Posted on 06/22/2007 5:48:28 AM PDT by indcons
Yesterday, a GOP aide, who is one of my sources in the Senate, gave me the rundown on what's currently happening with the Senate immigration bill (You can see my two previous reports from this source here and here).
To begin with, the key thing to keep in mind about the upcoming vote on the Senate immigration bill is that the pro-amnesty forces have two key cloture votes that they have to win.
The first is the vote on the so-called "clay pigeon" strategy. What this does is take the original bill and all of its amendments and reintroduce it on the Senate floor as a new bill. There are two reasons for doing this. The first is to prevent killer amendments that could upset the "grand compromise" from being voted on. The second reason is procedural, because it keeps conservative Senators who are opposed to the bill from being able to slow up the process.
However, in order for the bill and the previous amendments to be offered on the floor of the Senate as a new bill, it will take the cooperation of both Democratic and Republican leadership, along with 60 votes for cloture.
The conventional wisdom has been that this first cloture vote is a done deal because the Senate leadership has been wheeling and dealing behind the scenes. The way it works is that they go to a Senator and offer to allow a vote on their Amendment IF -- and only if -- that Senator agrees to vote for cloture on the "clay pigeon" strategy.
My source tells me that this has left a sour taste in the mouth of a number of Republican Senators who are upset that Mitch McConnell is cooperating with Harry Reid to curtail the rights of Republican Senators. Moreover, there's a growing fear that a dangerous precedent is being set here that could be used against Republican Senators again and again as long as they're in the minority. After all, if the "clay pigeon" strategy is used against conservatives on the immigration issue, who's to say it won't also be used against them on any number of issues in the future? According to my source, this is causing a lot of nervousness amongst Republican Senators and it has Mitch McConnell acting very defensive behind closed doors about working with Harry Reid to roll members of his own caucus. Because of this issue, my source tells me that the vote for the "clay pigeon" strategy is no longer a slam dunk and it is possible that the "grand bargainers" may not be able to get 60 votes to put the bill on the floor as a new bill. If that turns out to be the case, the bill is dead.
Then, if the bill does make it to the floor, there will be 22 amendments offered. These amendments have been carefully selected by the combined Democratic/Republican leadership to try to make sure that no deal breakers can make it through. Still, my source tells me that every amendment has the potential to be problematic for the grand bargainers, because the vote count is very close. If certain amendments pass, it could cost votes. On the other hand, some Senators may very well decide not to vote for the bill if their amendments don't pass. But, once the votes on the amendments are through, there will be another key vote for cloture and whether it will get the 60 votes is anyone's guess at this point.
Then, of course, if they do get the 60 votes for cloture, there will be a final vote for the bill, but since only 50 votes are needed, it will be almost guaranteed to pass.
Summary: My source tells me that he thought the amnesty proponents definitely had the upper hand last week, but now, he thinks the momentum may be swinging back the other way. He also said that he thinks the best chance to stop the bill will be on the initial cloture vote. He said that he's hoping that a coalition of conservatives who think this is a bad bill, liberals who think this bill is too tough, and Republican Senators worried about losing minority rights because of the "clay pigeon" strategy will get together and block the bill. If that doesn't happen, the pro-amnesty side won't have won, but the odds will shift a bit more in their favor.
PS #1: I pointed out that John Edwards and Claire McCaskill have made some extremely negative comments about the bill and asked my source if it's possible that Democratic opposition could increase enough to kill the bill. He said it was possible, but he thought Harry Reid was capable of strong arming the Democrats enough to keep them from losing many votes. Of course, he also added that he's not sure that Harry Reid really wants to see this bill pass, so he's not sure how hard he would fight for it. Either way, he said not to count on the Democrats to finish off the bill.
PS #2: I asked him about Johnny Isakson and Saxby Chambliss announcing that they will vote against cloture. My source's take was that it wasn't a bill killer, but that it was significant since both of them were prominent early supporters of the bill. He added that he thought their switch was indicative of the pressure Republicans are feeling at the grass roots level and he said that he thought Isakson and Chambliss deserved credit for paying attention to it while a lot of pro-amnesty supporters have tuned it out or even shut off their answering machines because they're tired of hearing their constituents complain about this issue.
PS #3: Last but not least, I talked to my source about the shots Trent Lott and Lindsey Graham have taken at people opposed to the bill. My source replied that when this whole thing started, these guys were cocky and thought they'd get this bill through with 70 votes, no problem. But now, because of the blogs and talk radio, they've lost the public debate on the issue and they know it. So, at this point, they're way out on a limb supporting a wildly unpopular bill that may or may not pass, and they're lashing out in frustration. He added that a lot of Republican Senators have been offended and embarrassed by their comments and are worried that the voters will lump them in with Graham and Lott.
Linseed Graham, “SHUT UP, you BIGOT!”
Trench Lott, “Turn yourself to SALT!”
They are trying to use the summer to their advantage. With so many people on vacation and such in the next two weeks, the gang in Washington hopes to sneak this one through.
Latest Zogby poll shows 3% popular support for the bill. I doubt you hear this on the old media networks.
Graham staked out his position on this because he thought that in the 08 election, he would be out of the Senate and in the McCain Administration as VP.
With McCain’s obvious decline in recent weeks, however, Graham may see the writing on the wall. His rants are out of desperation, as that giant sucking sound he hears is his Vice Presidency and very possibly his Senatorial career swishing around the opened drain.
Republican strategies got a lot done. Dems have nothing, so far.
Congress ordered exit and entry system in 1996 and … we still don’t have one. In fact, last fall [Secretary of Homeland Security] Michael Chertoff said building one would be cost prohibitive, it would cost billions of dollars and would take more than ten years. One of the things they are saying about this bill is, it is going to have an entry and exit system. They are lying to us again.
In 2002, there was a backlog of four million Green Card cases of “rampant and pervasive document fraud”, an increase of 50% over six years. “The staff is rewarded for timely handling of petitions,” rather than scrutiny on the merits. How is this going to happen now if suddenly they are inundated with 12 to 20 million applications…”
Congress and the Bush administration have used “subject to the availability of funds” to not fully implement the border security provisions of every bill they have passed and signed into law since 9/11.
The touch-back provisions that Sen. Hutchinson wants have nothing to do with slowing down illegal immigration in the future. The bill's actual provisions make no promises of lower illegal immigration and set no numerical reduction goals at all.
Most of the illegals here now do not want to become citizens, they want to remain citizens of their home country, but benefit from our social services, our tax dollars and our hard fought for way of life. How can anyone want to give legal status to criminals, gang members, fugitives, child molesters, rapists, etc. ?
Pres. Bush keeps saying this is to protect us, but these people are coming carrying diseases that we had wiped out years ago. I just don't trust congress or our government any more. They say one thing, but their actions don’t support their words. I’m fed up with this. Throwing money at it isn't the answer, actions are and there have been precious few of those. This bad bill will only be a magnet for more to cross the border. I am opposed to this bill from top to bottom, and there is no way they can spin it to change my mind.
At the bottom of the article about how the bill died the first time is speculation about why Republican Senators might be supporting this stinker of a bill. One “reason” given was that Republicans would shore up the Hispanic vote forever.
I am shocked by this thinking. “Takers” always vote Democrat b/c that’s where Big Government lives. Are they nuts? Republicans getting the Hispanic vote? Is this really what this awful legislation is all about?
I am surprised about McConnel. He’s usually good across the board. He wants to throw Bush a bone, but if he lets this bill through I believe he’s toast, as Rep leader. The Pubbies will get trounced in ‘08, big time and I cant believe he wants to end it this way. Spit or get off the pot, Mitch!
This article offered some needed clarity. There will be two big votes: the cloture vote, in which 60 votes are needed to invoke cloture and bring the bill to the floor, and the final vote approving the bill, which only requires a simple majority of 50 votes for it to pass. These people need to be leaned on to vote against cloture, first and foremost, because their “no” vote will count for less when only a majority is needed to pass the bill. I believe the Dems have the votes to pass the bill on the final vote. DEMAND THAT THEY VOTE AGAINST CLOTURE.
Who’d a thunk it, when they were taking history or civics class in high school, that members of the United States Senate would be plotting to find a way to SHUT OFF DEBATE about an important subject.
Cripes, Reagan got them to tear down the wall, and we’re turning into them!!
Truly a sad outcome.
What’s next? If you want to debate something they just send in the SS and shoot you?
Any thoughts on when these votes might come up? Are we talking today? next week, on the 4th of July during the fireworks display so no one will notice...?
Graham deserves getting himself into a mess for listening to a drunken Kennedy telling him to quickly grab the turd by the clean end.
Ted Kennedy’s whole constituency are the people that came here illegally that he got citizenship for.
Almost as bad as the late Minnesota politician Bruce Vento who sponsored wave after wave of SE asians and settled them in his district to ensure his lock on the Office.
Repeal the 17th amendment...go back to the way the constitution was before, and have senators appointed by the state legislatures....
No idea...Angela might know. Pinging her.
You might well be right about the July 4th date. While the rest of us are watching the fireworks, the Senate might well be preparing to set some off inside that building.
I am hopeful though. This bill might not get past cloture. They tried to ramrod it through the first time around but are under tremendous public pressure now.
Bush and Rove are doing their best to twist arms. I understand that they are threatening to withold RNC money from recaltricant senators.
Not only that, but when Republicans were in charge, there was always a statement made available by the MSM from the minority dems. Now, we still see the dems making their statements on the sNews shows but nary a peep from Republican opponents. One might get the idea the MSM has a (yellow) dog in this fight.
Ha! The irony of that is that as long as this bill is alive, there IS NO RNC MONEY!
I finally broke through the word game some senators are playing, especially Kay Hutchison (my senator). For weeks, her administrative assistants have been saying "she is against amnesty." Good.
But, wait. When I pushed back firmly yesterday to ask whether the so-called "touch-back" meant the bill didn't offer amnesty, the assistant agreed that returning to one's home country first meant S1348 was NOT amnesty and that would be the reason KBH could vote for it!!! Can you believe this?
It may be argued that the 'touch-back' provision may be 'satisfied' with a visit to a foreign embassy located WITHIN the continental USA. Such embassy premises are considered FOREIGN SOIL.
In other words, not even a real touch-back at all. STOP THIS ZOMBIE SHILL BILL NOW!
Yes, I have.
This is one of the things that disgusts me so much about the Republican congress and the party in general.
I have asked myself over the past ten years why they don’t fight the “enemy”. I have only recently understood that they ARE the enemy.
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.