Thread: SENATORS WHO VOTED NO MAY HAVE MISLED US...

Dear Friend:

Thank you for contacting me about immigration reform. The need to fix our broken system is clear, and I appreciate having the benefit of your insight on one of the most important issues of our day.

Immigration reform ultimately must be about improving our system for legal immigration, not about creating new benefits for illegal aliens. Although we are a proud nation of immigrants, we are also a nation of laws. If policymakers will agree that all immigrants must abide by the rule of law, then we can reach a consensus on ways to improve the legal process so that it meets the needs of our society, our economy and our national security.

Recently, the Senate debated S. 1639, a comprehensive immigration reform bill. I was one of 53 Senators who voted against the cloture motion to bring this bill to a vote. I had serious concerns that the legislation, as drafted, would have repeated the well documented mistakes of the 1986 amnesty bill. Furthermore, Senators were not allowed the full opportunity to offer amendments to this flawed legislation.

I have been working throughout my time in the Senate to develop a solution to this problem that I believe will work. I would invite you to visit my website at http://www.cornyn.senate.gov/immigration to acquaint yourself with the immigration reforms I support. As we consider immigration reform proposals in the future, I will continue to promote these policies, but I will oppose any bill that rewards illegal conduct and encourages further disrespect for our laws.

I appreciate the opportunity to represent the interests of Texans in the United States Senate. Thank you for taking the time to contact me.

Sincerely,

JOHN CORNYN
United States Senator

REC'D VIA EMAIL 7/3/07

I clicked on the above link and listened to the speech he made in the Senate. I took notes of exactly what he said. Then I listened to the message one more time and even more closely.

CORNYN IS NOT AGAINST A PATH TO CITIZENSHIP FOR THE ILLEGALS! He was AGAINST gang members, FOR good moral character, AGAINST sex offenders, AGAINST those convicted of DUI's, and AGAINST obsconders and ID thieves.

To those who entered illegally......to those whose visas ran out......we would CONSIDER A PATH TO CITIZENSHIP.

HAD CORNYN BEEN ABLE TO GET HIS AMENDMENT THROUGH, HE WOULD HAVE VOTED FOR AMNESTY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The BIG questions is HOW MANY SENATORS DID THE SAME THING??????? How many of them can really be trusted?????????

HHHMMMM, this is worthy of research

Just tells me we need to keep a close eye on all of them. Even Sessions, bless his heart, would be agreeable to letting some long timers stay here. But we have to keep pounding the message. No amnesty!

I'll be you a dollar to a donut, if the amendments had been allowed, the bill would have passed.

Remember he is part of the SPP ...He wants the NAU...

Most of the senators believe in giving a path to citizenship under their own terms. If Webb's admendment had passed he would had voted for it and there are several other senators that would have done the same. Not one said anything against the SPP that I heard. If someone heard differently please let me know because that is the person I am going to support.

Senator Sessions concerns me also with this "deep family roots" statement he keeps repeating. They have "deep family roots" in their own countries where they keep sending their monies back to.

Let them return and their family re-inification may finally occur.

Ephesians 4:32

Our biggest hope of beating this thing, is to get Ron Paul or Tom Tancredo elected president. I have read several places, where because of 08 being an election year, that the amnesty business probably won't come up again until 09.

Yup, and then any of the amendments we would have appreciated would have been stripped right out in conference by the pro-amnesty forces. These senators -- and everyone -- knew that, that's why the Senate debate about S.1348/1639 was a sham and was all about trying to ram amnesty through for the business and ethnic special interests.

WE NEED TO LISTEN AND CHECK OUT THEIR STATEMENTS ON THEIR SITES