Posted on 04/06/2006 8:33:43 AM PDT by STARWISE
WASHINGTON - In a last stab at compromise, Senate Republicans and Democrats reported progress Thursday toward agreement on legislation opening the way to legal status and eventual citizenship for many of the 11 million immigrants now in the U.S. illegally.
"There's been tremendous progress overnight," said Sen. Harry Reid (news, bio, voting record) of Nevada, the Democratic leader, while Majority Leader Bill Frist also expressed optimism that a long-sought compromise might be at hand.
There was no immediate reaction from President Bush, who has made immigration legislation a key priority.
The developments occurred after Frist unveiled a new bill late Wednesday night on the subject as the Senate headed into a test vote on the most sweeping immigration bill in two decades.
In general, the legislation would provide for enhanced border security, regulate the flow of future immigrants into the United States and settle the legal fate of the estimated 11 million men, women and children already in the country.
It was the fate of the illegal immigrant population that proved hardest to legislate, and it has left the Senate on the verge of gridlock for days.
(snip)
Sens. John McCain, R-Ariz., and Edward M. Kennedy, D-Mass., as well as other key senators met before the vote to review terms of a proposed compromise.
In general, it would require illegal immigrants who have been in the United States between two years and five years to return to their home country briefly, then re-enter as temporary workers. They could then begin a process of seeking citizenship.
Illegal immigrants here longer than five years would not be required to return home; those in the country less than two years would be required to leave without assurances of returning, and take their place in line with others seeking entry papers.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
People get paid for this?
Debate and law are obviously not your strong suits, not to mention logic. It takes 9 degrees to equate support for a guest worker program to murder. If you could substantiate both of the first two claims, I will align WITH you in demanding healthcare reform. The third assertion is not borne out by: http://www.hhs.gov/resource/index.shtml#health
But hey, it is your reality. We cannot let the government tell you what reality is.
You don't understand the case. The woman passed all sobriety tests but the cop arrested her anyway because she volunteered that she had a glass of wine with dinner.
She wasn't drunk or anywhere close to impaired.
Thanks for the link, glock; I hadn't seen that before. This is very bad, isn't it?!
Why not blame the Demcrat-Lite Republicans who are actually pushing this legislation such as the Senate Republicans and Bush?
I would say so.
If she accepts responsibility for the results of her actions then it's nobody's damned business if she's had a few drinks (or anything else) before getting behind the wheel. However, if she acts irresponsibly and injures or kills someone, she should be fully held accountable for the results of her actions.
I have seen plenty of drivers who are far more dangerous on the road while perfectly sober than are most people after a few drinks. And drinking and driving above DUI limits is so common that if it were strictly enforced we'd have no fewer than 50 million people in jail.
Do you really subscribe to cafeteria-style freedom - the freedoms you like are OK, the freedoms other people like (e.g., the freedom to rule ourselves as a sovereign people) are non-essential?
any elected official who votes for this has SH*T for brains.
Obviously we were dressed like a slut and were asking for it.
If you think laws are a joke, why should we believe that you take anything seriously, including our safety in the air?
Suddenly, the magic front doors at work make you a follower of rules? I don't believe it works that way and laughing at the antics of a drunk driver won't convince me differently.
Grow up, quit acting like a child if you want to be treated like a fellow member of the community.
So it if were all public property you would have no problem with the wall or is the "private property" thing just a red herring to hide your open border position?
I agree that it doesn't always mean violence, but the way this is shaping up, it's going to devolve into a race war.
What's more, I thnk it could happen on or soon after the May Day marches that the Communist supporters of the illegals are planning for them.
It's unbelievable how the landscape has so changed...and yet, it's to have been expected. And it can only become worse, unless something is done immediately. Sadly, I don't see that happening, ever.
I don't know what party to switch to, but I'm done with Republicans. This is obsurd.
His open sympathy for treason ought to have earned him exile from this community, and from any community for whom survival is a priority.
and is a complete sell out.
It won't come from the government protecting us against the invasion. It would come from the (most likely) few Americans who are fed up. And guess who'd be the first to be attacked and arrested by the National Guard when they're called out? American citizens.
Well, that is a d@mn shame that she did not have her papers in order. She confessed to a criminal act. By the reasoning of some, her children should be punished as well. Living with a convicted drunk driver and all, they will certainly grow up criminals as well. "Ignorance is no excuse for the law."
She wasn't drunk or anywhere close to impaired.
Tough. A convicted drunk driver is much worse than someone that overstays a visa. Right?
I would HOPE that our Guardsmen and women could distinguish between American citizens and those who are attempting to overthrow the country.
Ways to tell:
Skin color
Lauguage spoken
Color of flag they fly
Language of signs they carry
In all cases THIS TIME, it's obvious.
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.