A carefully crafted compromise that supporters had claimed could win an overwhelming majority received only 38 of the 60 votes necessary to protect it from weakening amendments by opponents.
The Senate sidetracked sweeping immigration legislation Friday, leaving in doubt prospects for passing a bill offering the hope of citizenship to millions of men, women and children living in the United States illegally.
Republicans were united in the 38-60 parliamentary vote but Democrats, who have insisted on no amendments, lost six votes from their members.
REST OF THE STORY HERE.
KEEP CALLING YOUR SENATORS! NUMBERS IN POST BELOW.
Friday, April 07, 2006
COMPROMISE SENATE ILLEGAL ALIEN AMNESTY SELL OUT FAILS THIS AM
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
32 comments:
You left out an important part:
An alternative bill by Majority Leader Bill Frist -- with no provision to let illegal immigrants stay but imposing large fines on employers who hire them -- received even less support in a 36-62 test vote.
And that's too bad. That part should have passed, but the whole package had to be passed out of the Senate and I'm glad it didn't.
That part?
Frist's bill wasn't a "part" of the current package that is currently stalled.
Here's the best development so far:
"It's not gone forward because there's a political advantage for Democrats not to have an immigration bill," said Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter, R-Pennsylvania.
Yet...
The vote fell nearly along party lines, with Democrats in favor of advancing the bill and Republicans opposed.
Those silly Democrats, voting in favor of a bill they don't want passed...
Eh?!
Before everyone becomes completely convinced that "no amnesty -- no way" is the only law that you will consider, consider this. I have finally come across some estimates of the cost of removing the 12 million people who are here illegally, and it is somewhere between $34 BILIION and $214 BILLION. And as Senator Everett Dirksen once said, "You know, a billion here, a billion there, and sooner or later you get to talking real money."
westsidedavid,
Before we do anything to or for the 12 million illegal aliens we need someone to put a finger in the dike and stem the flow of illegals into this country. Once the border issue is taken care of then we can address this issue.
David: Add up a one way bus ticket to Mexico By 12 million Illegals that are now taking away jobs from American citizens (and I'm not talking Agricultural Jobs)that we will do, and it comes out much cheaper then your typical Socialist tax everyone to the hilt go Lye down in the corner you (DOG) FIGURE, that you came up with.
woof woof Good Dog
klatu:
Do you really believe that bringing the buses to some rally, or other convenient place, aand suggesting that all persons not in the United States take seats on the bus for a one-way ride to a country from which they fled will convince 12 million poeople that they should get aboard. Somehow that seems more than just a bit naive.
westsidedavid,
If employers were fined heavily such they refuse to hire the illegals, the illegals will go home on their own. Those who turn to crime will be arrested and then sent home.
The illegals are threatening to boycott on May 1, they think they are running the show. Wait long enough you'll be the minority.
See anon backwards, I thought you were teaching me something, but I guess not.
Victoria, I was pointing out the stupid tactics you and yours play everyday - blame the "left" no matter what.
Simply put, it's pretty silly that the repubs who voted against the bill in majority would claim the democrats didn't want to move it forward, when they (dems) in majority voted for it...
AND, an alternative bill that sounds more like something you and folks around here would cream yourselves over, was even LESS POPULAR than the one in debate.
SO, it's not that they aren't listening, or the democrats are ruining everything, or that your view isn't being heard...they HAD an alternative to choose that DID everything you want - and NO MAJORITY in the senate wanted it.
What can I say? You can't teach an old dog new tricks...
Interesting quote I ran across today on illegal immigration;
Dr. David A. Yeagley, an American Indian and direct descendant of the Comanche warrior Bad Eagle says it best:
America today is making the same mistake we Indians made nearly four centuries ago. America is letting in too many foreigners. And we Indians could end up losing this country all over again. It may come as surprise to many white people who have been brainwashed by the media to see Indians as the ultimate liberals, but there are few groups in America today who take a dimmer view of mass immigration than the American Indian.
The Comanches were one of the most intolerant of all Indian peoples. We had no use for anyone else, white, Mexican or Indian. When we came thundering down on the southwest plains, we took the land we wanted and ran everyone else off. We created the life we wanted, at the expense of other people. The white man did the same. Only he did it on a grander scale.
In many ways, Indians see the white man as a kind of adopted son -- naive, reckless and destructive, at times -- but nevertheless cut from the same warrior cloth as we were. We do not see black, Mexicans, Asians, Arabs and others in this light. These peoples may have their own virtues and traditions, but they have no history with us. They are strangers. If they want to rule us, they must conquer us the way the white man did -- on the battlefield, by force of arms. That is the only honorable way for a warrior.
The white man seems to have lost his spirit. We see that he is giving this country away to [illegal alien] others, and this fills our hearts with fear. For we are part of the land he is giving away . . . The white man must regain his warrior soul and take back his land! In that fight, I will stand by his side and offer whatever strength I have to ensure his victory!"
We are NOT a Nation of Immigrants
lew, you might as well be quoting Malkin on the history of the Asian kingdom...Dr. David A. Yeagley is the Native American equivalent of Benedict Arnold..although there's considerable question that he is even Comanche (well founded rumors he is adopted).
Regardless, he no more speaks for the Native American than you do. His is just another radical right-wing conservative opinion.
How typical, back anon. As soon as someone sets one foot off of the plantation, discredit them with RUMOR!!!
Did it ever occur to you that he speaks for himself? Or, do you wish us to think you speak for a larger group yourself?
You may place your head back where you keep it buried, now.
lew,
Now you know that suomynona is the authority here and what ever he says goes. When he attaches a label we all must be good dogs and go lay down by our bowls. Not!
suomynona,
You are guilty of the same issue that you accuse some of the bloggers here. So can you say hypo.....
Did it ever occur to you that he speaks for himself?
lew, did you miss my second statement?
"Regardless, he no more speaks for the Native American than you do. His is just another radical right-wing conservative opinion."
When he attaches a label..
kodiak, get a little familiar with Yeagley and then tell me that he (at least) would not be considered of the extreme conservative viewpoint.
You are guilty of the same issue that you accuse some of the bloggers here.
And that issue would be...?
lefty
suomynona,
Actually I am somewhat familiar with Dr. Yeagley. My issue is that you are attaching a label that is code for dismiss. Dr. Yeagley is entitled to express his opinion. Others are free to share his opinion and state that they agree. You are free to disagree.
However, you are not free to tell me how to think about other peoples viewpoints.
I believe it would be folly to think that Native Americans cannot have a conservative viewpoint. And maybe to someone left of center that viewpoint maybe considered extreme. How you view yourself comes into play here. Only you really know for sure. I do believe that you are left of center. However, I do not believe you are in the extreme range, even from my conservative view point. However, I may be wrong, if so my appologies.
The only thing I would promote that you dismiss in Yeagley is the he in any way represents the views of any Indian nation.
He is not speaking for himself, his own opinion, or his personal views - but as if he knows and represents in whole the opinion of the Comanche nation and American Indian.
As for attaching a "code for dismiss," if your viewpoint follows what "could be" considered extreme conservative, wouldn't that be "code for embrace?"
suomynona,
There you go again. Trying to tell me how to think. Try stating your opinion concerning Yeagley and others as your opinion and that you recommend ... Get the message!!!
As I said I will consider other peoples points of view and decide whether I agree or disagree.
There you go again. Trying to tell me how to think.
And how many times have I told others on this board to "shut their pie hole?"
If you don't take what I post here as my own opinion or critical thought - that's your own problem.
Oops, there I go again, telling you how to think....oh brother.
You have told someone to shut up because you considered him illegal.
As to your opinion - I hear what you say.
BTW - I mean that I disagree.
I believe that Dr. Yeagley is correct in statement concerning the immigration issues faceing this country.
In case you have been preoccupied their are some immigrant groups that claim this land belongs to them and we are the illegals and have to leave.
Just in case they are right do you have your bags packed?
In case you have been preoccupied their are some immigrant groups that claim this land belongs to them and we are the illegals and have to leave.
Blah blah blah - what I don't get is all this quibble over who owns what from the "conservative" crowd when everything is supposed to belong to God...what am I missing in this?
BTW - I mean that I disagree.
Awesome, we need to celebrate, because that's the point of all this! :)
You have told someone to shut up because you considered him illegal.
The point was that I could no more prove he wasn't legal than he could that he was...i.e. everyone was demanding proof of citizenship, while what that actually meant was left undefined.
If you remember, whether I could prove his status or not wasn't important, in just repeating my accusations over and over I managed to actually get one or two posters to believe he was in fact illegal.
Besides, everyone should get a pass on telling said poster to shut up - his blatant ad hominem attacks are usually excused because of his viewpoint...
By-gones..
Here's a thought. Since Mexico seems to be the problem (it's not but that is what everyone has focused on) - why not take out their leader and do some reconstruction...wouldn't that be just as important to our nation, if not more, than our dealings in Iraq? If Mexico was a prosperous and fair nation, why would any one want to leave?
suomynona,
What value to you do you place on your citizenship?
What value to you do you place on your job?
Do you know that the President preference for a guest worker program is no limits on number of workers and any job above minimum wage would be open for a guest worker. Do you know that there are a lot of poor workers in other countries other than Mexico that would love to come here and work for less than what a Mexican would.
Does the thought that your employer may want to replace you with someone who'll work for a cheaper $$ comfort you? Are you willing to cut your wages to keep your job?
As to labels I have already pointed out about ability to prove ro disprove. See my previous posts.
I suppose that you could make a case that Mexico is invading and we need a military response. I think a fence similar in construction to Israels from the Pacific to the Gulf would be cheaper and just as effective.
On the other hand we could anex mexico and make it the 51st state. That way their economy will improve and they'll stay home.
kodiak, the value I place in my job is in no way related to the value I place in my citizenship.
I'll argue there is no employment "boogy man" in immigrants, legal or otherwise. What you are talking about is competition. There are plenty of citizen workers out there that would do my job for less than what I make - and my boss could very well hire them - IF they would produce at the same or higher level that I do. That only means I better darn well be working hard to make sure I am always at the top of my game, if I don't want to lose out to another worker.
If the argument that illegals are doing jobs Americans won't is bogus, then you must also accept that you have to be better at your job than said competition in any job to keep it - regardless of a workers status.
I think it's probably more correct to say illegals have a far greater personal value for the jobs they work than do their citizen competitors. Can you honestly say an American born teenager on summer break is going to value their part time job picking apples for fun money nearly as much as an immigrant working the same job, for 3-4 times as much money they made in Mexico or elsewhere, to support their family?
And it's not "should they," but "do they?"
With your answer in mind, apply this question - Does someone who takes value in their job do better work than someone who doesn't?
suomynona,
My assumption is you do not value your citizenship other wise you would have answered the question.
You get the point but not the danger. If your employer can get better production at cheaper cost you are gone and having to find something else to do.
I am not talking about teenagers. I am talking about skilled jobs that American citizens are being forced out of. It is a real problem. I know someone who and his family was forced out and it isn't picking produce!
They valued their jobs and had to find other areas of employment.
People can argue that this is just part of the process of a changing economy that does not change the pain.
I have no problem with competion from fellow citizens. I do have a problem with non-citizens being here illegally and competing period.
So keep you productivity up and costs down and good luck to you.
My assumption is you do not value your citizenship other wise you would have answered the question.
You're kidding, right? It wouldn't matter how I answer - because I don't agree with everything you say, to you I wouldn't value my citizenship.
As for your argument. It's nothing more than a political tactic when you want something changed to lay blame, point fingers, and single out. You are using the same logic in taking the pitfalls of living in a capitalistic society and putting it solely on the shoulders of illegal immigrants - as if they created the problem. I would think it's more fair to say they are a result of a greedy capitalistic system.
I would be moved to believe that far more American workers have lost their jobs to outsourcing than to illegal immigrants taking their jobs from them. The numbers might be stacked against me on that opinion, but I would think you can see what I am getting at.
I do agree (whoa, hold on there!) that the crux of the problem lies with the employer who knowingly hires illegals with no repercussions. But it trickles from the top down, not from the bottom up.
As for your friend who was forced out (I am sorry to hear, even if you don't believe me) - does he know for a fact it was illegal immigrants that caused him to be let go, and if so, did he report his employer?
(If you want something done, might as well get off the pot and start somewhere..)
suomynina,
You are wrong. Remember the discussion of being illegal vs legal.
I am not trying to suck you in, I am just trying to find out how you feel about your country.
There is no problem with you stating that you disagree and why. This would not be America otherwise. You know all this anyway.
As for the arguement isn't that what politians do?
The politians point their fingers at the middle class and say it is dwindling. Actually the middle class is being Squeezed by the upper and the illegals comming in and taking skilled jobs.
My friend worked for himself in the home construction trades. The illegals have moved in and forced out American workers as the builders are force to hire them to stay competive. The trade unions have a lock on scale that increases the cost of building out of the market. An arguement can be made for enforcement but wait is that not we have been discussing here. Reporting of illegals will do little good if INS does nothing about it. Inaction breeds inaction.
Remember the discussion of being illegal vs legal.
That's correct. But you try to suppose that the sour nature of capitalism is heightened, if not created solely by competition from illegal immigrants - that if all the illegals went away tomorrow, suddenly the middle class would expand by leaps and bounds and everyone would be paying more than minimum wage for any job.
Ok, so I embellish, but just because skilled illegal workers are gone does not mean there will be no competition for skilled jobs. I can agree that low cost labor (illegal or not) can suppress wages for everyone, just as much as large corporate distributors with buying power (such as Wal-Mart) can, or large US manufacturers who decide to move their operations over-seas.
You've made the argument about the cause and effects of greedy capitalism, not about illegal immigrants. They are merely a product of the system.
Really, someone would place it in the catagory of trying to stay in business. You failed to consider the consumer effect on the housing industry. The builders have to keep the costs down otherwise risk being unable to sell the home to even make a profit or to break even.
Now lets discuss greedy capitalism. Am I to believe that to make a profit say as small as a dollar would be considered greedy. I disagree with your arguement. Businesses are supposed to make a profit be it private parties or publicly traded for investors. Most of the businesses in the US are small businesses locally owned and operated. If any business doesn't make a profit they end up going out of business.
Socialism does not work. Just look at say France for an example of a socialistic system that is failing.
Remember the consumers do not want higher prices they want low prices. That is what drives the Wal marts of the world, provide what the consumer wants at a low price.
There is no magic bullet. the problem is not simple. We can control parts of the problem but not all. Throttling down of the influx of illegal immigrants will help greatly, it will not completely cure the problem.
Plugging the border will make this issue managable.
Now lets discuss greedy capitalism. Am I to believe that to make a profit say as small as a dollar would be considered greedy.
"Greedy" was the key word, kodiak, don't be silly.
I agree, business should make a profit, but not to the detriment of their employees or customers. You're free to think that is ok, but I do not.
No one in India had to illegally enter the US to "take away" our call center and technical service industry - those jobs were shipped over to them, and the government gave those companies a tax break for doing it. No one from China had to sneak across our borders to assemble and make our "low cost" goods that Americans used to manufacture. Business simply saw an opportunity for a greater return and started buying from across the water.
There is no magic bullet. the problem is not simple.
I couldn't agree more.
Post a Comment