.
There`s a Bill on
the Hill…or something of the sort…and it ostensibly
pertains to immigration reform.
Wonder if that`s
true!
They`re calling it
the
Middle Way: An immigration reform plan that is
broad-sweeping and includes a
"path to citizenship" in addition to some type
of Guest Worker Program.
(When I say
"they" are, I am pretty much referring to the same
nonspecific
"they" used in everyday conversation and yet
never clearly identified. You know, "they" who
supposedly saw your boyfriend at the movies with another
girl or "they" who always seem to know the
sordid events that happened after the office
Christmas party. That they!)
The Middle Way
is what they are calling it. It`s generally
favored by Democrats, President Bush and so-called
"moderate" Republicans. Then again, a
"moderate" Republican
is more often than not just a Democrat with good fashion
sense. I don`t understand the need for an alternative
category.
Issues such as
border enforcement, penalties and/or
consequences don`t seem to be part of the Middle
Way. Those who would seek such dreadful features in a
reform bill are undoubtedly monsters.
Some are calling
the month of May
Immigration Reform Month.
Mr. Obtuse himself,
Senator Harry Reid of Nevada, has even reserved the
last two weeks of May (beginning May 14th…VDARE.com
BLOG will publish live coverage) for floor debate on the
issue.
Hmm…perhaps Mr.
Obtuse is really Mr. Clever because Senator
Reid is rumored to be planning a bit of a coup.
Allegedly, he is hoping to avoid all those
technicalities called public hearings.
Generally speaking,
most bills of this caliber would normally have to suffer
—at the very least—a hearing before the
Judiciary Committee.
After weeks of
testimony, media scrutiny and
amendments (many hostile) controversial documents
such as these often emerge bloodied, battered and
unlikely to survive a full floor vote.
Last week,
Republicans demanded to see the language of the bill
before it goes to the floor for debate and vote. The
letter read:
"We understand that
you are committed to working to enact comprehensive
immigration reform legislation, and that you plan to
bring a bill to the Senate floor in the next few week.
"Due to the
seriousness and complexity of the issue, we ask that you
make any comprehensive immigration reform legislation
publicly available online at least one week prior to
moving it on the Senate floor."
[Let`s
See That Immigration Reform Bill, Senate Republicans Say
by Susan Jones, CNSNews.com, April 30, 2007]
The group drafting
the bill is supposedly
bipartisan, so I don`t understand why these
Republicans don`t have access to a copy. But
stranger things have happened, I suppose.
Senator Jim DeMint
(R-SC) seems
to be leading the charge although Senators
Brownback and
Hutchinson also signed the letter.
If this bill is
drafted during some closed-door Democrat negotiation,
and Reid drags it straight to the floor by
invoking a Special Rule, we`re in trouble, folks.
HOWEVER, this is my
question:
Is it a good
idea for Republicans to tackle the issue at all this
year?
Next year is the
big election year. Democrats seem to control the world
these days. And they`re not doing so hot so far.
They are rapidly
proving themselves to be an extraordinary mistake and a
party with a very simple agenda: it`s called the
We-Don`t-Have-An-Agenda-We-Just-Disagree-With-Everything-The-Republicans-Say
Agenda.
Going into the 2008
elections with this reputation is going to make things
difficult for Pelosi & Co.
(Not to mention
Clinton,
Obama and the Gang.)
What if the
Democrats are banking on a new immigration reform
measure to compensate for their more liberal policies
and to broaden their appeal?
They know that a
majority of Americans want something done about
immigration
right now. The Democrats (and the Bush White
House) think most Americans will accept a Guest
Worker/Amnesty Plan just because it looks like
we`re doing something about the problem.
So what if the
Democrats are depending on immigration reform to—in a
very real sense—save the day? Hmm…wouldn`t it then be
wise for Republicans to
not give them the opportunity?
Sadly, yes, it
would be wise if they took that approach. Which means
they, of course…won`t.
Let me mention a
couple of things before I explain.
I have been reading
a lot of scary things in the
MSM that might explain why the outlook looks so
gloomy for the The Cause.
On US News &
World Report`s
website, I saw
Tamar Jacoby listed as a "Republican Immigration
Expert With The
Manhattan Institute." This is like calling Harry
Reid a “Democrat Tax Expert” just because
he raises them so often.
There are new catch
phrases being circulated such as "without
amnesty without animosity", "melting-pot
model" and "merit visas".
You see, before the
tragic events of 2006 when Democrats took over,
Republican politicians such as my beloved
Jeff Sessions of Alabama and
Saxby Chambliss of Georgia supported strict
immigration reform.
The legislative
objective was always to guard and/or close the
borders, and to penalize (and likely deport) the
millions of illegal immigrants already here.
There was no
chance—absolutely no, no, no chance—for amnesty.
Guest Worker proposals fell under
that category.
Looking at the
situation today, the exact opposite seems to be
occurring.
Just recently,
Senator Sessions was asked if he would support
legalization in exchange for changes to the existing
Visa programs. His response:
"My view is that there
has to be some compassionate resolution of those people
here a long time with children in school," Sessions
said. [Senators
Try To Jumpstart Immigration Overhaul Talks
by Dena Bunis, The Orange County Register,
May 2, 2007]
I appreciate his
compassion—but this is a dangerous, dangerous notion.
We have to remember that many illegal immigrants are
banking on our compassion for their children to
provide them amnesty.
If a bank robber
goes to jail briefly but still gets to keep the money,
we are going to have a lot of bank robbers.
I asked
Rosemary Jenks of
NumbersUSA what she thought about the GOP caving-in
and especially, Senator Sessions.
"Yes, but look
for him to be firmly against amnesty and come around to
see that whatever bill comes out is awful. He won`t
vote for it",
she said.
She also said that
in her opinion most of the Senate has caved but the
House is holding out…there`s some relief I suppose. But…
"The danger is
very real."
Rosemary said.
The compromise to
which Sessions was referring involved so-called Merit
Visas.
Merit Visas would
be issued to those with "in-demand" skills such
as… well, I don`t actually know. I am guessing pretty
much
anything other than
construction and
field work as even the Democrats would have to
acknowledge them as pretty much saturated.
(Hmm…I wonder if
that will kill the whole
"jobs Americans won`t do" argument?)
There are other
proposed changes to our
already lavish immigrant visa programs as
well—alleged compromises designed to entice wary
Republicans to embrace liberal legislation.
In fact,
Speaker Pelosi (ouch…I hate writing that…it burns)
has already indicated to President Bush that she will
not take up the issue on the Floor unless
70 Republican members are behind the bill.
For example, we
know that roughly three-quarters of
legal immigration stems from family reunification.
Word has it the Bush administration is willing to shut
off Visas for
extended family members such as adult children,
siblings and parents.
I suppose that will
make a small difference. But minor children and spouses
would still be eligible, of course.
Existing illegal
immigrants would get to stay in the United States.
And that`s the bottom line!
Last I heard, they
would have to
pay a fine and pass a background check. The proposed
fines vary from $3500 to $10,000 per person.
But again, they
get to stay—which is amnesty
regardless of the price. All it just means American
citizenship has become a
commodity rather than a privilege.
So again, my
question is this: Should Republicans just back off and
do nothing?
Republican Senator
Mel Martinez (R-FL) told the Orange County
Register`s Bunis:
"I`m very concerned.
I do believe that there is a sense that we have to get a
bill done."
Why is that? Why do
they have to get a bill done right now?
Election year
politics will make it unlikely that anyone would bring
the issue to the floor for debate—candidates will be
avoiding anything controversial, right?
As such, 2007 is
the only year that immigration reform has a chance.
If Republicans wait
until after the 2008 election, they have much better
chance of passing a good bill—an honest bill. They have
a much better chance
of closing the border and denying
amnesty to illegal immigrants, once and for all.
Again, just to toot
my horn, the
brilliant Rosemary Jenks agrees with me! In her
words "Yes, yes, yes!"
But alas, I believe
the GOP is too cowardly to wait it out. If a
staunch conservative such as Sessions is inclined to
compromise in favor of
what amounts to amnesty, that`s a bad sign.
Hopefully the
patriots who are still holding out (Rep.
Tom Tancredo) will stay strong.
Any bill that
passes out of this Congress will not bode
well for Americans—of that we can be sure!
In closing, I have
to comment on this one:
"Amnesty
without animosity"…?
Good grief! This is
obviously the latest buzz phrase created by the Bush II
crowd. But, really, can we get any more ridiculous?
What`s the betting
it ends up on Senator Clinton`s MySpace Page?
Bryanna Bevens [email
her] is a political consultant and former chief of staff
for a member of the California State Assembly.
