Posted on 06/27/2007 7:40:17 AM PDT by 300magnum
WASHINGTON - President Bush, short on political capital and time, is devoting much of what's left of his term in office to getting an immigration deal.
Starting with an April 9 speech in Arizona, in which he talked tough about border security and prodded Congress to get moving, Bush has staged a dozen immigration events. That's not counting his four radio addresses on the topic in that time, or his phone calls to lawmakers, or his bold prediction that he'd see reporters at the bill-signing for a bill that seemed dead.
His agenda reflects that immigration is a White House priority for multiple reasons.
It is deeply important to the president, a former Texas governor who sees the status quo on immigration as a failure for the nation and a looming disaster for his party. It is seen as a major legislative victory within reach. And it is seen as urgent — now or never for him, most likely.
So each day, a White House strategy team weighs how to maintain momentum on a bill offering legal status to millions of unlawful immigrants.
A small, core group of officials — representing policy, communications, strategy and legislative offices — organizes the approach.
There is no war room, per se, but rather meetings held in locations at the White House and on Capitol Hill. The participants vary and overlap. The president gets involved when his participation is deemed to have the most impact. His voice is the loudest, but not one to be overused, the strategy goes.
The signals often come from Candida Wolff, Bush's legislative affairs chief.
"She hollers when she wants the president's assistance in speaking to a particular member of Congress," said Joel Kaplan, the deputy chief of staff for policy. "And I expect that she'll holler a few more times before all is said and done."
Meanwhile, two of Bush's Cabinet members have made almost a full-time job of lobbying for the bill. Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff and Commerce Secretary Carlos Gutierrez may as well be considered tenants on Capitol Hill, Kaplan quipped.
When the immigration bill stalled in the Senate, Bush got personally involved in resurrecting it.
He called Republican Sens. Jon Kyl of Arizona, Trent Lott of Mississippi and Mitch McConnell of Kentucky while in Europe. On his flight back to the U.S., he called Kyl and Democratic Sens. Ken Salazar of Colorado and Edward Kennedy of Massachusetts.
Then, the next day, he made a rare visit to Capitol Hill to lobby Republican senators at a closed-door meeting.
The rescue effort had at least some effect; later that week, Senate leaders reached a deal to get the bill back up for debate.
"Even a weakened president is a potent political force," said Republican strategist Rich Galen. "He may well get something out of this. I was with everyone else when the thing got pulled from the (Senate) floor, saying, 'Well, that's that.' But here it is again."
The Senate voted Tuesday to revive the bill. It must still overcome another make-or-break vote as early as Thursday that will also require the backing of 60 senators. And there is no guarantee that it will ultimately attract even the simple majority it needs to pass.
Bush is still making calls to senators, although the White House picks and chooses when it will disclose details.
"He's been on the phone," spokesman Tony Snow said Tuesday. "I'm not going to tell you how many or who he has talked to."
The president, not surprisingly, projects confidence. He talks of when, not if, the Senate will pass a bill to his liking in the coming days.
"When successful in the Senate, we'll be reconvening to figure out how to get the bill out of the House," he told advocates of his plan.
Trouble hovers there, too. Underscoring the intraparty fighting over immigration, House Republicans meeting in a private conference took the rare step Tuesday evening of voting overwhelmingly to oppose the Senate measure.
In his June 12 visit to the Capitol, Bush was gracious and grateful to fellow Republicans. At other times, his strategy has been more blunt.
Along the way, Bush has accused critics of the legislation of not reading the details of the bill; of potentially lacking courage; of engaging in scare tactics; of searching for a reason to oppose it; and of not doing what's right for America.
With all this, Bush's aides scoff at criticism that Bush should be more personally engaged in lobbying for the bill. So does he.
"My administration is deeply involved in the issue," Bush said. "I feel passionate about the issue."
(This version CORRECTS Galen's quote to say a weakened president is a "potent" force, instead of "potential" force.) )
The man's zeal for this atrocity is worthy of a far better cause. As it is, he is worse than I ever imagined.
May the bill go down in FLAMES!!! Either that or we will as a country.
It is deeply important to the president, a former Texas governor who sees the status quo on immigration as a failure for the nation and a looming disaster for his party. It is seen as a major legislative victory within reach. And it is seen as urgent — now or never for him, most likely.”
Yes, it is a disaster for the party, but not for the reasons he thinks. 6 years of lack of enforcement and lax border security, a tin ear to concerns of the grassroots, and an overeagerness to do the wrong thing on amnesty, and we have a divided and disspirited Republican base.
Yep, when you rob Peter to pay Paul, you can count on Paul’s support. 12 million new dems?
Don’t feel alone pal I am in the same boat.
I voted for him twice also, and I thought he was for the most part CONSERVATIVE. The Republican Party are a bunch of pansies.
If he’s not careful, his legacy will be the destruction of the Republican party ... and the infliction of permanent, lasting damage on the American republic.
I hate to say it, but Kerry would never risk his neck for a bill like this-this is a ‘gift’ from Bush. However, we will never get principled leaders if we are not willing to vote third party. The GOP is now just as lousy as the Democratic Party.
Who knew that he meant it.
I wonder if the Whitehouse shill “nthompsonwhitehouse” is still monitoring FR?
The President is a traitor.
His Oath of Office was to swear to uphold the Constitution.
U.S. Constitution, Article 4 Section 4:
“The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion;”
He is not only not doing this, he is actively working against it. How is this not treasonous activity?
Maybe we should be contacting our Representatives about bringing Articles of Impeachment?
Shameful and dead wrong. I just don’t understand why he can’t hear the voices of the nation. We don’t want this!
Me too. I was happy about his tax cuts and his stance on the WOT, but I never dreamed he would actually succeed in this immigration nonsense. I suppose I under-overestimated him.
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus
I just don’t understand why he can’t hear the voices of the nation. We don’t want this!
Oh, he hears. We may not want this, but he does, for his various reasons. He is the decider after all. That’s why he said that you and the rest of us “don’t want to do what is right for America.”
Doesn’t seem to matter if they are, they are so pompus in their opinion of themselves.
Maybe if either one of these were elected, conservatives would've been more watchful about what the adminstration was doing instead of giving the Prez the benefit of the doubt as happened time and time again with Bush.
Maybe conservatives will be more careful next time. I highly doubt it. The only thing most conservatives seem interested in these days is winning elections. They don't really seem to care what happens afterward, except when it's too late.
Example: In June 2004, Bush signed the Social Security Totalization Agreement with Mexico that would allow Mexican illegal aliens and their families back home to collect US Social Security benefits. How many emails expressing your outrage did you send to the White House before the election in November? By voting for Bush in 2004, you gave your tacit approval to what he's doing now.
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.