Thread: Shenanigans In The House

Shenanigans In The House

Serious immigration legislation is in the air. Rep Shuler's (D- NC) enforcement-only bill has attracted a fair number of supporters, and the rumor is that the House Republicans will try to force through a discharge petition necessitating a vote on the bill. While we are skeptical that a discharge petition has much chance of success, the House Democratic leadership is apparently not so sanguine (for info on discharge petitions, see here). The House Hispanic Caucus has prepared a plan to meet the antis head on if they force a vote on the Shuler Bill.

The plan begins with the proposition that any serious discussion of immigration on the Hill will definitely harm Republican presidential nominee McCain. If he supports the "pros", the anti immigration fanatics in the Republican party will not support him in the general election; if he supports the "antis", it will weaken his appeal to the independents for the general election. Second, should a vote on the Shuler bill come about, the House Hispanic caucus would seek to attach numerous benefit amendments to it - there is every likelihood that some of these amendments will succeed, a raising of the H cap, for example. Hopefully, so the thinking among the strategists among the House Democrats goes, the success of a few amendments will be a "poison-pill" guaranteeing the defeat of the over-all measure since the antis are not in a mood to make any deal trading enforcement with benefits at this time. Ironically, the antis in the House may be forced to vote against the amended Shuler bill, thus positioning the Democrats as the real pro-enforcement party.

Our take is that once started down the Hill (pun intended), the momentum of an immigration bill would be hard to stop, and we might end up with something along the lines of the Kennedy-Kyl compromise of last spring, but without the point system which doomed it. To the surprise of many, Comprehensive Immigration Reform appears far from dead. And once again, it’s the antis who deserve the credit for bringing benefits to the fore.

We welcome readers to share their opinion and ideas with us by writing to editor@ilw.com.


http://www.ilw.com/immigdaily/#comment
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I went to this article's site and if you scroll down there is a comment section and they do NOT like Lou Dobbs nor any anti Illegal or immimgrant MSM discussion.They say it is hate speech.

They want to keep those H-1B's and other immigrants plus the IA's rolling in.

I saw this at Politico.com

Lobbyist to run McCain's Hill effort

And Republicans say they will try to stave off divisive amendments on issues such as immigration and global warming, which would illustrate McCain’s divide with his party.

Why should I donate to the GOP so that they can pay a Lobbyist so McCain can hid his true agenda.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0308/8814.html

I told the GOP to stick it when called me for money.

Kepp moving ahead in the States. We're working towards a ballot measure to tighten up both driver's license and voting standards and to prohibit sanctuary policies. I think it has an excellent chance of succeeding with the general public.

Originally Posted by Paige

I told the GOP to stick it when called me for money.

They called me a few weeks back and I was able to unload my opinions on about every issue that has been ticking me off for a long time. It was like a dam burst.

Any new bills will be meaningless as long as we have the same old Revolutionaries in the government. Well except as pointed out as some sort of line of bull like the last fence law.

Democrats as the "real pro-enforcement party." What a joke.

With all due respect to to Heath Shuler who is at least honest enough to try to do something reasonable, his party is so weak on stopping illegal immigration no sane, informed person believes that the Dems care one iota about enforcing laws.

And the reason the Kennedy/Kyl/McCain/Bush amnesty bill failed last summer was not because of the point system, but because it was radical legislation that was rejected by the vast majority of Americans.