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 ...
I know alot more about politics then you'll ever know, Tex. Pence doesn't need permission from Hastert to accept an invitation from the Bush WH. And Sensenbrenner's support of Cannon is just that. Cannon supports HR4437. Tancredo thinks Cannon talks out of both sides of his mouth on immigration. And you know what, he does.
That is a loaded question which I will assume you ask in good faith. The answer would be no. Unfortunately, even when conservatives like Newt Gingrich approve of the Pence Plan and say they oppose amnesty, they are accused by some of supporting amnesty.
What Newt and Sensenbrenner find interesting about the Pence plan is that it addresses the enforcement ONLY aspects of immigration reform, FIRST. The FIRST part of the Pence plan is HR4437. The SECOND part is where Pence loses support for his plan. The SECOND part of the Pence plan is amnesty.
Newt didn't make any such limitations on his support...he supported the plan in total.
To the borderbots there can be no deviation from the Tancredo line.
I'm curious how many strikes you are looking to get tonight?
1) I'm not a "Dude".
2) You're deflecting....it isn't going to work. LOL You stated the article confirmed YOUR position. YOU claimed this SLATE article you now demean supported YOUR postion. And to date still have not been able to prove that. You are spinning yourself into circles here, why don't you just admit you were wrong to state it backed your position when clearly it rips it to shreads?
kind of like how some of your folks were blaming the First Lady for having your collective arses handed to you in Utah.
It's interesting how you keep latching onto that to bolster your spirits, ignoring anything that casts doubt on your perception of the race.. like that article you are afraid to debate. Interesting but in any event it isn't serving to dampen enforcement advocates. That must be dispiriting for you.
They jump all lines and are able to obtain legal status to work here, i.e., a W visa...
No they aren't jumping "all" lines. We've only established that they cut the guest worker line, the W visa being another guest worker visa. But we haven't established how many people if any they are cutting, as your 6 million figure was unrelated to any guest worker visa line.
...after six years have the choice of applying for citizenship or going home.
Yes, it is an amnesty type advantage to wait in country for a a green card, but three things. (1)They aren't cutting in front of others waiting in the green card line; (2) they aren't voting as citizens; (3) we don't see a slug of new voting citizens like we did under Reagan's amnesty without an increase in the green card quotas.
There's the "amnesty".
Now add to that an enforcement first HR4437 type plan and I will gladly consider the above-type of amnesty if enforcement works over time.
Tex, face it, your the ignorant one when it comes to Reagan. You've trashed Reagan on several occasions, in hopes of buidling up Dubya's piss-poor domestic policy record. Your opinion is worthless.
Newt Gingrich newsletter of June 12, 2006
"After we have demonstrated seriousness by securing the border, we need to establish the work-visa program in Rep. Mike Pence's (R-Ind.) bill (Border Integrity and Immigration Reform Act) that I wrote about last week. (You can learn more about the Pence plan here.) Pence's bill only allows work visas to be issued outside of the United States. So the simple answer to your question is that if you want to work in the U.S. legally, the rules will require you to go home to apply for the work visa.
"But this gets to why being serious about enforcing the law on employers is so important. If we do not enforce the law, then we can expect that employers will continue to break it. However, if we make it prohibitively difficult and costly for employers to hire a non-citizen illegally, then we can expect employers to comply with the law. When this happens, everyone who is working here illegally will be unable to find work and have no choice but to return home to get a work visa if they wish to work in the United States. We can establish a legal and compassionate way for individuals, especially those with families, to return home to apply.
"This is why the dichotomy nurtured by the pro-amnesty camp between 'mass deportation' and 'amnesty' is a false choice. The real choice is between amnesty and enforcing the law. Amnesty is a disaster, because it cheapens the value of American law. It sends the message that American law can be willfully violated without consequence.
"A work-visa program that is accompanied by total border control, uniform enforcement of existing laws (including draconian penalties on employers who continue to violate employment laws after a work-visa program is established), and the rejection of amnesty will have powerful incentives for individuals working here illegally to comply with the law and return home and apply. This will be especially true once a growing number of work-visa holders follow this path and employers find a growing pool of legal workers whom they can tap.
"The key in all of this is to create a set of incentives for the individual working here illegally to choose to comply with the law. If an individual working here illegally knows that improved border control will make it nearly impossible to cross the border again, that stepped-up law enforcement on the border and prompt removal will dramatically increase the chances of his being picked up and returned to his home country (with the penalty of being barred for a period of time of returning legally), that there is a legal way to work here, and that the work visa program that is established by the Pence bill is efficiently run so that there is a reasonably quick transition period in which to return home to apply and receive a work visa, then we can reasonably expect a swift migration to a dramatically improved and legal immigration system that will save lives and protect the rule of law."
I thought that was the original Tancredo position before he moved the goal posts.
Tell me why, if in a primary election that had a record low turnout and was billed as a referendum on illegal immigration, the border zealots couldn't defeat the incumbent they certainly had the motivation to take advantage of the low turnout.. They couldn't even get close. Jacobs didn't carry a single county in the district. If the issue was that red hot then Jacobs should have sailed to victory.
Well, about time.
I stopped contributing to the GOP and told them they would not see a penny from me until the White House adopted a more stringent position against illegal immigration. Not that I contribute millions, but every penny counts!
Let's see.
It's July 4th, 2006 and on two threads you have documented for any reader to discover for themselves that a) your contention the article supported your position is false b) your inability to admit the obvious and c) your extreme reluntance to debate the actual analysis that offers a contrarian view to the one your prefer.
Again, I thank you. I truly enjoy committing posters on record so that observers can make an informed choice. You've cooperated to an impressive degree.
You folks are more desperate then even I thought.
LOL. Yes and Reagan made his career out of stabbing fellow conservatives in the back the way Tancredo has done with, Delay, Pence and Cannon. Tancredo isn't fit to shine their shoes but that is about all he will be allowed to do from this point forward.
You may still be a pro-shamnesty fool. But Cannon is no longer the arrogant open borders numbskull he was even six months ago. We'll be watching to make sure the lesson "took" long term.
You, we don't give a flying fig about.
ROFLMAO!
LMAO Yeah the winner by a landslide got punked. I would love to play poker with ya'll.
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.