans continuing to push a plethora of reform measures while the Democrats scramble to frame a response.  For some Democrats, embracing immigration reform will be problematic without angering Hispanics, a key Democratic constituency. But with continued voter concern over border security and five years of sluggish economic growth, both parties are guessing that it’s an issue that will resonate with voters.

Indeed, according to Polling Report a recently released Time poll conducted Jan. 24-26 of 1002 adults nationwide indicated that 63% of Americans agree that illegal immigration is a very serious or extremely serious problem, while another 26% agree that it is a somewhat serious problem. Only 9% thought the problem was not very serious or were unsure. The poll has a margin-of-error of +/- 3%.

“Of course I hope that this issue can become bipartisan,” said Rep Jim Welker (R) -Larimer. “Former Governor Dick Lamm, known to be a liberal Democrat, is a very strong proponent of border control,” he added.

And while some inside both parties would blanch at the implication that Dick Lamm is supportive of the type of measures put forward by House Republicans, chairman of the State, Veterans & Military Affairs committee, Paul Weissman (D) -Boulder agrees that a bipartisan effort is needed.

“Today is not the end of the immigration debate in this building,” the committee chair said. “There is wide agreement that we have a problem. Where there is disagreement is in the solutions to it.” He further indicated a willingness to bring back some immigration reform proposals before the end of the session. “I imagine that out of this hearing there will be a number of bills that move forward,” he concluded. 

However Weissmann may have trouble convincing those on his side of the aisle to go along with his approach. Rep Fran Coleman (D) -Denver was a frequent skeptic throughout the hearings, questioning sponsors about the legality and practicality of their legislation and generally supporting the testimony of opponents of the Republican-backed legislation.

“I don’t believe that there is much that can be done at the state level, because all of my study all summer and through the fall has been that the laws are on the books and are at the federal level,” said Coleman after the hearings.

The witnesses in opposition to the bills often echoed the same themes voiced by Rep Coleman.

Critics of the bills testified frequently during the hearing that the issue wasn’t one of whether there was illegal immigration problem but whether the state had any constitutional power to enact solutions put forward by Republicans. Several witnesses, including representatives from the ACLU testified that much of the proposed legislation was an unconstitutional raid by the state on powers retained by the federal government to enforce immigration law.  The trouble, Republicans say, is that the federal government isn’t enforcing that law.

“I just wish our federal government would do their job and control our borders,” said Welker. “[The state of Colorado] just can’t operate that way,” he added.

Republicans are also having trouble in buying the bipartisan theme put forward by Weissmann.

“The fact is most of these votes were decided when representatives got elected,” lamented Rep Kevin Lundberg (R) -Larimer during the short recess prior to the voting.

Republicans have further charged that House Majority Alice Madden (D) -Boulder told a reporter that all the GOP-backed bills would be killed in the committee stating that there were “a lot of really bad immigration bills this year,” according to a GOP press release received today from House Minority Leader Joe Stengel’s office.

Weissmann and Madden denied the charges.

“We had a full and fair hearing yesterday,” Weissmann said. “I’ve been working all day with some of the Republican sponsors of some of those bills to make them workable.  It is irresponsible to pass legislation that is unconstitutional, unenforceable, unfunded, or unworkable.”

And in at least one case it was a Republican’s own discourtesy to the chairman of the committee that did in his bill according to Weissmann, not a conspiracy.       

 Rep Ted Harvey (R) -Highlands Ranch was visibly upset after his bill, HB 1133, entitled “Concerning the Elimination of Government Practices That Are Permissive Towards Illegal Immigration,” was killed by the committee. The bill contained provisions that would require contractors with the state to have a policy ensuring illegal immigrants were not hired by the contractors. The bill also attempted to give the give legal sanction to the current policy of not giving illegal immigrants in-state tuition. Comments from the committee were mostly positive on HB 1133 and it looked like it might pass. Weismann stated prior to the voting, however, that while he was generally sympathetic to the bill he would vote against it because he did not like the title. The bill was promptly voted on and died along party lines.

Weissmann later explained that there were problems with Harvey’s bill including the fact that much of the language and intent was a duplicate of HB 1343. Plus he found the title offensive.

“Your first stop [when you have a bill to put before the committee] is the chair,” Weissmann explained, claiming that had Harvey come to see him he would have worked with him to solve the problems with the bill so that it might have passed.

“You know there used to be something called courtesy,” he said.

Not in an election year.