Wednesday - May 31, 2006

Waiting On A Train

My take on this issue is pretty simple: Congress is not going to be able to pass immigration reform before the November elections. As the editorial excerpt below explains, the House and Senate are diametrically opposed on how to go about it. The House wants to take a tough stance but the Senate wants to include a ton of - shall we say - bulls**t amendments and extra crap that don’t make sense. As reported recently, the Senate bill has a lot of fine print. Here is a sample:

More minor-league athletes from other countries could get visas under the bill. More veterans could be recruited for border duty. The U.S. government would need to consult with various Mexican officials before new border fences could go in. Frequent Western Hemisphere travelers would get a new traveling card. More Canadian power-line workers could enter if they have received “significant training.”

Two-thousand Christian Iraqis in the Detroit area who now face deportation - and more in other parts of the country - could become eligible for legal permanent residency status. That provision seeks to undo a judge’s finding that religious minorities who came here seeking asylum from Saddam Hussein’s regime and got caught in an immigration backlog no longer have claims simply because the Iraqi leader was deposed.

_{Steve Sack - The Minneapolis Star-Tribune}

- Washington Times (May 29): “Make Or Break On Immigration”

The bitter battle over the immigration bill has become a legislative minefield in this election year, though whether it will yield heavy political casualties in November remains to be seen. To say that this issue is a wilderness of thorns, festering party divisions and brewing voter backlashes is putting it mildly. It could inflict additional wounds on George Bush’s battle-scarred presidency, shrink the GOP’s congressional majority and, possibly, hurt some vulnerable Democrats as well. Let’s take some of these pitfalls one by one.

Frankly, it is difficult at this juncture to see how the House and Senate can agree a compromise bill that can attract a majority in either chamber. Their two respective bills are diametrically opposed to one another. The House wants beefed-up, effective enforcement only and no other reforms until we’ve prevented all illegals from crossing the Mexican-U.S. border or at least significantly reduced their numbers.

The Senate generally wants that, plus other reforms, including a guest-worker program that lets migrants cross and recross the border to take jobs in the U.S. when available and would allow those who’ve been here several years to eventually become citizens after paying taxes, fines and meeting some other legal requirements. Neither side is willing to give at this point and leaders in both chambers say the other’s bill would be a nonstarter with their members.

House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert has a political rule on bringing bills to the floor: They must first be supported by a majority of the majority, that is a majority of Republicans. As of now, say party leaders, a majority does not exist and isn’t likely to if a House-Senate conference produces a blend of the two bills with any citizenship provisions.

White House political strategist Karl Rove met Wednesday with House lawmakers to encourage some give in on their position and the word from the closed-door meeting was that he got “a cold reception.” This sets up a possible scenario where the Republicans are unable to produce a bill that can win a majority of both houses and that, as much as anything, would drive Congress’ dismal poll ratings even lower --hurting the Republicans in charge of its legislative machinery and President Bush, who would be seen as ineffectual in enacting his agenda.

Posted by The Skipper     on 05/31/2006 at 04:33 AM   
Filed Under: • Illegal-Aliens and Immigration •  
• Comments (3) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

DISCLAIMER

THE SERVICES AND MATERIALS ON THIS WEBSITE ARE PROVIDED "AS IS" AND THE HOSTS OF THIS SITE EXPRESSLY DISCLAIMS ANY AND ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, TO THE EXTENT PERMITTED BY LAW INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF SATISFACTORY QUALITY, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, WITH RESPECT TO THE SERVICE OR ANY MATERIALS.

Not that very many people ever read this far down, but this blog was the creation of Allan Kelly and his friend Vilmar. Vilmar moved on to his own blog some time ago, and Allan ran this place alone until his sudden and unexpected death partway through 2006. We all miss him. A lot. Even though he is gone this site will always still be more than a little bit his. We who are left to carry on the BMEWS tradition owe him a great debt of gratitude, and we hope to be able to pay that back by following his last advice to us all:

1. Keep a firm grasp of Right and Wrong
2. Stay involved with government on every level and don't let those bastards get away with a thing
3. Use every legal means to defend yourself in the event of real internal trouble, and, most importantly:
4. Keep talking to each other, whether here or elsewhere

It's been a long strange trip without you Skipper, but thanks for pointing us in the right direction and giving us a swift kick in the behind to get us going. Keep lookin' down on us, will ya? Thanks.

THE INFORMATION AND OTHER CONTENTS OF THIS WEBSITE ARE DESIGNED TO COMPLY WITH THE LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. THIS WEBSITE SHALL BE GOVERNED BY AND CONSTRUED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND ALL PARTIES IRREVOCABLY SUBMIT TO THE JURISDICTION OF THE AMERICAN COURTS. IF ANYTHING ON THIS WEBSITE IS CONSTRUED AS BEING CONTRARY TO THE LAWS APPLICABLE IN ANY OTHER COUNTRY, THEN THIS WEBSITE IS NOT INTENDED TO BE ACCESSED BY PERSONS FROM THAT COUNTRY AND ANY PERSONS WHO ARE SUBJECT TO SUCH LAWS SHALL NOT BE ENTITLED TO USE OUR SERVICES UNLESS THEY CAN SATISFY US THAT SUCH USE WOULD BE LAWFUL.

Copyright © 2004-2008 Domain Owner