Congress Nears Deal on Illegal Immigrants (breaking on cable networks)

AP/Yahoo News ^ | 4-6-06 | DAVID ESPO

[STARWISE]

WASHINGTON - In a last stab at compromise, Senate Republicans and Democrats reported progress Thursday toward agreement on legislation opening the way to legal status and eventual citizenship for many of the 11 million immigrants now in the U.S. illegally.

"There's been tremendous progress overnight," said Sen. Harry Reid (news, bio, voting record) of Nevada, the Democratic leader, while Majority Leader Bill Frist also expressed optimism that a long-sought compromise might be at hand.

There was no immediate reaction from President Bush, who has made immigration legislation a key priority.

The developments occurred after Frist unveiled a new bill late Wednesday night on the subject as the Senate headed into a test vote on the most sweeping immigration bill in two decades.

In general, the legislation would provide for enhanced border security, regulate the flow of future immigrants into the United States and settle the legal fate of the estimated 11 million men, women and children already in the country.

It was the fate of the illegal immigrant population that proved hardest to legislate, and it has left the Senate on the verge of gridlock for days.

(snip)

Sens. John McCain, R-Ariz., and Edward M. Kennedy, D-Mass., as well as other key senators met before the vote to review terms of a proposed compromise.

In general, it would require illegal immigrants who have been in the United States between two years and five years to return to their home country briefly, then re-enter as temporary workers. They could then begin a process of seeking citizenship.

Illegal immigrants here longer than five years would not be required to return home; those in the country less than two years would be required to leave without assurances of returning, and take their place in line with others seeking entry papers.

[clawrence3]

That's fine with me - I will continue the civil discussion with the person I asked my 2 honest questions with.

[brytlea]

What planet are these cretins living on?

A planet that everything else revolves around....

susie

[clawrence3]

Well, I wouldn't be asking for clarification if I "got it" : )

[jackadams]

You remember when Buchanan was running in 96. He jokingly said the Barbarians are at the gate. What he meant was that average Americans were banging on the doorway of Washington DC's beltway and threatening to rush the elite politicians. He scared ME then but now I understand what he was campaigning against. THIS TIME THE BARBARIANS REALLY ARE AT THE GATES AND THEY ARE COMING FROM THE SOUTH AND OUR PRESIDENT IS OPENING THE GATES TO LET THEM IN. LORD HELP US.

[randog]

Hmmmmmmm...nothing in the article about a wall on the southern border or fines for employers of illegals....?

[clawrence3]

I'm sorry you are upset. Let me know if you want to discuss any of the specifics.

[samcgwire]

It's a race, who will get us first!

The Judiciary, the Executive Branch or the Legislative Branch?

The only Patriots that can proudly be pointed to are the House Conservatives and other Republicans that got H.R. 4437 through.

That's WHERE this whole thing should start, then the SHAMNESTY be worked for effectiveness AFTER America's borders are sucure.

It's just a big garden full of carrots and no fence now.

[Serenissima Venezia]

Actually, someone above indeed said to vote for Dems since they could not be any worse that GOP on immigration.

You might be referring to me - but I never said I would vote for Dems. I was responding to someone who said that not voting Republican was the same as voting for a Democrat. So I said there didn't seem to be a difference between them on this issue anyway.

Please shoot me if I am ever senile enough to consider voting Democrat!

[cryptical]

This is not over by a long-shot. Even if the Senate passes this compromise, it must be reconciled with the House, and their is every likelihood that the entire matter will explode.

Where did I hear this before? Oh yeah, CFR. It'll never pass, it'll get amended, the SC will find it unconstitutional...

[brytlea]

I think you're 100% correct.
susie

[Do not dub me shapka broham]

It really does burn me up.

Do these dirtbags really think that they can ignore the will of the American people simply because a bunch of sectarian ethnic agitators and unreconstructed Marxists were able to bus in thousands of malcontents waving Mexican flags?

[clawrence3]

Hi, Susie - did you see today's "talking points":

1) Were you against Carter's "amnesty" for draft-dodgers and deserters?

2) What if part of this "amnesty" requires everyone to get in line AFTER those already seeking legal status the right way?

[sam_paine]

I have no love for "not proved" Specter. I think Penn-staters deserve the fool, frankly.

[citizensgratitude]

They had the opportunity. Or at least to round them up and deport them ON THE SPOT.

[Do not dub me shapka broham]

What do you expect?

He's their valet.

[clawrence3]

Thanks for the clarification - I've read every single post above, but I don't recall who said it.

[bill1952]

>You can build all the walls you want but this country will not shoot on sight and local authorities won't prosecute the employers so it boils down to try and make them good productive citizens

Standard response.
You can't do that!
They won't do that!
We won't do that! - Ahh!

Like the man said, its like shining a light in the face of a vampire. - Ahhh! - You can't do that!

We can do every single thing needed to be done to achieve anything that we want to achieve, and hey,

If you don't think that we can do these things, then you have NO objection to a law being passed that would mandate them, right?
After all, it can't be done

[glowworm]

I would love to see if any of these yobos holds a public, town hall-style meeting during their Easter break.

It would be a grand FReep experiance.. They need to receive attention where-ever their body is, not necessarily a Town Hall structured meeting..

[JeffAtlanta]

Although, he [Limbaugh] is coming down hard against any guestamnesty bills, so it would be tough for him to change his tune. I suspect he'll just not speak of it again, as he's done before this week.Although, he is coming down hard against any guestamnesty bills, so it would be tough for him to change his tune. I suspect he'll just not speak of it again, as he's done before this week.

I predict that he will do a 180 within 2 weeks. He will most likely come back and say that although he sort of disagrees with the bill, he feels that it is a very MINOR issue and we need to focus on getting more republicans elected.

Either that or he will say that when the administration "explained" the bill to him, that he now realizes the brilliant strategery that is going on.

[azhenfud]

To the first part - "yes". I hold a VERY DEEP contempt for those DD's and deserters.

To the second, I ask you this: sponsors of legal immigrants must swear an affidavit of support for each immigrant, just in case their immigrant should decide the public dole is more profitable than work. If employers need those guest workers so desperately, why should those employers not be required to make the same promisory note to taxpayers? Why not also require those illegals who've received taxpayer-funded benefits reimburse the US for their mooching in addition to back taxes and their fines?

And finally, how would the end of that line be determined?