TOPICS
TOPICS
Even backers find fault with immigration bill
"Compromise" has been the watchword of the Senate debate over immigration legislation. But as the sprawling bill nears final passage, the compromises needed to keep the bill afloat have resulted in a bill that even its most ardent backers can find fault with.
Conservative Republicans have long opposed the bill, and efforts to nudge it to the right -- including the addition of provisions calling for a 370-mile fence along the border with Mexico and designating English the national language -- have not been enough to satisfy many in the GOP. Authors of many GOP amendments that have been adopted over the last two weeks still are unlikely to vote for the final package, including Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas.
Democrats, too, have many reservations, especially since adoption of some of the Republican-backed amendments. Minority Whip Sen. Richard Durbin, D-Ill., said members of his caucus who once were supportive of the bill have become less enamored of it.
"It's going to be leaving the Senate at a point where some Democrats are wondering 'should I vote for this?" Durbin said Tuesday. Durbin is telling members to vote for it, despite their reservations. "I'm urging them to err on the side of supporting it," he said, saying that Senate Democrats need to be "on the record" as supporting comprehensive immigration reform.
That might be important once the bill goes to a House-Senate conference. Unlike the Senate bill, which includes a guest-worker program, a path to legal-resident status for most of the estimated 11 million illegal immigrants in the United States, the House bill focuses exclusively on shoring up the borders and boosting enforcement of immigration laws.
If the bill that emerges from conference is one Democrats cannot support, votes on the Senate version would be important political ammunition.
A solid Senate vote would demonstrate a willingness to tackle the problem, Durbin said. "Then the House has to rise to the occasion," he said.
Republicans, too, have political reasons for supporting a bill they do not love. Sen. Trent Lott, R-Miss., who said he opposes the bill, maintained Republicans must enact a bill to help their chances of retaining the majority in November.
"I don't think we're going to produce a good bill, but we have to produce something," said Lott. "I think we need results. We're in charge and it'll be on our backs" if nothing is accomplished.
Even members of the bipartisan coalition that came together to back the bill are dubious about aspects of the Senate legislation. That group -- including Sens. Mel Martinez, R-Fla., Chuck Hagel, R-Neb., John McCain, R-Ariz., Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., and Edward Kennedy, D-Mass. -- have steadfastly beaten back efforts to drastically alter the bill. Throughout the two weeks of debate and amendments, members of the coalition have voted against such amendments, "for the good of the cause," Graham said Tuesday.
Still, those who on balance support the bill see the glass as half full. "There's stuff in there that people love and stuff in there that people loathe," said Angela Kelley, deputy director of the immigrant-advocacy group National Immigration Forum. "That's the definition of compromise."
Immigration advocates opposed several changes to the bill, including a measure limiting the number of guest workers sponsored by Sen. Jeff Bingaman, D-N.M., Kelley said. But they nevertheless support the bulk of the bill.
There is little danger that the bill will fail in the Senate as the package nears a final vote, perhaps on Thursday. A vote today to cut off debate is expected to easily pass.
Members of the bipartisan coalition are expected to remain solidly behind it, regardless of their personal feelings. And both parties want to support a bipartisan solution to a politically explosive problem.
COMMENTS
- "And both parties want to support a bipartisan solution to a politically explosive problem." That final sentence is the most telling -- neither party wants to actually secure the Mexican border. Both Republicans and Democrats have their own reasons for preferring to maintain the status quo but the means are both towards the same end -- political power. They do not give a shit about you, me, their oath of office or anything else besides their own political power. Folks, if we continue to let the whores in both parties screw us with their fear mongering, (be it they'll take your guns or they'll take your porno) our tacit acceptance of their lies allows them to continue their slow strangulation of the Republic. Anyone who claims a third party or independent candidate vote is wasted is at best ... misguided. Impeachment sounds better every day. That is, if "they" will allow it! Cracked & Wired Posted May 25, 2006 9:32 AM
- Congressmen and congresswomen, senators, male and female, This issue will either make or break our great country! Put aside your political party and make the right decision for America. We have been overrun with illegal immigrants and the problem must be fixed. The walk-out on May 1, 2006, by the illegal immigrants did not shut down this great country like they thought it would. As illegal immigrants they have no rights as American citizens. Let them become citizens or deport them. They have arrived here illegally and are making demands that they have not earned and do not deserve. I and many other people were under the impression that NAFTA was to encourage trade with Mexico and Canada. What we got was a stampede. The United States has opened the gate to illegal immigrants from south of the border who do not pay taxes and send millions of dollars out of the United States to their homeland. This has not benefited the United States. NAFTA was supposed to improve living standards and wages in Mexico. Instead, both have plummeted, harming the economic prospects for workers on both sides of the border. The smart decision is to process each illegal immigrant to become a citizen, or give them a limited work visa, or send them back home. These illegal immigrants are draining the resources of the American people. According to the National Center for Education Statistics, 59 percent of all foreign graduate students receive government-funded financial aid, and 40 percent receive direct grants as opposed to loans which must be repaid. How long will it be before your job will be threatened with over 12 million illegal immigrants living in the United States? Stop this now before you are replaced by a foreigner! GovExec.com reader Posted May 25, 2006 9:48 AM
- If passed, this bill will make the 1986 "shamnesty" pale in comparison to the rampant fraud in the 1986 version. Another new fraud document industry will be created to allow every alien to "establish" they were here during the requisite time period, even though they crossed into the United States two to three years after the passage of the bill. The "fines" they are supposed to pay will be waived for "hardship" reasons, criminals and alien absconders will be included in the amnesty, and the taxpayers will foot the bill for Social Security, welfare, etc., to the tune of billions of dollars a year. I guarantee this amnesty, guestworker, earned citizenship BS will be still be ongoing in 2020, just like the 1986 amnesty is still playing out with CIS and the courts. Every Senator or Congressman who votes for this needs to be dumped from office at the first opportunity. I guess history is doomed to repeat itself. ICE'd Twice GovExec.com reader Posted May 25, 2006 1:01 PM
