Backdoor Amnesty Through Change in Hardship Regulations?

The Department of Homeland Security intends to streamline the waiver application process for immediate relatives who have been unlawfully present in the United States for quite some time. The reason for this proposed change is that aliens who are present in the country illegally; but would be otherwise eligible for visas as immediate family members of American citizens must leave the country to process their visa application. Leaving triggers a disqualification for returning, because they were here illegally in the first place. The Obama administration is proposing to waive this legal barrier through a "provisional waiver for unlawful presence" in cases of extreme hardship for immediate family.

My issue is that this effectively grants an amnesty process for those who have immigrated illegally but have immediate family members present in the country. Why don't these people apply for their visas in the normal legal manner? Why hasn't the administration cleared the backlog of applications rather than propose a backdoor amnesty? They are certainly spending enough money on stimulus, but rather than solve this problem they seek backdoor amnesty to subvert U.S. immigration law.

Here is the proposed rule making with all legalize from the Federal Register:

On January 9, 2012, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) announced its intention to change its current process for filing and adjudication of certain applications for waivers of inadmissibility filed in connection with an immediate relative immigrant visa application. USCIS now proposes to amend its regulations to allow certain immediate relatives of U.S. citizens who are physically present in the United States to request provisional unlawful presence waivers under the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952, as amended (INA or Act), prior to departing from the United States for consular processing of their immigrant visa applications. Currently, such aliens must depart from the United States and request waivers of inadmissibility during the overseas immigrant visa process, often causing U.S. citizens to be separated for extended periods from their immediate relatives who are otherwise eligible for an immigrant visa and admission for lawful permanent residence. Under the proposal, USCIS would grant a provisional unlawful presence waiver that would become fully effective upon the alien's departure from the United States and the U.S. Department of State (DOS) consular officer's determination at the time of the immigrant visa interview that, in light of the approved provisional unlawful presence waiver and other evidence of record, the alien is otherwise admissible to the United States and eligible to receive an immigrant visa. USCIS does not envision issuing Notices to Appear (NTA) to initiate removal proceedings against aliens whose provisional waiver applications have been approved.
. . .
DATES: Written comments should be submitted on or before June 1, 2012.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by DHS Docket No. USCIS-
2012-0003, by one of the following methods:

Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the instructions for submitting comments.

Email: You may submit comments directly to USCIS by email
at uscisfrcomment@dhs.gov. Include DHS Docket No. USCIS-2012-0003 in
the subject line of the message.

Mail: Sunday Aigbe, Chief, Regulatory Products Division,
Office of the Executive Secretariat, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration
Services, Department of Homeland Security, 20 Massachusetts Avenue NW.,
Washington, DC 20529-2020. To ensure proper handling, please reference
DHS Docket No. USCIS-2012-0003 on your correspondence. This mailing
address may be used for paper, disk, or CD-ROM submissions.

Hand Delivery/Courier: Sunday Aigbe, Chief, Regulatory
Products Division, Office of the Executive Secretariat, U.S.
Citizenship and Immigration Services, Department of Homeland Security,
20 Massachusetts Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20529-2020. Contact
Telephone Number is (202) 272-8377.

While the DHS asserts that this proposed rule making conforms to the immigration law, that is not clear to me, but I am not expert. I encourage you to comment prior to the deadline.