Wednesday, April 05, 2006

The latest Senate amnesty plan.

I'm not sure this is such a terrible approach, but it has at least two major flaws even if it gets out of the Senate. One legislative and the other logistical. Reconciling this with the House bill will be extremely difficult and even if that is done with some compromise that resembles the Senate proposal how do you implement this plan? One of the big arguments now is that we can't find or deal with illegal immigrants that are already here so this plan will only work with those illegals that want to voluntarily comply.

Some highlights of the new proposal:

• Those who had been in the country the longest, more than five years, would not be required to return to their home country before gaining legal status. They would be subject to several tests, including the payment of fines and back taxes, and be required to submit to a background check, according to these officials.

• Illegal immigrants in the United States less than five years but more than two would be required to go to a border point of entry, briefly leave and then be readmitted to the United States. As with the longer-term illegal, other steps would be required, these officials said.

• Illegal immigrants in the United States less than two years would be required to leave the country and join any other foreign residents seeking legal entry.

This is what you get when you ask 100 people (our dear Senate) to formulate policy. It's about as elegant as a giraffe in a wheelchair, but I guess it's better than nothing. And it's fair. There's something here for everyone to hate.

Hats off to DavidU, who watched far more CSPAN II than I did.

Wasn't it Bismarck who said something like, "Laws are like sausages. It's best not seeing them made"?

Too sleepy to Google. Good night!

DavidU should go to Washington and remind these guys of what they've been doing and tell them what they should be doing. He's got a better handle on this than anybody pontificating in the Senate right now.

Years ago I put a telephone intercom system in a meat packing plant down in Alma, Georgia. No matter who said that about sausages was correct. I have to admit to liking to see most laws getting made and to just eating sausage without thinking too much.

These proposals are INSANE. How do we know how long an illegal has been here? Do they have a stamped visa or passport to show us? Nope.

What "proof" is acceptable? Under the table bribes perhaps? And who manages this bureaucracy?

Why are we rewarding people for being illegal longer than others?

This is ridiculous. Secure the borders. Set up a guest worker program, and if you want to be a citizen go through the same process as everyone else.
Seneca, RW - You guys seen the commercial for Comcast internet security with the monkey with the sledge hammer to combat spam and viruses? If they would just make C-Span into a reality show where people, when they see a senator say something stupid they could call in and vote for the monkey to come out and smack the senator with a bat. We would get better laws passed and with more efficiency. I mean do we really need to pass something recognizing a championship team? Didn't they get a trophies that's recognition enough...FIX this immigration stuff instead of preparing speeches and taking up time praising the Gators and Terps! Where is number for the MONKEY!!!

Oh and Go Gators!
Is everyone ready for the most useless vote in Senate history (sarc. I'm sure there have been worst ones). Perfect scenario: Sen Kyl fixed the language as not to include visa violators and Dem can get the stick out of their butt and continue with the next amendment (R- GA vs. R- ID....come on, I really want to see this one). Worst case: We have a cloture vote, its voted down and Dem lose. Sen. Frist's bill is voted on, if Rep stick together, its passed. We come out with a really cool looking border wall and still have ~8 million illegals who are now fenced in :) America Loses. I'm calling my bookie and putting 100 on America Loses :(

On a Related question: Does anyone know who has the power to cancel the upcoming Easter Recess? Frist? Bush? Reid? I don't know, but I guess only the first two. Rove needs to get Bush to cancel the recess. Come out on TV and say this is a huge issue (there are marches planned for all this weekend on both sides of the issue, then more already in May) and they need to pass the legislation before they leave on vacation. Everyone is waiting for Bush to say and do something "Presidential" on this issue so this would be the opportunity. I don't think the Minority Leader can actually cancel a recess, but he should at least say he wants to bypass the recess. The guy needs to do it as soon as the cloture vote fails this morning. I mean as soon as the vote is made, I want to see that little old guy from Nevada sprint off the floor, run down a reporter with a camera in the hall way and say Dem are willing to stay during recess to resolve.....blah...blah. He needs to do it before Bush comes around to it. Heck I don't really care, just someone needs to do it and get something realistic passed.
I am watching the new "Foo Fighters" video on Fuse and guess what the drummer has written on his bass drum?

"Captain Beyond"

Never underestimate the wide reach and influence of Captain Beyond.
This is Dull Tool speaking.

Who is Captain Beyond?

From the wild blue yonda?

This question I ponda.

Please responda.

I'll answer if I must-y

It's these guys. Or maybe you know them better from here.
Are you Reese Wynans?
Residents of the State of Alabama are getting their money's with from Sen. Sessions in this immigration legislation. He's been on the floor so many times I lost count and may be the only one that is making sense and actually paying attention to what Senate is trying to pass. Other than his "This is Amnesty!" rant in between sentences, he's been the only Real Republican speaking on the immigration issues.

Just thought I'd give him a 'hat tip' for doing what people elected him to do. Everyone else on the right seems very scared.
Doesn't mean I would have voted for him since I'm a Democrat and I do not follow his views, but he's making Republicans really proud. While the rest of the party hides trying to find a middle ground. Politically speaking; you have the majority, the majority of Americans want you to get tough...get tough. Don't cry later when you had the power to get it done your way and you folded.

As a Democrat I'm glad the Republicans are lost on this issue and are bending to Democrats and most of my views. They call it bi-partisan, but it's really the Democratic point of view in most of the bill.

What is the big fight over whether they can offer amendments or not?

My understanding is that the Dems aren't allowing any amendments to be voted on. Maybe David U can explain to us how they have that power since they are in the minority.

I say close the whole thing down and come back in 2 weeks and start over. Meanwhile we can accurately spread the word through a media blizt that the Dems are obstructionists. It worked for Saxby, and it's true.
Buy Danish,

Everybody talks about a majority meaning something, but in the Senate it doesn't mean nearly as much.

DavidU is also right that it doesn't help that the Senate Republicans don't have any balls. I'm hanging my hopes that the House will keep some sanity here.
RW- Yep, Dem don't want to allow debate on certain amendments, specially Sen. Kyl's, for fear they will drastically change the original bill. So they are blocking any amendments from being debated (Sen Kyl's is first in line to be debated, and he obviously refuses to let them skip him to get to more 'friendly' amendments). All the Rep Senators are together in saying let's discuss the amendments, but Dem even though they have a whole lot of Rep with them I think are worried that once they let Kyl's amendment be debated they could lose control of the bills direction. If they continue to block debate on amendments, the only thing left to do is to vote on the bill as is without amendments, which means the bill will not pass (like this mornings bill).

Sen. Session's is saying even with amendments the current bills sucks. He says the Senate has not even figured out how much it's going to cost or where the money is going to come from. He wants more meetings and experts to come talk to them about the issue. It seems reasonable but I think he forgets about the Recess and the fact that people want a bill NOW.
BD- How I understand it, Sen. Reid used a parliamentary maneuver (used to end filibusters) to force the Senate to decide whether the bill should be considered for a vote on the Senate floor as is. He filled cloture on the original bill, forcing a vote without any amendments unless basically he approved and thus removed his cloture motion. So they voted this morning on the original bill and said no to the bill. He basically took Frist's ability to shove amendment, that were against the Dem plans, into the bill. Although Sen. Lott later warned there were ways around Reid's tactics, but said he did not want to stoop to those levels. I have no idea what he meant, but it sounded better than anything American Idol can offer. :)

If this is not the case, someone let me know.

Is the Kyl amendment what they are waiting for now?

I'm a "people" and I would prefer they take their recess to listen to some of us and then come back to finish this bill.
RW- Yep, Sen. Kyl was the first to file an amendment.

Sen. Kyl refuses to change some of the language in his amendment

Sen. Reid probably suspects that Sen. Kyl has the votes, and the amendment makes a big change to the Judiciary bill, so he's blocking debate on it.
Dear Captain Beyond and RW, I saw Sen. Durbin on Lehrer News Hour and he was smirking about how Reid had declared cloture and kept the other senators from discussing any amendments. Cornish(R) from Texas was there totally disgusted. It does seem that they think the public expects immediate results (and they want to go on their spring break). Didn't see Sen. Sessions but he usually makes good sense. What a mess.
Another vote tomorrow morning on the bill RW posted to start this thread.

I've only watched bits and pieces of this, can you explain why Harry Reid kept calling his podium a car and a chair?
I'm still losing it...
Sen. Frist was has been saying that the Dem are refusing to let anything happen on this bill and that their actions are basically unprecedented in blocking legislation. Sen. Reid was saying "I can call this lecturn a car all I want, it still does not make it a car" then explaining that the procedure is common place, it's how the Senate has worked for some 200 years and that the Dem are not blocking anything, they are ready to vote right now (Minus amendments). Basically both were posturing for the camera. Frist knew this has been done before (even by Rep, Sen. Lott admitted to doing it many times just a couple of days ago) and Reid knows he's blocking a vote (Rep are not going to vote on a bill without being able to amendment it).

Fun times all around.
I'll be happy if they just pack it up and start over in 2 weeks.
Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?