Thread: House GOP gains on border issues

http://www.ocregister.com/ocregister/ne ... 285919.php

Sunday, September 24, 2006
House GOP gains on border issues
DENA BUNIS
Washington Bureau Chief
The Orange County Register
dbunis@ocregister.com To paraphrase CNN, House Republicans may just have pulled off the political play of the session.

Now the deal isn't sealed yet. But it seems that the House leaders who insisted on strengthening immigration enforcement before considering a guest-worker or legalization plan may just have gotten their way.

Many of us scoffed when we watched the GOP put forward a border security agenda that was totally recycled from the immigration bill they passed last December.

But their political calculus was clever. Republicans know that in this midterm election, Democrats cannot afford to be seen as soft on anything related to security. So how can they vote against a fence to secure the border, or provisions to make it easier to deport gang members, or more prosecutors for illegal-immigrant smugglers? And just as importantly, Republicans who need to turn out their party's base in November want to be able to go home and say the GOP did something on this issue.

So one-by-one, the majority put forward these measures. First it was the fence. Then last week, three other enforcement bills.

The one element that met with significant opposition was the provision about local police enforcing immigration laws. There's a real division among law enforcement on that one. And the immigrant community put up enough of an objection that 140 members voted no. The GOP still got a big enough majority to be able to say that these measures had bipartisan support.

Midweek, President Bush, who has been at odds with House leaders on this issue, said he would sign anything that bolsters border security. Game and set.

It isn't quite match yet. There is still the Senate.

Senate leaders don't have as much control over their chamber as their House counterparts. So Majority Leader Bill Frist – who says these bills are fine and should become law – has to figure out a way to force a vote on them. The only way he can be assured of that is to attach them to a bill Democrats cannot afford to vote against.

He's got one: the homeland security appropriations bill. If Democrats cannot afford to be seen as soft on national security, surely they can't go home to their states and have opponents trot out a no vote on a bill to fund homeland security.

But Frist isn't home free. Some pretty influential Republicans – most notably Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania and Appropriations Committee Chairman Thad Cochran of Mississippi – aren't happy about this end run. Specter is worried that if these enforcement measures become law, the House won't be inclined to talk about anything else on immigration, certainly not something many Republicans have already branded as an amnesty.

He may be right. In 1986, Congress passed an amnesty. Some people like to talk now about how easy it was to get President Reagan to sign that bill. But those who have followed this issue closely will remember that the only way that deal was struck was to counterbalance amnesty with what were supposed to be tough sanctions on employers who hired illegal immigrants. In hindsight, we know that those sanctions never amounted to much. At the time, it was a way to get the bill passed – a little for this faction, a little for that.

So if the enforcement parts of immigration reform are done in the next week or so, there won't be much reason for those who don't like the idea of a guest-worker or legalization plan in the first place to compromise.

The question now is whether Specter and others in his party who have championed the broad approach can keep the enforcement measures out of the homeland bill. The fence is likely to pass on its own no matter what. So is Sen. Feinstein's measure to outlaw border tunnels. But some of the other provisions – particularly the one on local law enforcement – might not make it in the homeland bill. We'll see.

Even if those provisions become law this year, those who are committed to getting a broader bill passed say the problem of 12 million illegal immigrants living in this country isn't going to go away. And they say employers are still in need of labor that they claim they cannot get in this country.

This isn't the first time lawmakers have decided to do piecemeal what they couldn't get done in one big bill.

More than a decade ago, then first lady Hillary Clinton tried to get a massive health-reform bill through Congress. It fell apart. But after it did, pieces of it ended up as law. And 12 years later, even though there are more uninsured Americans than ever now, Congress hasn't revisited the notion of one big health-system overhaul.

Maybe that won't happen to this issue. And maybe Specter and his allies can keep the House provisions from being folded into the homeland bill or another spending bill.

We'll be watching.

YES YES YES....WE'll be W A T C H I N G!

But Frist isn't home free. Some pretty influential Republicans – most notably Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania and Appropriations Committee Chairman Thad Cochran of Mississippi – aren't happy about this end run. Specter is worried that if these enforcement measures become law, the House won't be inclined to talk about anything else on immigration, certainly not something many Republicans have already branded as an amnesty.


These are the "usual" Jewish Neo-con RHINO's. NEO-CONS are causing ALOT of the problems in the Republican party, and all of them want OPEN BORDERS..

Just Calling a spade a spade. They need to be blasted.


Google and search NEO-CONS in the Bush administration for a true look at the dark side of this deal. Its both frightening and UGLY...
Liberals at MOVE ON .ORG seem to be more aware of this important issue than we are and if LIBERALS are talking about it, then I guess you CAN!

Mr. Bunis can't quite bring himself to say what's happening is the right thing to do. No, he prefers the more elitist left-wing phrase, "their political calculus was clever." And his flagrant bias slipped out with, "he would sign anything...Frist isn't home free....problem of 12 million illegal immigrants living in this country isn't going to go away...more uninsured Americans than ever now...maybe Specter and his allies can keep the House provisions from being folded into the homeland bill..."

Taking these apart was a joy but I'll limit my rant to two comments. First, if 80% of the nation have their collective way, those 12 million illegal aliens will indeed go away. And secondly, regarding uninsured Americans, I'd remind this witless sand crab that half the uninsured are illegal aliens and their anchor babies.

This is a small time hack, so consumed by his hatred of Bush, he's willing to trade America for a handful of refried beans (ick). The democrat party is not going along with draft bills because they've been cleverly maneuvered. They're doing it against their grain 'cuz they know their constituencies will throw them out if they don't go along.