Posted on 08/04/2013 10:43:09 AM PDT by Mozilla
House Majority Leader Eric Cantor says the House of Representatives will vote on a series of immigration bills in the fall, but wouldn’t commit to a vote on a measure similar to what the Senate has passed that provides a pathway to citizenship for the estimated 11 million illegal immigrants in the country.
“We’ve said we are not going to be bringing the Senate bill up — we don’t believe that that’s the right path toward an immigration reform bill,” the Virginia Republican said in an interview broadcast on “Fox News Sunday.” “We will have a vote on a series of bills at some point … and it will deal with a variety of issues.”
“Border security is a really important issue,” Mr. Cantor continued. Mr. Cantor continued. “I’ve been very active in promoting what I’m calling a kids bill. … It says that you ought not hold kids liable for illegal acts of their parents.”
Host Chris Wallace then said that he had to take the answers to mean that there’s not a commitment to an overall vote on granting some form of legal status to people in the country illegally.
“I have said that we will be addressing the issue of immigration in the House, according to our terms, not the way the Senate did,” Mr. Cantor said.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...
Washington’s assclowns are absolutely determined to establish a Democrat majority for the foreseeable future.
I know it’s getting old but why do we need new “immigration laws” if we’re not going to enforce the ones that we already on the books? Creating a bunch of more useless laws is something only morons would do.
The GOPe leadership are such losers.
Cantor has authored the “Kids Act” which gives amnesty to illegals who entered as children, as well as to their relatives.
And their relatives who have been deported will be allowed to return to the U.S. and will be given amnesty, too! All under the guise of “reuniting families”!
Cantor is insane.
No my friend, you WILL address immigration according to OUR terms or we’ll throw you out on your butts - got it?
ya best do it on the people’s terms unless you like being out of office
RINOs to America: We’re not going to enforce existing law, get that through your thick head. We’re going to create new laws and push decisions and rule making down to “commissioners” - border security is just window dressing to get the laws passed, our commissioners will see to it that the border remains wide open.
These RINO idiots are eager to kiss Obama’s ass rather than tell him and the rest of his Democrats “no”.
There’s supposed to be a fence? Where is it?
Why aren’t the Repubs asking that question?
This certainly does not make clear that “won’t bring up the Senate bill...” produces a situation where a house bill that deals with immigration is protected from entering a conference committee where anything can happen.
I had understood that any immigration bill taken up by the House would be subject to the Speaker allowing it to go to conference.
I would appreciate a definitive take on this issue.
Yes, that is true.
If they're going to aid Obama in destroying the country, they can do it without me.
Turning against conservatives will be the GOP’s demise.
You are correct. Any bill from the House will be gutted and inserted with a Senate Trojan. Then it comes back to the House for a vote. But all the democrats and 18 moderate republicans are all that is needed to pass it.
The only thing protecting the country from this immigration travesty is the Hastert Rule which says no bill will be taken for a vote in the House as long as there is not a clear majority of republicans supporting it.
Boehner at one point was willing to abandon the Hastert Rule but he was put on notice by Bachmann and other conservatives that if he abandoned the Hastert Rule that his Speakership would be in jeopardy.
So far Boehner is sticking by the Hastert Rule publicly but is working behind the scenes to get some sort of bill up for a vote. Cantor’s information is part of that work and so is Paul Ryan’s.
Why wait? Why react? Boehner has made his intentions clear. Don't wait. Initiate action rather than react: remove him from the Speakership.
I agree and I think you will find a lot of people agree.
The kids are ILLEGAL. End of discussion, you a-hole, Cantor. The Gelding Old Party is DEAD.
Boehner should have been removed long ago.
Pretty soon, you have numerous laws for a single thing and all of a sudden you are in violation, no matter what you do.
It's all about control.
I don't know for sure that a House bill would NOT contain some kind of path-to-citizenship even before it got to conference, but when the conference bill came back it would have a path-to-citizenship, but either possibility is a tremendous worry. Let's assume you are right.
Cantor promised that even if such a bill came back from conference, it would still have to have a majority of the GOP House members support to be allowed a vote in the House. July 10: Appearing on Hannity last night, House Majority Leader Eric Cantor promised to enforce the so-called “Hastert rule” on immigration reform, refusing to allow any proposal from a joint House-Senate conference committee to reach the House floor without the support of a majority of Republicans.
On the other hand lamebrain traitor Paul Ryan said he wanted all components of immigration reform to be brought up for a floor vote, regardless of whether they ultimately received majority Republican support or not. “We don’t know if we have a majority until we vote on it,” Ryan explained. He also said he’d been in close consultation with Speaker Boehner about how to proceed with the bill.
If Cantor was telling the truth, maybe he feels confident he can do enough bribing (with the help of amnesty lobbyists) and arm twisting before they check whether >50% would support a conference bill.
I am for that House proposed bill (idea) that gives states the power to enforce immigration law independently of the Federal government, if one comes up for a vote.
Blocking a bill like that would be siding with illegals, Obama and LaRaza and all the Dems that vote against it.
It all ***sounds*** good, especially to allow states to enforce the law. BUT...two things...
first read the post above yours and you should note that the conference committee can take out all the language about letting states enforce... and so your approval goes pffft!
Second, even if by some wild fantasy Reid and Obama LA were to let it pass with state enforcement, Holder would find some slimy way to get his Fed force enforcing and telling states to back off.
NO BILL, NADA, ZIP, ZILCH, UNTIL CONSERVATIVES CONTROL THE HOUSE, SENATE AND WHITE HOUSE!!!
And Bohner can easily pass the Senate bill with no conference bill, as he did with VAWA and the tax bill. I recall many claims that just saying ‘no’ against those would stop them.
Well Obama signed the Senate bill's ‘as is’ in both cases. Empty claims.
Opposing a bill that just gives the states the right to enforce Federal immigration laws without the SCOTUS interference when Obama wont is the same as joining LaRaza. We might as well be Dems.
Go explain to Jan Brewer why we must side with Obama and Holder and LaRaza against AZ.
I figure 2016 will either be Rubio or Christie, do they count?
I think you figure wrong this time around. The GOPe will try to hoist up Rubio/Christie/Jeb the Bush but I think Palin and others will stop them cold.
You mean like they did Romney last year?
That bothers me too. We know that Nappy said she could ignore parts of laws she didn't like. Rogue judges could also zap parts of immigration laws they don't like. In 1976 the SCOTUS ruled unanimously that US Civil Service regulations that required citizenship for some jobs were unconstitutional.
And it's not just Dem POTUSes who have such extraordinary compassion for illegals. GWB's DHS stopped arresting illegal aliens just before the 2008 election to avoid arresting Obama's illegal aunt.
I don't want Obama to sign any immigration bill either, but seems to me that on immigration, GWB was worse than Clinton.
Time to rename him, Congressman Paul Rymney.
Pass supermax border security and fund a mass deportation machine.
Call it the “Dream On” act.
The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday struck down key parts of an Arizona law that sought to deter illegal immigration, but let stand a controversial provision allowing police to check a person’s immigration status while enforcing other laws.
In a decision sure to ripple across the political landscape in a presidential election year, the court’s 5-3 ruling upheld the authority of the federal government to set immigration policy and laws.
“The National Government has significant power to regulate immigration,” Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote in the majority opinion. “Arizona may have understandable frustrations with the problems caused by illegal immigration while that process continues, but the State may not pursue policies that undermine federal law.”
I have never liked Cantor. He is a whiney spokesperson and a disingenuous loser. I cringe when he speaks.
Face it, we only have a few who represent their constituents, and he isn’t one of them. Most of them do what they want to do and ignore the people because “they know better”.
So much for the 10th amendment.
The 1960s Voting Rights Act put states under the heel of the Federal government, with the section recently rejected being the worse only applying to Red states.
And it was the GOP House, Senate and White House that re-authorized it in 2006.
Which GOP candidate would have done better than Romney did last time out?
What does that have to do with my response :#25 that you just replied to? I dont see the connection.
I am sure we will be lectured that Christie will do the best against a Dem in 2016, after he wins re-election with all those Dem and swing voters.
” but seems to me that on immigration, GWB was worse than Clinton. “
GWB was FAR worse than Clinton. Research it, and run the numbers. Compared to George W (amnesty) Bush, Clinton was pretty good.
” Opposing a bill that just gives the states the right to enforce Federal immigration laws without the SCOTUS interference when Obama wont is the same as joining LaRaza. We might as well be Dems.
Go explain to Jan Brewer why we must side with Obama and Holder and LaRaza against AZ. “
B U M P!!
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.
