Immigration Bill or "How to Eat an Elephant"

Scenario...There is a rogue elephant in the room. First step is to identify the elephant. Second step is to formulate a plan on how to deal with said pachyderm. Next thing needed is a plan on how to properly dispose of the animal for the good of all. The only way to eat said elephant is one bite at a time. What does this have to do with Immigration and the bill that won't die? Instead of insisting on an all or nothing approach, euphemistically called a "Comprehensive Approach" let's start over with nothing, show the country that they (the Government) is willing to enforce the laws that are already on the books, build the fence that was overwhelmingly approved last year, increase border security, stem the flood and enforce employer laws, cut off federal money to
Sanctuary Cities" and then we can talk about dealing with the illegal immigrants already here and maybe a guest worker program. The bill that is under consideration is so gangrenous and rotten that is smells from its core.

If President Bush is successful in his attempt to revive this fiasco as part of his legacy, it will indeed go down as part of his legacy and it is not the kind of legacy most people would find attractive. He and several of his party, formerly my party, in collusion with many of the Democratic party are willing to spit in the face of 73% of the American people. As low as Bush's approval rating is, it is almost twice what Harry Reid's approval rating is at the time. That may not last. There are a few heroes in the GOP. Among them are Cornyn, Hutchison, Coburn, Demint, Sessions and others but there are also a perfidious few that are in a race to the bottom. This elephant is down but not out and remains indigestible in its present state.

Why is the Senate and Bush so enamored with this bill? Why does it need to be 'comprehensive" and try to address both the enforcement and the amnesty at the same time. Why not separately? Because this puts them on both sides of the issue which is what most politicians want. Plausible deniability depending on the audience and set of voters they happen to be addressing at the time. They can say that it was the best they could get and had to compromise to do it. Expect to hear various forms of the canard "We just could not sacrifice the good in pursuit of the perfect." In fact what they have done is settled for the bad rather than pursue the good or at least much better. I'll say it again, better no bill than this bill. This may be a watershed moment for some of the GOP Senators when it is time for the primaries. Voltaire said it best. "Dans ce pays-ci, il est bon de tuer de temps en temps un amiral pour encourager les autres" In this country, it is wise from time to time to kill an admiral to encourage the others. Some of these Senators may indeed face a career ending primary firing squad.

Cornyn, Hutchison Followup Letters

I received two follow-up letters from Texas Senators John Cornyn and Kay Bailey Hutchison today and thought I would share them with you. It does seem that some of the Senate is listening. I hope they continue to listen to the people and not to the President and others including Kyle, Graham, Kennedy and McCain.

Dear Mr. Heard:

Thank you for contacting me about immigration reform. The need to fix our broken system is clear, and I appreciate having the benefit of your insight on one of the most important issues of our day.

Immigration reform ultimately must be about improving our system for legal immigration, not about creating new benefits for illegal aliens. Although we are a proud nation of immigrants, we are also a nation of laws. If policymakers will agree that all immigrants must abide by the rule of law, then we can reach a consensus on ways to improve the legal process so that it meets the needs of our society, our economy and our national security.

Recently, the Senate began to debate S. 1348, a comprehensive immigration reform bill. It is encouraging that the Senate is taking up this important matter and attempting to address the problems that plague our immigration system. However, I have serious concerns that the legislation, as drafted, will repeat the well documented mistakes of the 1986 amnesty bill. Further, if we fail to address the rampant fraud and fail to close all loopholes in our current broken system, then we will fail to truly reform our system.

I have been working throughout my time in the Senate to develop a solution to this problem that I believe will work. I would invite you to visit my website at http://www.cornyn.senate.gov/immigration to acquaint yourself with the immigration reforms I support. As we consider this bill in the Senate and beyond, I will continue to promote these policies, but I will oppose any bill that rewards illegal conduct and encourages further disrespect for our laws.

I appreciate the opportunity to represent the interests of Texans in the United States Senate. Thank you for taking the time to contact me.

Sincerely,

JOHN CORNYN
United States Senator





517 Hart Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510
Tel: (202) 224-2934
Fax: (202) 228-2856
http://www.cornyn.senate.gov

Here is the letter from Senator Hutchison.

Dear Mr. Heard:

Knowing of your interest in the issue of immigration, I wanted to send you a copy of an opinion editorial that I wrote with Senator Cornyn three weeks ago about the immigration bill currently being considered by the U.S. Senate. The editorial appeared in newspapers throughout Texas.

Secure Borders and Immigration Reform Without Amnesty

by Senators Kay Bailey Hutchison and John Cornyn

Published in Texas newspapers the week of May 21, 2007

As your U.S. Senators, we have been heavily involved in the Congressional debate on immigration reform for several years. We have taken a leadership role on this issue because we represent a state that uniquely benefits from the contributions of legal immigrants, but is also uniquely vulnerable to the dangers of illegal immigration. Throughout this process, our principles have been clear and consistent: We must secure our borders, and we cannot encourage illegal behavior through amnesty.

Last week, the Bush administration, along with a small group of Senators, announced a compromise immigration bill that would take a necessary first step in improving border security. We did not join in the announcement. While our efforts had a positive influence, we were not convinced the announced proposal guarantees repair of our current broken system. We are particularly concerned that we may be repeating the mistakes of the failed 1986 national amnesty.

As of late Friday, the actual text of the “grand compromise” had not yet been published. Major questions remain about details of the plan, and how it would work. , We believe the bill – which was negotiated privately – deserves a full public airing before it’s considered.

The bill promises some long-term positive changes, including significant border security measures, an end to chain migration, and a switch to green card distribution based on merit.

But many problems have not been satisfactorily addressed. For example, we must make certain that convicted criminals are not eligible for any legalization, and if these individuals attempt to stay here, that they are arrested and promptly deported.

We must ensure that only those who have played by the rules – and not those engaged in identity theft – receive Social Security benefits. This proposal would enable illegal immigrants to collect Social Security benefits for the time they were unlawfully in our country. At a time when we are already facing major shortfalls in our ability to pay benefits for future retirees, this represents an unfair burden on the American taxpayer. We must end the rampant document fraud that plagues our workplaces today, and do it in a way that is legally enforceable.

Some of our colleagues, sensing the fragile nature of the proposed compromise, want to rush it through the Congress immediately. This would be a major mistake. It is too important and too complicated to rush. The legislation requires extended Senate debate, with full opportunity for public input and criticism, and an open process for amendments to strengthen its provisions.

In 1986, the Congress approved a similar compromise plan that, in return for amnesty for most immigrants here illegally, promised an end to porous borders and disregard for our laws. Those promises were not honored. The amnesty legislation instead actually encouraged further disrespect for our laws, and led directly to the situation we face today.

As the bill reaches the Senate floor this week, our goal will be restoring the integrity of our borders, providing guest workers with opportunity, not amnesty, and preserving our social security for all who legally qualify. Our contributions to the debate will continue to be positive, and constructive.

Our country needs immigration reform. We must ensure that it’s done, and done correctly.

Sincerely,
Kay Bailey Hutchison


Please do not reply to this message. If you have additional comments, send your remarks through Senator Hutchison's website at http://hutchison.senate.gov/. Thank you.

I am working on a "how-to eat an elephant" piece as a way to immigration reform.

Eating Crow, and liking it

In my previous post I stated that the Amnesty Bill was a fait accompli. Apparently it may not be a done deal yet. According to this from the Washington Times

"The president's willingness to accept the granting of amnesty to millions of illegal immigrants has sent a harmful message to Republican voters around the country," said Rep. Mike Pence, Indiana Republican. "But I also believe that'll sort itself out in the primaries of 2008. At the end of the day, this is an issue where I find myself focusing less on politics than what policy I think is in the best interests of the American people."
Last year, both Mr. Pence and Sen. John Cornyn of Texas appeared to be promising allies for Mr. Bush. Mr. Pence met with the president in the Oval Office to talk about the congressman's plan to have illegal aliens leave the country and apply to re-enter from outside.
When Democrats won control of Congress, Mr. Bush tacked left, negotiating with Mr. Kennedy, Massachusetts Democrat, and producing a deal on Thursday that many Republicans say is amnesty.
"The core of the apple here is the fact that 12 million illegal immigrants in this country can get right with the law without leaving the country. I think for most Americans, that is amnesty," Mr. Pence said, adding that from his read of his colleagues -- Democrats and Republicans -- "I don't believe the Senate bill has a future in the House."
Also on the outside of the deal is Mr. Cornyn, who at one point had a bill that most closely mirrored Mr. Bush's principles of a temporary-worker program and requiring illegal aliens to leave the country without creating a new path to citizenship for them.

If this bill does actually go down in flames, I will be very happy. Someone pass the salt and pepper please.

Bastante es Bastante revisited

The latest update on the new Amnesty Bill in Congress. The title is in reference to a post I made in 2005 if you're wondering. It means enough is enough. It seems the new bill may be a fait accompli. Dare I say that it is a travesty and a very unfunny joke. I don't care how they spin it or by what nuanced names they try to call it, it is amnesty. Not only for those already here but for the flood to come. The border security part of the bill is a farce, just like the 700 mile fence, passed and funded is sitting in limbo. All that ended up being was political drama for public consumption. 2 miles have been constructed. Let us look at a little history of past efforts from the mouth of Sen.Kennedy

1965: "The bill will not flood our cities with immigrants. It will not upset the ethnic mix of our society. It will not relax the standards of admission. It will not cause American workers to lose their jobs."

1986: "This amnesty will give citizenship to only 1.1 to 1.3 million illegal aliens. We will secure the borders henceforth. We will never again bring forward another amnesty bill like this."

2007: "Now it is time for action. 2007 is the year we must fix our broken system."

Thank you Senator Kennedy. We read about this next partnership in the Washington Post.

When Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass.) declared last week that unnamed "stakeholders" would decide whether Congress overhauls immigration law this year, Latino organizations in Washington understood exactly what he meant.

After laboring in obscurity for decades, groups such as the National Council of La Raza, the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund, and the National Immigration Forum are virtually being granted veto power over perhaps the biggest domestic issue coming before Congress this year. Organizations that represent what is now the nation's largest minority group are beginning to achieve power commensurate with their numbers.

"There's a real sense that the Latino community is key to the solution in this debate, so now they are reaching out to us more than ever," said Eric Gutierrez, lead lobbyist for the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund, or MALDEF. "Neither party wants to make a misstep politically."

Such groups were practically in the room yesterday, maintaining contact as Democratic and Republican senators tried to hammer out a new immigration bill before a deadline set by Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.) for today before he moved it last night to Monday. The contours began to emerge for a bill that would couple a tightening of border controls with a guest-worker program and new avenues for an estimated 12 million undocumented workers to work legally.
A deal on those tough issues could depend on the assent of Kennedy's "stakeholders," Democratic negotiators agreed. Democratic leaders, who are fighting for the loyalty of the fast-growing Latino electorate, have no desire to embrace legislation that could end up alienating the voters they are trying to woo.

Another Washington Post article takes us behind the scenes into an amazing confrontation between Senator John Cornyn and Senator McCain.

During a meeting Thursday on immigration legislation, McCain and Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas) got into a shouting match when Cornyn started voicing concerns about the number of judicial appeals that illegal immigrants could receive, according to multiple sources -- both Democrats and Republicans -- who heard firsthand accounts of the exchange from lawmakers who were in the room.

At a bipartisan gathering in an ornate meeting room just off the Senate floor, McCain complained that Cornyn was raising petty objections to a compromise plan being worked out between Senate Republicans and Democrats and the White House. He used a curse word associated with chickens and accused Cornyn of raising the issue just to torpedo a deal.

Things got really heated when Cornyn accused McCain of being too busy campaigning for president to take part in the negotiations, which have gone on for months behind closed doors. "Wait a second here," Cornyn said to McCain. "I've been sitting in here for all of these negotiations and you just parachute in here on the last day. You're out of line."

McCain, a former Navy pilot, then used language more accustomed to sailors (not to mention the current vice president, who made news a few years back after a verbal encounter with Sen. Patrick Leahy of Vermont).

"Fuck you! I know more about this than anyone else in the room," shouted McCain at Cornyn. McCain helped craft a bill in 2006 that passed the Senate but couldn't be compromised with a House bill that was much tougher on illegal immigrants.

Ultimately, a deal was crafted and, as McCain suspected, Cornyn did not join in on the final agreement.

By early Thursday afternoon, McCain joined nine other senators and Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff and Commerce Secretary Carlos Gutierrez at a Capitol press conference announcing the deal.

After making a few comments, McCain left the Capitol to head to New York for presidential campaign events. Later that day, McCain missed his 43rd straight vote, this on the $2.9 trillion budget outline.

May I respectfully say to you Senator McCain Fuck you too. It will be a cold day in hell when you get my vote. As Arnold is wont to say, hasta la vista baby. I had written Cornyn and Kay Bailey Hutchison, both my Senators with my concern regarding this legislation and recieved this e-mail in return from Hutchisons office. It is a long letter so I will post the meat of it without all the "I did this" and "I introduced this" stuff.

I believe that granting citizenship or lawful permanent residence status to those who entered our country illegally would only encourage others to break our laws in the future. For these reasons, I opposed amnesty provisions set forth in the Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act of 2006. I voted against S. 2611 because I believe that any legislation addressing immigration must first address the safety and security needs of the United States. In a world where terrorists continue to seek to harm Americans, we must protect our citizens. We have every right to know who is in our country, who has crossed our borders, and the purpose and the length of the visit. We are negligent if we do not know these things.
The Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act of 2006 was passed by the Senate on May 25, 2006, by a 62 to 36 vote. Though S. 2611 passed the Senate, it was not considered by the House of Representatives prior to the adjournment of the 109th Congress. I will keep your views in mind as the Senate continues to consider this important issue in the 110th Congress.

Sadly with the House in control by the Democrats and with the collusion of several Republican lawmakers, this bill will probably easily pass muster in the conference committee unless the voice of the people and their constituents are not loud and persistent. People need to contact their Senators and Representatives, both Republican and "Blue Dog" Democrats in order to get this bill defeated. Security and border enforcement needs to come first, then and only then can we talk about any type of amnesty and guest worker program