Posted on 06/14/2007 7:14:46 AM PDT by Cat loving Texan
Senators Work to Revive Immigration Bill
By JULIE HIRSCHFELD DAVIS Associated Press Writer
WASHINGTON — Key Republican and Democratic senators are reaching for a deal to resurrect their stalled immigration compromise by requiring that some $4 billion be spent on border security and workplace enforcement.
The mandatory security funding is part of a plan to attract more Republican support for the measure, which grants legal status to millions of unlawful immigrants.
In private meetings Wednesday, the bipartisan group that crafted the delicate compromise was hammering out a plan to allow votes on a limited set of Republican- and Democratic-sought changes in exchange for a commitment from GOP holdouts that they will back moving ahead with the bill.
Republican architects of the measure, which grants legal status to millions of unlawful immigrants, expressed confidence that such an agreement was possible as early as Thursday.
"The list is there," said Sen. Mel Martinez, R-Fla., adding that GOP senators were ready to present their plan to Senate leaders.
With the tentative package, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid "should have what he needs to move forward," said Sen. Jon Kyl, R-Ariz. "This is just to let him know that it can be done."
Reid has said he would revive the measure if at least 20 more Republicans commit to moving ahead with the broad immigration bill. It stalled last week when only seven GOP senators supported a Democratic bid to limit debate and expedite a final vote.
Reid expressed optimism that negotiators would strike a deal that could pave the way.
Sen. Edward M. Kennedy of Massachusetts, the lead Democratic negotiator, said he supported the bid to provide mandatory funding for border security and enforcement.
"You give the assurance that when this is signed, that there are going to be the resources to do the kind of security protections that are in this legislation," Kennedy said.
Under the proposal by Kyl and Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., border security and workplace enforcement would be funded up front, and eventually covered by the fines and fees set out in the broader immigration bill.
"Everybody's trying to prove that they are willing and able to enforce the law this time, unlike 1986," Kyl said, referring to the last major immigration overhaul, which established a one-year amnesty program for illegal immigrants who had been in the U.S. at least four years.
"What better way to demonstrate that other than to say, 'We're not going to let congressional appropriations dictate this — we are going to put the money up front,'" Kyl said.
As part of the tentative deal, the Senate would vote on a proposal by Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison, R-Texas, to require all illegal immigrant household heads to return to their countries of origin before obtaining legal status, Graham said. Under the legislation, only those seeking green cards — permanent legal residency — would be required to return home first.
Negotiators spent hours Wednesday huddled in meetings or on the phone. Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff, who with Commerce Secretary Carlos Gutierrez helped craft the bill in a series of intense and secretive talks earlier this year, was again on hand to help broker a deal.
"There's no question it's an uphill battle," Kennedy said. "It's difficult but not impossible."
A day after Bush went to Capitol Hill to field criticism from Republicans who derailed the bill, the White House said it would be open to changes to the delicate bipartisan compromise. Architects have argued their so-called "grand bargain" could collapse under the weight of poison-pill amendments.
"You may have a carefully crafted compromise, but on the other hand, you have members of both parties who want to have their say and have their input," White House press secretary Tony Snow said.
Snow also signaled support for the idea of pumping additional money into border security, which he said was worth pursuing, and played down the bitter divisions among Republicans on the issue. "This is not an internal 'fight,'" he said, and added that Bush "considers fellow Republicans friends and colleagues."
Republicans have coalesced behind the idea of assuring a funding stream for border security and workplace enforcement. Georgia Republican Sens. Saxby Chambliss and Johnny Isakson want a separate emergency spending bill that could total as much as $15 billion to pay for such measures.
Additional funds for border and workplace crackdowns could persuade the Georgians to back the effort to resurrect the immigration bill, Chambliss said.
"We're thinking about it," he told reporters.
June 14, 2007 - 2:09 a.m. CDT Copyright 2007, The Associated Press.
Owen may, indeed, be correct. But it is a measure of the {appropriate} distrust we all have that we probably won’t believe them even if the audible voice of God confirms every word they speak.
$15,000,000,000 for some vague and undefined security measures.
I propose using the money to just pay illegals to leave the country. Give each one $10,000 in cash, collectible at the border on their way out, where they will also provide a photo, fingerprints, and a DNA sample. Maybe even a small tatoo in a hidden spot.
If they come back, and now we know who they are, they get thrown in jail for fraud.
One key question is how to go forward even though several amendments have already cut at the grand bargain -- including limiting the guest-worker program and making it easier to deport those who don't qualify for legalization -- and several other difficult amendments could pass before the bill is final.
Senate Minority Whip Trent Lott, Mississippi Republican, said those amendments will simply disappear when the House and Senate go to conference.
"No big deal -- you pitch those before you get to the Rotunda," he said.
and write or call your senators, Rush, Shawn, Laura, EVERYBODY to show them what a scam this bill is and Lott just admitted it.
This week, we will vote on cloture and final passage of a comprehensive bill that will strengthen border security, bring the 12 million undocumented Americans out of the shadows, and keep our economy strong. In the days ahead, we will work to improve the bill to protect and strengthen family ties while improving the structure of the temporary-worker program.
Is this one of the amendments which will be removed when the bill is to be reconciled between the house and the senate? The ones mentioned by McConnell?
Except that Lott said that "objectionable" (i.e., conservative) amendment would be stripped out in conference.
American lib? Precisely what they will be (in their own quaint way, of course) if this bill passes. This bill needs to be stopped dead. Keep calling and above all keep on praying.
Isn’t it pretty to think so.
They want to pass amnesty because they’re afraid if they don’t Fred Barnes might not say nice things about them. This is what we’re up against and the type of warped mentality that apparently rules in Washington today.
I don't buy that at all, quite frankly.
IMO some very powerful interests are pulling strings and the puppets at the end of those strings are dancing.
I asked how that could possibly be given the outpouring of anger against this bill, and he told me that a lot of moderates were afraid of being called racists by people like Michael Chertoff, Luis Gutierrez, and Fred Barnes.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1850026/posts
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus
I think that's just a smoke screen. I doubt any insider is gonna admit to a reporter that it's all about power brokers calling in markers.
Seriously, look at the overwhelming bipartisan opposition to illegal immigration. The GOP mayor of Hazelton who pioneered municipal ordinances against illegals won the GOP primary - AND the Dem primary with write-in votes. The polling numbers from honest polls are off the charts. If someone was interested purely in electibility, they would embrace this issue.
The fact that political animals such as Senators are standing in opposition to such a potent and growing political force, IMO, only means one thing: the power players who put these guys into power are pulling their strings.
Thanks, just got off the phone with mine.
The person I talked with in Lamar Alexander’s office said their phone lines are burning up, all against this legislation.
The person in Bob Corker’s office wouldn’t tell me whether or not the calls were majority opposed, said she couldn’t, but I told her I knew the answer anyway.
Both said they aren’t supporting the bill in its current form.
It may very well be. I know all this talk about border security going on by Bush and Chambliss is a facade to fool people into supporting the bill so attempts at deception is nothing new to them in Washington. They simply can't be that stupid to know that the overwhelming majority don't want this pos bill.
Oh, they are not stupid. Snake oil salesmen seldom are.
They are trying to fool enough of the people long enough to get this bill to Bush's desk. And give wavering Senators some kind of political cover.
We need to keep an eye on the pubbie senators who are not up for re-election in 2008. Those guys might be tempted to think the outrage would subside by 2010 or 2012. They need to be convinced otherwise - if they vote for this bill, conservatives will be tireless in working for their defeat by any means necessary.
It would be nice payback to see those supporters of amnesty in the GOP booted out, and I think many will be but by 2012 enough red states will have turned permanently blue that nationally the GOP is toast anyway and won’t have a prayer.
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus
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.