Senate Panel Approves Immigration Bill

Bear-Arms

Mentor
Joined
Mar 8, 2005
Messages
1,150
Location
United States
WASHINGTON - The Senate Judiciary Committee approved sweeping election-year legislation Monday that clears the way for 11 million illegal aliens to seek U.S. citizenship, a victory for demonstrators who had spilled into the streets by the hundreds of thousands demanding better treatment for immigrants.

With a bipartisan coalition in control, the committee also voted down proposed criminal penalties on immigrants found to be in the country illegally. It approved a new temporary program allowing entry for 1.5 million workers seeking jobs in the agriculture industry.

"All Americans wanted fairness and they got it this evening," said Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (news, bio, voting record), D-Mass., who played a pivotal role in drafting the legislation.

There was no immediate reaction from the White House, and Sen. Lindsey Graham (news, bio, voting record), R-S.C. said he hoped
President Bush would participate in efforts to fashion consensus legislation. "The only thing that's off the table is inaction," said Graham, who voted for the committee bill.

The 12-6 vote broke down along unusual lines, with a majority of the panel's Republicans opposed to the measure even though their party controls the Senate.

Sen. Jon Kyl (news, bio, voting record), R-Ariz., seeking re-election this fall in his border state, said the bill offered amnesty to illegal immigrants, and sought unsuccessfully to insert tougher provisions. He told fellow committee members that the economy would turn sour some day and Americans workers would want the jobs that now go to illegal immigrants. They will ask, "how could you have let this happen," he added.

Committee chairman Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania was one of four Republicans to support the bill, but he signaled strongly that some of the more controversial provisions could well be changed when the measure reaches the Senate floor. That is "very frequently" the case when efforts to reach a broad bipartisan compromise falter, he noted.

In general, the bill is designed to strengthen enforcement of U.S. borders, regulate the flow into the country of so-called guest workers and determine the legal future of the estimated 11 million immigrants living in the United States illegally.

The bill would double the Border Patrol and authorizes a "virtual wall" of unmanned vehicles, cameras and sensors to monitor the U.S.-Mexico border.

It also allows more visas for nurses and agriculture workers, and shelters humanitarian organizations from prosecution if they provide non-emergency assistance to illegal residents.

The most controversial provision would permit illegal aliens currently in the country to apply for citizenship without first having to return home, a process that would take at least six years or more. They would have to pay a fine, learn English, study American civics, demonstrate they had paid their taxes and take their place behind other applicants for citizenship, according to aides to Kennedy.

"Well over 60 percent of Americans in all the polls I see think it's OK to have temporary workers, but you do not have to make them citizens," said Kyl.

"We have a fundamental difference between the way you look at them and the way I look at them," Kennedy observed later.

Arizona GOP Sen. John McCain (news, bio, voting record), a potential presidential contender who worked with Kennedy on the issue, told reporters the street demonstrations had made an impact. "All those people who were demonstrating are not here illegally. They are the children and grandchildren" of those who may have been, he said.

The committee met as several thousand demonstrators rallied at the foot of the Capitol. Many were members of the clergy who donned handcuffs and sang "We Shall Overcome," the unofficial anthem of the civil rights era.

After a weekend of enormous rallies â€â€￾ a crowd of as many as 500,000 demonstrators in Los Angeles â€â€￾ thousands of students walked out of class in California and Texas to protest proposals to crack down on illegal immigrants.

"Do you see the community? Do you see how many people didn't go to work today," asked Janet Padron, attending a rally in Michigan.

Her remark underscored one of the issue's complexities.

Senators on all sides of the issue agreed that illegal workers hold thousands of jobs that otherwise would go unfilled at the wages offered.

The agriculture industry is "almost entirely dependent on undocumented workers," said Sen. Dianne Feinstein (news, bio, voting record), D-Calif.

In purely political terms, the issue threatened to fracture Republicans as they head into the midterm election campaign â€â€￾ one group eager to make labor readily available for low-wage jobs in industries such as agriculture, construction and meatpacking, the other determined to place a higher emphasis on law enforcement.

That was a split Bush was hoping to avoid after a political career spent building support for himself and his party from the fast-growing Hispanic population.

"America should not have to choose between being a welcoming society and being a lawful society," Bush said at a naturalization ceremony for new citizens. "We can be both at the same time."

Bush has said he favors a guest worker program, but it is unclear whether the administration would insist on a provision to require illegal immigrants already in the country to return home before they are allowed to apply for citizenship.

At several critical points, committee Democrats showed unity while Republicans splintered. In general, Graham, Sen. Sam Brownback (news, bio, voting record) of Kansas and Sen. Mike DeWine (news, bio, voting record) of Ohio, who is seeking re-election this fall, voted with the Democrats. That created a majority that allowed them to shape the bill to their liking.

Feinstein won approval for the five-year program to permit as many as 1.5 million agriculture workers into the country. "It will provide the agriculture industry with a legal work force and offer agriculture workers a path to citizenship," she said. The vote was 11-5, with Republicans casting all the votes in opposition.

Kennedy prevailed on a proposal to allow an additional 400,000 green cards for future immigrants, regardless of the industry where they find jobs.
 

White Shogun

Hall of Famer
Joined
Mar 2, 2005
Messages
6,285
I really don't understand these politicians. The latest poll showed that 75%, that's 3/4 of Americans, are in favor of tougher anti-immigration laws. Not amnesty. Not "guest worker" programs.

But these guys stay in office, year after year, election after election.

And even in the rare case when we DO vote someone out of office, the idiot that replaces him votes the same way as the castoff imcumbent.

Start taking Spanish classes now. Maybe add a semester of Mandarin, while you're at it.
 

guest301

Hall of Famer
Joined
Jan 7, 2006
Messages
4,246
Location
Ohio
Sen. Dewine(OHIO) will hear my disgust with his vote. He sent me some vague email promising to be tough but this is a joke and I just hope the larger Senate body does a better job on this when they recieve the house bill. This is flat out disgusting and inexcusable. I expect nothing but crapola legislation from the Democrats, but the Republicans should know better. None of those people won elections by promising a guest worker program. I sure hope a angry electorate shows up for the 2008 elections and I hope the slate of candidates to pick from is much better.
 

bigunreal

Mentor
Joined
Oct 21, 2004
Messages
1,923
There is no reason to ever expect our political leaders to do anything right. They haven't done anything to help the great majority of our citizens for a very, very long time and the situation doesn't look to change any time soon. As long as the one-party Republicrats have a stranglehold on our political system, there is no point in voting. Besides, it's pretty obvious they don't even count the votes (read "Votescam" by the late, great Collier brothers, if you haven't done so). Actually, we should all hope they don't count the votes, because if they really do, the people who vote in our elections are the biggest idiots in the history of humanity. Consider that, no matter how bad the problems are in our country, about 98% of all incumbents are re-elected, in virtually every election. As someone once pointed out a long time ago, the old Soviet Politburo had a higher turnover rate than that. If our elected leaders can't understand what a nightmarish future they are ensuring for their children and grandchildren with this open-bordered immigration policy, then they are either dumber than the fools who elected them or (far more likely) they are consciously engaging in a criminal conspiracy.
 

JD074

Master
Joined
Oct 19, 2004
Messages
2,301
Location
Kentucky
Hopefully the House will kill any guestworker program amnesty. Tancredo said that if the Senate passes something resembling the Judiciary Committee debacle, it would be killed. But House Speaker Haster said that they will consider everything....

All the Republicans on TV- especially that extremely obnoxious Kudlow guy- is complaining that this is breaking up the GOP, and it's losing all the gains it has made among Hispanics. I say, good! Maybe a break up of the GOP is exactly what we need. Not that I'm optimistic about anything, including this, but a break up of both parties could only be a good thing.
 
Joined
Aug 5, 2005
Messages
388
Location
North Carolina
Nice observation about the Politburo, bigunreal. Just like the Soviet Union, we too "elect" our politicians from pre-approved slates issued by the ruling party.

The truth is that voting is just a way for Big Government to dupe the rabble into thinking that it is a government "by the people, for the people." The worn-out cliche says it best: if voting could change anything, it would be abolished.
 

jaxvid

Hall of Famer
Joined
Oct 15, 2004
Messages
7,246
Location
Michigan
Southern Knight said:
Nice observation about the Politburo, bigunreal. Just like the Soviet Union, we too "elect" our politicians from pre-approved slates issued by the ruling party.

The truth is that voting is just a way for Big Government to dupe the rabble into thinking that it is a government "by the people, for the people." The worn-out cliche says it best: if voting could change anything, it would be abolished.

I disagree. It's worse then that. If only there was a central party calling the shots that we could shoot down. What it really is about is that there is a poisonous mindset that infects so many people that any change is impossible. At the upper levels there are arranged candidates but at the local level I have seen and worked for people that were really different, could really change things, but not a chance, people just will not vote for them. The public makes the two party system survive. They are to be blamed not political parties that cash in on the stupidity of the voters. There is only one way to break that cycle, restrict the vote to property holding white males, OOPS sorry we already tried it and it didn't last. DARN!
 

White Shogun

Hall of Famer
Joined
Mar 2, 2005
Messages
6,285
There is only one way to break that cycle, restrict the vote to property holding white males.

You should see the shock on people's faces when I say pretty much the same thing.

Women rarely vote on the issues. Remember the whole Al & Tipper kiss? Or the bulge in Gore's pants? How many women voted for Gore because he "kissed his wife on TV?"

Listen to or watch some of those 'man on the street interviews.' It seems as though at least half the population does not even know the name of the Vice President, let alone the Secretary of State. And we let these idiots vote?

Some will say that voting is meaningless of course, like SK said. Maybe its just a way to make everyone think the outcome is 'not' predetermined. I've always wondered how in the hell any of us would ever know how many votes were really cast, and for what candidate. We basically just have to take the news media at their word. And we know how accurate they are!
 

JD074

Master
Joined
Oct 19, 2004
Messages
2,301
Location
Kentucky
I agree, the public must take their fair share of the blame. There is nothing more annoying than a Bush-supporting Republican or "conservative." I expect liberals to be vehemently opposed to the best interests of white people. But these dumb*ss Republicans should be on our side, and they're not. Bush is working against white people every bit as much as any Democrat. The lack of racial awareness among white so-called conservatives is astonishing.

It's not just a practical matter, although that's my perspective (basically, I don't want to be a minority.) It's also an issue of justice. White people's interests are not being represented and conservatives couldn't care less. All they care about is economic growth and diversity.
 

Bart

Hall of Famer
Joined
Feb 6, 2005
Messages
4,329
White Shogun said:
Women rarely vote on the issues. Remember the whole Al & Tipper kiss? Or the bulge in Gore's pants? How many women voted for Gore because he "kissed his wife on TV?"


Sad to say, it's true.Looks are the most important factor in determining a woman's vote. A big spender will always appeal to them over a -mean spirited- fiscally reponsible candidate. Clinton with his phony - I feel your pain- shtick andfull head of wavy hairhad them lined up , ready, willing and able to perform at his beck and call.
 

Vindicator

Newbie
Joined
Jan 2, 2006
Messages
98
Location
Tennessee
Since Warren G. Harding, women have been voting on the basis of looks. Single women vote for the reckless spenders. They "marry the government" in their minds because they want to be taken care of.
 
Top