I know people hate to hear it, but GWB is not all that sharp. Hence, he leans extra heavily on the notion of the executive as someone who doesn't know jack about anything, but somehow has the ability to "make decisions" based on advice.
We ought to be over this notion by now, that Bush is a dummy. You don't get to be President, twice, win two wars, and get a good deal of your agenda through Congress by being stupid.
However they don't negate the fact that he stated a wish for reform on this issue prior to his first election and immediately thereafter and then in the wake of 9/11 neither took action on the issue by execution in any forceful manner or by introducing a program.
Instead, he let it twist in the wind until it became a media "crisis" that he couldn't avoid.
I also disagree with your last statement. Bush talked about his immigration plan in early 2004, then again in early 2005. It was Bush who drove the issue in the House, and he made a statement in early 2006 that he wanted the Senate to act.
I don't think the Congress would have taken this up at all had it not been for Bush pushing the issue. He wants an immigration bill, but I don't think he would sign HR 4437 without at least a guest worker program.
IOW, the Pence proposal stands a good chance of being the basis for negotiations in conference.
Like Huck, I believe the Congress has overwhelmed the executive branch in recent decades. Clinton was a very weak executive who was kicked around by his own party and, after 1995, the Republicans. Bush was determined to take back some of that executive authority, and he has done it, by putting documents off limits, and his willingness to go the courts to resolve disputes with the legislative branch.
Long time, no see. It's good to see your name back up on the forum.
I was going to put a footnote on my comment re: GW's intellect. It's relative, of course. But I do believe his chosen style of leading is based in part on his situation. He has attained high level positions, but then again, with his dad, and his connections, you have to take it with a grain of salt. In fact, his deferential style means you have to take it with an even bigger grain of salt. If all he does is defer to Tommy Franks, then who deserves the credit? You can credit him for staying out of Franks' way, I suppose. And I'm not falling for the old "Republican presidents are stupid" saw, in case you're wondering. Ronald Reagan was brilliant, as his speeches and letters now confirm beyond any reasonable doubt (I've read several biographies of Reagan, and his autobiography.) But I still don't think GWB has a lot of knowledge. He has some basic principles, and some core values and strengths, but he's been entirely reliant on the expertise of those reporting to him, with mixed results. That's my view on it, anyway. So when I say he's not sharp, that's not compared to the grocery clerk who can't make change in her head. It's compared to other people in leadership/policy roles. Tony Blair, for instance, runs circles around GWB.
Sorry, just a quick second reply. I disagree that Congress is responding to the president's push on this issue. I believe they are responding to the massive street protests of the House bill, and the media attention those multi-city protests garnered. Say what you will about them, filling the streets of several major cities with protesters definitely works, and that's what sent this into crisis mode, in my view. regards, h.