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 ...
That's fine with me - I will continue the civil discussion with the person I asked my 2 honest questions with.
A planet that everything else revolves around....
susie
Well, I wouldn't be asking for clarification if I "got it" : )
Hmmmmmmm...nothing in the article about a wall on the southern border or fines for employers of illegals....?
I'm sorry you are upset. Let me know if you want to discuss any of the specifics.
It's a race, who will get us first!
The Judiciary, the Executive Branch or the Legislative Branch?
The only Patriots that can proudly be pointed to are the House Conservatives and other Republicans that got H.R. 4437 through.
That's WHERE this whole thing should start, then the SHAMNESTY be worked for effectiveness AFTER America's borders are sucure.
It's just a big garden full of carrots and no fence now.
Where did I hear this before? Oh yeah, CFR. It'll never pass, it'll get amended, the SC will find it unconstitutional...
I think you're 100% correct.
susie
Do these dirtbags really think that they can ignore the will of the American people simply because a bunch of sectarian ethnic agitators and unreconstructed Marxists were able to bus in thousands of malcontents waving Mexican flags?
Hi, Susie - did you see today's "talking points":
1) Were you against Carter's "amnesty" for draft-dodgers and deserters?
2) What if part of this "amnesty" requires everyone to get in line AFTER those already seeking legal status the right way?
I have no love for "not proved" Specter. I think Penn-staters deserve the fool, frankly.
They had the opportunity. Or at least to round them up and deport them ON THE SPOT.
He's their valet.
Thanks for the clarification - I've read every single post above, but I don't recall who said it.
It would be a grand FReep experiance.. They need to receive attention where-ever their body is, not necessarily a Town Hall structured meeting..
I predict that he will do a 180 within 2 weeks. He will most likely come back and say that although he sort of disagrees with the bill, he feels that it is a very MINOR issue and we need to focus on getting more republicans elected.
Either that or he will say that when the administration "explained" the bill to him, that he now realizes the brilliant strategery that is going on.
To the first part - "yes". I hold a VERY DEEP contempt for those DD's and deserters.
To the second, I ask you this: sponsors of legal immigrants must swear an affidavit of support for each immigrant, just in case their immigrant should decide the public dole is more profitable than work. If employers need those guest workers so desperately, why should those employers not be required to make the same promisory note to taxpayers? Why not also require those illegals who've received taxpayer-funded benefits reimburse the US for their mooching in addition to back taxes and their fines?
And finally, how would the end of that line be determined?
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.