U.S. Panel Issues Sweeping Immigration Reform Plan : Policy: Bipartisan blueprint would cut off most benefits for illegal residents but would not deny them education.

A respected, bipartisan federal commission issued a sweeping blueprint Friday for reform of immigration policy, calling for cutting off most public benefits to illegal immigrants, creating a much-disputed computerized registry for job eligibility and making it tougher to illegally cross the border.

Pointedly drawing a line between legal and illegal immigrants, the commission urged a near-total ban on public benefits and services to illegal immigrants, while generally opposing a cutoff of aid to legal permanent residents.

“If a person is here unlawfully, he should be entitled to no benefits,” said former Texas congresswoman Barbara Jordan, chairwoman of the U.S. Commission on Immigration Reform. “Illegal aliens . . . broke the law to get here. They never intended to become a part of our social community and they are not entitled to benefits.”

However, Jordan balked at denying public education to illegal immigrants, one of the central aims of Proposition 187, the anti-illegal-immigration initiative on California’s November ballot.

“I just regret that the political atmosphere and environment in the state of California has yielded such an ill-considered proposition,” Jordan said in impromptu comments after the report was released.

In general, the commission endorsed a series of recommendations aimed at stopping illegal immigration that are increasingly gaining acceptance in mainstream policy circles. Many of those could be implemented by the Clinton Administration, though the costs could be substantial and Congress would have to come up with billions of dollars.

The White House and the Justice Department embraced the report. A high-ranking White House official termed it “very useful. . . . We agree with the commission on a number of significant steps, and we are heading in a similar direction.”

But several suggestions--notably the proposal for some kind of national computerized verification system for workers--remain extremely controversial among immigrant and civil rights groups, who condemn the plan as too costly and an infringement on civil liberties.

“This would lead to Big Brother,” said Art Montes of the League of United Latin American Citizens.

The 250-page report called on the federal government to make its immigration policies more credible through tougher and smarter enforcement--and more tax dollars. The commission did not directly address the growing calls for new congressional limits on legal immigration, which is now at record levels, but said that legal immigration in general benefits the nation.

Congress created the commission in 1990 and required that it issue a report this year and again in 1997. This year’s report is particularly timely because immigration has emerged as a red-hot political issue--mostly in California and six other states affected by millions of illegal immigrants.

The nine-member commission said the 32 recommendations are a politically neutral foundation for reforming a deeply flawed system.

“The credibility of immigration policy can be measured by a simple yardstick: People who should get in do get in; people who should not get in are kept out, and people who are judged deportable are required to leave,” the report said.

On those scores, the commission found existing federal procedures wanting but warned that improving them will be costly.

“If the nation is serious about controlling illegal immigration, it must commit substantially more resources than are currently allocated,” the report said.

Commission members said most of the recommendations can be implemented under existing laws. The Clinton Administration has already endorsed many of the ideas, notably the call for tougher border enforcement.

The commission decried the anti-immigration sentiments underlying much of the recent national furor over the topic.

“We strongly denounce the hostility toward immigrants that we find emerging in so many public and private debates,” Jordan said. “But we disagree with those who would label efforts to control immigration as inherently anti-immigrant.”

The continued flow of illegal immigration “undermines our commitment to legal immigration,” Jordan said.

Established by Congress as part of the 1990 Immigration Act, the commission has four Republican and five Democratic members holding diverse views on immigration issues. The Democratic appointees include Lawrence H. Fuchs, a professor at Brandeis University and executive director of the last federal panel to tackle immigration, and Warren R. Leiden, executive director of the American Immigration Lawyers Assn.

Republican appointees include Richard Estrada, an editorial writer for the Dallas Morning News, and Robert Charles Hill, a lawyer and Reagan-era Justice Department official.

The report recommends a seven-point strategy “to prevent illegal entries and facilitate legal ones”:

* Stricter border management that focuses on prevention rather than apprehension. The commission was impressed by Operation Hold the Line in El Paso and the Clinton Administration is trying a similar strategy--Operation Gatekeeper--at the much busier San Diego border.

* Improved verification of worker eligibility through stricter sanctions against those who hire illegal workers, enhanced labor standards and the controversial computer registry designed to address the rampant market in counterfeit work documents.

* A ban on most public benefits to illegal immigrants, except emergency health care, public education, child nutrition and school lunch programs. It also calls for short-term federal financial aid to states hit hard by immigration costs.

* Swifter deportation procedures.

* Better management of immigration emergencies, such as recent the influxes of seaborne immigrants from Cuba and Haiti.

* More reliable data on the numbers of immigrants and the cost and benefits associated with them.

* Better cooperation with foreign countries to control the root causes of immigration to the United States.

Atty. Gen. Janet Reno welcomed the report and thanked Jordan and the commission “for their superb work.”

But the commission’s recommendation for the national computer registry continues to alarm immigrant advocates and civil libertarians. The commission had hoped to defuse the adverse reaction by releasing details on the proposal in August, when Jordan testified before a Senate committee.

The commission recommended that verification pilot projects be tested in several states during the next three years. If those programs prove successful, then they would be phased in nationwide. If they fail, some other verification system would be tried, but the commission thinks the computer registry is the most promising.

How exactly the computerized registry process would work remains somewhat murky, but it would probably combine information from the Social Security Administration and the Immigration and Naturalization Service to create a database indicating who is legally permitted to work in the United States. Employers would presumably tap into the system by telephone or computer to verify worker eligibility.

Late Friday, the White House said it continues to back the idea of a phone-in system, but because of concerns over the accuracy of the INS data bank, the Administration prefers expanding the pilot projects to 200 local sites, rather than conducting statewide experiments as called for by the commission.

“This is a technical difference,” said Ginny Terzano, White House deputy press secretary. “The commission’s recommendation is welcomed by the Administration, but it makes more sense to work out the kinks in the local projects.”

Many civil rights advocates fear the data bank will lead to creation of a national identification card, something many have long condemned as a waste of money and as invasive government.

“It’s grossly out of proportion to the problem they’re trying to solve,” said Charles Wheeler, directing attorney of the National Immigration Law Center, an advocacy group in Los Angeles. “I think it’s a major step for this country to take just because undocumented workers take some low-level jobs in California. . . . We’re talking about billions of dollars to fix an issue that affects 1% of the work force.”

But Jordan responded forcefully to attacks on the registry concept.

“I know that is the fear, that a national data bank will lead to a national ID card. . . . But if it looks like it’s heading in that direction, I’ll lie down on the Capitol steps and say, ‘Hold it.’ ”

Harold W. Ezell, a commission member who was a co-author of Proposition 187, criticized Jordan for her remarks. “She’s speaking on her own, and she has a right to do so, but I think she used the wrong platform,” he said.

Bornemeier reported from Washington and McDonnell from Los Angeles.

Recommended Reforms

The U.S. Commission on Immigration Reform issued a comprehensive report Friday on federal immigration policy. Here are some highlights:

BORDER MANAGEMENT

* Adopt “prevention” strategies such as Hold the Line in El Paso.

* Increase Border Patrol resources.

* Develop mobile, rapid-response team to thwart smugglers.

* Increase cooperation between United States and Mexico.

WORK SITE ENFORCEMENT

* Develop computer registry for more fraud-resistant work authorization.

* Reduce fraudulent access to “breeder documents” to establish an identity.

* Adopt harsher penalties for producing fraudulent documents.

* Vigorously enforce labor standards and employer sanctions.

BENEFITS ELIGIBILITY

* Ban public benefits to illegal immigrants, except in emergencies.

* Oppose a broad categorical denial of public benefits to legal immigrants.

* Support short-term financial aid to states burdened by immigration costs.

DETENTION OF CRIMINALS

* Ensure that deported criminal immigrants do not return to the United States.

IMPROVING DATA

* Improve data collection on size of immigrant population, flow of illegal immigrants, and cost and benefits associated with people of different immigrant status.