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.
All of the usual open borders suspects are in love with this Pence character. But you still like Teddy Kennedy's bill better, don't you?
Pence is not for open Borders. To answer your question, I despise Ted Kennedy
Your so right. Bush must have extreme patience. I would have told this supposed "base" to take a flying leap months ago. This is the problem with the internet at times. Its a giant echo chamber. Everyone is convinced that their issue is the one thats the most important and they meet similar people on the net and they all imagine that countless millions think just like they do. Therefore they believe that countless millions of Republicans believe that Bush is a rino, that Sen Brownback is a Rino, that Sen Santorum is a rino, that Sen Martinez is a rino etc etc. Even now Rep Pence is being transformed as a rino because of his stance on immigration. Even though he was a "True Conservative "last week.
It pretty funny to watch. But I am part of the Great unwashed I guess a Bushbot as I have been labled so what do I know lol
You think a "compromise bill" that includes a guest worker provision which includes illegal aliens as eligible for guest worker permits is a compromise. It is not. It is a sellout of all those who have gone through the long legal process, proof that Americans who were against the 1986 amnesty but accepted it when told that strong enforcement would come with the measures included in that bill, were lied to twice. We were told you had the tools to enforce the immigration laws then. Now you want us to believe you need new ones. We were told that would be the last amnesty. Now you want us to accept another.
No, we are done with your vision of "compromise," where Americans demand our laws be enforced, politicians promise us a half-a-loaf 'solution,' and then they deliver us nothing at all. If we wanted nothing from DC, we'd be happy with the status quo, thank you very much. There's no reason for us to be behind a "compromise bill" that gets us even more nothing.
What question did that answer? You do support Teddy's immigration bill, don't you?
Far from it. He is a guardian of freedom.
I support the bill that Kennedy backed as well as many other Conservative Senators and that has the approval of our conservative President. Kennedy is actually supporting legislation I like. Even a clock is right twice a day.
Nothing about the House bill seems to me to be very thought out. Its seems mostly like pandering. However this is because its not really comprehensive. It will hopefully be meshed with the Senate Bill and something good will come out of it.
CNN likes him..that's enough to run away from him as fast as your two little feet can take you.
Sorry..you and I will have to part ways with this. The Senate bill needs adjustments. Too many freebie giveaways. My wallet is not big enough to carry all of Kennedy's pie in the sky ideals. I believe that the punishment for the crime of being illegal needs to be stiff. It's not like a parking ticket like some have implied. It's worse..much worse but there can be restitution.
I agree with Tomcreado, I'd vote for him if I could.
The man should be given an award from protecting us from invaders from the south.
The real "invaders" are Islamic extremists.
I haven't heard your hero Tancredo say a d@mn thing against anyone but Christians. That's why the left likes him.
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.