Posted on 06/12/2007 8:10:31 PM PDT by ConservativeMind
His party divided and his polls sagging, President Bush prodded rebellious Senate Republicans on Tuesday to help resurrect legislation that could provide eventual citizenship for millions of illegal immigrants.
"It's a highly emotional issue," said Bush after a session in which several lawmakers bluntly told him their constituents do not trust the government to secure the nation's borders or weed out illegal workers at job sites.
To alleviate the concerns, the president said he was receptive to an emergency spending bill as a way to emphasize his administration's commitment to accelerated enforcement. One congressional official put the price tag at up to $15 billion.
"I don't think he changed any minds," conceded Sen. Mel Martinez (news, bio, voting record), R-Fla., a supporter of the legislation. But Martinez added that the president's appearance had helped nudge "people on the fence" to be more favorably inclined.
One Republican widely viewed as a potential convert, Sen. Bob Corker (news, bio, voting record) of Tennessee, said he was not yet persuaded. "At the end of the day, I've got to be able to sit down and know myself that we are going to secure our border," he said. "Today, I do not feel that way."
Bush's trip to the Capitol marked only the second time since he became president that he attended the weekly closed-door senators lunch, a gesture that underscored the importance he places on passage of comprehensive immigration legislation.
Despite the president's commitment, many conservatives in his own party have criticized the measure as an amnesty for millions of lawbreakers. Additionally, job approval ratings in the 30-percent range make it difficult for the president to bend even Republican lawmakers to his will.
Compounding the challenge is a stream of statements from Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (news, bio, voting record), D-Nev., that it is up to Bush and the Republicans to produce enough votes to revive a measure that was sidetracked on the Senate floor last week. "We'll move on to immigration when they have their own act together," he told reporters during the day.
"Fourteen percent of the Republicans supporting the president's bill won't do the trick," he said, referring to the fact that only seven GOP senators supported a move to free the bill from limbo last week.
Several participants in the Republican meeting described the session as friendly and rancor-free, and said Bush had even made a joke at one point when addressing Sen. Jeff Sessions (news, bio, voting record), the Alabama Republican who is one of the bill's fiercest critics.
One senator quoted Bush as telling Sessions: "Don't worry, I'll still go to your fundraiser. We disagree about this, but we are friends."
Sessions was among the senators to question the president, pointing to polls showing widespread opposition to the legislation. Bush responded that there are other polls that show support, according to participants. They spoke on condition of anonymity, citing confidentiality rules covering the closed-door meeting.
These officials said numerous senators told Bush the public lacks confidence that the government would carry out the enforcement measures in the bill.
One, Sen. Saxby Chambliss (news, bio, voting record), R-Ga., told Bush that he and fellow Georgia Republican Johnny Isakson (news, bio, voting record) had sent the president a letter outlining the concerns.
"The message from a majority of Georgians is that they have no trust that the United States government will enforce the laws contained in this new legislation and secure the border first," it said.
"This lack of trust is rooted in the mistakes made in 1986, and the continued chaos surrounding our immigration laws. Understandably, the lack of credibility the federal government has on this issue gives merit to the skepticism of many about future immigration reform."
The letter asked Bush to support a spending bill to secure the border before other elements of the immigration measure go into effect. It did not specify how much money would be needed, but one congressional official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said the advance costs could reach $10 billion to $15 billion.
"The administration should request the emergency funds, and the Senate should vote to provide them before resuming debate on the broader immigration measure," Chambliss said in an interview.
Apart from the additional funds, Republican and Democratic supporters of the bill hoped to complete work on an agreement that could free it for final passage by month's end.
Discussions center on a plan to allow votes on about a dozen Republican-sponsored amendments as well as several proposals by Democrats. In exchange, GOP holdouts would then support a move to end debate and advance the bill to a final vote.
Among the amendments was one by Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison (news, bio, voting record), R-Texas, to require all illegal immigrant household heads to return to their countries of origin before obtaining legal status. Under the legislation, only those seeking green cards — permanent legal residency — would be required to return home first.
After an early evening negotiating session between Republican and Democratic senators, Sen. Lindsey Graham (news, bio, voting record), R-S.C., said the group is trying to craft an amendment to assure Americans that the bill will include ample funding for tighter border security and tougher workplace enforcement. The plan could involve "pre-funding" the effort with billions of dollars eventually to be repaid through fines and fees, he said, or through a more traditional supplemental spending bill, such as those recently used to pay for the Iraq war.
Graham said the bipartisan negotiators also are looking at harsher penalties for immigrants who overstay their visas or re-enter the country illegally. "If you had mandatory jail time" for such offenses, he said, "I think it would create a deterrent."
Another possible amendment, Graham said, would ban employers from participating in a new temporary worker program if they repeatedly break the law by hiring illegal workers.
"I'm looking for ways to break the cycle of skepticism" among those who feel a new immigration law would be as poorly enforced as the 1986 law, he said.
The administration pushed back against Republican critics of the bill later Tuesday. In a letter to nine conservative senators who bitterly oppose the measure, Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff said the administration has committed manpower and money to improving border security and enforcement, and needs the immigration bill to step up its efforts.
"Failure to act on this legislation will deny the country the safety and security provided by these enhanced enforcement measures," Chertoff wrote.
___
Associated Press writer Julie Hirschfeld Davis contributed to this story.
That can't be repeated enough. I don't care if they are legal or illegal. I just don't want hundreds of millions of uneducated 3rd world people coming to the U.S.A and ruining it by voting for Democrats/socialism and turning the U.S. into a socialist Mexico or Venezuela. I kinda like having freedom , prosperity and civilization you know. And if they came here illegally they should be deported 500 miles deep into Mexico like Ike did it.
I think real conservatives are rugged individualists. I'm an individualist and I am against giving people charity or government benefits. I don't care about helping anyone in "need" or anyone who is poor like the poor 3rd world immigrants who want to come to the U.S.A to make a better life here. That sounds like the socialist ideology: "From each according to his ability to each according to his need". Socialism has never worked anywhere it has been tried, the Soviet Union, Cuba, North Korea, the killing Fields of Cambodia etc. .
socialism /collectivism doesn't work . socialism /collectivism doesn't work
F. A. Hayek had a remarkable career pointing out the flaws in collectivism. One of his keenest insights was that, paradoxically, any collectivist system necessarily depends on one individual (or small group) to make key social and economic decisions. In contrast, a system based on individualism takes advantage of the aggregate, or 'collective,' information of the whole society; through his actions each participant contributes his own particular, if incomplete, knowledge—information that could never be tapped by the individual at the head of a collectivist state. Hayek's book "The Road to Serfdom"
A classic work in political philosophy, intellectual and cultural history, and economics, The Road to Serfdom has inspired and infuriated politicians, scholars, and general readers for half a century. Originally published in England in the spring of 1944--when Eleanor Roosevelt supported the efforts of Stalin, and Albert Einstein subscribed lock, stock, and barrel to the socialist program--The Road to Serfdom was seen as heretical for its passionate warning against the dangers of state control over the means of production. For F. A. Hayek, the collectivist idea of empowering government with increasing economic control would inevitably lead not to a utopia but to the horrors of nazi Germany and fascist Italy.
“Just kill this bill and start over ENFORCE THE EXISTING LAWS!!.”
Like this One?.....
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2006/10/20061026.html
That’s one, for starters. I notice he’s been dragging his feet on that one. There are others of course he hasn’t even bothered to address.
An enemy inside the walls is always more dangerous than one outside the gates.
Agree, but this part of the letter disturbs me a little. This bill will pass.
We respectfully ask that your Administration enforce the border security laws that have already been authorized by Congress “regardless of whether the Senate passes the immigration reform bill”. We believe these enforcement measures are vital and “should not wait until Congress passes additional immigration reforms.”
Why should we trust them to do ANYTHING for us, if they won’t handle this one?
IMO, they have proven they do not deserve any trust on Immigration at any level. This Amnesty Bill tells us this is true. The question is, what can we do to replace the traitors in control. Personally, I think impeachment and recall are potential tools but not likely to be successful...any other ideas?
If you consider the Republicans’ biggest donors (big business), it is divided. Of course, big business wants the cheap labor that the illegals provide.
Big business can’t vote, but they write big checks.
I'm not going to lay down in a minefield. Sounds painful.
The ACTUAL solution would be doable, but too complex for government to accomplish; and business could do it but they would rather cheat to make a bit more money.
1. Amnesty for those illegals who have been here continuously for (say) 8 or more years, AND who pass certain rigorous background checks, AND a rigorous citizenship / language test (to make sure of assimilation). Also, payment of 'estimated' back taxes based on prevailing over-the-table wages in the industry the individual works in; this could be done on the installment plan. ****This step would be problematic in that it might admit a LOT of terrorist sleepers, so I'm not sure it would be a great idea. *****
2. BTFW (Build the wall).
3. Mass deportations of the others.
4. Change ALL the existing visas to prefer Europeans and other First-Worlders who can support themselves; but require a 1-to-1 match of new hires of US citizens for every visa card holder hired by a sponsoring company. And a policy that visa holders MUST be laid off first in preference to citizens.
5. A limited 'guest worker' program with the company posting guaranty bonds for the workers. Workers must be paid above the table, and possess a biometric ID card. Remittances out of the US would be subject to (say) 15% tax to help fund the costs of administration.
6. Ted Kennedy, John McCain, Mel Martinez, and Lindsey Graham should be sent to Iran.
7. Bush and Cherkoff should be sent packing.
8. John Kyl and Sen. Craig of Idaho should be condemned to pick lettuce at the under-the-table wage.
Cheers!
No, Bush really doesn't care. I agree with you. We're on the road to national extinction.
Thanks.
And, here’s another idea.....change it to “SENATOR”...put up that wall.....and do a thread and get people to send it to their senators!
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.