Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 41
Like Tree8Likes

Thread: Bill to undo Obama immigration actions, fund DHS fails in Senate test vote

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

  1. #11
    Senior Member Judy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    55,883
    http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-s...curity-funding

    GOP grows indifferent to Homeland Security funding

    01/28/15 11:21 AM—Updated 01/28/15 12:07 PM
    facebook twitter 7 save share group 30

    By Steve Benen

    Most recent showdowns on Capitol Hill follow a similar trajectory.

    In 2011, for example, both parties agreed that national default must be avoided, until some Republicans declared, “Maybe default wouldn’t be so bad.” In 2012, both parties hoped to avoid damaging sequestration cuts, until some Republicans declared, “Maybe the sequester wouldn’t be so bad.” In 2014, both parties said they wanted to avoid a government shutdown, until some Republicans declared, “Maybe a shutdown wouldn’t be so bad.”

    The pattern never seems to change.

    Top Republicans are increasingly unworried about missing the Department of Homeland Security’s funding deadline.

    The Feb. 27 deadline was supposed to mark the next stage in Congress’ fight on President Barack Obama’s immigration policies, but now, leading Republicans say the fallout would be limited if Congress fails to act. In private conversations and in meetings around the Capitol and on the House floor, top House GOP figures say most of DHS’s 280,000 employees will stay on the job even without a new funding bill because they are considered essential employees – though their paychecks would stop coming in the meantime.

    Rep. Mario Diaz-Balart (R-Fla.) told Politico that Congress shouldn’t ignore the looming deadline, but if lawmakers blow past it, it’s “not the end of the world.”

    If you haven’t been following this, lawmakers are dealing with another manufactured crisis: Democrats want to fund the Department of Homeland Security at agreed upon spending levels, and Republicans also want to fund the Department of Homeland Security at agreed upon spending levels – but only if they can destroy President Obama’s immigration policy, eliminate protections for undocumented immigrants, and make millions of immigrants eligible for deportation.

    There’s not a lot of middle ground between these two points – there’s obviously no way Democrats will agree to the Republicans’ terms – and if Congress doesn’t figure something out, current DHS funding will be exhausted by the end of February.

    Apparently, the increasingly common response from Republicans is, “So what?”

    In the upper chamber, Senate Republicans leaders have already said they have no intention of allowing a partial government shutdown to happen, though some of their own members – most notably Senate Homeland Security Committee Chairman Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) – have said they don’t care if lawmakers miss the Feb. 27 deadline.

    In case anyone’s tempted to think the Republican posturing is harmless, consider the interview Rachel did last week with DHS Secretary Jeh Johnson. Rachel noted that Congress is holding up funding for the cabinet agency, and asked, “Does that have a material consequence for your department yet or are you worried it will in the future?” He replied:

    “Yes and yes. Right now, the Department of Homeland Security is operating on a continuing resolution, which means that we are allowed to spend money until February 27th – at the same rate we spent money last year. That means that as long as we are on a C.R., we cannot engage in new starts, new spending, new initiatives, new grants to state and local law enforcement to fund homeland security missions. We can’t put in place the independent panel that recommended changes to the secret service has suggested we do. We can’t do a lot of things for border security. Our counterterrorism efforts are limited.

    “And my concern is that we not play political volleyball with our budget. We need an appropriation that is stood up on February 27th so we can go forward with a full year’s appropriations so we can fund these very vital things to homeland security.”

    What’s more, let’s also not forget that if the Republican-led Congress balks at DHS funding, as part of some kind of partisan tantrum, the effects would be serious and immediate. Sahil Kapur recently explained, “[T]he agencies tasked with protecting the border and hunting down undocumented immigrants to deport would be harmed by a shutdown. U.S Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and Customs and Border Protection rely on appropriations.”

    A few too many Republicans have apparently adopted a new posture: “We don’t care.”
    Yep, "so what?"

    "We don't care." Righto!

    Not a dime, Republicans, not a dime.

    You know it's really hard to fathom that we have 280,000 employees in DHS, which is a lot of suits and boots, folks, yet we still have 12 million or more illegal aliens in the country doing whatever they want, an average of only 400 illegal aliens per DHS employee, roughly 2 per employee per work day. To do their job, all each employee in DHS had to do was keep or help keep 2 illegal aliens per work day out of the United States. And based on their own figures, they couldn't even keep 2 a year out.

    So I think this Department is just wasting our money and playing US for fools.
    Last edited by Judy; 02-03-2015 at 10:30 PM.
    A Nation Without Borders Is Not A Nation - Ronald Reagan
    Save America, Deport Congress! - Judy

    Support our FIGHT AGAINST illegal immigration & Amnesty by joining our E-mail Alerts at https://eepurl.com/cktGTn

  2. #12
    Senior Member JohnDoe2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    PARADISE (San Diego)
    Posts
    99,040


    BOEHNER CALLS ON SENATE TO DEFUND EXECUTIVE AMNESTY: ‘WE’VE WON THIS FIGHT IN THE HOUSE’


    PUBLISHED:

    Tue, FEB 3rd 2015 @ 11:25 am EST

    Breitbart News -- Caroline May

    House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) is pressing the Senate to pass the House-passed Department of Homeland Security bill that defunds executive action.


    At his Tuesday morning news conference, the Ohio Republican highlighted Senate Democrats who have been critical of President Obama’s executive actions and called on them to follow through.


    “There’s a whole host of Democrats who issued press releases criticizing the president’s executive overreach,” Boehner told reporters. “[Claire] McCaskill (D-MO), [Joe] Donnelly (D-IN), others. Was it all talk?”


    The Senate is expected to hold its first vote on the House-passed Department of Homeland Security bill Tuesday. However, Senate Democrats have said they will work to block the bill.


    Boehner stressed that the House has done its work to defund executive amnesty and now it is time for the Senate to act.

    https://www.numbersusa.com/news/boeh...house%E2%80%99
    Last edited by JohnDoe2; 02-04-2015 at 12:43 PM.
    NO AMNESTY

    Don't reward the criminal actions of millions of illegal aliens by giving them citizenship.


    Sign in and post comments here.

    Please support our fight against illegal immigration by joining ALIPAC's email alerts here https://eepurl.com/cktGTn

  3. #13
    Administrator ALIPAC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Gheen, Minnesota, United States
    Posts
    67,706
    Which Republican Senators did not vote for Cloture on this bill? Graham and McCain?

    W
    Join our efforts to Secure America's Borders and End Illegal Immigration by Joining ALIPAC's E-Mail Alerts network (CLICK HERE)

  4. #14
    Senior Member Judy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    55,883
    Quote Originally Posted by ALIPAC View Post
    Which Republican Senators did not vote for Cloture on this bill? Graham and McCain?

    W
    No, it was Dean Heller from Nevada, who voted with the Democrats. Mark Kirk wasn't present and didn't vote. So Graham and McCain both voted for Cloture with all other Republicans.
    A Nation Without Borders Is Not A Nation - Ronald Reagan
    Save America, Deport Congress! - Judy

    Support our FIGHT AGAINST illegal immigration & Amnesty by joining our E-mail Alerts at https://eepurl.com/cktGTn

  5. #15
    Senior Member JohnDoe2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    PARADISE (San Diego)
    Posts
    99,040
    Quote Originally Posted by ALIPAC View Post
    Which Republican Senators did not vote for Cloture on this bill? Graham and McCain?

    W
    "This motion, which required 60 votes to pass, was opposed by every Democratic Senator and Sen. Dean Heller of Nevada."
    NO AMNESTY

    Don't reward the criminal actions of millions of illegal aliens by giving them citizenship.


    Sign in and post comments here.

    Please support our fight against illegal immigration by joining ALIPAC's email alerts here https://eepurl.com/cktGTn

  6. #16
    Senior Member Judy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    55,883
    https://www.numbersusa.com/news/sena...s-funding-bill

    The Senate voted today, mostly along party lines, to block the House-passed version of the DHS funding bill, H.R.240, from coming to the floor for debate. The procedural vote needed 60 votes to succeed, but all Democrats and GOP Senator Dean Heller of Nevada voted against motion. H.R.240 fully funds the Department of Homeland Security through the 2015 fiscal year, but blocks funding for Pres. Obama's unconstitutional executive amnesties.

    The motion failed 51-to-48. Sen. Mark Kirk (R-Ill.) was not present.

    Majority Leader Mitch McConnell voted against the motion, but McConnell's vote was a stipulation under Senate rules that require the person who makes the motion to vote with the minority in order to offer it again. After the vote concluded, Sen. McConnell moved to bring the bill back to the Senate floor.
    A Nation Without Borders Is Not A Nation - Ronald Reagan
    Save America, Deport Congress! - Judy

    Support our FIGHT AGAINST illegal immigration & Amnesty by joining our E-mail Alerts at https://eepurl.com/cktGTn

  7. #17
    Senior Member JohnDoe2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    PARADISE (San Diego)
    Posts
    99,040

    URGENT ACTION
    Senate blocks bill to defund Obama's amnesty, but another vote is expected
    Friends,
    Yesterday, the U.S. Senate blocked Majority Leader Mitch McConnell's motion to bring the House-passed DHS funding bill to the floor for debate. The bill would defund Pres. Obama's unconstitutional executive amnesties that grant work permits to 5 million illegal aliens, allowing them to compete with American workers for newly created jobs.

    After yesterday's vote, Sen. McConnell immediately moved to bring the bill back to the Senate floor for debate, meaning another vote is imminent. Please urge your U.S. Senator to put American workers and national security ahead of amnesty for illegal aliens by voting for the House-passed version of the DHS funding bill.
    SEN. DIANNE FEINSTEIN -- 855-827-2356
    Use the toll-free number we've provided above that will connect you directly to your Senator's D.C. office. When the staffer answers, you can use the following talking points.
    I'm extremely disappointed that you voted against bringing the DHS funding bill to the Senate floor for debate. Pres. Obama's executive actions on immigration would grant work permits to 5 million illegal aliens, allowing them to compete with struggling American workers for newly created jobs. These actions need to be stopped and the House-passed version of the DHS funding bill does that. I urge you to vote YES to bring the bill to the floor for debate.
    Last November, Pres. Obama decided to play politics with our national security by overstepping Congress and announcing several executive actions on immigration. I'm disappointed that you blocked an effort in the Senate to bring the House-passed version of the DHS funding bill that would defund these executive actions to the floor for debate. Should DHS funding run out, I place the blame squarely on you and your colleagues for voting against the motion. I urge you to stop putting illegal aliens ahead of American workers and national security and vote YES to bring the bill to the floor for debate.
    After you've made the call, please visit your Action Board to check for any faxing opportunities.
    Last edited by JohnDoe2; 02-04-2015 at 02:01 PM.
    NO AMNESTY

    Don't reward the criminal actions of millions of illegal aliens by giving them citizenship.


    Sign in and post comments here.

    Please support our fight against illegal immigration by joining ALIPAC's email alerts here https://eepurl.com/cktGTn

  8. #18
    Senior Member JohnDoe2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    PARADISE (San Diego)
    Posts
    99,040
    Hatch calls for defunding immigration executive action

    Written by or for St. George News on February 4, 2015

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — Sen. Orrin Hatch spoke on the Senate Floor Tuesday in support of the Department of Homeland Security funding bill, H.R. 240, calling for the president to work with Congress instead of conducting unilateral executive actions on immigration.

    Hatch has long been an advocate for bipartisan comprehensive immigration reform through a legislative solution. A few select quotes from his speech:


    On the president’s executive action
    With his latest move in the field of immigration, President Obama seeks not only to prevent enforcement proceedings against millions of people unlawfully present in this country, but also to license their unlawful presence with affirmative work permits. In doing so, he not only ignores the duly enacted laws of the land, but also seeks to unilaterally replace them with his own contradicting policies.

    On the House bill defunding the president’s executive action
    Faced with this brazen lawlessness, the House of Representatives passed a bill that both funds our critical Homeland Security priorities and fulfills our duty to respond to the President’s lawless executive actions. This is a careful line to walk, and our colleagues deserve praise for their admirable work. Their bill represents a responsible governing approach by funding our critical Homeland Security needs while preventing President Obama’s constitutional abuse.
    When faced with such a sensible approach, I have frankly been shocked and dismayed by the opposition that many of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle have expressed to this bill. On the floor today, many of my colleagues have indicated that they will oppose letting us vote on Homeland Security funding—and even on amendments to the bill—unless we allow President Obama’s executive action to come into effect.
    (report continues below)

    Video courtesy of the Offices of Sen. Orrin Hatch

    The full speech, as prepared for delivery:
    Mme. President, I rise today to discuss a matter of utmost importance: the Department of Homeland Security funding bill, H.R. 240.
    Mme. President, we live in a world of extraordinary threats.
    Terrorists continue to devise ways to harm Americans
    Around the world, terrorists continue to devise ways to harm Americans and our interests. In Pakistan and Afghanistan, we see a resurgent al-Qaeda, which continues to plot attacks from its increasingly ungoverned safe-havens. Throughout the broader Middle East, we see al-Qaeda’s affiliate groups—from al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula to al-Shabbab—posing a sophisticated new threat. In Iraq and Syria, we see the self-proclaimed Islamic State controlling vast swaths of territory, shocking the world with its brutality, and announcing its deadly-serious intent to kill Americans. And within Western societies, we see the potential for radicalization at home, the danger of which has been made manifest in the attacks on Ottawa, Sydney, and Paris.
    Inside the United States, the Department of Homeland Security serves as our critical line of defense against many of these threats at critical points—from our borders to our airports to our coasts and ports.
    Defending against these many serious threats requires efforts
    In the realm of cyberspace, criminals, terrorists, and other nations’ governments present sophisticated threats on a variety of fronts. Defending against these many serious threats requires efforts that range from securing critical infrastructure to guarding against the sort of espionage and blackmail that Sony recently experienced. These are enormously difficult tasks, especially in an ever-changing high-tech operating environment.
    As the agency charged with protecting civilian networks and coordinating on cyber-defense issues with the private sector, the Department of Homeland Security stands at the crossroads of our nation’s defense against this next generation of threats.
    And when the dangers we face are natural rather than manmade, the Department plays no less of a critical role. From hurricanes and tornados to volcanoes and forest fires, the Department’s component agencies—such as FEMA and the Coast Guard—play a critical role in the preservation of lives and property.
    The House-passed bill provides the Department with nearly $40 billion dollars in funding, a level consistent with the Budget Control Act’s spending limits. That money will not only fund the critical programs I have mentioned so far, but will also provide critical improvements on a wide range of fronts, including for:

    • More Border Patrol agents;
    • New ICE detention facilities;
    • Increased funding for E-Verify;
    • More effective security screening at our airports;
    • Improved Secret Service protection;
    • Increased support for cyber-defense;
    • And important disaster relief.

    These provisions all enjoy broad bipartisan support, and I commend my colleagues on the Appropriations Committees for their hard work on this package. But this work has been complicated by a troubling development: by some of my colleagues—almost all Democrats—actively seeking to block consideration of this vitally important funding.
    Why? Only because they seek to protect a President of their own party who has acted lawlessly and overstepped proper constitutional bounds. Instead of following the examples of great senators of the past, who stood up to presidents of their own party on behalf of the Constitution and the rule of law, today we have witnessed far too many senators instead shamefully toe the party line.
    Mme. President, our nation’s Founders knew, in the sage words of Montesquieu, that “in all tyrannical governments . . . the right both of making and of enforcing the laws is vested in one and the same man, . . . and wherever these two powers are united together, there can be no public liberty.” For this reason, when drafting the Constitution, the Framers divided power—between the executive, legislative, and judicial branches, and between the federal government and the states.
    President Obama has decided that he “won’t take no for an answer” when Congress refuses to go along with his agenda
    Despite these constitutional foundations, President Obama has decided that he “won’t take no for an answer” when Congress refuses to go along with his agenda. In direct opposition to our centuries-old system of legislation and to the binding authority of the Constitution, the President has audaciously declared that “when Congress won’t act, I will.”
    And he has followed up these threats with a variety of unilateral executive actions, many of which are flatly inconsistent with the law and the Constitution.
    Over the past weeks and months, I have come to the Senate floor to speak out about a series of specific instances that exemplify the brazen lawlessness of this administration. This pervasive and illegitimate overreach has come in many different forms.
    With his latest move in the field of immigration, President Obama seeks not only to prevent enforcement proceedings against millions of people unlawfully present in this country, but also to license their unlawful presence with affirmative work permits. In doing so, he not only ignores the duly enacted laws of the land, but also seeks to unilaterally replace them with his own contradicting policies.
    The President and his allies in this chamber want nothing more than to turn this into a debate about immigration policy. But that is not what this debate is about. Immigration is a complex and divisive issue, and Americans hold a wide variety of views on the matter that don’t always divide neatly on partisan lines. Many conservatives—myself included—share some of the same policy goals as President Obama.
    Instead, this is a debate about loyalty. As senators, where do our loyalties lie? Do we owe our loyalties first to the Constitution, to the protection of the American people, and to the goal of lawful and lasting immigration reform? Or do we owe our loyalty out of reflexive partisanship to a President bent on dangerous unilateralism?
    President Obama’s executive action is a direct affront to our system of republican self-government
    Mme. President, President Obama’s executive action is a direct affront to our system of republican self-government. The Constitution vests legislative authority with Congress, not the President alone. Instead, the President is charged with the duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed. This is not a suggestion or an invitation for the President to enforce the law—it is an obligation for him to do so.
    The President and his executive branch exercise prosecutorial discretion—the discretion to choose not to prosecute certain cases. But that power stems from considerations of fairness and equity in particular cases. Instead of requiring individualized determinations in specific cases, the President’s latest action sweeps up millions of people based on only a few broad, widely shared criteria.
    An administration of course cannot prosecute when there are not sufficient resources to do so. But the Obama administration has never explained how these executive actions would save money. In fact, the administration’s own policy advisors have acknowledged that a work permitting program will be expensive and will actually take away resources from law enforcement.
    And while no one disagrees that capturing and removing violent criminals should be our highest immigration priority, President Obama has gone much further and made current immigration law essentially dead letter for millions of illegal immigrants.
    Despite the administration’s claim to the contrary, President Obama’s action is not comparable to the executive actions taken by President Reagan and President George H.W. Bush. Even the Washington Post’s editorial board found that claim by the White House to be “indefensible.” Presidents Reagan and Bush simply implemented the enforcement priorities established in laws that Congress actually passed.
    An attempt to bypass the constitutionally ordained legislative process and rewrite the law unilaterally
    By contrast, President Obama has sought to change the law before Congress has acted, so he cannot rely on Congress’s authority to enforce the policy he prefers. Indeed, President Obama has acted directly in the face of congressional opposition, and we should call his Executive Order what it is: an attempt to bypass the constitutionally ordained legislative process and rewrite the law unilaterally.
    Perhaps the most persuasive case against this disturbing unilateralism was laid out by President Obama himself. On at least 22 different occasions since he took office, the President acknowledged that he lacked the legal authority to carry out these actions. As he himself said, by broadening immigration enforcement carve-outs, “then essentially I would be ignoring the law in a way that I think would be very difficult to defend legally. So that’s not an option. . . . . What I’ve said is there is a path to get this done, and that’s through Congress.”
    Faced with this brazen lawlessness, the House of Representatives passed a bill that both funds our critical Homeland Security priorities and fulfills our duty to respond to the President’s lawless executive actions. This is a careful line to walk, and our colleagues deserve praise for their admirable work. Their bill represents a responsible governing approach by funding our critical Homeland Security needs while preventing President Obama’s constitutional abuse.
    When faced with such a sensible approach, I have frankly been shocked and dismayed by the opposition that many of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle have expressed to this bill. On the floor today, many of my colleagues have indicated that they will oppose letting us vote on Homeland Security funding—and even on amendments to the bill—unless we allow President Obama’s executive action to come into effect.
    Mme. President, senators of both political parties have often stood up to executive encroachment—not for partisan gain or political grandstanding, but in defense of Congress as a coordinate and coequal branch of government with its own essential authorities and responsibilities.
    Implicit in the constitutional design of separating the federal government’s powers is the idea that each branch would have the incentive and authority to resist encroachments from the other branches, ensuring that unfettered power is not concentrated in any one set of hands.
    The Founders recognized this as indispensable to preserving the individual liberty of all citizens
    The Founders recognized this as indispensable to preserving the individual liberty of all citizens. For as Madison counseled in Federalist 51: “[T]he great security against a gradual concentration of the several powers in the same department consists in giving to those who administer each department the necessary constitutional means and personal motives to resist encroachments of the others.”
    Senator Robert C. Byrd of West Virginia embodied this institutional ideal as much as anyone with whom I have served. Although he helped lead this body for more than a half century and left us less than five short years ago, I was surprised and dismayed to learn recently that nearly half of current members never served alongside him.
    Senator Byrd fiercely defended this body’s prerogatives and independence against the encroachments of the executive branch. And he neither censored his criticisms nor weakened his defenses based on the President’s political party. Even in his twilight years, when President Obama took office with extraordinarily high approval ratings, Senator Byrd was willing to hold the new president’s feet to the fire to defend the Senate’s right to give advice and consent to nominees.
    He publicly chastised the new White House for its excessive reliance on czars, observing that unconfirmed policy chieftains “can threaten the Constitutional system of checks and balances. At the worst, White House staff have taken direction and control of programmatic areas that are the statutory responsibility of Senate-confirmed officials.”
    Mme. President, how far we have fallen since the days of Senator Byrd.
    Indeed, this brinksmanship by my colleagues in the minority represents the height of irresponsibility:
    They risk our Homeland Security funding at a time when our terrorist enemies have repeatedly demonstrated a renewed capability to threaten the homeland;
    They risk our very system of constitutional government by sacrificing our power to make the laws and the President’s duty to enforce them;
    And they risk many of the immigration reform goals that are shared across party lines.
    I am committed to making real progress toward implementing lasting immigration reform
    Mme. President, I am committed to making real progress toward implementing lasting immigration reform. I supported the Senate’s comprehensive immigration bill last year. Even though the bill was far from perfect, I voted for it because I believe in working together to make much-needed progress on this vitally important issue.
    As I have long argued, the way to get real immigration reform back on track is not for the President and his allies to insist on his my-way-or-the-highway approach. Responsible legislating—not unilateralism—is the right way forward on immigration. The President’s executive action risked the opportunity for meaningful bipartisan progress and undermined the Constitution in the process. And now, his allies in this chamber are apparently willing to risk the security of our nation at a time of extreme danger just to close partisan ranks to provide political cover to the President.
    Mme. President, if my colleagues in both parties are serious about protecting our Constitution’s separation of powers and the liberty it ensures, if they are committed to protecting Americans from the sorts of terrorist attacks that we have lately witnessed with alarming frequency, and if they are committed to working together to achieve lasting immigration reform the right way, I urge them to reconsider their vote earlier today and to agree to—at the very least—debate this critically important bill.
    Thank you, Mme. President.

    http://www.stgeorgeutah.com/news/arc...cutive-action/
    NO AMNESTY

    Don't reward the criminal actions of millions of illegal aliens by giving them citizenship.


    Sign in and post comments here.

    Please support our fight against illegal immigration by joining ALIPAC's email alerts here https://eepurl.com/cktGTn

  9. #19
    Senior Member JohnDoe2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    PARADISE (San Diego)
    Posts
    99,040
    Next Senate Vote on Defunding Amnesty TODAY
    Demand your Senators vote YES on the motion to proceed to debate.
    NO AMNESTY

    Don't reward the criminal actions of millions of illegal aliens by giving them citizenship.


    Sign in and post comments here.

    Please support our fight against illegal immigration by joining ALIPAC's email alerts here https://eepurl.com/cktGTn

  10. #20
    Senior Member JohnDoe2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    PARADISE (San Diego)
    Posts
    99,040
    Recent Senate Roll Call Votes


    Date Vote (Tally) Result Question Issue
    Feb 04 52 (53-47) Rejected On Cloture on the Motion to Proceed H.R. 240
    Feb 03 51 (51-48) Rejected On Cloture on the Motion to Proceed H.R. 240
    NO AMNESTY

    Don't reward the criminal actions of millions of illegal aliens by giving them citizenship.


    Sign in and post comments here.

    Please support our fight against illegal immigration by joining ALIPAC's email alerts here https://eepurl.com/cktGTn

Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 17
    Last Post: 02-03-2015, 06:27 PM
  2. Senate sets Monday vote in key test for immigration bill
    By JohnDoe2 in forum illegal immigration News Stories & Reports
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 06-23-2013, 11:31 AM
  3. Immigration bill fails crucial vote in Senate
    By Jean in forum illegal immigration News Stories & Reports
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 06-08-2007, 03:46 AM
  4. Immigration bill fails key test, is withdrawn CNN
    By jp_48504 in forum illegal immigration News Stories & Reports
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 06-07-2007, 11:01 PM
  5. Bill fails first key test vote
    By GoDawgs in forum General Discussion
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 06-07-2007, 02:26 PM

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •