Posted on 06/05/2006 4:51:21 PM PDT by Spiff
House Republicans vs. Senator Frist’s amnesty plan.
By Rep. Tom Tancredo
The United States Congress stands at a historic crossroads on immigration policy. Two roads diverge. Will the nation get another amnesty program or will it get secure borders to halt illegal entry into our country? House Republicans must choose, because they can’t have both.
The recently passed Senate bill giving amnesty to 12-15 million illegal aliens presents a challenge to House Republicans, but it also presents an opportunity. The House should respond with a strong reaffirmation of the enforcement-first strategy for border control and immigration-law enforcement, an approach strongly favored by a large majority of the American people. If House Republicans abandon that path, they will invite the desertion of their conservative base and the certain loss of the House in the November elections.
Senate Democrats voted 38 to 4 for the amnesty bill, while a majority of Senate Republicans rejected it. The amnesty bill is clearly a Democrat bill that passed with Republican support, thanks to Sen. Frist’s machinations. House Republicans must refuse to drink Bill Frist’s Kool Aid concoction—not even a tiny spoonful labeled “amnesty lite.”
Last December, the House of Representatives passed H.R. 4437, a bill that embodies the enforcement-first strategy for border control and immigration enforcement. The Senate bill takes the exact opposite approach. The two bills are polar opposites not only in text but also in spirit and in purpose. For this reason it is impractical and delusional to try to marry one to the other. Despite the advances of modern science, we do not yet have the capacity to marry a snake to a hawk and produce an eagle.
The crux of the problem is that in the deceptively packaged Senate bill, border control is there as a promise but amnesty is guaranteed, immediate, and irreversible. That is the formula that failed in the 1986 amnesty program, and the House must not buy that pig-in-a-poke again. In such omnibus plans, enforcement can be delayed, diluted, and sabotaged in numerous ways. That is why “enforcement first” is not a slogan—it is an urgent necessity.
The American people expect more from the “People’s House” than joining the Senate’s sellout to the cheap-labor lobby and the American Immigration Lawyers Association. If House Republicans do not answer that call to duty, we will deserve neither our citizens’ respect nor their votes.
There is one sure way to derail the Senate’s amnesty bill: The House Republican leadership should tell the Senate we will not go to conference on the Senate bill. The House should simply challenge the Senate to act on H.R. 4437. Until the Senate sends the House an enforcement-only bill, we have nothing to conference about.
A few Republicans in the House have called for compromise by suggesting clever plans that amount to “amnesty lite.” Down that path lies disaster because “enforcement first” cannot be compromised: Either Congress secures the borders before considering new guest-worker plans or we create a guest-worker program on the mere promise of border security. Genuine enforcement cannot be a mere part of a “comprehensive bill,” it must precede any other reform. House Republicans who break ranks with HR 4437 are choosing a path of certain catastrophe—for the nation in the long run and for our party in November.
If House Republicans take the enforcement first platform to the American people in November, they can win. There is no advantage whatsoever for Republicans in agreeing to write a bad bill in conference on the premise that even a bad bill is better than no bill at all. That is the argument we hear from the White House and it is sheer nonsense. The president does not have to face the voters in November, we do. The president lost all credibility on immigration reform in March 2005 when he called the Minutemen “vigilantes” with Vicente Fox standing at his side. It is time for the president to put his attack dogs on a short leash and let House Republicans chart their own course.
Fate has given the House of Representatives the task of rescuing our national sovereignty and our children’s futures from the Senate’s folly. There are signs we may be up to the challenge, but if we are not, neither history nor the voters will forgive us.
—Rep. Tom Tancredo represents Colorado’s 6th district and is chairman of the 97-member Congressional Immigration Reform Caucus.
The point is that this is a vote that can be had. If we dont handle it right though we could lose Hispanics like we did the blacks. People forget that how Republicans lost the black vote was because of several particular events ending with how Republicans turned their back on the pleas of blacks in Louisiana and Mississipi during the great flood in 29.
We have been paying for that mistake ever since
"Well I am hoping that if Casey in Penn wins at least one good thing that might happen is that there will be more Pro Life Democrats running."
I alrady knew you were deluded but this caps it off ... PULEEZE. There is *NOTHING* pro-life about Casey that will last 24 hours in DC. Plenty of 'pro-life' Democrats, including Sen Harry Reid, ended up dyed-in-wool backstabbing water-carriers for the liberal special interests.
Casey is a liberal. He will vote for Chuckie Schumer and Ed Kennedy to run the Senate and will help them filibuster conservative judges ... Roe v Wade will be the law of the land for another generation if the Democrats sweep in the next 2 elections.
" It wasnt that long ago that happened. In Louisiana both Louisiana Senators(Johnston and Breaux were prolife as well as every House Dem we have had except I believe William Jefferson."
You want prolife, vote Republican. The liberal proaborts have run off true prolifers from the party.
I should have said 40%. Now buzz off and burn your crosses or wash your sheets.
I think its important to see where he got those Hispanic votes also as well as other factors. In 12 years if these folks can make it through what is required to become citizens they sound like likely Republican voters.
Be nice, He's pretty lonely right now. His other friends have pretty much dropped out for the night and left only him to hold back the forces of Conservatism and reason.
Hell I have you surrounded.
Bingo...we have a winner.
I can not compete with your mind set. You remind me of the Mexican (Latin American) politicians...soon you are in power and try do do the right thing, you're becoming the bad guy...and by God we will tear you apart!
Good night Texas!
I am not advocating people vote for Casey over Santorum. IN fact for some reason Freepers don't like Santorum on here it appears. I have never understood why. Yes he will vote for the Dem House Leadership so that is a problem. However if Casey's convictions are like his dads that is generally a good thing for the Pro life movement. At least it shows an opening there that can be exploited. Thats all I am saying
They're wrong on this issue. Just plain wrong.
I guess that made some kind of sense to you.
I don't remember thinking about or mentioning it at all since it's irellevant. What is relevant is that the Hispanics I meet who are citizens want the border secured as much as I do.
I see. How do you know that?
Damn straight.
I think you have done a pretty good job of routing them l. PLus I am noticing that Earthdweller, who I seem to recall as an ally in this, is posting now. So by the time he gets now here to this part of thread we will have reinforcements lol
LOL.
It's simple. Santorum had the opportunity to remain neutral in the last primary which Spectre won over a conservative opponent. He supported the Arch-RINO Spectre who squeaked out a victory and has been a pain-in-the-rectum ever since.
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.