Posted on 06/01/2011 10:08:34 PM PDT by smoothsailing
June 1, 2011
As Arizona’s immigration law – SB 1070 – received overwhelming public support last year, Texas Governor Rick Perry attempted to thread a political needle by talking tough on immigration while asserting that a law similar to Arizona’s “would not be the right direction for Texas.” In a case of dramatic political theater, the Texas legislature has unwittingly and quite unexpectedly, put Perry in a box he made every attempt to avoid being placed in.
As the Texas legislative session was winding down just this week, Democratic state Senator Wendy Davis (Fort Worth) made a huge blunder; she filibustered an education spending bill that could not be left unresolved, in part, because of all the funds that would be withheld from public schools as a result of it being tied to the budget.
Failure to pass the bill all but mandated that Perry call a special legislative session to resolve the impasse. However, there’s a hitch that Davis and her fellow Democrats failed to recognize. In Texas, special legislative sessions make it possible for any and all unresolved bills to come to the floor for a vote. In this case, one such bill is very similar to Arizona’s SB 1070. Perhaps even more important is the fact that a super majority is not required to bring a vote to the floor in a special session; it can be done with a simple majority.
If HB 12, dubbed the “Sanctuary Cities” bill, would have been passed and signed into law, cities and counties would have been prohibited from forcing law enforcement not to inquire about a person’s immigration status. In essence, it was a nuanced version of the Arizona law, which requires officers to check immigration status. This Texas bill would simply prevent officers from being told not to.
At the beginning of the regular session, Perry placed sanctuary cities on his list of “emergency items” he wanted the legislature to address. On its face, this would indicate he endorsed passage of such a bill. In the end though, HB 12 passed in the House but died in the Senate when it was blocked by 12 Democrats.
This leads us back to the special session. HB 9 – a bill that effectively mirrors HB 12 – has been filed by a Republican State Rep. With no need for a super majority, the odds of such a bill passing will go up exponentially. Only one thing needs to happen in order for the vote to be brought to the floor; Governor Rick Perry must add it to the list of items to consider.
On one hand, Perry has said a bill similar to the one in Arizona “would not be right for Texas.” On the other hand, he has said dealing with the issue of sanctuary cities is an “emergency” and a “priority.” To remain true to his word, Perry must allow HB 9 to be voted on before the special session ends after 30 days. Compounding the debate further is what happened in the hours before Davis’ ill-fated filibuster. A Houston police officer named Kevin Will was killed by a drunk illegal alien with a BAC of .238. If a sanctuary city law was in place prior to Will’s death, perhaps his would-be killer would not have been in Texas at all. Will leaves behind two children and a wife who is expecting.
As the Texas Governor mulls a presidential run, he is likely hearing from political consultants and gurus that he should not touch this legislation, that doing so will dramatically hamper any such aspirations.
In reality, the opposite is true. If he listens to such consultants, he will have been exposed as someone who doesn’t mean what he says. In essence, ascribing the word “emergency” to the issue of dealing with sanctuary cities will have been nothing more than a political calculation. It will mean he talked tough only when he thought he wouldn’t be called on it. It would make him a dishonest RINO.
If Perry allows the bill to be voted on, it will quite likely get passed. If he then signs it into law, his odds of being the Republican presidential nominee in 2012 will go up. Go figure, all he has to do is ignore those consultants.
Ben Barrack is a talk show host on KTEM 1400 in Texas and maintains a website at benbarrack.com
I want them to get in, pass the minimum, and get out.
Whew, you had me worried. FReepRegards!
America filled up 40 years ago, no more shipping of foreigners to America period.
Just for clarification, are you opposed to any new legal immigrants, or just the illegal kind?
All mass immigration, except for a few thousand or tens of thousand, administrative type deals.
America was in a very good place 40 years ago as far as population, this last 100 million people has destroyed our national identity and community, and culture, and ability to unite in common goals, the next 500 million will make America a living hell.
We have become nothing more than a place to work and do business, a big work site for the world, many of whom will even retire back to their home countries with their dual citizenship.
Thanks. I’m glad I made the 40 year cutoff and I’m grandfathered in.
My parents came here legally 42 years ago when I was a baby.
I guess I can stay then? Don’t send me back to Kazakhstan with Borat.
Please. Is not niiice!
There it is, now our nation and it’s future is all about not offending your immigration group identity, you sound militant.
Like I pointed out, this last 100 million new people has doomed us, and it is too late to stop what the future is bringing, because the immigrant wave since 1965 is large enough to turn America into something that we were never meant to be.
When the liberal media refers to border control advocates as “anti-immigration” conservatives cringe. We are talking about ILLEGAL immigration. Not legal immigration.
I hope they never read these last few comments from you. It’s the kind of ammo they love to make their argument.
You are right. Legal immigrants need to assimilate and embrace the American ideals of freedom.
If they don’t like it, they can go back to the shithole they came from.
Good night my FRiend.
THANKS FOR THE NEW TAGLINE
Well, then, he'd better crank it up, before all this QE n + 1 stuff puts our bond rating on its butt and the dollar in the sink and we start getting slapped around by the international bond markets. That will get expensive, quick.
Wonder if Boehner is sitting on his face, or Paul's just sitting on his hands?
Boehner's redirected the House from repealing Obamacare to writing a budget and "doing something" about Social Security and Medicare that is doing a great job of providing the demagogues with ranting points.
But now the bond rating agencies are already climbing into the driver's seat and forcing the House to concentrate on the debt limit. Don't know if Paul can get anything going on QE and Fed operations while that is going on.
The legal immigration status quo favors illiterate, uneducated foreigners who are related to lawful residents over skilled foreigners who have no such relatives, it imports 1 million persons per year when one out of ten Americans can't find work, and it overburdens law enforcement with a superabundance of potential criminals and terrorists.
It does all these things, in addition to inflicting other outrages, while being perfectly legal. Hence, legality is no guarantee of harmlessness, let alone benefit.
Let's see if Perry has the cojones to stand his ground. In the popular Mexican games of "¿Quién es más macho? and ¿Quién es el pendejo?," Perry, doe not look like a convincing winner for our team. He is Perry the Panderer.
How hard is it to say, "No licenses, no tuition, no citizenship for the kids of illegals, no job, no welfare, no medical care at the ER, and GTF home?"
I certainly agree that what is “legal” and “illegal” is subject to whims of humans at the moment. From a philosophical standpoint. The difference between an award and a hanging depends on who is in charge at the time.
You might be interested in this...
This is a perfect storm for Governor Perry. And for those of us who think he’s a RINO.
I’m LOVIN’ it!
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.