Skip to comments.Gowdy: 'More Interested in Getting It Right' Than Following Senate on Immigration
Posted on 07/01/2013 7:02:57 AM PDT by Resettozero
(CNSNews.com) - Joking that he was "moved almost to the point of tears by Sen. (Chuck) Schumer's concern for the future prospects of the Republican Party," Rep. Trey Gowdy said on Sunday the immigration bill passed by the Senate is dead on arrival in the House:
"The Senate bill is not going to pass in the House. It's not going to pass for myriad reasons," Gowdy told "Fox News Sunday."
(Excerpt) Read more at cnsnews.com ...
We need to have criminal penalties for Federal Executive Officials who do not enforce the laws currently on the books.
He says the current system is broken. How would he know? It’s not used. The only thing broken are Oaths.
Enforce existing law.
The bill these Sinators passed borders on treason, in broad daylight. It echoes the treason voiced by their “leader” when he talked about a post-partisan America. This translates to decimating the Republican party and the American worker, by importation of a new electorate beholden to these usurpers.
Hopefully he will decide to take on Linda Graham in the primary next year.
Want on or off this ping list? Just drop me a FReep mail.
Add to that fraud convictions for US Senators and HOR reps who go traitor on their campaign promises, and we could get somewhere.
“Getting it right” = Arresting and deporting existing trespassers + building impregnable border fence + felony penalties for future trrspassers and employers of these criminals.
Anything less is unacceptable.
No, Mr. Gowdy.
Nothing needs to be done outside of secure the border and enforce current law.
If you do anything other than that, you can take a flying leap.
I - and most conservatives - can GUARANTEE that we will desert the Repulsican party should the house pass this pile of Obamstuff bill.
Plan your future carefully RINOs.
It’s not going to pass for myriad reasons,”
How about it rewards those who commit a felon by crossing into our country illegaly.
Hm, I think it'd be cheaper, and more cost effective, to deploy (at regular intervals) 144mm Howitzers and infantry.
LOVE Trey Gowdy!
I meant to say that if you have a Trey Gowdy ping list, put me on it.
NO BILL SHOULD COME OUT OF HOUSE!!
The House/Speaker Boehner need to Blue Slip the Senate bill.
Any bill the House comes up with (a Trojan horse) will go to conference. NOT GOOD!
Yep. There's no real disincentive for them to neglect enforcing established law.
I have a political crush on Gowdy. He’s got a set of brass ones and is incredibly articulate.
It is dangerous for the House to pass ANY amnesty bill because when the Senate and House bills go to committee for reconciliation, the RINOs will allow ALL enforcement to be taken out of the bill in exchange for empty promises from the Rats.
“ Virtually everyone agrees on the broad principles. Where we get ourselves into a little bit of a difference of opinion are the details.....So, you can agree in theory on border security but disagree very strongly on how it's achieved. You can agree on a path to legalization or citizenship. But whether border security is a condition precedent, which it would be in my case, is a very important distinction.”
Like the Senate RINOs he wanted to indicate that citizenship was OK with him. This is worrisome. It is like they are all scared to oppose that in public,.
They’ll also need to revise the current statutes that say that after a certain point, people who were criminals for crossing the border illegally stop being criminals and just become civil violators for being here without proper authorization. Completely ridiculous. If you were a criminal when you initially came here, you remain a criminal until you’ve gone through the justice system. I can’t think of any other situation (there may be one) where, without any remedial action on the lawbreaker’s part, he stops being a lawbreaker just by the passage of time. Limitations is different, you’re still a lawbreaker but you can’t be tried.
I agree 100% ... No Bill is the Best Bill in the House... Why? Because Boehner and others will pass a Trojan Horse good sounding bill and it will go to House-Senate Conference where the Senate Bill will be stuffed into the House Bill and that will be it... voted on and passed and signed. It is TOO DANGEROUS to pass a Immigration/Amnesty Bill in the House - it will be misused. Better to HAMMER Boehner and Ryan and others - Hammer so hard as to get Boehner to resign as Speaker. This would throw the House legislative process into chaos for most of the rest of the summer and maybe beyond. Get new Speaker who will listen to Conservatives and go out to the states and have drawn out Town Hall meetings sames as was done before to kill the Senate Amnesty Bill. We need a Massive Phone campaign
Couldn’t have said it better about Gowdy.
I do not trust this government or anyone in it to do the right thing on anything.
Mr. Gowdy, you may have said some cool things that don’t matter a hill of beans in some pointless hearing, but you do not have my trust, and I am not sure that you ever will.
The best way for you to begin to earn that trust is to do NOTHING.
Just stop. The only thing this government has succeeded in creating is failure, and I have enough failure to last a lifetime.
Please, just go on vacation and stay on vacation.
[regarding immigration, Gowdy says] "I think you have to find a synthesis between the humanity that I think defines us as a people, and the respect for the rule of law that defines us as a republic"...
Gowdy... says three images come to his mind when he considers immigration: Vietnamese fleeing Communism in the wheel wells of airplanes; Cubans dying on makeshift rafts off the Florida coast; and a woman from Sierra Leone whose hands were cut off because she tried to vote.
"Peoples' desire to improve their lives resonates with me, no matter where they're from," Gowdy said.
...Gowdy said he expects to conduct his first few hearings as fact-finding missions to inform what he hopes will be a Republican-backed immigration reform bill...
...He disputes allegations that illegal immigrants are draining certain government services reserved for citizens, such as unemployment benefits and Social Security. Illegal immigrants don't qualify for such benefits.
And the farmers and growers in his Upstate South Carolina district can't find and keep American employees, so allowing immigrants to work here legally is essential, Gowdy said.
He said deporting all 11 million illegal immigrants would require government action that would "shock the conscience of some of the folks who are most forceful in arguing for it."
"You want them knocking on your front door?" he said. "You want them going to elementary schools and rounding up the kids?"
...[He's non-committal on amnesty right now, but regarding the "path to citizenship" says] "It would depend on what that path involved and depends on the factors you would immediately want to look at," he said. "Law-abidingness, for one. And connection to the community. I'd also be curious as to how many of them desire citizenship."
NO HOUSE BILL!! BLUE SLIP THE SENATE BILL!! STOP AMNESTY!!
DC Fax: 202-225-5117
DC Fax: 202-226-1177
Gowdy SC on FNS:
Virtually everyone agrees on the broad principles. Where we get ourselves into a little bit of a difference of opinion are the details.....So, you can agree in theory on border security but disagree very strongly on how it's achieved. You can agree on a path to legalization or citizenship. But whether border security is a condition precedent, which it would be in my case, is a very important distinction”
No-one opposed to giving illeagsl the vote would say that. This is exactly what Rubio was saying.
Bottom line ... watch and see (for the disbelievers)... Any House ‘Immigration’ Bill passed - means the Senate Bill will become law. Goudy and the rest of them need to be sobered up ... threatened with replacement if any bill is passed.
This would be very similar the same tactic used when Hastert was Speaker ... 2006
Sweet Column: GOP House leaders stall immigration bill. Death by hearings. Hastert slap to Bush.
By Lynn Sweet on June 21, 2006 6:42 AM | 17 Comments
House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert and GOP House leaders virtually killed chances wide-ranging immigration legislation — supported by President Bush — will be considered this election year.
In a highly unusual move, Hastert (R-Ill.) said Tuesday there will be hearings this July and August in Washington and across the nation on the immigration bill passed by the Senate. Conservatives favor the tough enforcement-only House version, which subjects illegal immigrants and those who help them to felony charges.
“I think the action by the House of Representatives to reopen a series of hearings on comprehensive immigration reform is a cynical effort to delay or kill a comprehensive immigration bill,’’ said Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-Mass.).
I am not trying to attack your buddy but I would like to know up front if each of these House members are for giving them the vote or not,
clearly Rubio, Mccain and Grahamnesty were for giving them the vote and full citizenship and they got no challenges on it in the Senate,
People’s desire to improve their lives resonates with me too. They can start by being law abiding as they seek citizenship in my country, which takes a long time, and I am just fine with that.
Mr. Gowdy, you work for an entity that has earned my distrust. You personally do not have my trust, and you have not earned it.
You can start by representing the people of this country, and not representing the citizens of another country who came here illegally.
If you do not do this, then as far as I am concerned you are a traitor, and I do not care at all what lovely and sentimental words you choose to hide your treachery in, because it is still plainly visible to those of us you are selling out and disenfranchising.
Your reply is deceptive and wrongly leading. Go to the blackboard and diagram this:
“You can agree on a path to legalization or citizenship. But whether border security is a condition precedent, which it would be in my case, is a very important distinction.
The clause “which it would be in my case” refers to “whether border security is a condition precedent” and not to the part you underlined.
Either your understanding of English is flawed or you intended to deceive just to make a silly point on FR.
WHAT are you talking about? WHO are you talking about? Not Trey Gowdy.
it is clear he wanted viewer to take away that citizenship was OK with him as long as the border was first(before any legalization too) Trey: 'You can agree on a path to legalization or citizenship'. This is the type of lawyer words Rubio was using.
His only disagreement with Rubio on that show was that the Senate bill failed to live up to that,.
Now maybe he has a enough poison pills to kill that bill, if so good.
Where and when did Trey Gowdy say that he intended to make certain that there would be a House bill to be reconciled with the Senate version? He hasn’t. He said he desires for the House to do things incrementally and in small steps and in the right order. One of those increments could be requirement that present laws be enforced.
Some of you just aren’t listening very carefully to what he is saying.
He has done nothing to warrant placing my trust in him. He has not earned my trust.
Words do not mean anything to me anymore, only actions count, and I see no action being taken by him or anyone else to help America or her citizens.
chris37, since you have not created an About Page on FR, I cannot see if you are a resident of S.C. or not. Either way, you are free to campaign against him or anyone for any reason. Because it is still, for the time being, America. And Trey Gowdy, as my U.S. Representative, is pleasing me in helping to keep this...The United States of America.
Obviously, your mileage does vary.
would LOVE to see him take on Graham next year. He is forceful in his statements during the hearings and every other time I’ve seen him on TV or in various House activities.
I thought I read (on FR?) that Rep Gowdy will not challenge Sen Grahamnesty.
Forget the parades of horribles scare tactic.
Deport on contact.
We offer more "rights" and benies to illegals than we do to our own citizens and service members.
I am in Florida, not SC.
If Mr. Gowdy’s words please you, then that is your business.
His words mean nothing to me, and now I see he wants to do something on amnesty, and that pisses me off.
You are certainly free to support him as you see fit, and I am free to not support any of them as I see fit. As far as I can see, all they have done is aid the democrats in destroying my country, and I cannot support that.
The GOP means nothing to me outside of “enemy”.
Never confuse lack of motion with lack of action.
” Like the Senate RINOs he wanted to indicate that citizenship was OK with him. This is worrisome. It is like they are all scared to oppose that in public,. “
” Virtually everyone agrees on the broad principles. Where we get ourselves into a little bit of a difference of opinion are the details.....So, you can agree in theory on border security but disagree very strongly on how it’s achieved. You can agree on a path to legalization or citizenship. But whether border security is a condition precedent, which it would be in my case, is a very important distinction
No-one opposed to giving illeagsl the vote would say that. This is exactly what Rubio was saying. “
Yep. Just more BS verbiage.
I trust neither.
I would prefer if all buildings they occupy were left empty for the rest of time.
I do understand your sheesh.
Yes I am harsh. Speaking for myself the deal is broken, the contract has been breeched and I no longer give my consent.
There may well be no fixing this either. I cannot trust liars, and I have no way of distinguish those who lie from those who don’t, and it is a risky assumption on my part that there are even those who don’t.
So far the House Judiciary Committee seems to insist that no path-to-citizenship be in the House immigration bills. Gowdy is on that committee.
AP reports today LINK 07-01-2013: Rep. Bob Goodlatte, the Virginia Republican who leads the House Judiciary Committee, said he does not foresee a proposal that could provide a simple mechanism for immigrants here illegally to earn full standing as U.S. citizens, as many Democrats have demanded. Goodlatte's committee members have been working on bills that address individual concerns but have not written a comprehensive proposal to match the Senate's effort. The House answer would not be "a special pathway to citizenship where people who are here unlawfully get something that people who have worked for decades to immigrate lawfully do not have," he said.
1) Boehner/Cantor/Ryan, at some point, could decide they like a path-to-citizenship and try to purge committees of those who don't play ball.
2) I don't like the fact that the House immigration bill is called "comprehensive" and I don't like the size of the bill (which I have heard would be a big lump composed of whatever immigration bills the House passes). Something that big would surely go to conference, where we would see Rubio, McCain and Goober, etc. again.