Posted on 04/05/2006 4:20:11 PM PDT by Libloather
Senate Stuck on Quarrels Over Immigration
By DAVID ESPO, AP Special Correspondent
25 minutes ago
Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa and Dolores Huerta, co-founder of the United Farm Workers, pray in Los Angeles Wednesday, April 5, 2006, with Cardinal Roger Mahony, who was delivering a special Mass at Cathedral of Our Lady of the Angels to offer prayers for legislators who are debating immigration legislation this week. (AP Photo/Ricardo DeAratanha/Pool)
WASHINGTON - The Senate swung between compromise and gridlock Wednesday on the most sweeping immigration bill in two decades, the future of an estimated 11 million illegal aliens at the mercy of unpredictable election-year maneuvering.
Key senators haggled over a proposed deal to confer legal status on a large majority of the 11 million men, women and children, but compromise remained elusive. "We've got a ways to go," said Sen. Pete V. Domenici, R-N.M. after one bargaining session in the Capitol, although he added that the talks were "moving in the right direction."
But with Democrats adamantly refusing to allow votes on politically charged amendments, Majority Leader Bill Frist sounded a pessimistic note hours later on the Senate floor. Barring a dramatic change, said the Tennessee Republican, "The course we're on is to leave here in a few days having accomplished nothing for the American people."
Democrats seemed untroubled by the prospect.
They set up a test vote for Thursday on legislation that cleared the Senate Judiciary Committee more than a week ago with a bipartisan majority before it ran into Republican resistance on the floor.
"This is a vote that for millions of Americans is a question about whose side you're on," said Sen. Dick Durbin of Illinois, the second-ranking Democrat, adding that unless legislation clears the Senate this week, it may be doomed for the year.
But it appeared destined to gain far fewer than the 60 votes needed to advance, and perhaps less than a majority that would give political bragging rights to Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid of Nevada.
The bill would strengthen border security, regulate the flow of future foreign workers and open the way to citizenship for many immigrants who are in the country illegally.
With the floor vote looming, several officials said the compromise under discussion would allow longer-term illegals to seek citizenship after meeting several conditions, including the payment of fines and any taxes they owed. Immigrants in the United States illegally for less than five years but more than two would be required to travel to a border point of entry before they could re-enter as legal temporary workers. It was not clear whether they would have to physically leave the United States as part of the process.
Immigrants in the country less than two years, an estimated 2 million people, would be "in a little bit of limbo," said Sen. Mel Martinez, R-Fla., not entitled to automatically return to the country if they made their presence known to authorities.
Officials said the talks had bogged down on the fate of the more than 3.5 million immigrants in the country between two and five years. Many Democrats and much of organized labor oppose temporary guest worker programs, arguing that they condemn individuals to a second-class existence subject to exploitation by their employers. And while those in the group would be given legal status, it was not clear how long they would be required to remain in a temporary status before they could receive so-called "green cards."
Under a scenario that had been under discussion, the government would grant 390,000 green cards a year. But critics pointed out that could leave some individuals in a temporary status for as long as 10 years, and only then be eligible to begin a six-year process of gaining citizenship.
Supporters countered that anyone covered by the proposed compromise had been living in the United States illegally, and would benefit from gaining legal status, even as temporary workers.
If the issue was hard to resolve, the politics were intense as both parties struggled with internal divisions.
Among the Democrats, Sen. Edward M. Kennedy of Massachusetts and others were actively involved in the compromise talks. But Reid and others told associates they were less interested in an agreement.
Sentiment was divided among Republicans, as well.
"I think we will soon be at the point where he (Frist) has to pull the bill and ask the Judiciary Committee to have intensive hearings and call a bill back up in some weeks or months," said Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., an outspoken critic of the legislation.
Well, while our side of the aisle is disorganized, the left is organizing.
On Thursday, Rep. Hilda Solis, D-Calif., and co-sponsor Rep. Luis Gutierrez, D-Ill plan to introduce a bill in the U.S. House that calls for a commission to study the "deportation and coerced emigration" Mexicans in the 1930's! And reparations are mentioned!
It's a USA Today article today, front page, titled "US urged to apologize for 1930s deportations". We can't post USA Today articles here or I'd post it.
less than 90 days in session this year
IMHO, no bill is better than a bad bill. "Progress" is a illusion if it means amnesty for who knows how many illegals. The 11-million number may well be low. And they will keep coming--nothing will change.
The worthless 100 are at it again.
Brit's panel were unanimous: No immigration bill.
[The Senate/McKennedy bill won't pass, so probably none with get through this session.]
Definitely. The worst possible scenario would be some type of "Gang of 14" compromise that persuades Republican senators to support it in the deluded hope that the base won't hold it against them come election time! As I said on another thread yesterday, he two words in the English language that are the most chilling, when used together, are "Senate" and "compromise" (with "Kennedy" and "automobile" a distant second).
Solution simple, armed forces with orders to shoot to kill on the southern border, deport all the illegal invaders, No amnesty, no worker program. Problem solved.
Reparation I dont think so!!
Mexico owes us!
Beat me to it. The simplest solution is nearly always the one most assured of success. Pass HR 4437.
Call your Senator today!
What does anyone think about requiring immigrants to perform 2 years of military service to gain citizenship?
As a long time Republican and contributor, I am done with the RINO party and since I cannot ever vote for a DemoRAT I will sit the next national election out. I have no other choice.
Reparations Ping! (Post 2.)
Here's the guy I was talking about earlier.
Shoot to kill illegals coming over the border.
Shades of Stasi.
The Republicans in the Senate did not even take it up. HR 4437 is dead.
They have the Presidency and the "leadership" of both parties. All we have is the people. The Bush/Kennedy/McCain/Hillary pro-criminal, anti-sovereignty, left is going to be hard to beat.
What became of Bush's promise of doubling the Border Control Agents from 10,000 to 20,000?
Go to:
http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/viewArticle.asp?articleID=1312
I know many Freepers don't believe in this stuff but most of the US politicians are more beholding to the CFR and the one worlders than they are to this country. Proof! Actions speak louder than words. Politicians that are promoting open boarders during these times of terrorism are either traitors or they are insane. Most politicians hold a JD, and we all know how trust worthy lawyers are.
As a long time Republican and contributor, I am done with the RINO party and since I cannot ever vote for a DemoRAT I will sit the next national election out. I have no other choice.
In otherwords you are voting for the party of Cynthia McKrazy and Harry "I was against illegal immigration before I was against immigration reform" Reid.
I'm sorry you didn't get the sprinkles on your ice cream sundae!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.