Thread: Kyl Hits Immigration Head Wind

Kyl Hits Immigration Head Wind
May 23 2007
Senator's Support of Compromise
Divides Republican Base
By SARAH LUECK

WASHINGTON -- Last year, in the midst of a heated re-election campaign, Arizona Republican Sen. Jon Kyl hurled at his opponent a damaging accusation in the border state: He ran TV ads saying the Democrat supported "amnesty" for illegal immigrants.

Now, as Mr. Kyl backs a bipartisan Senate immigration bill, he is hearing the same charge leveled at him by other Republicans in his state and on conservative blogs and radio shows.

The debate between the conservative Mr. Kyl and his base is one of the most important battles determining the fate of the landmark immigration overhaul. Mr. Kyl hopes his endorsement will help win over other immigration hard-liners, a constituency where he has credibility, particularly after opposing last year's Senate-passed bill as too weak. That's the main reason the Bush administration pinpointed Mr. Kyl early on as a focal point of its legislative strategy.

Mr. Kyl yesterday won a victory in the Senate's first day considering amendments, as fellow lawmakers overwhelmingly defeated an attempt by some Democrats to strip out a temporary "guest worker" program that he backs.

But so far at least, Mr. Kyl appears to be having a hard time drawing the support of his fellow conservatives. And if he ultimately flees -- as he says he still may -- the entire effort is more likely to unravel.

On Monday, protesters outside his Phoenix office waved signs reading "Recall Kyl," reported local radio station KTAR. The state Republican Party chairman, Randy Pullen, held a news conference criticizing the legislation and said the Republican base is upset by Mr. Kyl's support of it.

In backing an agreement that allows most illegal immigrants to remain in the country, Mr. Kyl knew he would inflame many conservative Republicans who view that as amnesty. But he says the lesson he learned in the last election was that the public wants Congress to pass a bill. With Democrats in charge, he says, trade-offs are necessary.



Mr. Kyl focuses on what he says are the positive elements he influenced in the package: increased border security; requirements for employers to verify the status of workers; and a shift in the basic priorities of the immigration system to one focused more on filling holes in the job market than the current emphasis on preserving family ties.

"A conservative person ought to want to restore the rule of law," Mr. Kyl said in an interview. "That means we're going to have to actually pass a bill, rather than sit on the sidelines and complain."

The proposed legislation requires several "triggers" -- such as the hiring of more border agents and implementation of an employer-verification system -- to be met before a new guest-worker program would begin.

Guest workers could come only temporarily, for three two-year stints, but would have to return to their home countries for one-year periods in between. That was a crucial element to meet the requirement of Mr. Kyl and other Republicans that "temporary means temporary."

Some Democrats dislike the guest-worker program. Yesterday, the Senate defeated a proposal from Sen. Byron Dorgan (D., N.D.) to strike it from the bill, in the first test of the fragile bipartisan compromise.

Mr. Dorgan echoed complaints from labor unions about that provision, saying it would create a permanent underclass of workers and reduce wages for Americans. But his proposal failed on a vote of 64-31.

Most illegal immigrants who entered the U.S. before Jan. 1, 2007, would be able to register for "Z visas" and continue to live and work here. But there would be significant strings attached, such as required payment of a fine and a demonstration of English proficiency. To get green cards, they would have to return briefly to their home countries.

Mr. Kyl said many provisions in the final bill "remove key elements of amnesty," such as the fines.

"They may think it's amnesty," Mr. Kyl said of his critics. "The next obvious question is, 'What would you do about it instead?'"


If the essential elements of the "grand bargain" are intact, Mr. Kyl says he will "absolutely" vote for the legislation. But with a slew of amendments yet to be debated before the Senate votes on the overall bill in June, his support isn't assured. "There is so much that has to happen between now and then," he says.

Other amendments are likely to come up soon from critics on both the left and the right, including proposals to: reduce the number of people that could come in as guest workers; mandate prison sentences for people caught trying to illegally cross the border; and declare English the official language of the U.S.

So far, critics have been louder than supporters of the bill. This weekend, in a meeting with Republican Party officials in his home state, Mr. Kyl said some people were "very negative."

Among them was Mr. Pullen, an immigration hard-liner who says the Senate bill's security changes are inadequate and that the bill provides "essentially a blanket amnesty like in 1986," the last time Congress passed a sweeping immigration bill.

Mr. Kyl "did the best he could to get reforms in," Mr. Pullen said in an interview. "I don't think it's good enough."

But Mr. Kyl is getting some positive response on the bill too, most notably from business groups. At a meeting with the Agri-Business Council of Arizona on Friday, Mr. Kyl got a standing ovation, partly because of his efforts on immigration, said the group's executive director, Chris Udall.

On Saturday, Mr. Kyl got a "very warm" reception from the Arizona Chamber of Commerce and Industry after explaining the Senate bill, said the group's president, Glenn Hamer. "From the business community's standpoint, particularly in Arizona, there's an almost desperate desire to see a comprehensive federal solution for immigration problems," Mr. Hamer said.

In the Senate, Mr. Kyl's conservative reputation seems to have at least tempered the debate. Sen. Mel Martinez, a Florida Republican and supporter of the immigration deal, said Mr. Kyl's influence "kept the bill as a conservative bill." He is hopeful more Republicans will come on board "when people get past the hysteria of the moment."

Even Senate critics of the legislation haven't attacked Mr. Kyl in public, though they have faulted the fact that a small group of senators forged the deal in private. Alabama Republican Sen. Jeff Sessions worked with Mr. Kyl last year to oppose the Senate-passed immigration bill, which died in the House, where Republicans railed against "amnesty."

This year, Mr. Sessions is battling Mr. Kyl, leading the fight from the right against the deal. Still, he says, Mr. Kyl "is the best thing they've got going for them."

http://online.wsj.com/public/article/SB ... in_tff_top

But Mr. Kyl is getting some positive response on the bill too, most notably from business groups. At a meeting with the Agri-Business Council of Arizona on Friday, Mr. Kyl got a standing ovation, partly because of his efforts on immigration, said the group's executive director, Chris Udall.

On Saturday, Mr. Kyl got a "very warm" reception from the Arizona Chamber of Commerce and Industry after explaining the Senate bill, said the group's president, Glenn Hamer. "From the business community's standpoint, particularly in Arizona, there's an almost desperate desire to see a comprehensive federal solution for immigration problems," Mr. Hamer said

Well, there is his base...enough said

On Saturday, Mr. Kyl got a "very warm" reception from the Arizona Chamber of Commerce and Industry after explaining the Senate bill, said the group's president, Glenn Hamer. "From the business community's standpoint, particularly in Arizona, there's an almost desperate desire to see a comprehensive federal solution for immigration problems," Mr. Hamer said.

Of course...a desperate DESIRE for cheap labor!!!

Americans aren't DESPERATE enough to want a BAD BILL!!! No bill is BETTER than a BAD one!!! Give me a break!!!! GET REAL!!!! TRAITOR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!

"They may think it's amnesty," Mr. Kyl said of his critics. "The next obvious question is, 'What would you do about it instead?'"

ENFORCE OUR CURRENT LAWS!!!!!!

"A conservative person ought to want to restore the rule of law," Mr. Kyl said in an interview. "That means we're going to have to actually pass a bill, rather than sit on the sidelines and complain."

Do you know how pathetic you sound!?!!

Why don't we give them all of your property, cars, household goods, EVERY single thing you own... you go first a.............e!!

But he says the lesson he learned in the last election was that the public wants Congress to pass a bill. With Democrats in charge, he says, trade-offs are necessary.

Actually Mr. Kyl, you haven't learned a thing. We don't want a new bill, we want our borders secured and current laws enforced. That is all that's necessary. The only reason YOU want a new bill, is to get cheap labor for your business buddies and to give amnesty to illegals.

He has sold his soul to the highest bidder

Kyl is a perfect example of why we cannot trust any of these politicians. They whore themselves out to the highest bidder. Kyl is a pig.

But Mr. Kyl is getting some positive response on the bill too, most notably from business groups. At a meeting with the Agri-Business Council of Arizona on Friday, Mr. Kyl got a standing ovation, partly because of his efforts on immigration, said the group's executive director, Chris Udall.

On Saturday, Mr. Kyl got a "very warm" reception from the Arizona Chamber of Commerce and Industry after explaining the Senate bill, said the group's president, Glenn Hamer. "From the business community's standpoint, particularly in Arizona, there's an almost desperate desire to see a comprehensive federal solution for immigration problems," Mr. Hamer said.

News flash, Sen. Kyl, Agri-Business and the Arizona Chamber of Commerce don't represent the majority of your constituents! Oop, but I guess they do repesent the majority source of your campaign funds.

I guess Kyl has decided who is friends are, however, he's too stupid to realize who the majority of his voting constituents are.