Thread: Congress passes on immigrant problem until after 2008

Sorry if this has been posted previously, as I haven't seen it.
---------

Originally published Monday, November 12, 2007
Congress passes on immigrant problem until after 2008
Two California lawmakers say it's unlikely any measures to legalize the nation's 12 million illegal residents will come to a vote.
By Lisa Friedman
MediaNews

WASHINGTON - First there were protests and rallies for new immigration laws. Then, after repeated failures to pass major reform, came the promises and recriminations.

Now two leading lawmakers - Rep. Zoe Lofgren, D-San Jose, the chairwoman of the House Judiciary subcommittee on immigration, and Rep. Howard Berman, D-Van Nuys, one of the key negotiators in all immigration bills - are openly acknowledging that no measures legalizing any of the country's estimated 12 million illegal immigrants is likely to come for a vote until after the 2008 presidential election.

"I don't think we're talking comprehensive immigration in this Congress," Berman said, using the Democrat term for legislation they see as incorporating both beefed up border security and employer verification as well as a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants.

Major reform is "not viable in this Congress," added Lofgren. But, acknowledging the possibility that lawmakers might increase the cap on high-tech visas, she said, "that doesn't mean we can't improve the existing system."

Immigrant advocates suffered two major blows in recent weeks. First a measure known as the Dream Act that would legalize college-bound students whose parents brought them to the U.S. without visas, failed in the Senate. Then California Sen. Dianne Feinstein opted not to attach her bill giving legal status to about 500,000 illegal farm workers to a $283 billion farm bill. The time, she said, just wasn't right.

But now time is getting short. Election season is already heating up - a time when few lawmakers would be willing to touch the issue. And in the meantime, both houses are scrambling to complete about 10 spending bills.

"One doesn't want to give up hope," said Josh Bernstein, federal policy director for the National Immigration Law Center. But, he acknowledged, with appropriations bills still in flux, "that's their priority."

Rep. Elton Gallegly, R-Thousand Oaks, who believes any measures granting a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants amount to amnesty, and whose own bills propose to clamp down on employers who hire illegal immigrants, had a warning for Democrats who want to bring up new legalization measures.

"Do so at your own peril" Gallegly said.

He and other anti-immigration hardliners point to what they call a growing anger in the country about the number of illegal immigrants and Congress' failure to crack down.

Yet while polls continue to show that the majority of Americans oppose illegal immigration, immigrant advocates argue that recent elections belie hardliners' electoral power.

Immigration dominated recent state and local campaigns in Virginia.

But when election time came last week, the issue failed miserably as a vote-getter. Democrats seized control of the state house and even picked up an additional three seats in the House of Delegates.

Gallegly dismissed the Virginia elections as an indicator of how powerful anti-illegal immigration voters are. Instead he pointed to the public outcry directed at presidential hopeful and New York Sen. Hillary Clinton when she flubbed a question about whether illegal immigrants should be granted drivers licenses.

Yet immigrant advocates claim that comments like Gallegly's prove their point. While immigration hardliners are loud, intense and well-organized, they argue, the group's zeal doesn't seem to translate to the voting booth.

"I don't think there's a single general election you can point to and say immigration made a difference," Bernsten said. "Between elections the illusion grows that they are an important voting block."

Rep. Xavier Becerra, D-Los Angeles, agreed.

"We've got politicians who are afraid of their own shadows," he said.

Becerra along with Rep. Joe Baca, D-Rialto and other members of the congressional Hispanic caucus are pushing to include broad legalization measures into a bill granting an increase in high-tech visas, which does have this possibility of coming up this year or next. He argued that people don't want to see piecemeal legislation.

"I think the elections this week send a clear signal – immigration by itself is not a wedge issue to count on in a negative campaign," he said.

Opponents said they are confident that Democrats won't risk American's wrath if they try to push legalization measures.

"Nancy (Pelosi) ain't gonna touch it," Gallegly predicted. "And if it's such a popular political item, I don't see why they don't."

http://www.dailybreeze.com/news/regstat ... 91046.html

Seems almost like they dont want to keep a Job in politics

The time would be better spent ENFORCING THE LAWS we have now.

No legalization for anyone here illegally, ever. Send this message and they are less likely to sneak in.

Strengthen current immigration laws, end birthright citizenship, ensure no more than 10% of immigrants come from any one country.

Whatever happened to the self-support issue? Any immigrants wishing to come in had to prove they would not be a drain on our social programs. BRING IT BACK!

Yet immigrant advocates claim that comments like Gallegly's prove their point. While immigration hardliners are loud, intense and well-organized, they argue, the group's zeal doesn't seem to translate to the voting booth.

Wishful thinking on the part of the OBL and ethnocentric groups. For example, look at the recent special Congressional election -- an underfunded relatively unknown GOP candidate ran tough on illegal immigration (and other issues) and almost beat a well-known, well-funded Dem candidate with high name recognition (Tsongas) in liberal MASSACHUSETTS of all places.

As illegal immigration continues to impact more communities throughout the US, more citizens will wake up and vote.

Well they may wished it doesn't but they are scared enough to back peddle.

Remember Rahm Emanuel helped get Pelosi in the position she's in and he recently said this:

"The volatility of how to deal with the more than 12 million undocumented immigrants already living in the U.S. has led Democrats like Rep. Rahm Emanuel of Illinois to call immigration "the new third rail of politics." On state and local levels, there is ample evidence of a backlash against illegal immigration, and Republicans are hoping to leverage that discontent into votes next November."

"I don't think there's a single general election you can point to and say immigration made a difference," Bernsten said. "Between elections the illusion grows that they are an important voting block."

Perhaps the 2008 election will be that single general election that one will be able to point to and say immigration made a difference. Over the last four to five months, I've noticed many people I know personally and professionally who never spoke of illegal immigration previously starting to cite illegal immigration as a major concern for them. Many of these folks are moderate to liberal in their social views, but they've started to recognize that unfettered illegal immigration is negatively affecting their work environment, community life, and national life as U.S. citizens. These are the voices of the silent majority speaking up and refusing to be silent any longer. This silent majority is slowly waking up to this issue and beginning to express anger, outrage and resentment relative to illegal immigration and the inability of our government (federal, state and local) to get a handle on this growing national problem. Also, what the CA Democrats cited in this article fail to recognize is that there's an increase in blue-dog and more conservative Deomocrats who are willing to speak out and stand up to the liberal side of the party on this issue, and they are beginning to support border security efforts and other measures aimed at curbing illegal immigration-this is not a partisan issue...it's an American issue and the silent majority is starting to realize that very point. I have a feeling that illegal immigration is going to be a big issue on the minds of many voters (regardless of party, race, ethnicity, or religion) as they enter the polling booth next year, and politicians who believe that American citizens don't see this issue as important to their lives are misguided, at best, or spinning the issue, at worst.

Added to Homepage!


http://www.alipac.us/article-2712--0-0.html

Don't forget that Sen. Feinstein is threatening to bring back her huge AgJOBS amnesty scheme next month or early next year. We'll have to stay on guard.

Originally Posted by Populist

Now two leading lawmakers - Rep. Zoe Lofgren, D-San Jose, the chairwoman of the House Judiciary subcommittee on immigration, and Rep. Howard Berman, D-Van Nuys, one of the key negotiators in all immigration bills -

These two Democrats don't represent Americans, they represent Mexicans! Their districts are packed with illegal aliens, there are probably more foreigners in their districts than US Citizens! There are many more CA Democrats like them, our legislature drew the boundries to put most non-citizens in the "Democratic" districts.