Obama's plan to push immigration bill

Last night I read a very recent article of the New York Times about President Obama's plan to push immigration bill. Immigration laws have been one of the most-discussed issue for a while. The latest update is Obama has made addressing the immigration system as one of his priorities sometime in the near future.

Here's an excerpt of the second paragraph from the top:
Mr. Obama will frame the new effort — likely to rouse passions on all sides of the highly divisive issue — as “policy reform that controls immigration and makes it an orderly system,” said the official, Cecilia Muñoz, deputy assistant to the president and director of intergovernmental affairs in the White House.
I like how this paragraph delivers a neutral, general introduction by mentioning the potential controversy of the issue and still implies that it's done for the best.

It's a really wise thing to have lawmakers from both parties and immigration groups to hold discussions. On one side, there's a concern that with with all the Americans workers being laid off, why are we still providing jobs for foreign workers? “It’s going to be, ‘You’re letting them keep that job, when I could have that job,’ ” said Roy Beck, executive director from NumbersUSA.
And the other contradicting side lies with the reasoning to recognize illegal workers who have already been contributing to the workforce for years.

The article presents both sides in a quite balanced way, I think. Although I would like to hear groups who support the idea of making illegal immigrants become legal. I said "groups" as in more than one person. The article used Rep. Luis V. Gutierrez, a Democrat from Chicago as an example. In general, this seems like an update article that doesn't really summarize the whole journey of the long-debated issues of immigration bills. There were a whole lot more of historical facts that could be tied in with the topic. There were no independent sources in the article who mention the idea of legalizing the status of the workers because of their contributions. Rep. Gutierrez mostly mentioned it as a way to preserve families. I'm not sure if this factor was left out because the writer assumes it's just already way too obvious.

Perhaps this just a web version of the story and the print version runs longer and more comprehensive than this?