According to the NYTimes, "A carefully constructed compromise on immigration reform apparently fell apart in the Senate today after Democrats fended off conservative Republican efforts to amend the agreement and an effort to cut off debate failed by a lopsided vote."
Sounds as though the conservative Republicans were trying to "amend" the agreed to language and their effort to "cut off" debate failed or am I just reading it wrong. Do the authors of the piece realize that or was it their intention to imply that?
Senator Tedward Kennedy said, "I think politics got in front of policy on this issue," as though any activity he has been involved in on Capitol Hill in the past 30 years has ever been any different.
"Despite the bipartisan agreement announced Thursday, some conservative Republicans insisted on trying to offer amendments that the bill's sponsors said would have distorted its purpose. The Democratic leader, Senator Harry Reid of Nevada, termed the effort "filibuster by amendment."'
The above appears entirely to discount Reid's attempt to cut off discussion and implies it was only the "conservative Republicans." The "distortion" these bullies were trying to create was/is a protected border without granting amnesty by any name."Both sides said that without a quick resolution of the differences they would not have a vote on the final legislation before Congress leaves for its spring recess after today."
HOORAY, THREE CHEERS!!! Get a Clue and don't rush 'cause you can't handle it!!
Republicans attempted to add amendments, yet Democrats considered this just a stalling tactic and an attempt to "gut" what they liked about it, even though it is part of what is wrong with it.
According to Senator John McCain, the one of the main architects (along with Tedward), "the fact that we did not act tonight is a huge blow," for his ego and propects for the presidency. But it is a huge boon for the American public as perhaps now, rather than rush through the usual mishmashed mediocrity, they will be forced to work on it more slowly under the scrutiny of our prying voting eyes.
As posted previously here, the three pieces toward legalization, permanence, normalization, phased-in access to earned regularization, earned adjustment or the ever manipulatively incorrect, yet more realistic amnesty are as follows:
1.) "illegal immigrants who have lived in the United States for five years or more, about seven million people, would eventually be granted citizenship if they remained employed, had background checks, paid fines and back taxes and learned English."
Good idea, but what do we do about the 6.3 million of those 7 that don't follow through?
2.) "Illegal immigrants who have lived here for two to five years, about three million people, would have to travel to a United States border crossing and apply for a temporary work visa. They would be eligible for permanent residency and citizenship over time, but they would have to wait several years longer for it."
Good idea, but what do we do about the 2.7 million of those 3 that don't follow through?
3.) "Illegal immigrants who have been here less than two years, about one million people, would be required to leave the country altogether. They could apply for spots in the temporary worker program, but they would not be guaranteed positions."
Good idea, but what do we do about the 1 million of those that don't follow through?
All these good ideas and no one seems to be addressing the 20 million more that enter during the course of playing "make believe" enforcement.
Some horrible, racist ideas sought through amendment by "conservative (trouble making) Republicans were:
DHS certifying that "the border was secure before creating a guest worker program or granting legal status to illegal immigrants."
Having the "legalization program bar illegal immigrants who had deportation orders or had been convicted of a felony or three misdemeanors. "
"Democratic critics of the proposals said they were intended to ensure that the legalization process would never be implemented." Whereas, all Reid and the fellas want is "legalization." Now is that so bad?
Too bad for Ricky "Tricky Dickie, Bird-Tird" Durbin and Harry "what I say it is, it is" Reid that this "uphill battle" for the remainder of the session is taking a vacation and will be more difficult to play with in the future.
Amnesty phased-in access to earned regularization earned adjustment permanence normalization regularization DeMediacrat Islamofascism War On Terror Illegal Immigration
