Thread: Dems sweetening the dream act to gain Republicans votes

Update on Dream Act!!

http://dreamact.info/forum/showthread.php?t=17726

Durbin plans to introduce 2 more Dream Acts.

Take a look at this! They are clearly trying to sweeten the Dream Act for Senate Republicans. I just called Hutchinson and McConnell and told them we know what Durbin is up to and NOTHING can change the fact that this is a massive amnesty. I also called Boehner and Cantor and told them if they can stop the jobless benefits they can stop the Dream Act amnesty and we expect nothing less!!!


#1 Today, 04:53 AM
Senior Member
Joined in Apr 2009
392 postsvictor85 online
victor85
View Public Profile
Send a private message to victor85
Find all posts by victor85

100 AP

Quote:
"Revised immigration legislation that Senate Democrats hope to pass in the lame-duck session would reduce the number of people eligible for conditional legal status and maintain a ban on in-state tuition rates for undocumented students, in a bid to gain more support for the measure.

"Late Wednesday 11/17, Majority Whip Richard J. Durbin, D-Ill., introduced two new versions of the so-called DREAM Act, which would create a path to conditional legal status for some undocumented children of illegal immigrants who go to college or join the military. Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., put both on the Senate calendar Thursday morning.

"In what appears to be an effort to offer options to the bill's critics, one version (S 3962) keeps an eligibility age of younger than 35 for the program, but a second version (S 3963) lowers that age to younger than 30. Versions of the bill in previous sessions had the age pegged at 30 and as low as 25.

"If no other eligibility criteria are changed, the potential number of people eligible would drop slightly, from roughly 2.1 million to slightly more than 2 million, according to an analysis by the nonpartisan Migration Policy Institute. Fewer than half of those would probably meet all the bill's criteria.

"In addition, both new versions have been stripped of language that would restore the right to in-state college tuition rates for beneficiaries, a turnaround also geared to win more support from lawmakers.

"Undocumented students have been ineligible for in-state tuition rates since 1996, when Congress passed the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act (PL 104-20. The previous Senate version of the legislation that failed earlier this fall would have restored that right, but the two new versions would not.

Under Pressure
"The changes are intended to win over critics of the legislation, which is on a wish list of bills that Democrats want to pass before they adjourn and lose their majority status in the House in the 112th Congress. After failing to deliver a promised comprehensive immigration overhaul, Democrats are under pressure from activists to pass the narrower legislation in light of Hispanics' strong support for Democratic candidates in the Nov. 2 elections.

"The legislation is contentious not only because of the fraught politics of immigration in both parties, but also because of pressure to pass more sweeping legislation. Some key GOP senators are demanding stronger border security and say they will not support a narrower bill that does not make other changes to immigration laws.

"Utah Republican Orrin G. Hatch said that the age limit in the narrower legislation was not his only concern, though he added he has not focused on the legislation in some time. Hatch authored the original legislation with an age cutoff of 25.

"My empathy is with that type of legislation, and I'll just have to look at it," he said. "They're doing it for purely political reasons, and that's not what I think ought to be done."

"Efforts to pass the legislation in the Senate will probably focus on moderate GOP members whom Democrats often court as allies. The votes of departing lawmakers and the handful of Republicans who supported legislation in the past will also be sought.

"At least two Republicans support the legislation as a stand-alone measure. One is sponsor Richard G. Lugar, R-Ind. Another is Robert F. Bennett of Utah, who is leaving the Senate.

"I support the DREAM Act as free standing legislation, but putting it in a bill that has a number of objectionable aspects is not something I support. If Harry Reid brings it to the floor as a stand-alone bill, I will vote for it," Bennett said in a statement.

"When the Senate voted in September on a defense bill that Reid wanted to amend with the immigration legislation, Blanche Lincoln and Mark Pryor, both Arkansas Democrats, voted against the move.

"Lincoln was defeated on Nov. 2, and she said this week that she intends to vote for the immigration bill as a stand-alone legislation.

"There's a lot of bright young minds out there that we've invested a lot of resources in, and being able to continue that education is an important thing," she said.

"President Obama has pledged to help Democrats pass the bill, and Education Secretary Arne Duncan also pressed the case on Thursday, saying that potential beneficiaries are an "untapped pool of talent." He acknowledged that changes to the legislation were under discussion, and said Congress should seize the opportunity to pass the bill.

"We need to break through on this one," he said."

http://dreamact.info/forum/showthread.php?t=17726

This congress has not passed a budget, not addressed unemployment compensation, not addressed the tax cuts but they have plenty of time to talk about benefits for non-citizens.

Originally Posted by ReggieMay

This congress has not passed a budget, not addressed unemployment compensation, not addressed the tax cuts but they have plenty of time to talk about benefits for non-citizens.

No way they get this all done in the time left

And if they don't get to the important stuff , its the end of the dems

Right now in the Senate I think we're looking at 41 FOR SURE YEAS and 34 FOR SURE NAYS. That leaves 24 FENCE SITTERS that need to be spoken to (see below)

Baucus
Bayh
Begich
Bingaman
Brown (MA)
Brownback
Casey
Collins
Dorgan
Graham
Harkin
Johnson (SD)
Lugar
Manchin
McCaskill
Murkowski
Nelson (NE)
Rockefeller
Snowe
Stabenow
Tester
Voinovich
Warner
Webb

Senator Lincoln said: There's a lot of bright young minds out there that we've invested a lot of resources in, and being able to continue that education is an important thing," she said

Some of these so-called students are in their thirties, never learned how to speak English, never held a stedy job, never done anything except go on welfare or into gangs, etc.

Originally Posted by Justthatguy

Senator Lincoln said: There's a lot of bright young minds out there that we've invested a lot of resources in, and being able to continue that education is an important thing," she said

Some of these so-called students are in their thirties, never learned how to speak English, never held a stedy job, never done anything except go on welfare or into gangs, etc.

So, she is saying she supports the wishes of foreign nationals who should not be here with special legislation.

Senator Lincoln, that is what is called "sunk cost." You don't keep throwing good money after bad just because you spent on it before. Think of the investment as foreign aid--send them back now to their country of origin to be patriots and improve their own country. That is the moral thing to do.

"There's a lot of bright young minds out there that we've invested a lot of resources in, and being able to continue that education is an important thing," she said.

What about all the American kids they intentionally put into debt with student loans designed not to ever be paid off, and all the rest of the American kids that got kicked to the curb?

Democrats and Rinos will never learn...kick them to the curb.