Posted on 05/19/2007 4:48:30 PM PDT by ER_in_OC,CA
WASHINGTON — The Capitol phones were ringing off the hook Friday.
In fact, the day proved to be one of the busiest in months for call volume, Senate aides said.
The reason? Immigration.
Next week, the Senate plans to take up the divisive bill that would provide the estimated 12 million illegal immigrants in the U.S. with a pathway to legal status, and callers felt the need to vent, mostly.
"I'd say the calls have been heavy, very heavy in fact," said Dan McLaughlin, communications director for Sen. Bill Nelson, D-Fla. "The overwhelming number of callers were opposed to the immigration deal. I would say they're opposed largely on the basis of the view that it offers amnesty, even though the bill does not."
The situation was as bad, if not worse, in Sen. Mel Martinez's office. The Florida Republican you'll recall helped broker the controversial immigration deal this week.
"Yeah, we're getting a lot of calls," Martinez spokesman Ken Lundberg said, with a chuckle. "Not just from Florida, but across the nation on both sides of the issue."
McLaughlin said Nelson advised his aides to make note of the callers' concerns.
For now, the senator is "wanting to reserve judgment on the developing deal," McLaughlin said, adding that a 384-page draft of the bill had been delivered to the office Friday morning.
Even if the sweeping immigration legislation does pass the Senate in the coming days, the real problems begin in the House, where members — especially Republicans — haven't been too keen on a comprehensive approach.
Last year, with the mid-term elections right around the corner, House lawmakers chose to stick to a border protection bill.
It doesn't look like much has changed.
On Friday, Rep. Dave Weldon, the Republican who represents Vero Beach, called the Senate proposal "a bad bill."
"Amnesty first, border security later, American citizens last, that's the bottom line of this proposal," Weldon said.
Hell, half of Mexico lives there already.
As bad as this legislation looks on the surface, once you start reading the fine print it becomes even more radical than you imagined.
What in God's name is this administration thinking...?? Something is definately not right somewhere.
Actually, I think I agree with AmericanInTokyo.
“Yeah, the bill allows illegals to instantly become legal.
It allows them to stay that way indefinitely.
It even doesn’t even bother to pursue any back taxes they might owe, a luxury not afforded to citizen taxpayers.”
Yeah. Like as in, we don’t pay our back taxes - guess what. We can have gov lien agianst anything we own and - or - go to jail...
Aren't any more reasons that make any sense at all.
I just don’t know, FRiend. Dubya took office with economic ambitions (accomplished), but had some sort of Texas governor/thousand-points-of-light baggage with our southern border.
We’ll likely never know why such an American President with foreign policy vision (rightly or wrongly) was just all too happy to give up our physical sovereignty. I’m wondering if this is all just some sort of gamesmanship.
Just because we do not agree with something Bush has done does not mean we abandon him. We need to double the prayers for him to see the error of his ways.
What about it? Anyone else want to weigh in here?
I suppose it could have something to do with that new world order stuff, and the north american union. I knew this was a possibliity when I voted for him. I just did not think that the legislature would ever muster the support to pass it, and I really hoped Bush would temper the compassion with common sense.
Course it is not law yet. If we can not turn the tide on this lousy bill, then we are well and truly screwed.
We just have to keep the heat on. The MSM, of course, will flak for this stupid GOP equivalent of “Hillarycare” unless somehow Dubya gets credit for it.
Friday was a s**train at the Capitol Switchboard. It’s supposed to be voted on in the Senate on Wednesday. My guess is the House will kill it, but that’s no excuse for us.
Giving the Dems hell about it is actually kind of fun, since we can make the crocodile tears argument about the wages of “Working Families”. Cross-dressing can be beneficial at times!
;-)
LOL. Not only that we can weep bitterly because they are splitting up families and is it not all about the CHILDREN????? Why where in the world is the “village” that it would allow them to do this?
Damned straight/Spot On. Giving a (gasp) MALE wage-earner equal opportunity not only discriminates against the distaff workforce, but the surge of workers no doubt prevents the “oppressed” class from seeking publically-supported “reproductive rights” funding.
We could tie this up for years!
[and take it easy on AIT, he’s a good one.]
LOL. We surely could tie it up for years. I didn’t mean to be hard on AIT, just can’t resist toning down what sounds to me like a little hyperbole.
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.