PDA

View Full Version : Senate Drives Stake Through Immigration



ELVIS
06-28-2007, 10:08 PM
June 28, 2007 (http://apnews.myway.com/article/20070629/D8Q24TJG0.html)

By JULIE HIRSCHFELD DAVIS

http://ak.imgfarm.com/images/ap/Congress_Immigration.sff_DCSW105_20070628144726.jp g

WASHINGTON (AP) - President Bush's immigration plan to legalize as many as 12 million unlawful immigrants while fortifying the border collapsed in the Senate on Thursday, crushing both parties' hopes of addressing the volatile issue before the 2008 elections.

The Senate vote to drive a stake through the delicate compromise was a stinging setback for Bush - who had made reshaping immigration laws a centerpiece of his domestic agenda - engineered by members of his own party.

It could carry heavy political consequences for Republicans and Democrats, many of whom were eager to show they could act on a complex issue of great interest to the public.

"Legal immigration is one of the top concerns of the American people and Congress' failure to act on it is a disappointment," a grim-faced president said after an appearance in Newport, R.I. "A lot of us worked hard to see if we couldn't find common ground. It didn't work."

Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, D-Mass., his party's lead negotiator on the bill, called its defeat "enormously disappointing for Congress and for the country." But, he added: "We will be back. This issue is not going away."

The bill's Senate supporters fell 14 votes short of the 60 needed to limit debate and clear the way for final passage of the legislation. The tally was 46 to 53, with three-quarters of the Senate's Republicans voting to derail the bill.

Lawmakers in both parties said further action was unlikely this year, dooming its prospects as the political strains of a crowded presidential contest get louder.

Only 13 percent of those in a CBS News Survey taken earlier this week said they supported passage of the bill. Almost three times that number, 35 percent, opposed it. Even more, 51 percent, said they did not know enough about the immigration legislation to say whether they supported passage.

"I believe that until another election occurs, or until something happens in the body politic, that what occurred today was fairly final," said Sen. Mel Martinez, R-Fla., the GOP chairman.

"I don't see where the political will is there for this issue to be dealt with," said Martinez, who helped develop the bill.

House Democratic leaders signaled they had little appetite for taking up an issue that bitterly divides both parties and has tied up the Senate for weeks.

Rep. Zoe Lofgren, who heads the House Judiciary subcommittee that was to write a version of the bill, said the Senate's inability to move forward "effectively ends comprehensive immigration reform efforts" for the next year and a half.

"The Senate voted for the status quo," the California Democrat said in a statement.

The vote already had led to partisan finger-pointing.

Howard Dean, the Democratic Party chairman, said it was "a reminder of why the American people voted Republicans out in 2006 and why they'll vote against them in 2008."

The measure was the product of a liberal-to-conservative alliance led by Kennedy and Sen. Jon Kyl, R-Ariz., that forged an immigration compromise intended to withstand challenges from the left and right.

They advocated the resulting measure as an imperfect but necessary fix to the current system, in which millions of illegal immigrants use forged documents or lapsed visas to live and work in the U.S.

The proposal would have made those millions eligible for lawful status while tightening border security and creating an employee verification system to weed out illegal workers from U.S. jobs.

The bill also would have set up a temporary worker program and a system to base future legal immigration more heavily on employment criteria, rather than family ties.

Ultimately, though, what came to be known as their "grand bargain" commanded only lukewarm support among important constituencies in both parties. That was no match for the vehement and vocal opposition of Republican conservatives, who derided it as amnesty.

"The end result was a blanket that was too small to cover everyone," said Tamar Jacoby, an analyst at the conservative Manhattan Institute who was a strong supporter. "By its nature, because it was a compromise, it was hard to muster intense support. But the opposition was very intense."

Conservative foes' were among the loudest voices during the debate, led by Sens. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., Jim DeMint, R-S.C., and David Vitter, R-La. Their views were amplified by talk radio and television hosts who attacked the bill and urged listeners to flood Congress with calls, faxes and e-mails.

The conservatives hailed the demise of the bill as a fitting death of an effort that had thwarted the public's will. They faulted Bush and their own party for trying to push through a measure that lacked public support and placed Republicans in a politically tough spot.

"They made a big mistake. I think the president's approach didn't work," Sessions said. Republicans "need to be careful we don't walk into such an adverse circumstance again. This did not work out well. Our own members were placed in difficult positions."

Bush made an unusually personal appeal for passage of the legislation, appearing at a luncheon with Senate Republicans this month to urge them to put aside their skepticism.

He sent Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff and Commerce Secretary Carlos Gutierrez, as well as his top policy aides, to spend hours in Capitol Hill meetings with senators over a period of months to develop and then help push through the deal.

The two secretaries were on hand to buttonhole senators as they entered the chamber for votes.

The outcome, though, was a stunning reversal from just a few weeks ago, when Bush confidently declared, "I'll see you at the bill-signing."

Mexico's president, Felipe Calderon, said the Senate had made a "grave error" in killing the legislation. The action, he said, would cut off legal immigration, permit continued unlawful immigration and human rights violations and decrease security on both sides of the border.

Voting to allow the bill to proceed by ending debate were 33 Democrats, 12 Republicans and independent Joe Lieberman, Conn. Opposing that effort were 37 Republicans, 15 Democrats and independent Bernard Sanders, Vt. Tim Johnson, D-S.D., who has been absent from the Senate all year due to an illness, did not vote.

In a mark of lawmakers' ambivalence on the issue, the outcome was substantially different from a test-vote earlier in the week, when the Senate voted 64-35 to revive the bill. Then, 24 Republicans joined 39 Democrats and Lieberman to move ahead with the bill. On Thursday, 12 of those Republicans and six of the Democrats switched their votes and opposed moving forward.

All the Democratic presidential candidates in the Senate voted to end debate and advance the bill. Among the Republican candidates, only Sen. John McCain of Arizona voted to keep the measure alive.



:elvis:

Unchainme
06-28-2007, 10:10 PM
So Nice you posted it Twice, Elvis? :D

FORD
06-28-2007, 11:00 PM
I'm not sure what the "Amen" is about, considering nothing changed. Not that I'm endorsing the bill, just pointing out that fact.

Nitro Express
06-29-2007, 03:39 AM
We have millions of illegals here in the first place because nobody enforced the existing laws. Under the law, the illegal alliens should be arrested and deported and the employers who hired them illegally imprisoned and fined.

How hard is it to have a legal guest worker program? It can be done but employers don't want to pay the F.I.C.A. tax on legal employs or pay the minimum wage.

It's not a immigration issue. It's a do we want to tollerate slavery and abuse issue. Illegal immigration opens the door to more smuggling. More crime. It makes our laws a joke.

Ellyllions
06-29-2007, 09:22 AM
We've made our laws a joke when it comes to illegal immigration. It took my little town 2 years of complaining to get the INS to come out and help us serve the 3 filing cabinets of felony warrants. 2 YEARS. We'd call, they'd tell us that they didn't want anything to do with it, paraphrasing of course.

What's going to happen is a monster amount of corruption in this country is going to be exposed. Corruption from the employers to the local law enforcement, to the State governments, to the Federal governments. The corruption in this issue is what's keeping the illegals flowing, not the laws. Because NO ONE is enforcing them.

Hardrock69
06-29-2007, 10:09 AM
SEND ALL THE FUCKING ILLEGAL ALIENS BACK TO WHERE THEY FUCKING CAME FROM!!!
:mad:

BITEYOASS
06-29-2007, 10:20 AM
Originally posted by Ellyllions
We've made our laws a joke when it comes to illegal immigration. It took my little town 2 years of complaining to get the INS to come out and help us serve the 3 filing cabinets of felony warrants. 2 YEARS. We'd call, they'd tell us that they didn't want anything to do with it, paraphrasing of course.

What's going to happen is a monster amount of corruption in this country is going to be exposed. Corruption from the employers to the local law enforcement, to the State governments, to the Federal governments. The corruption in this issue is what's keeping the illegals flowing, not the laws. Because NO ONE is enforcing them.


The States should do more since the feds won't do shit. Hell there is nothing in the constitution stating that the federal government has to do everything. That is the reason state government exists in the first place. Seems that everybody in this country wants the feds to do everything, when they don't have the budget and too little personal due to political squabbling among 50 different states. More often one state disproportionaly receives funds over the other and you wind up with a big cluster fuck.

knuckleboner
06-29-2007, 10:21 AM
figures. one of the few bush policies i actually agreed with goes down.

i'd like to see pelosi take up something and try to at least get the issue to an actual vote. if they could hammer out something in the house, that puts a bit more pressure on the senate to get something done.

i have no doubt she won't even utter the word, "immigration." but i wouldn't mind if she did...

EAT MY ASSHOLE
06-29-2007, 10:22 AM
Originally posted by Hardrock69
SEND ALL THE FUCKING ILLEGAL ALIENS BACK TO WHERE THEY FUCKING CAME FROM!!!
:mad:

Really? Seriously, all our differences aside, I'm surprised that you take this stance on the issue. What's your reasoning?

(For me, the bottom line is, we're ALL immigrants in ths country. And I thought the worst parts of this bill were the "touchback" requirements, forcing them to go back to their home country for a year and then pay a $5000 fee to come back and be processed. Terrible. Are they supposed to leave their children behind for a year? If they're so prosperous as to have $5000, why would they even want to immigrate in the first place? It was just a bad bill, nonsensical, mean-spirited and bigoted. I'm glad that this bill was shot down.)

EAT MY ASSHOLE
06-29-2007, 10:25 AM
Originally posted by BITEYOASS
Seems that everybody in this country wants the feds to do everything, when they don't have the budget and too little personal due to political squabbling among 50 different states.

EXACTLY. Ellylions, you can complain about the high cost of taxes all you like, but then when you have to sit there and wonder why nothing can get done, it JUST might have EVERYTHING to do with federal budgets being destoyed by the bush tax policies and a lot of these agencies being severely understaffed and/or without the resources to do their jobs.

knuckleboner
06-29-2007, 10:33 AM
Originally posted by EAT MY ASSHOLE
And I thought the worst parts of this bill were the "touchback" requirements, forcing them to go back to their home country for a year and then pay a $5000 fee to come back and be processed.

i agree with you on the touchback, but i'm pretty sure that was an amendment that did not get included in the version of the bill that was effectively killed.


Also defeated Wednesday was an amendment by Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison, R-Texas, that would have required adult illegal immigrants to return to their home country within two years in order to apply for a new type of visa that will allow them to stay in the United States indefinitely. cnn.com (http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/06/28/immigration.congress/index.html)

Unchainme
06-29-2007, 12:26 PM
I'm all for LEGAL Immigration, Let 'em come in, Just sign the guest book...I also believe it's very stupid that we don't Allow SKILLED workers in, Folks with College degrees and such..That's Bullshit...You relax the requirement for that, But Toughen up the Illegal migrant laws...It's not a race thing..And anyone who says it is, is bullshit..

Wallyg
06-29-2007, 01:08 PM
Originally posted by BITEYOASS
The States should do more since the feds won't do shit. Hell there is nothing in the constitution stating that the federal government has to do everything. That is the reason state government exists in the first place. Seems that everybody in this country wants the feds to do everything, when they don't have the budget and too little personal due to political squabbling among 50 different states. More often one state disproportionaly receives funds over the other and you wind up with a big cluster fuck.

Several states and cities have tried but the ACLU gets a judge to issue an order forbidding them from enforcing their new laws/ordinances under the ruling that it is a federal responsibility and the states have no jurisdiction. Just happened in Texas.

Nickdfresh
06-29-2007, 05:54 PM
Originally posted by Nitro Express
We have millions of illegals here in the first place because nobody enforced the existing laws. Under the law, the illegal alliens should be arrested and deported and the employers who hired them illegally imprisoned and fined.

How hard is it to have a legal guest worker program? It can be done but employers don't want to pay the F.I.C.A. tax on legal employs or pay the minimum wage.

It's not a immigration issue. It's a do we want to tollerate slavery and abuse issue. Illegal immigration opens the door to more smuggling. More crime. It makes our laws a joke.

A-FUCKING-MEN!!!!

Guitar Shark
06-29-2007, 05:58 PM
Originally posted by Hardrock69
SEND ALL THE FUCKING ILLEGAL ALIENS BACK TO WHERE THEY FUCKING CAME FROM!!!
:mad:

Please tell us where the money for this will come from.

And ELVIS, shouldn't the title of this thread be "Senate Drives Stake Through Immigration Reform"? ;)

Nickdfresh
06-29-2007, 06:07 PM
Exactly! Removing immigrants is like moving the entire population of a state. We could barely do that to the city of New Orleans...

And are people really happy that this issue will not be addressed until at least 2009?

WOOOO-HOOOOAH!!

BTW, I agree this bill sucked and totally catered to business interests while pissing on the backs of people that just want to work. The dirty little secret is that despite pronunciations to the contrary, most in the gov't freely look the other way and enable businesses to hire illegals because politicians are effectively bribed to do just that. And the Bush administration has all but freely admitted that illegal labor is a means to break the unions and to reduce wages further enriching the top 2%. The attempted New Deal "rollback:)" was all too apparent in a bill the scumbags tired to shove up the ass of the American people right after Katrina, which effectively tried to gut fair wages...

But keep blaming the Mexicans, suckers...

DLR'sCock
06-29-2007, 06:39 PM
My feeling on this is that there is system that is set up, and when ignored it sets a precedent if acknowledged as so then you might as well allow everyone who wants in and let the whole economy collapse.

The big business man and the small business man don't wish to pay people what they should so that their profits are higher, and this has been ignored for too many years.

DLR'sCock
06-29-2007, 06:47 PM
bleep

DLR'sCock
06-29-2007, 06:57 PM
double post

LstLkly2Succeed
06-29-2007, 07:19 PM
I'm at this point completely sick of the immigration problems. We obviously can't deport all of them, there's just not enough money for that. If something was to be done about immgration, it had to be done years ago. I don't in particular sympathize with the illegal immigrants, my parents came here legally from Canada 18 years ago and still have not been able to get citizenship, so it irritates me to see people coming here legally getting the same benefits. But I think deportation would be logistically impossible so let them pay a fine and stay in the country. Right now I think it's the best the US can do. The issue itself is sickening though, I've been hearing about it for a while now and nothing has been done, and now a major reform has been shot down. I'm hoping the next president will be able to deal with the problem a little more sensibly.

FORD
06-29-2007, 08:57 PM
Originally posted by LstLkly2Succeed
I'm hoping the next president will be able to deal with the problem a little more sensibly.

I'm hoping the next president will be able to deal with EVERYTHING more sensibly.

LstLkly2Succeed
06-30-2007, 02:13 AM
Haha, true.