Thread: Senate votes to end the debate on S-744 - UPDATES

Senate Endorses Proposal Calling for Extra Border-Security Measures

By ASHLEY PARKER

Published: June 24, 2013

WASHINGTON — The bipartisan push to overhaul the nation’s immigration laws took a major step forward Monday evening when the Senate endorsed a proposal to substantially bolster security along the nation’s southern borders as part of measure that would provide a path to citizenship for 11 million undocumented immigrants already in the country.

• 
• This Time, Greater Will to Overhaul Immigration (June 24, 2013)
  
  
• Border Deal by 2 in G.O.P. Lifts Chances of Immigration Bill (June 21, 2013)
  
  

The 67 to 27 vote prevented any filibuster of the plan to devote roughly $30 billion to border enforcement measures, including nearly doubling the Border Patrol force to 40,000 agents from 21,000, and completing 700 miles of fencing. Opponents of the enhanced security questioned whether the steps would ever be taken and said that the legislation should require that the border be secure before undocumented immigrants could begin to seek legal status.
But the solid bipartisan support for the border security proposal crafted by two Republican senators, Bob Corker of Tennessee and John Hoeven of North Dakota, suggested that advocates of the overhaul had the votes needed to clear remaining procedural hurdles and pass the legislation, perhaps before legislators return home during the July 4 recess.
The Corker-Hoeven plan helped bring on board more than a dozen Republicans who voted Monday to take up the provision, many of whom said they were reluctant to support any immigration overhaul that did not secure the southern border and guard against a future wave of illegal immigrants. Their amendment will also require a $3.2 billion high-tech border surveillance plan — including drones and long-range thermal imaging cameras — as well as an electronic employment verification system and a visa entry/exit system at all air and sea ports.
All those security measures must be in place before any immigrant can become a legal permanent resident and receive a green card.
Mr. Corker said the new border security proposal “strengthens this bill, puts it in balance, creates trust with the American people and creates the kind of pathway that many people are seeking.”
Despite a clamoring for stronger border security from many Republicans in the Senate and the House, some leading Republicans dug in against the Corker-Hoeven plan. Senator John Cornyn of Texas, the No. 2 Republican in the Senate, said that he could not “support an amendment cobbled together at the 11th hour that doubles the Border Patrol without knowing how much it will cost of whether it is even the right strategy.”
Other Republicans and advocacy groups opposed to the bill also offered loud complaints: that the legislation was drafted behind closed doors by a small group of senators; that the bill was too long and not given ample time for discussion; that the legislation needed to be stronger when it came to border security; that the Corker-Hoeven amendment was simply a toothless provision intended to give Republicans cover to vote for a bill they still viewed as “amnesty.”
On Monday, a group of 14 Republican senators sent a letter to Senator Harry Reid of Nevada, the Democratic leader, calling for a “serious, extensive amendment process.”
“This is deeply, deeply disturbing,” read the letter, referring to the fact that only a fraction of the amendments filed to the bill had been voted on. “It is effectively shutting down the American people’s ability to be heard on this issue through their elected representatives.”
A spokesman for Mr. Reid, however, pointed out that many of the 14 Republicans were the same senators who had failed to work with Democrats to reach a compromise to bring up more amendments on the Senate floor.
Proponents of the immigration overhaul were also not entirely pleased with the Corker-Hoeven plan. A coalition of groups representing border communities urged senators to reject the amendment, which they called “an example of excessive and wasteful government spending” and a “poorly thought-out policy.”
“It is an assault on our system of checks and balances and seriously threatens the quality of life of border residents,” wrote the border groups, in a statement.
Other advocates worried that in an effort to garner broad bipartisan support for the bill, Democratic senators were making too many concessions without getting anything in return. The border plan, for instance, also includes a provision by Senator Orrin G. Hatch, Republican of Utah, that would prevent undocumented immigrants from qualifying for Social Security benefits, as well as from receiving federal welfare funds.
“It is a tough pill to swallow, and there is no guarantee it will not get worse later in the process,” said Kevin Appleby, the director of migration policy at the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, referring to the amendment. “If the path to citizenship is further weakened, there could come a tipping point where the bill becomes unsupportable.”
If the bill passes the Senate, it will head to the Republican–controlled House, where it already faces vocal opposition. Speaker John A. Boehner of Ohio has publicly said he will not bring any immigration bill up for a vote that does not have the support of the majority of House Republicans, a decision that pleases the Tea Party wing of his caucus but that also raises significant hurdles for passing any broad immigration bill in the House, where many conservatives oppose any pathway to citizenship.
Speaking on the Senate floor Monday, Mr. Reid urged Mr. Boehner to take up the Senate’s immigration bill quickly, even if he doesn’t have the support of the majority of House Republicans.
“Rather than twisting the arms of Tea Party extremists, just work with moderates from both parties to pass bipartisan legislation,” Mr. Reid said. “And rather than trying to force legislation designed to please only the right wing, my friend, the speaker should just take the easy way out.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/25/us/politics/senate-endorses-proposal-calling-for-extra-border-security-measures.html?_r=0

So 6 Senators did not vote on this tonight???

W

Originally Posted by ALIPAC

So 6 Senators did not vote on this tonight???

W

So it seems.

Senate Vote 160 - Advances Border Security Proposal


On the Cloture Motion S.Amdt. 1183 to S. 744 (Border Security, Economic Opportunity, and Immigration Modernization Act)
S.Amdt. 1183

Border Security, Economic Opportunity, and Immigration Modernization Act
Full text of the bill »

Sponsor:	Charles E. Schumer
Introduced:	April 16, 2013
Passed House:	–
Passed Senate:	–
Considered by President:	–
Became Law:	–

Yes	67	50 Democrats 15 2 60 needed to pass
No	27	27 Republicans
Present
Didn't vote	6	2 4

Result:	Cloture Motion Agreed to by a margin of 7 votes
Date of Vote:	June 24, 2013
Time of Vote:	5:34 p.m.
Roll Call Number:	160

Related Story: Senate Backs Proposal for Extra Security at U.S. Borders

Bill Details »

Geography of the Vote

	Yes votes	No votes	Other
Republicans	15	27	4
Democrats	50		2
Independents	2

Complete Roll Call

Yes Votes (67)

Member	Party	State
Lamar Alexander	R	TN
Kelly Ayotte	R	NH
Tammy Baldwin	D	WI
Max Baucus	D	MT
Mark Begich	D	AK
Michael Bennet	D	CO
Richard Blumenthal	D	CT
Barbara Boxer	D	CA
Maria Cantwell	D	WA
Benjamin L. Cardin	D	MD
Thomas R. Carper	D	DE
Bob Casey	D	PA
Jeffrey S. Chiesa	R	NJ
Susan Collins	R	ME
Christopher A. Coons	D	DE
Bob Corker	R	TN
William Cowan	D	MA
Joe Donnelly	D	IN
Richard J. Durbin	D	IL
Dianne Feinstein	D	CA
Jeff Flake	R	AZ
Al Franken	D	MN
Kirsten E. Gillibrand	D	NY
Lindsey Graham	R	SC
Kay Hagan	D	NC
Tom Harkin	D	IA
Orrin G. Hatch	R	UT
Martin Heinrich	D	NM
Heidi Heitkamp	D	ND
Dean Heller	R	NV
Mazie K. Hirono	D	HI
John Hoeven	R	ND
Tim Johnson	D	SD
Tim Kaine	D	VA
Angus King	I	ME
Mark Steven Kirk	R	IL
Amy Klobuchar	D	MN
Mary L. Landrieu	D	LA
Patrick J. Leahy	D	VT
Carl Levin	D	MI
Joe Manchin III	D	WV
John McCain	R	AZ
Claire McCaskill	D	MO
Robert Menendez	D	NJ
Jeff Merkley	D	OR
Barbara A. Mikulski	D	MD
Lisa Murkowski	R	AK
Christopher S. Murphy	D	CT
Patty Murray	D	WA
Bill Nelson	D	FL
Mark Pryor	D	AR
Jack Reed	D	RI
Harry Reid	D	NV
John D. Rockefeller IV	D	WV
Marco Rubio	R	FL
Bernard Sanders	I	VT
Brian Schatz	D	HI
Charles E. Schumer	D	NY
Jeanne Shaheen	D	NH
Debbie Stabenow	D	MI
Jon Tester	D	MT
Tom Udall	D	NM
Mark Warner	D	VA
Elizabeth Warren	D	MA
Sheldon Whitehouse	D	RI
Roger Wicker	R	MS
Ron Wyden	D	OR

No Votes (27)

Member	Party	State
John Barrasso	R	WY
Roy Blunt	R	MO
John Boozman	R	AR
Richard M. Burr	R	NC
Daniel Coats	R	IN
Tom Coburn	R	OK
Thad Cochran	R	MS
John Cornyn	R	TX
Michael D. Crapo	R	ID
Ted Cruz	R	TX
Deb Fischer	R	NE
Charles E. Grassley	R	IA
James M. Inhofe	R	OK
Mike Johanns	R	NE
Ron Johnson	R	WI
Mitch McConnell	R	KY
Jerry Moran	R	KS
Rand Paul	R	KY
Rob Portman	R	OH
Jim Risch	R	ID
Pat Roberts	R	KS
Tim Scott	R	SC
Jeff Sessions	R	AL
Richard C. Shelby	R	AL
John Thune	R	SD
Patrick J. Toomey	R	PA
David Vitter	R	LA

Did Not Vote (6)*************************************

Member	Party	State
Sherrod Brown	D	OH
Saxby Chambliss	R	GA
Michael B. Enzi	R	WY
Johnny Isakson	R	GA
Mike Lee	R	UT
Mark Udall	D	CO

by Mike Flynn 24 Jun 2013, 3:56 PM PDT
breitbart.com



On Monday, the Senate voted to cut off debate on the Schumer-Corker-Hoeven substitute amendment to the Gang of 8 amnesty bill.

The full chamber will now vote on the amendment, which will replace the original Gang of 8 bill as the final Senate immigration legislation. Majority Leader Reid will soon seek to cut-off debate on the main bill, with final votes on the legislation likely scheduled for Thursday or Friday.

Supporters of the "Gang" legislation have long predicted strong bi-partisan support for their immigration reform legislation. The effort ran into trouble last week, however, as details about the weakness of the bill and its border security provisions were made public. The Corker-Hoeven Amendment was quickly drafted to overcome these concerns.

That Amendment and other changes to the bill were released Friday evening. The full consequences of the new proposal are only now coming to light. The next 48-72 hours will be critical in determining the fate of the legislation. Supporters probably have the votes to secure passage in the Senate, but have said repeatedly that they need 70 or more votes to pressure the House to act. Whether they get that on final passage remains unclear.

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Governm...y-Bill-Forward

Added breitbart article to the Homepage:
http://www.alipac.us/content.php?r=1...y-Bill-Forward

Originally Posted by ALIPAC

So 6 Senators did not vote on this tonight???

W

Did Not Vote (6)

Member	Party	State
Sherrod Brown	D	OH
Saxby Chambliss	R	GA
Michael B. Enzi	R	WY
Johnny Isakson	R	GA
Mike Lee	R	UT
Mark Udall	D	CO

The fate of S.744 will be determined by the end of the week. Here's what's left:

• 1) final vote on Schumer-Corker-Hoeven amnesty amendment (50 votes needed),
• 2) motion to limit debate on Leahy manager's amendment (60 votes),
• 3) final vote on Leahy manager's amendment (50 votes), and
• 4) motion to end debate on the bill (60 votes).