Jun 15 2007
Immigration Bill May Be Gaining Support
MacRanger notes Peggy Noonan wants a time out – clearly she wants to bide time.
We should close the border, pause, absorb what we have, and set ourselves to “patriating†the newcomers who are here.
Why the panicked call for a time out? Now the deal is to legalize the illegals if we close the borders? That seems sort of bizarre trade. So what’s up? Another sign is that Nancy Pelosi is confident the House will pass a bill if the Senate does.
Speaker Nancy Pelosi expressed optimism the House would approve a plan to overhaul U.S. immigration law if it gets through the Senate first.
“We want it to be bipartisan and comprehensive,” Pelosi said in an interview on Bloomberg Television’s “Political Capital with Al Hunt,” airing this weekend. Asked if the House would pass the measure currently before the Senate, she said, “with some modification. But we’ll work together in a bipartisan way.”
Tells me something is happening underneath the surface here. I wonder if polls are shifting or something? While a proponent of getting this bill passed, I am still surprised and Pelosi’s confidence in getting it through the house. So apparently the next two weeks in the Senate will be the defining moment on this issue.
Gah! People keep saying “just close the border” — as if that’s something that can be done in a few months! Meanwhile the border with Mexico is something like 1500 miles long. Just how quickly do people really think we can secure a line that long? And if it isn’t really necessary to actually close the whole length tight, if it’s necessary only to concentrate on the busiest sections of the border and we can leave some stretches of the border untouched, at least for a time, HOW secure does the border need to be before these people will say, “OK, now we can proceed to Step Two”?
Even to secure only 300 miles will take a while. Property owners are going to be filing legal challenges if the fence is going to be marching across their land, and you have to know that environmentalists are going to be issuing challenges, and even if they don’t, the feds have to do “environmental impact statements” for every portion of whatever fence they put up.
Sorry, but that “just get the fence up now” meme is just annoying. By all means build the fence, just don’t expect the whole project to be finished before President Bush leaves office.
I am beginning to wonder if there is a such a thing as “secure”. It seems to me to be a mythical place.
And I wish we could take a break from Peggy Noonan and her incessant yammering. This is the pundit whose advice last year was to stay home and let the Democrats win.
They might think they want to keep this around for the 08 campaign, but from what I have seen this is not a winner for these folks. If the candidates keep talking about it the day will come when they have to come up with a viable alternative that actually makes sense.
AJ
No offense but to quote Pelosi to support your position is stretching a little, look at her track record so far.
I never quoted Pelosi support my position. I quoted her about being optimistic on passing the bill.
There will be 12 admendments voted on from both sides in the next two weeks – let see if it will fix it or kill it when the smoke clears.
You see Merlin thanks to the fact that people like Peggy Noonan thought it was important to send a “message” to the GOP or whatever, Nancy Pelosi became the Speaker of the House. So every time some one uses Noonan to support their position, they should remember that.
Amen on Noonan, Terrye.
I’d forgotten that she was one of the “punish the GOP, that’ll show ’em” agitators. Her tone and her writing style does not work for me at all. I find it too much work to weed through the layers of emotional angst and psychological analysis to find a point. When I do, I almost never agree with her.
Peggy Noonan, Urgggg. I mean lord she and Chris Natthews can talk to each other. I think she overestimates her infulence or for that fact popularity
Just received a weekly round-up from The New Republic. You have to register (free but somewhat involved) to get access to the whole column. Here is the opening of the lead editorial. I think it’s well done, and it is not without criticism either.
Nuevos Braceros
by the Editors
[Editor’s Note: Since the current issue went to press, the immigration bill facing Congress has stalled on the Senate floor. President Bush continues to urge his Republican colleagues to vote the bill onto his desk. So, too, do we call for the bill’s passage, as it would integrate into American life those who have lived on the margins of society for far too long.]
We support the immigration bill now before Congress because, as we have previously argued, this compromise is the best that liberals are likely to get. Putting off immigration reform any longer more or less ensures that nativism will grow, making it likely that future proposals will be far more draconian. Moreover, by creating a path to citizenship for twelve million undocumented workers, the bill would accomplish an important task: integrating into American life those who have lived on the margins of society for far too long.
http://www.tnr.com/doc.mhtml?i=20070618&s=editorial061807b
Panicked, AJ? I could make the same comment about Linda Chavez’s NRO piece.
No, what we’re watching is the emergence of a truce. A tacit agreement to see what the final bill looks like…then make a decision.
And there IS trade space. Tancredo’s bill to strip DHS funds from ‘sanctuary cities’ is a start. Barrier walls, Border Patrol agents by the thousands, and fast expulsion of anyone crossing it will buy acceptance of a large-scale legalization program. The question is whether or not the final bill is acceptable.
In the meantime, both sides seem to be trying to defuse the rhetoric. You might want to consider that yourself.
Check this out A.J.:
[SNIP] It’s increasingly clear from Web postings and interviews with top conservative bloggers that the immigration bill has done serious damage to the president’s credibility among the conservative netroots, the grassroots bloggers on the Web.
Erick Erickson, managing editor of the popular conservative blog RedState.com, says he receives between 800 and 900 e-mails a day from readers, most of whom are “enraged” by the White House’s immigration efforts.
“Of all the issues the president has picked to make his hill to die on, he has picked the one that has divided his base,” said Erickson, who lives in Macon, Georgia. “I am shocked by the anger and outrage out there … You’ve got war against the president within the Republican party.”
When details of an immigration compromise were announced this spring, conservative bloggers were immediately incensed. Michelle Malkin labeled it “a White House betrayal.”
Another popular blogger, Hugh Hewitt, called the bill a “fiasco” and wrote: “this push for this bill is a disaster, Mr. President.”
See:
Conservative bloggers in full revolt over immigration
http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/06/15/bloggers.bush/index.html
And sorry to do lay this on everyone, but it cannot be avoided:
[SNIP]
LOSING THE FUTURE | by Michael Medved
Friday’s Wall Street Journal reported more alarming news for the Republican Party: according to the new WSJ/NBC Poll, Hispanics now identify themselves as Democrats rather than Republicans by a horrifyingly lopsided margin of 51% to 21%.
This reflects a collapse of Hispanic support for Republicans since 2004, when Bush nearly matched John Kerry in the Latino community, 45% to 55%.
[…] Hispanics now represent at least 14% of the US population and the strong majority of these people have immigrated legally, or else they’re native born. Even if all the illegals went home in the next few years (fat chance), and even if we stopped all future immigration from Hispanic countries (both legal and illegal), Latinos would still rapidly increase their political influence and power. For one thing, their high marriage and birth rates means a growing population and, for another, every year more legal immigrants manage to complete the naturalization process to become citizens (and voters).
In recent years, Republicans have managed to remain a competitive party in most states of the union in part because they have successfully competed for Latino support. If, on the other hand, we ever reached the situation where 80% of Hispanics automatically, unthinkingly, voted for Democrats (in addition to the more than 80% of African-Americans who automatically, unthinkingly vote for Democrats), then we will never again see a GOP president, or a Republican majority in either House of Congress.
[…] Despite the courageous reform efforts of far-sighted Republican Senators and of President Bush, the loudest voices in the GOP currently speak in strident, angry, desperate, uncompromising and unmistakably anti-immigrant tones. In the midst of our ongoing debates, all those who care at all about the party’s future ought to keep in mind that the nation’s more than 40 million Latinos are avidly listening.
http://michaelmedved.townhall.com/blog/
SallyVee
Your latest post is a two sided sword.
Some on the right are motivated just because they see the same demographics just on partisanship reasons and self preservation.
Others correctly point out that this likely outcome will result in such a shift as to be an altering influence on the country that will have many long term implications for the country as a whole regardless of the more mundane political considerations.
As I state elsewhere, I think the percentage actually going for full citizenship is an issue yet to be decided.
One amendment I would like to see is that if you get the basic zcard and don’t apply for the citizenship path in say 15 years then your zcard is revoked.
Otherwise you end up with the effect of two guest worker programs.
In addition I would like to see that any new admissions to this country under separate legislation (Iraqi nationals admissions for example), asylum or whatever should each year be offset to the guest worker program quota.
Also I would hope the guest worker program would give preference to those already in the waiting line for having their citizenship application processing.
I never quoted Pelosi support my position. I quoted her about being optimistic on passing the bill.
Left by AJStrata on June 15th, 2007
Subtle distinction from what I said , but history shows the last go round on immigration reform the house drew a line in the sand and scuttled the whole issue whether you agree with their approach or not.
Granny Nan spouts optimism like popping vitamin E pills but her delivery record deserves a false advertising disclaimer.
Heck Air America was optimistic and Kos had his favorite son in play against Joementum.
All glass with no net doesn’t win the day.
Merlin,
It is not a subtle distinction. I only commented on her confidence to get the bill passed. I do not support her views on the matter of the bill.
You know what is pathetic – is people who think they can read your mind and then claim how they know more than the person whose mind they tried to read!
Give it as rest Merlin. You\’re making things up out of thin air – like many of the amesty hypochondriacs.
AJ
I am not trying to read your mind, I am simply expressing mine and looking down the road of how this will play out in the House after all this Senate knashing of teeth and rendering of garments.
The game is in play with a lost love on the rebound.
Now we will have to wait to see if we end up with unrequited love or a finish that would emulate a trash talking run of the mill romantic novel where sunsets are forever.
Myself I prefer to play badminton with bowling balls, it’s just a guy thing I have a weakness for.
Merlin, I think it’s a single sided sword – Hispanics are here to stay no matter how hard you try to wish that away. And they will continue to grow, most likely faster rate than other segments of the population.
The only question is whether we on the Right decide to [further] alienate them or treat them like human beings who have all the same thoughts, desires, dreams and goals as the rest of us. We have far more in common with Hispanics than Lefties do when you stop to think about it. Many Evangelicals and Catholics have already figured that out.
SallyVee
What you say tends to lead toward the political gamesmanship narrow point of this whole debate. Like who can I recruit to my team and what do I have to do to make my side win.
I try to back off farther and look at all of the impacts.
Pure population growth will put strains on our system in many ways. Sure long term we can adsorb many more people but there are provisions in this bill they COULD but not necessarily result in spikes that we are unprepared to cope with.
A harsh but undeniable fact is there is very bad blood between the two ethnic groups you mention.
Even Arnold had to resort to segregation of jails recently until the tempers died down.
I am not saying this as a bigot race based thing, but just a pure noting of the facts established by the data.
It’s one of those ostrich eggs buried in the sand that some don’t even want to hunt in the consideration of the impacts of the whole immigration question.
Read the crime statistics look at the trend data and how it all plays out.
This is an issue that will not go away and for those who wish to claim that is just another the sky is falling news release, then they don’t know my history of cold impartial researching of data without an agenda.