Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

McCain & The SAVE Act ( Immigration Bill in the House )
Flopping Aces ^ | March 12, 2008 | Curt

Posted on 03/12/2008 7:39:59 PM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach

Politics, ain’t it great?

House Republicans are trying to force action on a Democratic-written immigration enforcement measure, the latest GOP attempt to elevate the volatile issue into an election-year wedge.

Republican leaders hope that by pushing the bill - endorsed by 48 centrist Democrats and 94 Republicans - they can drive Democrats into a politically painful choice: Backing a tough immigration measure that could alienate their base, including Hispanic voters, or being painted as soft on border security in conservative-leaning districts.

Which bill is this? It’s a bill that emphasizing the principles of attrition through enforcement.

The SAVE Act addresses border security by increasing manpower and making needed technological and infrastructure improvements on America’s northern and southern borders, including 8,000 new Border Patrol Agents and provides the infrastructure they need to be effective.

It expands the E-Verify program to provide all employers with the tools they need to ensure that their employees are here legally. The E-Verify program is a simple, effective, and free program that allows employers to efficiently and quickly ensure that the people they hire are legally allowed to work in the U.S. The program will be phased-in over four years, beginning with the federal government, federal contractors, and employers with over 250 employees. Smaller businesses would begin using the system in a graduated manner.

The SAVE Act also provides the tools, resources and infrastructure necessary to enforce existing federal laws and penalize offenders. It increases the investigative abilities of Immigration and Customs Enforcement with more agents and more training. Additionally, it provides assistance for state and local law enforcement.

Rep. Heath Shuler, Democrat, introduced it in the House. Sen. Pryor (D), Landrieu (D) and Vitter (R) in the Senate. A total of 48 Democrats in the House and three in the Senate signed up and even RINO’s like Snowe joined along with the “get tough” side like Tancredo and Bilbray.

So whats the problem? Reid and Pelosi hate the thing and buried it, despite a clear majority who approve of it.

So they are forcing the Republicans to force a Discharge Petition. They need 20 Democrats to sign it in the House. Since 48 approved of it when it first came up that “shouldn’t” be a problem. The problem will be in the Senate where 10 Democrats can switch sides and Reid can still prevent it from coming up.

Which means it will be buried.

But make no bones about it, this issue will be coming up during the election.

Democrats are trying to turn the tables, hoping that Republicans’ efforts to push get-tough immigration measures will hurt McCain with Hispanic voters and independents, two groups that have supported him in the past.

In a letter to McCain last week, Sen. Robert Menendez, D-N.J., called on the Arizonan to reject the GOP leaders’ plans, calling them “draconian and divisive.”

“Such a rejection will let this nation’s 44 million Latinos know that demonizing them for political purposes will not be tolerated and that the more hateful rhetoric in the immigration debate has no place in our country’s civic discourse,” Menendez wrote.

Wanting to protect our borders and ensure those here ILLEGALLY are not allowed in and/or kicked out is now hateful rhetoric.

Sigh….

Which side will McCain come out on? Judging by the fact that he realizes his “comprehensive” bill was a mistake and has accepted the will of the people when it was defeated:

TIM RUSSERT (host): If the Senate passed your bill, S.1433, the McCain-Kennedy immigration bill, would you, as president, sign it?

McCAIN: Yeah, but we — look, the lesson is, it isn’t won. It isn’t going to come. It isn’t going to come. The lesson is they want the border secured first. That’s the lesson. I come from a border state. I know how to fix those borders with walls, with UAVs, with sensors, with cameras, with vehicle barriers. They want the border secured first — and I will do that. And, as president, I will have the border state governors secure — certify those borders are secured.

And then, we will have a temporary worker program with tamper-proof biometric documents, and any employer who employs someone in any other circumstances will be prosecuted. That means a lot of people will leave just normally because they’re not going to be able to get a job. Then, of course, we have to get rid of the two million people who have committed crimes here. We have to round them up and deport them.

As far as the others are concerned, we were in an ongoing debate and discussion when this whole thing collapsed, and part of that, I think, has to be a humane approach. Part of it has to be maybe people have to go back to the country that they came from for a period of time while we look at it. But the principle the American people want: secure the borders, reward no one ahead of someone who has either waited or come to this country legally because they have broken our laws to come here. But I’m confident — look, there’s humanitarian situations. There’s a soldier who’s missing in action in Iraq. His wife was here illegally. America’s not going to deport her.

We have humanitarian circumstances. America’s a generous, Judeo-Christian-valued nation, and we can sit down together, though, all the leading Republican candidates now just about agree that with — using those principles that I just articulated — we can fix it. But secure the borders first.

RUSSERT: But you would sign your bill if it’s passed.

McCAIN: It’s not going to come across my desk.

RUSSERT: It won’t pass.

McCAIN: I — if pigs fly. Then — look –

RUSSERT: So, it’s dead.

McCAIN: The bill is dead as it is written. We know that. We know that. And the bill is going to have to be, and I would sign it, securing the borders first and articulating those principles that I did. That’s what we got out of this last very divisive and tough debate. And we have to get those borders secured. That’s what Americans want first.

I think he realizes this SAVE bill is what the American people want and will come out in support of it, rather against it as Menendez wants.

It’s an excellent opportunity for McCain to show us that he can listen to the American people and come out in support of a bill that makes sense.


TOPICS: Extended News; Government
KEYWORDS: 110th; aliens; hillary; illegalentrants; immigration; mccain; nobama; obama; rinobush; rinomccain; save; saveact

1 posted on 03/12/2008 7:40:03 PM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
Wanting to protect our borders and ensure those here ILLEGALLY are not allowed in and/or kicked out is now hateful rhetoric.

Funny how the pro-illegal crowd has no harsh words for Mexico's anti-illegal immigration policies. But the U.S. is soooo "mean-spirited" when we seek to enforce our own laws. Gack.

2 posted on 03/12/2008 7:42:57 PM PDT by Digital Sniper (Hello, "Undocumented Immigrant." I'm an "Undocumented Border Patrol Agent.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All
GOP Moves to Force Immigration Vote

****************************EXCERPT**********************

Mar 11, 1:46 AM (ET)

By JULIE HIRSCHFELD DAVIS

WASHINGTON (AP) - House Republicans are trying to force action on a Democratic-written immigration enforcement measure, the latest GOP attempt to elevate the volatile issue into an election-year wedge.

Republican leaders hope that by pushing the bill - endorsed by 48 centrist Democrats and 94 Republicans - they can drive Democrats into a politically painful choice: Backing a tough immigration measure that could alienate their base, including Hispanic voters, or being painted as soft on border security in conservative-leaning districts.

The plan is fraught with political risks for both parties. A full-blown immigration debate could call attention to Republicans' divisions at a time when their expected presidential nominee, Sen. John McCain, is fighting to gain the trust of the GOP base.

McCain, R-Ariz., played a prominent role in failed legislative efforts to grant some of the estimated 12 million illegal immigrants already here a path to legal status, which conservatives deride as "amnesty." He now says he would consider such a plan only after the borders have been fortified.

House Republicans are eyeing a bill by Rep. Heath Shuler, D-N.C., that would do just that, as well as mandate that employers verify that their workers are in the U.S. legally.

Leaders are expected as early as Tuesday to use a parliamentary tactic that would eventually force a vote on the measure if 218 lawmakers - a majority of the House - demand it. Republicans are pressuring Democratic backers of the measure - including several first-termers and dozens from swing districts, all facing tough re-election fights - to defy their leaders and sign the petition.

"Lots of Republicans and lots of Democrats would like to see something done," Rep. Roy Blunt, R-Mo., the No. 2 whip, said Friday.

The move would be a rebuke to Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., who opposes the Shuler bill unless it's paired with measures to allow undocumented workers a chance at legal status and allow legal immigrants to bring more family members to the United States. Democratic leaders have been working behind the scenes to craft an alternative that could dissuade their more conservative members who back Shuler's bill from joining the GOP effort to press forward on it.

They are considering pairing a widely popular measure by Rep. Bart Stupak, D-Mich., to allow more seasonal workers to come to the United States under so-called H-2B visas with proposals aimed at speeding the process of granting immigrants' spouses and minor children visas to join their parents in the U.S., among others. Also under discussion is a bill that would allow nonresident immigrants serving in the military to become citizens.

It's not clear whether Republicans can gather enough support for a vote on the bipartisan enforcement bill, which couldn't take place until April at the earliest. GOP leaders relish the idea of calling attention to Democrats' rifts on the issue in advance of Congress' 14-day Easter recess starting next week. They plan to blast Democrats who have endorsed the legislation but not signed onto the effort to force a vote on it.

"I think it makes it harder for the majority to do nothing," Rep. Adam Putnam, R-Fla, said of the idea last week. "On a district-by-district basis, there will be places where this is an important issue."

Shuler has said he would sign the petition. He's one of several conservative-leaning freshman lawmakers whose elections in Republican or swing districts gave Democrats control of the House in 2006, handing Pelosi the speaker's gavel. He won his race amid Republican efforts to tie him to Pelosi, including an ad that accused him of plotting with Democrats "to take over Congress with the votes of illegal immigrants."

"He does support the (legislation) and would like to see an up-or-down vote," said Andrew Whalen, Shuler's spokesman. "He would prefer that it didn't become a political issue."

Some Democrats said they are eager to debate the legislation.

"It's a very big issue. I hear a lot about it, and that's why I want to bring it to the floor," said Rep. Jason Altmire, R-Pa., another first-termer who is co-sponsoring the bill. "We need to address it. Let's just bring it all to the floor and see what wins."

Even some Democrats who back Shuler's bill bristle at the idea of joining Republicans to force a vote on it, voicing concern that they're being used as political pawns.

"For their presidential candidate to have supported amnesty and for them to be pulling a stunt like this is pure politics," said Rep. Lincoln Davis, D-Tenn., a co-sponsor of Shuler's bill.

In the Senate, a group of mostly conservative Republicans last week unveiled a package of legislation to crack down on illegal immigration and secure the border. They, too, said they would use procedural tactics to get Democrats on the record on the volatile immigration issue.

Democrats are trying to turn the tables, hoping that Republicans' efforts to push get-tough immigration measures will hurt McCain with Hispanic voters and independents, two groups that have supported him in the past.


3 posted on 03/12/2008 7:45:13 PM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach (No Burkas for my Grandaughters!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach

Would the e-Verify system by voluntary or mandatory under this bill. I also understand that SAVE would effectively mandate a birth certificate database, which is necessary to implement the loathesome Real ID.


4 posted on 03/12/2008 7:48:59 PM PDT by Tolerance Sucks Rocks (Cloverfield 2008! Why vote for a lesser monster?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tolerance Sucks Rocks
mandate a birth certificate database, which is necessary to implement the loathesome Real ID.

Yep. You don't think this is just for them do ya?

And then, we will have a temporary worker program with tamper-proof biometric documents..."

5 posted on 03/12/2008 7:55:22 PM PDT by calcowgirl ("Liberalism is just Communism sold by the drink." P. J. O'Rourke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
It’s an excellent opportunity for McCain to show us that he can listen to the American people and come out in support of a bill that makes sense.

No, it's simply more meaningless posturing. Even if it were to pass, it wouldn't do a lick of good without any enforcement. </yawn>

Call me cynical.

6 posted on 03/12/2008 8:03:46 PM PDT by FoxInSocks (B. Hussein Obama: The Paucity of Hope)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach

McCain did quickly say, “Yeah” when Tim asked him if he, as POTUS, would definitely sign McCain’s amnesty bill if it ever came to his desk, and then McCain quickly proceeded to change the subject to border security first.


7 posted on 03/12/2008 8:06:47 PM PDT by johnthebaptistmoore (Vote for conservatives AT ALL POLITICAL LEVELS! Encourage all others to do the same on November 4!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach

McCain will truly either shine and agree to sign on to the SAVE Act, or he will truly “politically fall flat on his face” for the sake of long-term amnesty for illegal immigrants throughout the U.S.!


8 posted on 03/12/2008 8:10:57 PM PDT by johnthebaptistmoore (Vote for conservatives AT ALL POLITICAL LEVELS! Encourage all others to do the same on November 4!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Digital Sniper
I fail to see how the public will take any Republican backed immigration bill seriously, considering the last amnesty bill that sucked so bad was sponsored by the RINO we are running for president.

The general public is smart enough to know we can count on RINO boy to make them legal just as soon as he can.

9 posted on 03/12/2008 8:19:45 PM PDT by Slump Tester (Only CINOs and democRATs knowingly and willingly vote for RINOs!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: FoxInSocks
No, it's simply more meaningless posturing. Even if it were to pass, it wouldn't do a lick of good without any enforcement.

And funding.

10 posted on 03/12/2008 8:23:30 PM PDT by TLI ( ITINERIS IMPENDEO VALHALLA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach

McCain will NOT support the SAVE Act.

He has stated his position quite clearly. He wants to make all 20-40 million illegals citizens, and all of their siblings, children, and parents that the current laws allow to follow here. He will sign any amnesty bill that comes to his desk.

His “secure the borders first” is a sham. The Senate is in session. If he meant it he can submit a bill right now - it’s all not-straight talk.

McCain’s advisers like Charlie Black have already written off conservative voters in a ploy for Hispanics, independents and Democrats.


11 posted on 03/12/2008 8:35:32 PM PDT by oldbill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: johnthebaptistmoore
Aw c’mon. You know he won't sign on to that. he'll repudiate it. And some folks here will find a hundred excuses for him.
12 posted on 03/12/2008 8:42:50 PM PDT by isrul (Help make koranimals an endangered species)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach

Election year pandering. sort of sick!!


13 posted on 03/12/2008 8:48:09 PM PDT by org.whodat (What's the difference between a Democrat and a republican????)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: johnthebaptistmoore
McCain quickly proceeded to change the subject to border security first

Yes and how did he vote on the Texas bitch Kay Bailey Hutchinson, cut the fence funding amendment??

14 posted on 03/12/2008 8:50:48 PM PDT by org.whodat (What's the difference between a Democrat and a republican????)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: johnthebaptistmoore
McCain quickly proceeded to change the subject to border security first

Yes and how did he vote on the Texas bitch Kay Bailey Hutchinson, cut the fence funding amendment??

15 posted on 03/12/2008 8:51:10 PM PDT by org.whodat (What's the difference between a Democrat and a republican????)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: isrul
And some folks here will find a hundred excuses for him.

Ain't that the truth.

16 posted on 03/12/2008 9:21:40 PM PDT by TLI ( ITINERIS IMPENDEO VALHALLA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: TLI
Sadly, it is.
17 posted on 03/12/2008 9:26:04 PM PDT by isrul (Help make koranimals an endangered species)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach

McCain will not miss the opportunity to betray americans. you can see bush already moving that way on the border now that the heat is off.


18 posted on 03/12/2008 9:38:28 PM PDT by ckilmer (Phi)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
44 million Latinos

It's more like 144 million with the illegals here and THAT is why we don't want them to become citizens. Los Angeles is the perfect example of what happens when they get "one of their own" in there! A city full of gang violence and increased crime. Why? Because they are a lawless people who don't even obey the laws in Mexico. Why would they obey them here?

19 posted on 03/12/2008 9:44:59 PM PDT by NRA2BFree ("The time is near at hand which must determine whether Americans are to be free men or slaves!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All

# 2006- Sen. McCain voted against extending the border fence in the Sessions Amendment (2) to H.R. 5441.

# 2006- Sen. McCain voted to prevent the border fence from being built by voting in favor of the Managers Amendment to S. 2611, the Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act of 2006.

# 2006- Sen. McCain voted to allow illegal aliens to receive Social Security by voting to table the Ensign Amendment to S. 2611, the Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act of 2006.

# 2006- Sen. McCain voted against funding additional immigration investigators by voting against the Sessions Amendment (1) to H.R. 5441.

# 2005- Sen. McCain voted against providing funding for additional Border Patrol and ICE agents by voting against the Byrd Amendment to H.R. 1268.

McCAIN: THE AMNESTY KING FOR ILLEGAL ALIENS
o 2007 ? Sen. McCain was heavily involved in the backroom negotiations of S. 1348 with Sen. Kennedy and Pres. Bush ? this was an amnesty (permanent residency & path to citizenship) for more than 10 million illegal aliens.

o 2007 ? Sen. McCain cast several votes to protect the amnesty in S. 1639 and to move the amnesty toward a vote.

o 2007- Sen. McCain is a cosponsor of S. 774, the DREAM Act. The bill would grant in-state tuition and amnesty to more than a million illegal aliens under the age of 30.

o 2007- Sen. McCain is a cosponsor of S. 340, the Agricultural Job Opportunities, Benefits, and Security Act of 2007 (AgJOBS). This bill would grant amnesty to millions of illegal agricultural workers.

o 2006- Sen. McCain voted in favor of S. 2611, the Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act of 2006. This bill would have awarded amnesty to 10.2 million illegal aliens.

o 2005- Sen. McCain and Sen. Kennedy introduced S.1033, an amnesty for virtually all illegal aliens.

o 2005- Sen. McCain was a cosponsor of S. 239, the AgJOBS amnesty.

o 2003- Sen. McCain was a cosponsor of S. 1645, the AgJOBS amnesty.

o 2003- Sen. McCain was a cosponsor the S. 1461 amnesty for millions of illegal aliens.


20 posted on 03/12/2008 9:48:11 PM PDT by AllseeingEye33 ("It is what it is")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Tolerance Sucks Rocks
Would the e-Verify system by voluntary or mandatory under this bill. I also understand that SAVE would effectively mandate a birth certificate database, which is necessary to implement the loathesome Real ID.

If someone wants to vote, and claims to have been born in the U.S., how would one verify that without birth records? If one isn't going to verify it, how can one prevent citizens from being disenfranchised by fraudulent non-citizen votes?

21 posted on 03/12/2008 9:49:16 PM PDT by supercat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: oldbill
McCain will NOT support the SAVE Act.

And I will NOT support McCain for prez. Period! </snicker>

22 posted on 03/13/2008 3:14:01 AM PDT by Ron H. (Count me in the swelling ranks of recently unDocumented & dissatisfied former Republicans.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach

bump or as they say in spanish “Mueva a la cima”. I am boning up.


23 posted on 03/13/2008 7:32:06 AM PDT by Delacon (“The urge to save humanity is almost always a false front for the urge to rule.” H. L. Mencken)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: johnthebaptistmoore

If the bill actually comes to the floor McCain will be ‘too busy campaigning’ to vote on it. Just watch.


24 posted on 03/13/2008 8:16:06 AM PDT by sheana
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: sheana

yep. that’s courage...


25 posted on 03/13/2008 10:53:36 AM PDT by WOBBLY BOB (Conservatives are to McCain what Charlie Brown is to Lucy.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: supercat

Each state and territory, as well as Washington, DC, can keep records of births. It’s not like the Feds need to do it for purposes of establishing a National ID.


26 posted on 03/13/2008 2:03:09 PM PDT by Tolerance Sucks Rocks (Cloverfield 2008! Why vote for a lesser monster?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Tolerance Sucks Rocks
Each state and territory, as well as Washington, DC, can keep records of births. It’s not like the Feds need to do it for purposes of establishing a National ID.

What bad things would the "National ID" do that aren't already in place?

If John Smith who was born in Oregon moves to Idaho and wants to register to vote, it will be necessary for the state officials in Idaho to verify his birth records. How is having Oregon maintain the records better than having the federal government maintain them? If Oregon receives a records request, there will be no standardized way for it to verify that it is fetching the records at John Smith's request. Further, if the federal government demands John Smith's birth records, I wouldn't expect Oregon to refuse.

As it is, the federal government has Social Security records for the vast majority of citizens born in this country. The only citizens who would not have such records would be those whose parents never declared them as dependents. So most likely the IRS would have a pretty good idea of when and where John Smith was likely born, and would probably be able to verify that information with the state at will. So how is that different from having the federal government hold the information (or at least a verified copy of it)?

27 posted on 03/13/2008 7:19:47 PM PDT by supercat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach

No matter what gets passed, both sides will come back after the elections and gut any tough anti- amnesty bill.

Dems and Pubbies both want amnesty. It’s all about money, power and votes.


28 posted on 03/13/2008 7:25:29 PM PDT by airborne (For ENGLISH, press '1' . For SPANISH, hang up and learn ENGLISH!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: supercat

Well, let’s just say that, since the passage of the 16th and 17th Amendments, the federal government has assumed jurisdiction over more and more things in our lives. Why let it go any further?


29 posted on 03/13/2008 8:08:36 PM PDT by Tolerance Sucks Rocks (Cloverfield 2008! Why vote for a lesser monster?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson