| This thread has been locked, it will not receive new replies. |
|
Locked on 04/07/2006 1:27:25 PM PDT by Religion Moderator, reason:
Duplicate: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1610910/posts |
Posted on 04/07/2006 9:37:15 AM PDT by VU4G10
A carefully crafted compromise that supporters had claimed could win an overwhelming majority received only 38 of the 60 votes necessary to protect it from weakening amendments by opponents.
Republicans were united in the 38-60 parliamentary vote but Democrats, who have insisted on no amendments, lost six votes from their members.
An alternative bill by Majority Leader Bill Frist — with no provision to let illegal immigrants stay but imposing large fines on employers who hire them — received even less support in a 36-62 test vote.
Earlier Friday, President Bush prodded lawmakers to keeping trying to reach an agreement, but both sides said the odds were increasing that a breakthrough would not occur until Congress returns from a two-week recess.
"An immigration system that forces people into the shadows of our society, or leaves them prey to criminals is a system that needs to be changed," Bush said at the National Catholic Prayer Breakfast. "I'm confident that we can change our immigration system in ways that secures our border, respects the rule of law, and, as importantly, upholds the decency of our country."
Democrats and Republicans blamed each other for the stalemate.
"It's not gone forward because there's a political advantage for Democrats not to have an immigration bill," said Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter, R-Pa.
He said Democrats perceive a benefit in having only a GOP-written House bill that criminalizes being an illegal immigrant. That bill has prompted massive protests across the country, including a march by 500,000 people in Los Angeles last month.
Democrats blamed Republicans for insisting on amendments that would weaken a compromise that Senate leaders in both parties had celebrated Thursday.
"This opportunity is slipping through our hands like grains of sand," said assistant Senate Democratic leader Dick Durbin of Illinois.
The election-year legislation is designed to enhance border security and regulate the flow of future temporary workers as well as affect the lives of illegal immigrants.
It separates illegal immigrants now in the U.S. into three categories.
Illegal immigrants here more than five years could work for six years and apply for legal permanent residency without having to leave the country. Those here two years to five years would have to go to border entry points sometime in next three years, but could immediately return as temporary workers. Those here less than two years would have to leave and wait in line for visas to return.
The bill also provides a new program for 1.5 million temporary agriculture industry workers over five years. It includes provisions requiring employers to verify they've hired legal workers and calls for a "virtual" fence of surveillance cameras, sensors and other technology to monitor the nearly 2,000-mile U.S.-Mexican border.
Demonstrations in support of the compromise were planned for Monday across the nation, including one in Washington that organizers claimed would draw 100,000 people.
The acrimony in the Senate at Thursday night's end was a sharp contrast to the accolades 14 members of both parties traded just hours earlier when they announced their compromise.
Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist called it tragic "that we in all likelihood are not going to be able to address a problem that directly affects the American people."
The House has passed legislation limited to border security, but Speaker Dennis Hastert, R-Ill., and other leaders have signaled their willingness in recent days to broaden the bill in compromise talks with the Senate.
But Rep. Tom Tancredo, R-Colo., said anything with what he called amnesty would not get agreement from a majority in the House.
The immigration debate has given the American public a glimpse of what may lay ahead in 2008 GOP presidential politics.
Frist, R-Tenn., a potential presidential candidate in 2008, sought to establish more conservative credentials when he initially backed a bill limited to border security. At the same time, he has repeatedly called for a comprehensive bill — adopting Bush's rhetoric — and involved himself in the fitful negotiations over the past several days.
Hawkins from rightwingnews.com has it right I think.
Republicans voted in unison because it was found they didn't have enough votes to break cloture. So along came McCain/Linds/Martinez/Frist/Hagel with a save face measure of claiming Dem blockage of amendments is why it failed.
Reality? They were going to be humiliated by having a Republican led filibuster block their bill THEY promised would easily pass.
Dems from red states joined them for obvious reasons, it isn't popular at home.
Oh, and one other thing. Bush got my wife's vote in 2000 and 2004. She's hispanic (native-born citizen, not an anchor baby, either). And she's appalled at amnesty. But, then again, she has lived in the barrio and seen the impact of illegal immigration firsthand, as have many FR posters who live along the border. Do you live anywhere near large numbers of illegals? Or do you live in some nice suburb where the illegals come to help cut the yards?
Nah, Hispanics are split.
Hispanics that are illegal/close to illegals either through friendships & family/etc.. favor amnesty.
By and large, Hispanics of many generations in this country, or those that came legally, are as outraged as every other American is.
The politicians in D.C. are misreading this reality.
How can you say that with a straight face? Kerry got at least 60% of the vote, the last I knew that's a majority.
A bill that doesn't secure the border in less than 90 days, to me, is a big FARCE. Support the Minutemen (& women) and their success and protest these political FAKERS. The "Don't Let Invading Aliens Behind" bill borders on TREASON. IMHO.
people are absolutely eating frist alive on his blog
http://www.volpac.org/index.cfm?FuseAction=Blogs.View&Blog_id=243&IsAllComments=1#Comments
go tell him how you feel
I hope you paid your common sense penalty before posting that. But it is always nice to see when SOMEONE GETS IT.
That may be very true. There are stories out today that after the staffers had actually read the bill and realized what's in there a lot of the Senators began to turn against it.
This latest round of BS has convinced me.
I am very disappointed in Mr. Bush and disgusted with Congress as a whole..
From now on, in every election, besides local elections) I plan on voting against anyone who is an incumbent.
That is, unless, the incumbent shows me that he or she has a large measure of respect for We the People and has been doing our bidding.
Perfect
At one time, there was something called "presidential leadership." It entailed telling people in your own party that if they didn't do the right thing they'd pay politically.
You've obviously mistaken the president for someone who cares about the American people---the Mexican people, yes---the American people, no.
They do that often and try to hustle the bills through before scruntiny can reveal their deceits. I applaud Leader Frist for maneuvering the bill through, in such a way, to give maximum exposure to the deceit of the RINOs and LEFT WING DEMS.
The one big argument of the neo-traitors against Border Security First is the "criminal" provisions left in by the House dems. I wonder if it is possible, now, that the Frist bill has stalled.. is to revote and resubmit the House bill. (Without the Felony language.) The Senate patriots have bought some good delays.. KUDOS to them.
It may not be behind us. Let's hope it is but the way the Senate works, this thing could sneak back up in the middle of the night and pass without anyone knowing it. I think we need to keep the pressure on. Phoenix is preparing for a 100,000 person march on Monday in support of illegal immigration. The organizers have warned the marchers to leave the Mexican flags at home. I hope they all show up with Mexican flags and signs declaring their intent to take back the southwest.
That would be a fantastic idea if they could pull it off. Take out the felony language and that would disarm the demogogues like Harry Reid and Clinton. They could even leave open the possibility for a limited guest worker program, but only after the borders are secured with a show of true intent in enforcing our laws.
Chickens....they just lost my support...what a waste of skin....I know they don't have backbone...
Yes but if Tancredo were president he could execute existing laws against illegal immigration; Something that is in the presidents' power that's notably absent from the current executive.
"The politicians in D.C. are misreading this reality."
Have you seen any polls lately showing how Hispanic citizens feel on illegal immigration.
I think you will say "no."
Is it likely that no poll lately targeted Hispanic citizens on this question?
I think you will say "no."
So why haven't we seen the polls?
However whenever the vote totals are shown, there are 60 votes against the proposals.
Has anyone seen a vote total where there is actually a majority supporting this crap?
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.