Posted on 07/04/2006 7:38:49 PM PDT by nj26
On the eve of nationwide hearings that could determine the fate of his immigration bill, President Bush is signaling a new willingness to negotiate with House Republicans in an effort to revise stalled legislation before Election Day.
Republicans both inside and outside the White House say Mr. Bush, who has long insisted on comprehensive reform, is now open to a so-called enforcement-first approach that would put new border security programs in place before creating a guest worker program or path to citizenship for people living in the United States illegally.
"He thinks that this notion that you can have triggers is something we should take a close look at, and we are," said Candi Wolff, the White House director of legislative affairs, referring to the idea that guest worker and citizenship programs would be triggered when specific border security goals had been met, a process that could take two years.
The shift is significant because Mr. Bush has repeatedly said he favors legislation like the Senate's immigration bill, which establishes border security, guest worker and citizenship programs all at once. The enforcement-first approach puts Mr. Bush one step closer to the House, where Republicans are demanding an enforcement-only measure.
"The willingness to consider a phased-in situation, that's a pretty big concession from where they were at," said Representative Tom Cole, Republican of Oklahoma, whose closeness to Mr. Bush dates to his days as a top Republican National Committee official. "It's a suggestion they are willing to negotiate."
In a sign of that willingness, the White House last week invited a leading conservative proponent of an enforcement-first bill, Representative Mike Pence, Republican of Indiana, to present his ideas to Mr. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney in the Oval Office.
Ms. Wolff said the president found the Pence plan "pretty intriguing."
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
Pretty much sums it up.
Thanks for the news....so what does it say....?
I guess it allows illegals to bypass the selective service requirement together with the amnesty....
or am I wrong..?
What is your source for that "6 million" figure?
How many of those 6 million are waiting for a temporary working visa?
Exactly...since there is no amnesty your there is no issue regarding selective service.
The six million figure comes from ICE. Many of them are family members who are in categories that are subject to annual caps. Some people wait five or six years to get in. Temporary working visa are not part of this total. These are non-immigrant visas.
Ditto. If guest worker and amnesty have strong support in the US, then let us vote on it as a stand alone bill. I think the globalists know that the polls show that Americans are not comfortable with it and are concern with the long term effects of letting them stay. Today the economy is booming, but Americans are wondering what will happen if the economy hits a recession. Americans are also aware of the structural burdens on the schools, hospitals, state budgets (and taxes) illegal immigrants impose. That is why the US Chamber of Commerce, Dems are insisting on a comprehensive bill that will sneak unpopular provisions into law under the secure border provisions. Thank God for talk radio and FR, otherwise info controlled by the MSM would of snookered the American public.
You stated the article proved your position was valid. I give you the opportunity to prove this is the case. And your means of doing so is to reprint CANNON'S release? That was quotation from his headquarters, not the author and completely at odds with the analysis offered in the article.
Again, I repeat, how does the ARTICLE's analysis and conclusions square with your opinion. Offering a quotation from Cannon is completely at odds with what you were asked to deliver. And I suspect you know it.
Your post pretty much sums it up. Mr. Cannon knew he would lose if he linked himself to Bush's amnesty plan. So he obscured where he stood (i.e., never mentioned that he supports amnesty, and hinted that he would return the lawbreakers) and then won by simple name recognition.
This explains the behavior of the pro-amnesty players - they know that this Primary was never a clean referendum on the amnesty plan.
It all makes sense now.
ROFLMAO...from the people who base everything on Tom Terrifics daily press releases.
It's quite simply really, Cannon won and stated it very plainly...he won.
There is not a lot they can do. Once out of reconciliation it goes to the President. They will try to make it an issue but I don't think they will get much traction in the election.
Temporary working visa are not part of this total. These are non-immigrant visas.
The Pence plan appears to be a guest worker type amnesty. Under the plan, illegal aliens in this country go home and apparently jump the guest worker line to get back in this country.
Thus these illegals under the Pence plan are not cutting the line in front of 6 million as you mentioned in your earlier post.
Pence's plan is amnesty plain and simple.
More BULLoney. Your dreaming again, Tex. Cong Sensenbrenner will have nothing to do with any amnesty proposal. The Pence Plan is an amnesty proposal. Tancredo and Sensenbrenner are in full agreement on HR4437 going forth.
When you don't have the facts, it is difficult to make your case. You don't even know what is in the Pence plan. I do. It is amnesty. Read it and then make up your mind.
It is about the American people and last Tuesday they soundly rejected the approach offered by the border zealots.
:-)
Matter of fact....I've blasted Tancredo on his Mecca comments and am on record of disliking his personality. Go ahead, review my postings far back and you'll find I am no fan of the man. But don't let me disrupt your talking point. LOL
It's just too hard for you to grasp that someone can work alongside someone they aren't particularly warm towards to advance a policy they believe in is it? In this instance I agree with him on illegal immigration. On the WOT I agree with the President. On Miers I was against the President. On Roberts and Alito I was with him. On Dubai I was with him. On Terri I was against the Courts ordering her put to death. On NCLB I supported the admin, on prescription drugs I'm against them. Go ahead, I find it amusing when people try to typecast me. It's not so easy to do if you give any respect to my posting history.
As to your latter statement, again you avoid addressing the article's analysis. When you choose to do so, let me know.
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.