Attention Senators Dodd, Reid and Specter: Prepare Your Resumes!
Last week,
I wrote that I didn't foresee
"comprehensive immigration reform"
a.k.a.
amnesty
on the political horizon any time soon.
And now that Senate Minority Whip
John Kyl—almost
as big an
advocate of illegal immigration as his subversive Arizona
colleague
John
McCain—has publicly stated that amnesty is off
the dance card, it's official.
On Tuesday Kyl, who serves on the Senate Judiciary Committee, in response to a question about when immigration might be taken up, replied:
"If you've
picked any subject that isn't really on the front burner right
now, you've
picked it. Nobody's thinking about it right now because we've
got all these emergencies."
[Kyl
Downplays Immigration Reform Talk, CongressDaily, March 25,
2009]
Of course, I don't
trust Kyl as far as I can throw him. But, given all of the
other
tangible evidence that points away from amnesty, I'll
declare
it dead—at least for now.
Having made that pronouncement, I confess
to being slightly disappointed.
In a way, I looked forward to a good
rousing Senate fight, in which the traitors would make
outrageous, indefensible statements supporting illegal
immigration that would come back to haunt them during the 2010
mid-term elections.
Luckily for us, many of their immigration
voting histories are so scandalous and their other actions so
disgraceful that their political careers are likely over—even
without their further embarrassing themselves in an amnesty
debate,.
Peering into my crystal ball, I see three of
the worst pro-immigration advocates exiting the
Senate—Connecticut's
Christopher
Dodd, Senate Majority Leader
Harry
Reid of Nevada, and Pennsylvania's Arlen Specter.
I discussed Specter's fate in my 2008
VDARE.COM columns
here
and
here.
Dodd's immigration grade in the decade from
1996 through 2006, went
straight downhill from its C+ peak, according to for
Americans For Better
Immigration. And since 2006, Dodd has earned an
F- immigration grade. Whatever the category—chain migration,
interior enforcement and elimination of illegal immigration
enticements—Dodd is on the wrong side.
Only a few years ago,
Dodd chastised
Americans for not doing a "better job" of welcoming
illegal aliens.
Still, if you're looking for something nice
to say about Dodd—and I cannot imagine why you would—his
immigration record is slightly better than
Teddy Kennedy's.
Immigration is one of many issues that might
push the thirty-year Senate veteran out of office. Even Dodd's
prominent role as the Senate Banking Committee Chairman during
the AIG
bonus debacle is still only part of the whole story about
why Connecticut voters have had enough. [Dodd
Admits Role in AIG Bonus Controversy, by Christopher
Keating, Hartford Courant, March 19, 2009]
Pick from these other problems that have
been festering for two years or more.
Dodd
-
Moved his family to Iowa to make an ill-advised, doomed
2008 presidential bid. Connecticut voters perceived this
as abandonment.
-
Refused to release documents pertaining to his two
questionable Countrywide mortgages given to him at lower
than the prevailing interest rate.
-
Withheld details pertaining to the
sweetheart financing of his 10-acre property on
Ireland's west coast. Dodd calls his overseas home a
"cottage". To me, it looks like an estate. (See it
here to decide for yourself.)
As a result, Dodd's
job approval numbers have dropped steadily from 60 percent
favorable on May 10, 2007 to 41 percent approval on Feb. 10,
2009.
A March 10th poll showed if the
election were held today, Dodd would run neck-and-neck with his
likely opponent former Republican U.S. Rep. Rob (mediocre
on immigration) Simmons. That's an uncomfortable position for
Dodd, considering he has not been in a close race since his
first successful Senate bid in 1980. [Dodd's
Stock with Voters Began Dropping Before AIG, by Susan
Haigh, Associated Press, March 22, 2009]
Whether Dodd gets the boot because of his
immigration pandering, his
AIG failure
or his nefarious personal banking connections doesn't matter.
The important thing is that, after
36 years in Congress (thirty of them in the Senate), Dodd be
gone.
Majority Leader
Reid's
defeat would be even more satisfying, since it could be
directly tied to his
non-stop amnesty advocacy. Reid is patriotic immigration
reform's
Public
Enemy #1 in the Senate.
Although Reid enjoys the biggest party majority of any Senate
leader in a quarter of a century, he can hear the footsteps in
what will be 2010's marquee battle.
A recent
Research 2000 poll of likely voters put Reid's approval
rating at 38 percent and his disapproval rating at 54 percent.
And while
President Barack Obama carried
Nevada
by a comfortable
12 percentage points, the state voted for
George
W. Bush in 2000 and 2004.
Even among Democrats,
Reid's
prospects look dim. Only 44 percent would positively vote to
re-elect him. Reid's closest advisors have recommended that, if
he is serious about getting re-elected, he resign as majority
leader to spend full time campaigning—an idea I heartily
endorse!
Because of his abysmal numbers,
Reid observers have awarded him the dubious title of
"most vulnerable Democrat." [How
Vulnerable Is Harry Reid? by Steve Benen, Washington
Monthly, December 29, 2008]
A
Nevada Zogby Poll/FAIR cost study revealed in detail why
Reid is in such a precarious position.
-
79 percent of Nevada voters wanted
E-Verify protections included in the stimulus bill. But
Reid
refused to allow the motion even to come to the Senate
floor.
-
(55 percent of
Nevada voters oppose amnesty for illegal aliens, an idea
Reid embraces.
-
77 percent of
Nevada voters believe illegal immigration has a negative
impact on the state budget. Reid, for years, has championed
illegal alien causes.
A new Federation for American Immigration Reform study, The Costs of Illegal Immigration to Nevadans, found that taxpayers bear a $630 million annual burden as a result of illegal immigration, or about $763 per native-headed household in the state.
After
forty years in the political arena, the savvy Reid knows
that his lofty Senate position doesn't automatically translate
into an easy win at the polls.
South Dakota's
Tom
Daschle, the Democratic leader for a decade, lost his 2004
re-election bid. Similarly, in 2008 Kentucky's
Mitch
McConnell, the current Republican Senate Minority leader,
only
narrowly held on. [Sen.
Reid Hits The Ground Running in Uphill Re-Election Bid
by T. W. Farnum, Wall Street Journal, December 28, 2008].
For immigration patriots,
Daschle's downfall was particularly heartening. In 2004, as
the most powerful Democrat in Congress and a vocal proponent for
amnesty,
Daschle lost to Republican
John Thune, a candidate who had compiled an excellent
anti-illegal immigration record while he was in Congress. Thune
is
vigorously opposed to amnesty.
South Dakota voters, in the meantime,
perceived that Daschle—like Dodd and Reid today—had lost touch
with their views and wishes.
Ironically, as difficult to believe as it is,
Reid was
once one of us. From 1989 through 1996, Reid
staunchly opposed illegal immigration and amnesty.
What's sad is that ten years ago, when Reid
abandoned his admirable opposition against the alien
invasion, Nevada was a great place to live:
wide open
spaces, affordable housing, safe streets and decent schools.
Look at it now, a sprawling illegal alien
paradise, home to various
cutthroat gangs and a rotten education system.
Little wonder that Nevada voters are poised
to throw Reid out.
Voters will have
other 2010 opportunities to show amnesty advocates the door.
But these will be more challenging.
Among the Democrats:
-
Barbara Boxer, California
-
Chuck
Schumer, New York
-
Barbara
Mikulski, Maryland
-
Patty Murray, Washington
-
Patrick
Leahy, Vermont
-
Ron Wyden, Oregon
-
Russ
Feingold, Wisconsin
For the RINOs:
-
John McCain, Arizona
-
Arlen
Specter, Pennsylvania
Still, even in this apparently safe line-up
of incumbents, pockets of opportunity to unseat them
exist—assuming that
-
The
economy struggles on, unemployment remains high and
voter angst prevails.
-
Voters decide all incumbents are complicit in
America's crisis
-
Obama's popularity sinks below 50 percent, as it likely will
-
Ire about the various
bailouts and stimulus packages remains high
-
The opposition nominates
serious—and ideally—formidable
opponents.
For example, if McCain's runs against a
politically inexperienced
eighth
grade math teacher, as he did in 2004, then the election is
over before it starts.
Or if Schumer's challenger is a neophyte who
doesn't once
mention immigration's impact on
New York,
as was the case six years ago, lights out.
But if, as may happen in California, a star
emerges—a literal possibility now that
Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger is evaluating the prospect of
challenging Boxer—then, things get interesting. [Is
Schwarzenegger Eyeing A 2010 Senate Run? by Michelle
Levi, CBS News, March 23, 2009]
Sure, Schwarzenegger has been
a disaster as governor. But he's the
"Terminator", still hugely popular among voters who
follow action movies but not politics. And he may be a better
advocate for patriotic immigration reform than Boxer.
Schwarzenegger certainly can't be worse.
Dodd, Reid and Specter all hope that in the
year and a half remaining prior to November 2010, they can
reverse their fortunes.
Call it wishful thinking.
In my book, they've done too much damage
over more than three decades in the Senate to survive—above all
in allowing the immigration crisis to balloon out of control.
Joe Guzzardi [email him] is a California native who recently fled the state because of over-immigration, over-population and a rapidly deteriorating quality of life. He has moved to Pittsburgh, PA where the air is clean and the growth rate stable. A long-time instructor in English at the Lodi Adult School, Guzzardi has been writing a weekly column since 1988. It currently appears in the Lodi News-Sentinel.