Usually one of the first casualties of an election year is substantive accomplishments on Capitol Hill. Although legislation suffers, politics thrives. This atmosphere can be a catalyst for bills that have a better chance of making a political point than becoming law. This is the case with immigration. A broad Senate bill that would have strengthened border and workplace enforcement while providing a path toward legalization for undocumented workers that many industries desperately need died almost a year ago.Since then, the immigration issue has become volatile and brittle. Passions tend to cause internal divisions in parties and split interest groups into strange-bedfellow arrangements.Although a comprehensive bill won’t rise out of this political cauldron, many rifle-shot bills could bubble to the surface in the coming weeks. For instance, a measure written by Rep. Heath Shuler, D-North Carolina, has garnered 146 co-sponsors, most of whom are Republicans.

Shuler’s bill focuses solely on enforcement. It cracks down on illegal workplace hiring by mandating that all companies use E-Verify, a government-run electronic verification system that 52,000 employers now use voluntarily.

Employers enter information from I-9 forms into the system, which then checks it against government databases at the Department of Homeland Security and the Social Security Administration.

E-Verify is reviled by many in the HR community. They cite its 4 percent error rate, criticizing it for being inefficient, ineffective and prone to errors that could ultimately cause an economic disruption if all employers use the system.

As an alternative to E-Verify, the Society for Human Resource Management and other HR organizations have worked with Rep. Sam Johnson, R-Texas, to write a bill called the New Employee Verification Act. It has 13 Republican co-sponsors.

The measure would establish a mandatory electronic verification system based on existing new-hire databases in each state. Those databases were originally constructed to track fathers who skirted child support payments. The system would replace I-9 forms, allowing employers to enter information directly or over the phone.

Like the Shuler bill, the Johnson legislation would impose civil penalties on employers who hire illegal immigrants. But the Johnson bill would not hold companies responsible for hiring done by subcontractors and would only require verification of new hires rather than the entire workforce.

The Johnson bill has not yet attracted a Democratic co-sponsor because Democratic leadership is discouraging caucus members from signing on to rifle-shot measures.

Shuler has been able to line up many Democrats from conservative districts because his bill gives them an outlet to prove they are tough on immigration.

But Democratic leaders also are wary of Shuler’s proposal because it’s essentially a Republican vehicle. The bill’s supporters are circulating a “discharge petition,” a document that would send a bill directly to the floor for a vote if it collects 218 signatures. The Shuler petition has 181 so far.

While immigration intrigue unfolds in the House, Senate Republicans have introduced 15 immigration enforcement bills. One of them, written by Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Alabama, would establish an electronic verification system based on E-Verify. Under quirky Senate rules, Sessions likely will have an opportunity to force votes on his package.

If Shuler and Sessions get the floor action they seek, it will be difficult for any member of Congress—Republican or Democratic—to come out against workplace verification. The question is whether they will be voting for E-Verify or the SHRM-backed system, if Johnson can develop enough support for his bill or get it inserted into Shuler’s bill.

On top of all these political machinations is another important factor. The law that created E-Verify expires in November. One way or another, Congress has to do something on employment verification soon, even though it’s an election year.