Posted on 05/20/2006 5:49:47 AM PDT by Uncledave
May 20, 2006 The Ensign Amendment Fiasco By Ross Kaminsky
The Senate has by a 50-49 vote allowed a provision to remain in the Immigration Bill allowing illegal aliens to claim Social Security benefits. There is no way to sugar-coat what a disaster this is for Republicans and for the country.
Democrats had many reasons for voting against Senator Ensign's amendment, which was designed to insure that "persons who receive an adjustment of status under this bill (The Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act of 2006) are not able to receive Social Security benefits as a result of unlawful activity."
1. The Democrats are well aware that they can even further dishearten GOP voters by keeping provisions like this in the Immigration Bill. While the President tries to find a middle ground that Republicans can support, the inclusion of provisions which insult basic sensibilities of right and wrong, i.e. allowing a taxpayer-provided benefit for illegal behavior, makes that middle ground nothing but a mirage and further disunifies the Party.
2. The Democrats know that keeping provisions like this in the bill make a successful House-Senate conference that much more difficult to achieve and the passage of Immigration Reform is less likely. This gives them a great election issue, painting the Republicans as the party that can't get anything done. And who could say they are wrong?
3. The Democrats are in favor of anything that keeps more people addicted to government. In this case, the idea that millions of people would suddenly have claims on Social Security is a dream come true for them, second only to giving illegal aliens both claims on government funds and the right to vote for the politicians who promise to give them more of it.
4. On a similar note, if this provision becomes law, the future liability of the Social Security system will explode along with estimates of future budget deficits, allowing the Democrats to call the (Republican) Immigration Bill another example of GOP fiscal irresponsibility. And again, who could say they are wrong?
Senator Patrick Leahy demonstrated the standard (though still jaw-dropping) Democratic hypocrisy on the issue. Quoting from the Washington Times: Sen. Patrick J. Leahy, Vermont Democrat, said it would be unfair to deny illegals the benefits. "We should not steal their funds or empty their Social Security accounts," he said. "That is not fair. It does not reward their hard work or their financial contributions. It violates the trust that underlies the Social Security Trust Fund."
I don't know whether to laugh or cry when I read such things, given the Democrats' primary purpose of spending every penny that comes in to the Treasury, including all Social Security taxes. The idea that senior politicians still claim there are real Social Security accounts or a solvent trust fund is both funny and frightening. However, the Democrats are at least consistent on this.
More disconcerting is the Republican participation in this travesty. The list of GOP Senators who voted against the Ensign Amendment includes some of the usual RINO (Republican in Name Only) suspects such as Chafee, DeWine, and Voinovich. More interesting was the rest of the list of Republican senators who opposed the amendment: Brownback, Hagel, Lugar, Stevens, Specter, and McCain.
At least three of these men have Presidential aspirations. I can not imagine that they believe the potential benefit from getting Hispanic or Democrat crossover votes would outweigh the tremendous damage to their support among the Republican base and the strength of the issue they would be handing primary opponents. Noting that the vote was 50-49, if any one of these Republicans had voted for the amendment, it would have passed. Given the apparent huge political miscalculation here, and assuming that these are not stupid men, I presume that I am missing something. But try as I might, when thinking about this vote, I keep coming up with "Error".
I can just picture the campaign commercial: A Hispanic-looking man walks up to a Social Security office window holding an identification document that the viewer can tell is a forgery. He asks for some money (from a window labeled "funded by American taxpayers") and when he is lightly questioned about his ID, he replies that it was good enough to get him a job so it should be good enough to get him some cash. The voice-over says "John McCain voted to do this to Social Security...."
The immigration issue was probably a neutral for the GOP until recently. Most Americans are not as aggressively anti-immigrant as the House of Representatives, so a middle ground on the issue that could be acceptable to most Republican voters was theoretically achievable. But as the Republicans continue to permit such things as Social Security benefits and in-state tuition rates for illegal aliens, any such common ground all but vanishes. The Republicans have maneuvered themselves into the worst possible position on immigration, with the Democrats politely helping out by doing nothing. Given the disheartening performance by the GOP in nearly every other area, and particularly with the massive increase in government spending while all branches of government were controlled by Republicans, it is increasingly likely that Republican voters will be too disgusted to go to the polls in November.
The Democrats offer nothing better. They truly are the Party of No Ideas. But when your opponent is beating himself with one strategic and tactical error after another, why take the risk of going on offense? Nancy Pelosi can picture herself sitting in the Speaker's chair soon, and she will hardly have had to break a sweat. She'll have to write a big thank you note to John McCain and friends. Ross Kaminsky blogs at Rossputin.com Page Printed from: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2006/05/the_ensign_amendment_fiasco.html at May 20, 2006 - 07:48:33 AM CDT
Does anyone have the list of Republicans that voted to give illegals Social Security?
Sorry, the entire list.
Chaffee
DeWine
Graham
Hagel
Lugar
Martinez
McCain
Specter
Stevens
Voinovich
Now - for those of you who state that it would be a great disaster if we were to lose the Senate in November - I have a question...
What good does have a 10% majority do when 20% of the majority votes with the minority?
Worse yet......Judiciary Chairman Patrick Leahy or John Conyers (house)
Hopefully, this puts the final nail in the coffin of Mike DeWine. It's better to flush out now Ohio's tired old Republican guard, (including the other boob, Voinovich), than to keep this boob on to do damage for six more years. It might also do wonders in effecting the thought processes of other like-minded Republican RINOs.
The real fault is with our legislators - they do nothing, they stand for nothing.
So convenient to blame the President who is NOT the one writing the legislation. I haven't noticed the congress doing anything the President wants. Seems the senators are always the ones destroying any of our agenda.
Why do you ignore the backstabbing efforts of McCain, Nagle, Specter, Graham and the entire list that always default and join in with the democrats? Why is McCain foremost in creating legislation that we conservatives rile against. I don't see the President creating any legislation.
That is problem
Whoops - Nagle = Hagel
For those of you in Alaska, I see that Stevens joined Cantwell this time. On issues of immigation and homeland defense the man is an utter phoney, and a tired old phoney at that.
Yeah, you're probably right. It actually crossed my mind after I posted that I was probably disproportionately harsh on GWB in that comment and inadequately harsh on the Senate, though I sure didn't take it easy on McCain either!
I think the mere absurd notion that I might join a McCain bandwagon put me in such a scathing mood that I misdirected some of it toward GWB. My real issue here is that I detest McCain, and it really irks me that not everyone else detests him likewise..
My issue with GWB on all this is that I don't think it'd even be much of an issue were it not for GWB throwing his weight behind amnesty, by whatever name. If GWB agreed with the strong-borders, tough-on-illegals view of the House that bill would be a done deal.
Did anyone check to see if this was another one of his ANWR protest votes?
AG, usually you and I are in opposition. But I agree 100% with your comments, and appreciate your choice of words as well.
Which Democrats voted with Ensign?
The Senate could be mostly replaced with anonymous citizens pulled off the city streets and would make better sense. Kind of like how they do jury duty. I served on a grand jury for 3 months, once a week, and these ordinary citizens - retired people, a flagger, someone who worked in a door factory, a vet assistant, and others - made more sense than just about any elected (deleted noun) I've ever heard.
Only a few college grads in the bunch, I may add. Oh, and no millionaires, either.
Why there are so many freepers that keep defending the President on this issue is beyond me. Wake up!
Close the borders and don't reward illegals along with ruining this country in the process! President Bush is NOT helping in this matter.
Day after day I read threads supporting what the President wants to do with ILLEGAL immigration and how people keep defending him on it... I thought this was "Free Republic" not "Bush at all cost"
I watched this vote with complete horror an dismay.
The penlty for any other person other than "our guests" for makeing a false statement to a federal officer or the knowingly passing false or forged documents for benefit is very serious time.
Why is it that these "guests" can obtain money now from SS , again under false pretenses. Is like telling a bank robber " you can keep the money if you tell us how much you stole".
As a qualifier far any amnesty I would demand to see the last 5 years income tax returns which have been previously filed and not yesterday. i.e. on time (including extentions)as per IRS regulations.
This simple request, and yes you can obtain your previous returns from the IRS if you are not a record keeper, would sort those who are legitimate (morally legal guests) and those who are just here to beat the system.
Eligibility for any amnesty programs and contributions to SS could be determined without the problems of the newest growth industry in the US....forged documents which leads us right back to the beginning of my discussion.
Grouped By Vote Position YEAs ---50
Akaka (D-HI)
Baucus (D-MT)
Bayh (D-IN)
Biden (D-DE)
Bingaman (D-NM)
Boxer (D-CA)
Brownback (R-KS)
Cantwell (D-WA)
Carper (D-DE)
Chafee (R-RI)
Clinton (D-NY)
DeWine (R-OH)
Dodd (D-CT)
Dorgan (D-ND)
Durbin (D-IL)
Feingold (D-WI)
Feinstein (D-CA)
Graham (R-SC)
Hagel (R-NE)
Harkin (D-IA)
Inouye (D-HI)
Jeffords (I-VT)
Johnson (D-SD)
Kennedy (D-MA)
Kerry (D-MA)
Kohl (D-WI)
Landrieu (D-LA)
Lautenberg (D-NJ)
Leahy (D-VT)
Levin (D-MI)
Lieberman (D-CT)
Lincoln (D-AR)
Lugar (R-IN)
Martinez (R-FL)
McCain (R-AZ)
Menendez (D-NJ)
Mikulski (D-MD)
Murray (D-WA)
Obama (D-IL)
Pryor (D-AR)
Reed (D-RI)
Reid (D-NV)
Salazar (D-CO)
Sarbanes (D-MD)
Schumer (D-NY)
Specter (R-PA)
Stabenow (D-MI)
Stevens (R-AK)
Voinovich (R-OH)
Wyden (D-OR)
NAYs ---49
Alexander (R-TN)
Allard (R-CO)
Allen (R-VA)
Bennett (R-UT)
Bond (R-MO)
Bunning (R-KY)
Burns (R-MT)
Burr (R-NC)
Byrd (D-WV)
Chambliss (R-GA)
Coburn (R-OK)
Cochran (R-MS)
Coleman (R-MN)
Collins (R-ME)
Conrad (D-ND)
Cornyn (R-TX)
Craig (R-ID)
Crapo (R-ID)
Dayton (D-MN)
DeMint (R-SC)
Dole (R-NC)
Domenici (R-NM)
Ensign (R-NV)
Enzi (R-WY)
Frist (R-TN)
Grassley (R-IA)
Gregg (R-NH)
Hatch (R-UT)
Hutchison (R-TX)
Inhofe (R-OK)
Isakson (R-GA)
Kyl (R-AZ)
Lott (R-MS)
McConnell (R-KY)
Murkowski (R-AK)
Nelson (D-FL)
Nelson (D-NE)
Roberts (R-KS)
Santorum (R-PA)
Sessions (R-AL)
Shelby (R-AL)
Smith (R-OR)
Snowe (R-ME)
Sununu (R-NH)
Talent (R-MO)
Thomas (R-WY)
Thune (R-SD)
Vitter (R-LA)
Warner (R-VA)
Not Voting - 1
Rockefeller (D-WV)
Vote Summary By Senator Name By Vote Position By Home State
If he is the nominee, the vast majority. The lesser of two evils argument will prevail, McCain will be rehabilitated by "conservatives", and his sins will be forgiven.
But not by me.
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.