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.
Tancredo has been the lone voice for immigration sanity for years. Now you are saying that Tancredo is just being political if he doesn't admit defeat and back the opposite of what he has stood for all these years?
Every piece of legislation that leaves the house will have border enforcement amendments tacked on so Bush and the senate won't be able to kill it or hide from it.
Until Hastert or Boehner draw the line in the sand, there is no line in the sand.
Your standard seems to uniquely apply to anti-immigration candidates. And it should be no surprise as this speaks for itself.
You obviously know alot about ESP. The ignorance is yours.
Yes, I am ignorant about your reference to ESP. What does ESP have to do with Tancredo and his ability to represent my district? He does a great job and has been re-elected by huge margins. He is a strong Conservative, and will be re-elected in November.
What bullying? Pence's plan is the best compromise there is. You and I agreed to that already. If the Senate won't consider it, then what?
If the status quo continues, the House will be just as much to blame.
Wrong. Voters will realize that the Senate is to blame and just wants to ram its amnesty package down America's throats. House candidates will be supported, but the Senate and support for the administration will deteriorate even more than it already has.
In addition, every House member is running, so they're much more exposed than the Senate is.
House Republicans will be rewarded. The Senate will completely be ignored. Maybe its time for a unicameral Congress, IMO.
"Tancredo doesn't want a solution to illegal immigration."
However, in the second paragraph of the article, Tancredo offers his solution:
"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.
So Tancredo goes beyond just wanting a solution, he actually offers one.
However, he knows that there will be NO bill without a guest worker component so he is offering NO SOLUTION at all. He will just keep moving the goal posts since immigration is the only thing that keeps him in his phoney baloney job.
Doesn't matter. If the House is seen as being the obstacle to an immigration bill, Tancredo will spend the next two years getting nothing, for sure, on illegal immigration.
"No bill" translates, for the voting public, into "no action, no reform." If you think that works in the House GOP's favor, you're mistaken.
Friend of mine spoke to Sensenbrenner's staff. Said he's aware of it but the Senate still supports its amnesty.
How are you and sinkspur going to support reasonable immigration reform now?
I don't understand this logic on immigration. If people cant accept a Pence like compromise in the House then I am beginning to wonder the end game here with that group. I have noticed a slight change in the debate here and elsewhere. At the start it was only being against illegal immigration. Now the anti legal immigration forces are being more open in what they believe.
You're engaged in wishful thinking. Voters will say "the Senate is reasonable, the House is not." It would be very easy to write a few ads, in fact, that point that out.
House candidates in marginal districts will get clobbered.
Did you think the Senate was just going to say hey that's better than ours? Geeze. There are 2 bills on the table and if there is to be a final bill it will be some combination of the 2. If that can't be reconciled then there will be no bill. That is what Tancredo is praying for. He is the last person on earth to want this issue resolved.
"What Part of No Don't You Understand?" - Lorrie Morgan
Maybe we ought to mail a copy of that song to all our wavering RINO Senators and Congrescritters.
NO AMNESTY!
Sinskpur, please....you're dizzying me with the spinning here.
The end game is to do nothing and then to bitch and moan for another 40 years.
Its a good thing that the Senate BIll is not an amnesty bill then
"...what does that have to do with avoiding Vietnam?"
What the hell does ANYTHING have to do with avoiding Vietnam? By the time the Bush presidency ends we'll have had sixteen years of presidents who avoided Vietnam, let alone congressmen.So what?
I spent a year there...does that qualify me to be an elected official? Not in the least. I do, however, think it gives me the right to be angry when I'm up to my a$$ in illegal Mexicans.
If Tancredo is doing something to put a stop to this, more power to him. If a broken term limit promise (how many others did this) is more impotant to you, then let the Mexicans live in YOUR garage.
Posting HTML
I'm going to watch you squirm when the House begins to backpedal.
Maybe the Pence bill is the best anybody can get this year. As you can see, however, the unappeaseables will still kick and scream and piss and moan that it's a "sellout." And Tancredo will try to kill it.
I'll back Pence's bill, gladly, because he, at least, is facing reality.
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.