A new bill on immigration reform that began debate in the Senate on Monday has been criticized by both Democrats and Republicans.

The bill would institute a guest worker program and allow illegal immigrants legal status, as well as strengthen enforcement of existing laws.

The bill would allow illegal immigrants who have been in the United States since before Jan. 1, 2007, to seek a “Z Visa,” giving them immediate work authorization. The head of the household would have to return to his home county within eight years, but would also be guaranteed re-entry to the United States. A $5,000 penalty would also have to be paid, according to CNN.

“Y Visas” would be issued every year to 400,000 guest workers, allowing them to work for two-year periods up to three times, being required to return to their home country for a year in between. The guest workers would earn points toward merit-based Green Cards and could bring families on 30-day visitor Visas each year, according to CNN.

The enforcement portion of the bill would be strengthening border fencing, and additional border patrol agents would be added. Employers hiring illegal immigrants could also potentially be fined. This portion of the bill must be put in place before a guest worker program could be implemented, according to CNN.

Donald McDowell, president of the ISU Republicans and senior in political science, said many Republicans and conservative Democrats think the bill is too much like amnesty.

“You could look at that in the sense of our government rewarding people who broke the law by giving them legal status.” McDowell said. “I think that is a problem.”

Tyler Platt, vice president of the ISU Democrats and freshman in engineering, said that although some may see the bill as encouraging illegal behavior, illegal immigrants would still be required to pay fines for breaking the law, so they wouldn’t be getting away without a penalty. He said he thinks the bill is a good one, overall.

Steffen Schmidt, university professor of political science, said Congress might be anxious to show constituents that they are not hopelessly mired in gridlock.

“I think it tells you that the immigration issue was a little easier to show some cooperation on than the war in Iraq and some other things,” Schmidt said.

He also said the presidential campaign could be motivating the bipartisan effort.

“Democrats and Republicans would both like to pass some law that they defend when they go out and campaign; that addresses some of these issues that people are concerned about,” Schmidt said.

McDowell said it was interesting that the president is working with the Democrats and that many Republicans are torn on the issue. Also, Democrats in traditionally Republican districts are against the bill, he said.

“They don’t want to be on record as voting for amnesty, if that’s what this gets tagged as,” he said.

Although the bill has drawn criticism from Republicans and Democrats, Schmidt said this is not unusual for bipartisan action.

“In the past, if you had something bipartisan, the left wing of the Democratic Party and the right wing of the Republican Party never participated,” he said.

In the end, both Platt and McDowell noted that the extreme left and right wings’ dislike for the bill could indicate it is a good compromise after all.

Related article: U.S. Senate agrees to put off final action on bipartisan immigration deal until June

Related article: In Mexico, many migrants fear that new U.S. immigration proposal will lock out millions