Thread: Change of heart by McConnell debated

Friday, June 29, 2007


Change of heart by McConnell debated
Proponent became foe when vote came

By James R. Carroll
jcarroll@courier-journal.com
The Courier-Journal



WASHINGTON — Since the beginning of the year, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell has said that immigration reform was a top priority.

And he stood at President Bush's side to reiterate that point a couple of weeks ago.

But as the bipartisan immigration compromise died Thursday, the Kentucky Republican was not seen in floor debates or at news conferences — and ultimately voted against the measure.

Whether McConnell's actions amounted to a flip-flop or wise leadership of his party was a matter of debate among observers, senators and the Republican leader himself.

McConnell said in an interview he couldn't support the bill as it was and recognized that it had split his GOP caucus.

"Once it became clear this was the last vote we'd have on immigration and it was not going to have an opportunity to get better nor have a chance to get to final passage ... many people decided to oppose it, including myself," McConnell said in an interview today.

The Senate Republican leader told his colleagues in a floor speech Thursday night, hours after the compromise died, that he was disappointed an agreement couldn't be reached.

"I had hoped for a bipartisan accomplishment, and what we got was a bipartisan defeat," McConnell said.

Like his colleagues, McConnell said in his speech, his office was flooded with calls from constituents who objected to provisions in the immigration measure that would have provided a path to citizenship for those in this country illegally.

And, he said, people didn't trust the government to finally get tough on border control.

The bill "wasn't the people's will," McConnell said. "And they were heard."

Party divisions

The White House has said nothing critical about McConnell's defection from what many commentators saw as Bush's last best hope for a domestic policy triumph in his second term. McConnell's wife, Elaine Chao, is Bush's labor secretary.

Sen. John Sununu, R-N.H., a supporter of the immigration bill, said McConnell "has provided outstanding leadership."

"Mitch has insisted that our rights are represented," Sununu said.

Sen. Jon Kyl, R-Ariz., another supporter of the bill, told reporters Thursday many senators were under tremendous political pressure back home, and when it became clear the compromise would fall short of the votes needed to keep going, colleagues bailed out.

Did he consider McConnell among that group?

"I'm not going to comment on any particular individual," Kyl said.

Sen. David Vitter, R-La., an opponent of the compromise, also did not mention McConnell, but he said, "I do think this has created real divisions within the party — within our Senate caucus, within the Republican Party more generally."

The Washington Times on Thursday quoted one unidentified Republican senator opposed to the immigration measure as "very, very disappointed" that McConnell was not on the Senate floor in the thick of the debate, unlike Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., who backed the bill.

Today, The Washington Post reported that, according to unidentified GOP Senate aides, Senate Minority Whip Trent Lott, R-Miss., was "furious" at McConnell for not taking on the compromise's chief opponents.

But Lott's press secretary, Nick Simpson, said in an interview today that Lott was not angry with McConnell, and that the Post did not talk to the senator or anyone in his office.

"He's not mad at the leader for anything that he did," Simpson said.

McConnell said in the interview that he and Lott spoke through the day Thursday and have a good relationship.

He said he purposely did not confront opponents of the bill. "I thought they had every opportunity, as members of my caucus, to go out and fight the bill. They were not doing anything that was not within their rights," he said.

Duties of leadership

After the vote, McConnell attended no news conferences by bill opponents or supporters.

The Kentuckian stressed that he was trying to represent the interests of an extremely divided group of Republican colleagues.

On a motion earlier in the week to go forward with the bill, McConnell said, chuckling, "There were 24 (Republicans) who voted to go forward, and 25 who voted not to."

That time, McConnell voted to go forward.

McConnell handled a delicate situation about right, said Jennifer Duffy, Senate analyst with the nonpartisan Cook Political Report.

"It might be necessary leadership," she said. "If you're supposed to represent your entire conference, then it's very difficult for you to take a very public side."

"First, he serves his conference, and the president (comes) second. It would be a whole lot easier to do that job if he didn't have to serve an unpopular president," Duffy said.

McConnell also must have an eye on Kentucky, where he faces re-election next year, she said.

But Norman Ornstein, senior analyst with the American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research, a conservative Washington-based think tank, thinks the episode was an embarrassment for McConnell.

"He had been highly visible in trying to broker a deal, doing what a majority or minority leader is supposed to do when trying to help your president out," Ornstein said. "To have done that for so long and then basically, when crunch time comes, absent yourself pretty much from the floor and debate and then vote against it, it's just kind of striking."

A re-election factor?

A national group that wants to restrict immigration, NumbersUSA, began running a television ad against McConnell in Kentucky on Tuesday, charging he was "strong-arming" colleagues to support "amnesty" for undocumented immigrants.

While Ornstein acknowledged McConnell had a divided caucus, "he's clearly getting a little sensitive to some of these ads." And, Ornstein added, "the politics of '08 could be treacherous."

McConnell said he wasn't thinking about re-election next year.

"If I had been preoccupied with 2008, I probably wouldn't have been in favor of bringing this subject up," he said. The senator has not spoken much about the specific provisions of the immigration compromise, but he did vote to strike out the citizenship provisions of the bill on May 24, provisions opponents have attacked as "amnesty" for illegal immigrants.

"My view is, if you get the workplace enforcement right — and I think that part of the bill was very good — the problem over a period of time takes care of itself," McConnell said today. "Because if you can't find employment ... either you figure out a way to make yourself legal or you go home."

McConnell said he thought the bill was properly crafted in providing $4 billion for border enforcement efforts.

As for his fellow Republicans, McConnell said they all had a luncheon shortly after the immigration bill was killed.

"People were, first of all, kind of relieved it was over; it was an extraordinarily tense experience," McConnell said, "and (they) felt a great effort had been made, but it just wasn't possible to get there."

http://www.courier-journal.com/apps/pbc ... 1/70630003

"I had hoped for a bipartisan accomplishment, and what we got was a bipartisan defeat," McConnell said.

Your defeat was our victory!

The bill "wasn't the people's will," McConnell said. "And they were heard."

Your damn right on that one...
the La Raza crowd and the Chamber of Commerce attempted to Hijack OUR COUNTRY with the help of many TRAITORS on the hill...
I must give a shout out to them for REALLY waking the American people up
and reminding all of us
that we the people run this Country
and that the boys on the hill are their to represent us
PS if you didn't represent us...start looking for work

McConnell waited until there we 41 no votes before he, realizing the bill was lost, cast his no vote. Just another finger-in-the-wind politician.

We pay your salary. You work for us, the American people, and we can fire your two-faced rump.