Republicans: Immigration reform is more likely to happen if we take the Senate

Buzzfeed ^

[Bigtigermike]

Key House Republicans say congressional action on immigration is much more likely if Republicans take control of the Senate.

The effort, two Republicans say, would likely involve individual measures rather than a broad, comprehensive bill favored by Democrats.

"I actually think it's more likely, if we take the Senate, that we will have immigration reform," said Rep. Raul Labrador. "We will be able to do it on a step-by-step approach like most Republicans have been asking to do and I think the American people want."

Labrador, who was a member of the bipartisan House group working on the issue before exiting, foresees a Republican-controlled Congress passing a series of bills that deal with the border and focus on interior security and guest-worker programs.

"I don't want to mislead; it's a difficult lift as we all know," Rep. Mario Diaz-Balart told BuzzFeed News. "But we would have a better shot at getting it done if Republicans take control of the Senate for the simple reason that it could be initiated in the House with close coordination with the Senate."

[Truth29]

This sounds like the GOP has awakened to the possibility they might win and are pulling out all the stops to make sure that they screw it up again.

[MMaschin]

This article is about a new Republican Senate. What you are talking about would need to occur in the current Congress. Any bill not passed when the new Congress is sworn in in January is trashed, and needs to be started from scratch.

Amnesty has turned into a third rail in these midterms, there is ZERO chance that a Republican Congress/Senate pass a bill that includes amnesty. I would be surprised in they pass anything that Obama will sign. My guess is that they pass a bill and Obama vetoes' it. Then they override the veto with bipartisan support from moderate Dems. The Republicans then become the party of activity, and the Dems become the party of no.

[The Toll]

Then who needs to take the Senate for ENFORCING THE D*MN LAW to become “more likely”?

[Hostage]

> “Then they override the veto with bipartisan support from moderate Dems.”

Dream On!

[Ray76]

There is a path to citizenship, they didn’t follow it. Deport them. No if’s, and’s, or but’s, just deport them. And prison for any employer who knowingly employes illegals.

[EternalVigilance]

All E-Verify is essential for is to further tighten the grip of the statists on the American people.

We don’t lack the ability to secure our borders and stop illegal immigration. All we lack is the will.

And we don’t have to give up our own liberty to do it.

[BlackElk]

odawg:

Anyone not "a little too pure to vote for Romney" (at the very least and more likely MUCH too pure to vote for the POS) has no business misappropriating the honorable name of "conservative."

[BlackElk]

odawg:

And, on what basis do you presume to tell iscool that he addressed the wrong person. You took the position of RINOs from the time that the GOP was founded. You posted that some folks (4 million of us) were just a little "too pure" to vote for Romney. That means too pure to vote for a baby-killing, "gay" everything promoting, gun grabbing, tax-raising, medical services socializing, envirowhacko total $$$$$ obsessed POS like Romney. In yeas gone by I was too pure to vote for George McGovern as well. It does not matter if the POS bears the "R" label because he and his crony socialist friends BOUGHT the GOP nomination. He has and had no business receiving a single conservative vote NO MATTER WHOM HE WAS STANDING AS A STATUE AGAINST! Not then. Not EVER!!!

You are apparently a supine Romney bootlicker. Don't expect actual conservatives to join you in supporting the old Dudley DoRight image assumed by Dudley DoWrong. I have a difference or two with iscool but not on this. You were precisely the right target insofar as you advocate voting for any R candidate no matter how bad since Romney is the very WORST ever.

[ObamahatesPACoal]

http://www.c-span.org/video/?309448-1/house-conservative-republican-agenda

Labrador Pushes amnesty in November of 2012. 44 minutes in Labrador and King debate amnesty.

Steve King has made “Tea Party conservatives” Gowdy, Labrador and Paul look like fools.

The candidate who gaffed would have been better. The fact that Labrador was bringing up Puerto Rico in an Idaho congressional Debate shows you the kind of pretender he is.

Unfortunately Palin endorsed McCain. Then Cantor and Palin endorse Vaughn Ward in Idaho against Labrador.

http://noisyroom.net/blog/2010/05/22/some-stubborn-facts-about-raul-labrador/

The Blue Dog Democrat hammered him for saying he makes money from a broken immigration system. Labrdor survived with 51% in the general.

http://www.mofopolitics.com/2014/03/11/flashback-raul-labrador-helps-illegal-immigrants-stay-in-the-united-states/

Did Raul Labrador Retriever really say of a broken immigration system, “I like it because I make a good living because of it”. Kind of…

The sound bite is a short version of a longer answer to a question put before him by the Treasure Valley Pachyderms during a question-and-answer session on March 26.

Did Raul Labrador Retriever really make half his living off illegal immigrants? Sort of…

[jjotto]

...4 million conservatives...

That number is just made up out of thin air with nothing to back it up. No statistically significant evidence at all. Maybe it was 15 million. Maybe it was 4,000.

[ObamahatesPACoal]

They don’t have the numbers to over ride.

There are 3 patriotic Dems (on immigration) in the House of Reps. Even the Arizona Democrats are getting away with pushing amnesty because the Arizona Republican candidates are just as bad.

It is ironic. They had a poll that had Steve King as the most partisan house member but the most non-partisan were the 2 Democrats that vote with King 99% of the time on immigration.

John “The Invasion” Barrow (GA-12th)
http://savannahnow.com/larry-peterson/2007-11-21/barrow-wants-secure-borders-crack-down-employers-deny-benefits-illegals

Nick Rahall (D-WV03)
https://rahall.house.gov/press-release/rahall-statement-immigration-proposal

“We are sending the wrong message abroad if we keep waiving the penalties for breaking our immigration laws.”

Mike McIntyre(D-NC07)

http://www.alipac.us/alipac-returns-endorsement-congressman-mike-mcintyre-race-against-david-rouzer-994/

“We are happy to return our endorsement to Congressman Mike McIntyre; his opposition to any form of amnesty for illegal immigrants makes him a clear choice over David Rouzer, who supports AgJOBS Amnesty for illegals,” said William Gheen.

4th best Democrat: Dan Lipinksi (D-IL03):

http://swnewsherald.com/immigration-jobs-debated-at-town-hall-p3400-1.htm

“We have so many people unemployed in the country right now,” responded Lipinski. “We have wages that have been stagnant for decades. So, how does allowing more people in here to work legally not do more harm to that?”

Tempers flared among the attendees when the Hispanic and Arab representatives disagreed with the idea that they are taking jobs away from American workers.

Lipinski is probably more conservative than Mark Kirk. His district is also pretty safe. He could vote for amnesty and still win so he is much better than many members of congress.

[Altura Ct.]

We don’t need reform we just need the damn laws enforced.

[SoConPubbie]

A non-vote is a democrat vote. You are seeing the result of 4 million conservatives who were a little too pure to vote for Romney in the last election.

Hey guys, more of the "Holier-than-thou" pretend conservatives calling principled conservatives purists over here.

[Dr. Sivana]

You are seeing the result of 4 million conservatives who were a little too pure to vote for Romney in the last election.

The fact that there are so many Establishment Republicans who aren't taking the hint and want to give Romney another go so he might squeak out a 50.1% GWB 2000 style win shows that THEY are the gangrene, and they'd rather have HRC than a true conservative. DITCH the Romney wing, and you will find a lot of these independents and non-voters might decide to give the Republican Party a chance.

[GeronL]

They are blaming the voters again as if these votes are owned by the GOP and that Republicans are somehow entitled to these votes. Instead of blaming the GOP and their awful candidates who do not inspire people to vote for them.

In blaming voters they are acting just like the Democrats in that they no longer see the individual as a person but part of a group that is owned. They are statists as much as the Dems.

[highball]

Are they trying to lose this election?

"Stupid Party", indeed. Shows what they think of us, too.

[odawg]

“Holier than thou?? “Principled conservatives?”

Does these last two years of Obama give you comfort?

[Syncro]

GOP-e talking points to get Romney elected

I'm always surprised to see FR members that aren't aware of the voter fraud in elections for the last decade, 5 to 10 million illegal votes elected the dems.

Keep voting for McCain, Romney, etc and the GOP-e give high fives all around.

The GOP, along with McCain and Romney, wanted to be on the band wagon of electing (and re-electing) the first "black" president.

Next the GOP will run someone who will give the next presidential election to Hilliary so they can be on the cutting edge of seeing the first woman as president.

Blaming voting outcomes on conservatives that won't vote for the same ‘ol same ‘ol is ignorant and ludicrous.

Yeah right, it's the 5 million FR members that didn't vote for Romney, oh yeah that's the problem.

[i_robot73]

As I said the federal government has no power to keep you from employment, its already your right and to do so would open them up to legal action they could not win. Hate to break it to you, but there's a few piece of paper called the I-9 and W-4, try to get employment without one/both. As to E-Verify, It is the GOV'T job to ensure the borders are secure; it is not the responsibility of employers to ensure those seeking employment are 'legal' I concur with the poster: it is another unconstitutional hurdle to We the People and a power grab over the same. A Free people require NO permission.

[usurper]

Hate to break it to you, but there's a few piece of paper called the I-9 and W-4, try to get employment without one/both.

I fail to see your point, employers are required to complete the I-9 form when they hire you. All you have to do is demonstrate that you are eligible for employment.

Our elected representatives passed a law over 20 years ago under IRCA making it illegal to knowingly hire illegal aliens in an effort to keep them out of the workforce and reduce the pull factor that brings them here. Employers are required by law to fill out the I-9 form and face fines for failing to do so.

All E-Verify does is to require the employer to verify the information that is already captured on the I-9 form.

Who would be apposed to that? Answer: Someone who knows the information on the I-9 form is bogus but wants to hire the illegal alien anyway without fear of prosecution or fine.