Immigration bill fails in Senate
Controversial 'amnesty' measure pulled, but supporters say it'll be back – soon

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/artic ... E_ID=56081

Posted: June 8, 2007
1:00 a.m. Eastern
© 2007 WorldNetDaily.com

A plan to reform America's immigration laws and allow millions of illegal aliens now within its borders to pay a fine and become legal has floundered in the Senate and been set aside – for now, although its backers say the plan will return, and probably soon.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., and Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., said the issue may be brought up again, with McConnell advising, "I wouldn't wait a whole long time to do it."

Indeed, as Fox News reports, "all the GOP lawmakers who spoke with Fox News were upbeat that the legislation could be revived soon – even within a matter of weeks, with one negotiator noting that last year's bill was first pulled from the floor by then-Majority Leader Bill Frist before it was brought back up again and passed."

And Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham said he and Reid are confident the bill will be back.

The proposal tied tougher border security and enforcement of legal immigration status in the workplace to a procedure to legalize most of the estimated 12-20 million illegal aliens already in the U.S. Also involved was a controversial temporary worker program and a procedure involving an evaluation of merit for future immigration.

The proposal floundered in a 2nd vote that would have sped up the Senate's handling of the White House-backed "comprehensive" immigration reform. The divided Senate refused by a wide margin to limit debate on the plan. The 45-50 vote was 15 short of the 60 votes needed to move the legislation along.

Democrats then set the bill aside and took up other proposed legislation.

President Bush has made immigration reform a focal point of his recent domestic policy, but Republican senators said they would not be hurried into a decision, offering a series of amendments to the plan.

Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass., watched as the plan he helped craft disintegrated, and warned the issue would experience a resurrection.

Critics said the plan would simply give amnesty to illegal aliens who broke United States law to enter the country, as well as create a separate "class" of cheap workers who would undermine the U.S. wage structure

Eagle Forum, a leading pro-family organization founded by Phyllis Schlafly, praised the "tireless efforts" of the American people in voicing their opposition to and successfully defeating S. 1348, the Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act of 2007.

"It became obvious that the longer the Senate debated the so-called comprehensive immigration bill, the more the grassroots opposition increased," said Eagle Forum president Phyllis Schlafly.

"The United States Senate finally listened to the overwhelming opposition to this amnesty bill," said Eagle Forum Executive Director Jessica Echard. "With calls running hundreds to one opposed, there was no question that we don't want new laws. We simply want our immigration laws, which already exist, enforced."

Eagle Forum organized a coalition of outside groups to oppose the bill, similar to the coalition used to successfully defeat the Harriet Miers nomination in 2005.

"This vote sends the message that the American people can still call the shots on how they are governed. The power of the White House, Big Business, cultural and religious elites was not enough to drown out the overwhelming public opposition to this bill. What a great day for grassroots America!" Echard stated.

The plan would have allowed illegal aliens in the country as of this year to pay fees and fines and get renewable four-year visas to live and work in the U.S., puts holders of those visas on a path to citizenship under certain circumstances, and set up the temporary worker problem allowing 200,000 guest-workers annually to enter the U.S.

It also would have added 20,000 border agents, 370 miles of barrier fence and other efforts to crack down on illegal immigration.

As WND reported earlier, the issue has torn at the Republican Party, with its grass-roots opposing the plan publicly praised by President Bush.

Just two days after President Bush slammed critics of his immigration policy, the Republican National Committee reportedly fired all 65 of its telephone solicitors, as donors were said to be furious over the president's stance to give legal status to millions of illegal aliens.

"Every donor in 50 states we reached has been angry, especially in the last month and a half, and for 99 percent of them immigration is the No. 1 issue," a fired phone-bank employee told the Washington Times.

Ousted staff members told the paper Anne Hathaway, the committee's chief of staff, summoned the solicitors and told them they were out of work, effective immediately.

They claim the reasons they were given were an estimated 40 percent plunge in small-donor contributions, as well as aging phone-bank equipment the RNC said would cost too much to modernize.

The committee, however, is denying any drop-off in the influx of cash.

"Any assertion that overall donations have gone down is patently false," RNC spokeswoman Tracey Schmitt told the Times via e-mail. "We continue to out-raise our Democrat counterpart by a substantive amount (nearly double)."

As WND reported, opponents of the controversial immigration deal forged by the White House and a bipartisan group of senators in private meetings "don't want to do what's right for America," according to President Bush.

"The fundamental question is, will elected officials have the courage necessary to put a comprehensive immigration plan in place," Bush recently told students and instructors at the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center in Glynco, Ga.

A recent Rasmussen poll showed only 26 percent of American voters favored the Senate plan.

The public is most passionate about enforcement, the survey indicated. About 72 percent of voters said it's "very important" for "the government to improve its enforcement of the borders and reduce illegal immigration."

The figure jumped to 89 percent among Republicans, while 65 percent of Democrats and 63 percent of unaffiliated voters believed enforcement is "very important."