Harry Reid has scheduled debate to begin this week on a comprehensive immigration reform (read Amnesty) bill. Since there is no new bi-partisan amnesty bill ready yet, Dingy Harry is set to bring last years Senate Amnesty bill, S-2611, to the floor for a debate.
Just what makes these bills "amnesty" bills? I'm with you as far as opposing bills similar to S-2611, but I don't understand why people confuse them with amnesty.
From where I sit, the question is whether or not the price of legalization is high enough, requirements to qualify are rigorous enough, and the punitive actions against law breakers, including employers, are severe enough to discourage future illegal border crossers.
>>Harry Reid has scheduled debate to begin this week on a comprehensive immigration reform (read Amnesty) bill. Since there is no new bi-partisan amnesty bill ready yet, Dingy Harry is set to bring last years Senate Amnesty bill, S-2611, to the floor for a debate.<<
It’s very confusing. There is also the “compromise” proposal from the Senate Judiciary Committee, which does not, to my knowledge, have a bill number yet:
‘Also on May 8, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) said he will not push back his May 14 target for the beginning of floor debate. Reid plans to invoke a parliamentary maneuver today that bypasses the normal committee process and places a bill directly on the Senate Calendar. He has not decided whether he will use last year’s Senate-passed bill (S. 2611) or the Judiciary Committee-passed version as a placeholder for floor debate. Reid said the measure could be amended later if Senators work out the details in their “compromise” bill.
Specter noted that some Republican senators may seek to filibuster Reid’s motion to proceed on a bill, for which Reid would need 60 votes. Although S. 2611 passed the Senate with 62 votes last year, a number of the Republican members who voted for the bill are now following the lead of Sen. Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.), the lead negotiator for Senate Republicans, and are disinclined to vote for the bill again. ‘
But if we call senators and say we oppose both S. 2611 and the “compromise,” this also may be confusing, because
1) Harry Reid, if S. 2611 were brought to the floor, open it up for amendments, so they could say it might “morph” into something completely different via amendments
2) The “compromise” is not even a bill yet (as far as I know).
I am against both, but I seem to be shooting at two Cheshire Cat bills.