SwordoftheVistula
06-27-2009, 09:27 AM
They'll push for it, but we might be able to stop it the same way we did last time: some Congresscritters actually have to respond to their constituents or possibly lose reelection, also the unions and corporate interests are squabbling over the details.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/06/25/AR2009062501914_2.html?hpid=moreheadlines
Just hours before President Obama hosted lawmakers for a discussion on immigration at the White House, Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel conceded that Obama and his allies on Capitol Hill do not have the votes to pass a comprehensive reform bill.
"If the votes were there, you wouldn't need to have the meeting. You could go to a roll call," Emanuel told reporters during an hour-long breakfast.
About 20 senators and House members met with Obama at the White House this afternoon for the discussion in the State Dining Room. Aides to the president said the meeting was intended to "launch a policy conversation by having an honest discussion about the issues and identifying areas of agreement and areas where we still have work to do."
The president is expected to announce administrative actions that the White House has already taken to chip away at the issues, including a modernization of computers that allow people to quickly see their immigration status. Officials said the White House hopes to begin the more controversial debate over a comprehensive approach to address illegal immigration later this year.
But Emanuel offered reporters a more realistic assessment, saying that while it is "not impossible" to get immigration reform done this year, it is more likely to be pushed off.
"It's not impossible to do it this year," he said. "Could you get it in this year? Yes. I think the more important thing is to get it started this year."
Responding to a question about the political implications for Democrats of delay, Emanuel said, "It's better that it happens politically. It's also better that we continue to focus on improving the economy."
Emanuel's assessment follows that of other White House officials, who have been telegraphing for weeks the legislative challenge that immigration reform presents. Press secretary Robert Gibbs made the point at a briefing last week. And Rep. Luis V. Gutierrez (D-Ill.) echoed the sentiment recently.
"With this issue, it's 'Do we have the votes?' Hell, if we had the votes, we wouldn't be calling you," Gutierrez, a leading advocate of immigration changes, told the Wall Street Journal, referring to conversations he had with administration officials.
But a senior aide to Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.)disputed the dire predictions. "The Senate passed a comprehensive immigration reform bill by a filibuster-proof margin and with strong bipartisan support in 2006, and we can do it again," spokesman Jim Manley said. "The White House should leave the vote counting to us."
Today's comments came after Senate Democrats yesterday outlined plans to overhaul the nation's immigration laws, including a requirement that all U.S. workers verify their identity through fingerprints or an eye scan.
Sen. Charles E. Schumer (N.Y.) said a national system to verify work documents is necessary because Congress has failed to crack down on unscrupulous employers and illegal immigrants with fake documents.
"I'm sure the civil libertarians will object to some kind of biometric card -- although . . . there'll be all kinds of protections -- but we're going to have to do it. It's the only way," Schumer said. "The American people will never accept immigration reform unless they truly believe their government is committed to ending future illegal immigration."
By announcing his plans, Schumer, who chairs the Senate's main immigration subcommittee, ushered in what Obama has signaled will be his next major legislative campaign, after the economic stimulus plan, health care and energy.
Schumer said legislation should secure control of the nation's borders within a year and require that an estimated 12 million illegal immigrants register with the government and "submit to a rigorous process to convert to legal status" or face immediate deportation. Rejecting the euphemism "undocumented workers," he said: "Illegal immigration is wrong -- plain and simple."
A senior White House official said Obama is open to all of Schumer's proposals, including his ID plan, saying that "he wants to listen, he wants to talk. All of it is on the table."
Hispanic leaders and immigrant advocates have pressed Obama to fulfill a campaign pledge to tackle the issue this year. In response, House and Senate Democratic leaders voiced new optimism this week that a deal can be struck before election season heats up next spring.
"I think we have the floor votes to do it," Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.) told reporters Tuesday. House Majority Leader Steny H. Hoyer (D-Md.) added that action could begin "as early, perhaps, as this fall."
Despite the congressional pledge, White House aides have worked to lower expectations about today's meeting, noting Congress's inability to deliver legislation to former president George W. Bush in 2006 and 2007, and vowing to proceed with debate this year only with strong bipartisan support.
"The president wants to make it clear he is serious," a senior White House official said yesterday. "He also wants to make it clear he's going to need strong partnership and leadership on both sides of the aisle to get the right policies moving."
Key Republicans reacted cautiously, saying they would work with Obama if he thinks a deal is possible.
"What we need now is not another photo op at the White House," Sen. John Cornyn (Tex.), the ranking Republican on Schumer's panel, said Tuesday. "What we need is a plan from the president of the United States."
In pushing Congress to tackle the subject for the third time in four years, advocates say a bigger Democratic majority, Republican unease over the party's waning support from Hispanics and public demand for solutions will deliver a filibuster-proof 60 votes in the Senate.
But the plan faces obstacles, opponents said, including rising competition for jobs in a collapsing economy, and continued resistance to granting "amnesty" to illegal immigrants.
"Every Democrat that's in a competitive district knows that will be the question next year: Why did they vote for more foreign workers while 14 million workers are unemployed?" said Roy Beck, founder of NumbersUSA, a group that advocates for limiting immigration.
Also unclear is what backing might come from business groups. Schumer's priorities did not include expanding a guest-worker program, which employers sought. Instead, Schumer said that any deal must also create mechanisms to attract highly skilled immigrants, control the flow of low-skilled immigrants and protect native-born workers.
A system to access legal workers "is non-negotiable from a business point of view," said Tamara Jacoby, president of the ImmigrationWorks USA lobby, adding: "But we're open to a discussion of what that legal mechanism should be."
Commentary from NumbersUSA:
www.numbersusa.com
WHITE HOUSE AMNESTY MEETING REVEALED DIFFICULTY FOR PASSAGE
Breathe a little sigh of relief.
The amnesty meeting at the White House yesterday gave Pres. Obama a very clear image of just how polarized the immigration issue is and what a high cost he might pay if he lets the Congressional Hispanic Caucus bully him into pushing an amnesty this year -- or next. (See our story on the President's reaction.)
True, the President invited an incredibly unbalanced representation of the Senate and House, disproportionately from the Hispanic Caucus. And although he included a lot of Republicans to show balance, most of the Republicans were from the most open-borders fringe of their Party.
We took a look at the Recent Immigration-Reduction Grades earned by the 30 Members present (you can see the full list at the bottom of this story). Here's what we found:
A -- 3 Members
B -- 2 Members
C -- 2 Members
D -- 5 Members
F -- 18 Members
Nonetheless, among the 30 Members at the "intimate chat" were probably our 3 best spokesmen for sane immigration policies that protect U.S. workers: Rep. Lamar Smith (R-Texas), Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.) and Rep. Heath Shuler (D-N.C.).
Some overzealous anti-amnesty groups started an irate phone campaign against these three for attending, fearing that they were caving. But we can be proud that the three did attend because they threw buckets of cold water on the fevered rhetoric of the pro-amnesty forces. My argument for years has been that our side essentially wins in every setting, no matter how unbalanced the line-up if we have at least two strong spokesman (preferably three) present to show how illogical the open-borders side is.
For several days hundreds of open-borders organizations (backed by tens of millions of dollars from wealthy foundations) had hyped the White House meeting with Members of Congress as the "kick-off" for a sprint to pass a giant amnesty later this year.
Because of the presence of sane Members, DHS Sec. Janet Napolitano was repeatedly challenged for reducing immigration enforcement, countering Pres. Obama's rhetoric at the meeting that his Administration was moving forward in showing that it can provide the enforcement to justify an amnesty.
Pres. Obama was also challenged to put the 14 million unemployed Americans first in considerations of what to do about immigration.
Sen. Menendez (D-N.J.) argued that illegal aliens need to be made U.S. citizens so they can save Social Security. He was immediately challenged with information recently gathered at the Social Security Administration that the illegal aliens will never pay as much into the fund as they take out -- a strange way to "save" the system.
Of course, because of the 6-1 pro-amnesty ratio at the closed-door meeting the prevailing mood was that passing an amnesty is a majority wish. But among the pro-amnesty supporters there was major dissension that bodes well for stalling amnesty legislation this year.
Sen. McCain (R-Ariz.) and Sen. Graham (R-S.C.) were the chief pro-amnesty Republican spokesmen in the meeting. But they as much as said that that Democrats will need to throw the unions overboard if they are going to get McCain's and Graham's votes on an amnesty. The unions are insisting that the amnesty not include a giant new guest worker program. McCain and Graham said the U.S. Chamber of Commerce won't go along with it and, presumably because of that, McCain and Graham won't go along with a low-guest worker amnesty either.
Some Democrats indicated they very well might stiff their union supporters to allow for a lot more foreign guest workers if McCain would silence the right-wing critics of amnesty in Congress. McCain indicated that he would bring congressional right-wingers around.
After the meeting, though, union leaders said they had no intention of budging on their insistence against expanded guest worker programs.
So, will Obama and Democratic leaders stick it to the unions in order to get the Chamber's and McCain's support? Sounds like trouble in the amnesty family.
Pres. Obama left little doubt that he truly wants to reward more than 11 million illegal aliens with permanent work permits and U.S. citizenship. But the words of his spokesmen and his own words indicated that he is stalling. He is forming "working groups" inside the Department of Homeland Security to work on different aspects of an amnesty bill. Presumably, some Members of Congress will be invited to be part of that and report back later. The fact that Obama included in the meeting 3 A-Grade and 2 B-Grade Members also indicates that he wanted to impress on the amnesty zealots that the arguments against amnesty and in favor of unemployed Americans are not going to be easy to overcome.
Yesterday, Obama's words showed him to be an ideologue. But his actions and his announced actions showed him to be much more of a pragmatic politician. We will continue to root for the pragmatist.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/06/25/AR2009062501914_2.html?hpid=moreheadlines
Just hours before President Obama hosted lawmakers for a discussion on immigration at the White House, Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel conceded that Obama and his allies on Capitol Hill do not have the votes to pass a comprehensive reform bill.
"If the votes were there, you wouldn't need to have the meeting. You could go to a roll call," Emanuel told reporters during an hour-long breakfast.
About 20 senators and House members met with Obama at the White House this afternoon for the discussion in the State Dining Room. Aides to the president said the meeting was intended to "launch a policy conversation by having an honest discussion about the issues and identifying areas of agreement and areas where we still have work to do."
The president is expected to announce administrative actions that the White House has already taken to chip away at the issues, including a modernization of computers that allow people to quickly see their immigration status. Officials said the White House hopes to begin the more controversial debate over a comprehensive approach to address illegal immigration later this year.
But Emanuel offered reporters a more realistic assessment, saying that while it is "not impossible" to get immigration reform done this year, it is more likely to be pushed off.
"It's not impossible to do it this year," he said. "Could you get it in this year? Yes. I think the more important thing is to get it started this year."
Responding to a question about the political implications for Democrats of delay, Emanuel said, "It's better that it happens politically. It's also better that we continue to focus on improving the economy."
Emanuel's assessment follows that of other White House officials, who have been telegraphing for weeks the legislative challenge that immigration reform presents. Press secretary Robert Gibbs made the point at a briefing last week. And Rep. Luis V. Gutierrez (D-Ill.) echoed the sentiment recently.
"With this issue, it's 'Do we have the votes?' Hell, if we had the votes, we wouldn't be calling you," Gutierrez, a leading advocate of immigration changes, told the Wall Street Journal, referring to conversations he had with administration officials.
But a senior aide to Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.)disputed the dire predictions. "The Senate passed a comprehensive immigration reform bill by a filibuster-proof margin and with strong bipartisan support in 2006, and we can do it again," spokesman Jim Manley said. "The White House should leave the vote counting to us."
Today's comments came after Senate Democrats yesterday outlined plans to overhaul the nation's immigration laws, including a requirement that all U.S. workers verify their identity through fingerprints or an eye scan.
Sen. Charles E. Schumer (N.Y.) said a national system to verify work documents is necessary because Congress has failed to crack down on unscrupulous employers and illegal immigrants with fake documents.
"I'm sure the civil libertarians will object to some kind of biometric card -- although . . . there'll be all kinds of protections -- but we're going to have to do it. It's the only way," Schumer said. "The American people will never accept immigration reform unless they truly believe their government is committed to ending future illegal immigration."
By announcing his plans, Schumer, who chairs the Senate's main immigration subcommittee, ushered in what Obama has signaled will be his next major legislative campaign, after the economic stimulus plan, health care and energy.
Schumer said legislation should secure control of the nation's borders within a year and require that an estimated 12 million illegal immigrants register with the government and "submit to a rigorous process to convert to legal status" or face immediate deportation. Rejecting the euphemism "undocumented workers," he said: "Illegal immigration is wrong -- plain and simple."
A senior White House official said Obama is open to all of Schumer's proposals, including his ID plan, saying that "he wants to listen, he wants to talk. All of it is on the table."
Hispanic leaders and immigrant advocates have pressed Obama to fulfill a campaign pledge to tackle the issue this year. In response, House and Senate Democratic leaders voiced new optimism this week that a deal can be struck before election season heats up next spring.
"I think we have the floor votes to do it," Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.) told reporters Tuesday. House Majority Leader Steny H. Hoyer (D-Md.) added that action could begin "as early, perhaps, as this fall."
Despite the congressional pledge, White House aides have worked to lower expectations about today's meeting, noting Congress's inability to deliver legislation to former president George W. Bush in 2006 and 2007, and vowing to proceed with debate this year only with strong bipartisan support.
"The president wants to make it clear he is serious," a senior White House official said yesterday. "He also wants to make it clear he's going to need strong partnership and leadership on both sides of the aisle to get the right policies moving."
Key Republicans reacted cautiously, saying they would work with Obama if he thinks a deal is possible.
"What we need now is not another photo op at the White House," Sen. John Cornyn (Tex.), the ranking Republican on Schumer's panel, said Tuesday. "What we need is a plan from the president of the United States."
In pushing Congress to tackle the subject for the third time in four years, advocates say a bigger Democratic majority, Republican unease over the party's waning support from Hispanics and public demand for solutions will deliver a filibuster-proof 60 votes in the Senate.
But the plan faces obstacles, opponents said, including rising competition for jobs in a collapsing economy, and continued resistance to granting "amnesty" to illegal immigrants.
"Every Democrat that's in a competitive district knows that will be the question next year: Why did they vote for more foreign workers while 14 million workers are unemployed?" said Roy Beck, founder of NumbersUSA, a group that advocates for limiting immigration.
Also unclear is what backing might come from business groups. Schumer's priorities did not include expanding a guest-worker program, which employers sought. Instead, Schumer said that any deal must also create mechanisms to attract highly skilled immigrants, control the flow of low-skilled immigrants and protect native-born workers.
A system to access legal workers "is non-negotiable from a business point of view," said Tamara Jacoby, president of the ImmigrationWorks USA lobby, adding: "But we're open to a discussion of what that legal mechanism should be."
Commentary from NumbersUSA:
www.numbersusa.com
WHITE HOUSE AMNESTY MEETING REVEALED DIFFICULTY FOR PASSAGE
Breathe a little sigh of relief.
The amnesty meeting at the White House yesterday gave Pres. Obama a very clear image of just how polarized the immigration issue is and what a high cost he might pay if he lets the Congressional Hispanic Caucus bully him into pushing an amnesty this year -- or next. (See our story on the President's reaction.)
True, the President invited an incredibly unbalanced representation of the Senate and House, disproportionately from the Hispanic Caucus. And although he included a lot of Republicans to show balance, most of the Republicans were from the most open-borders fringe of their Party.
We took a look at the Recent Immigration-Reduction Grades earned by the 30 Members present (you can see the full list at the bottom of this story). Here's what we found:
A -- 3 Members
B -- 2 Members
C -- 2 Members
D -- 5 Members
F -- 18 Members
Nonetheless, among the 30 Members at the "intimate chat" were probably our 3 best spokesmen for sane immigration policies that protect U.S. workers: Rep. Lamar Smith (R-Texas), Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.) and Rep. Heath Shuler (D-N.C.).
Some overzealous anti-amnesty groups started an irate phone campaign against these three for attending, fearing that they were caving. But we can be proud that the three did attend because they threw buckets of cold water on the fevered rhetoric of the pro-amnesty forces. My argument for years has been that our side essentially wins in every setting, no matter how unbalanced the line-up if we have at least two strong spokesman (preferably three) present to show how illogical the open-borders side is.
For several days hundreds of open-borders organizations (backed by tens of millions of dollars from wealthy foundations) had hyped the White House meeting with Members of Congress as the "kick-off" for a sprint to pass a giant amnesty later this year.
Because of the presence of sane Members, DHS Sec. Janet Napolitano was repeatedly challenged for reducing immigration enforcement, countering Pres. Obama's rhetoric at the meeting that his Administration was moving forward in showing that it can provide the enforcement to justify an amnesty.
Pres. Obama was also challenged to put the 14 million unemployed Americans first in considerations of what to do about immigration.
Sen. Menendez (D-N.J.) argued that illegal aliens need to be made U.S. citizens so they can save Social Security. He was immediately challenged with information recently gathered at the Social Security Administration that the illegal aliens will never pay as much into the fund as they take out -- a strange way to "save" the system.
Of course, because of the 6-1 pro-amnesty ratio at the closed-door meeting the prevailing mood was that passing an amnesty is a majority wish. But among the pro-amnesty supporters there was major dissension that bodes well for stalling amnesty legislation this year.
Sen. McCain (R-Ariz.) and Sen. Graham (R-S.C.) were the chief pro-amnesty Republican spokesmen in the meeting. But they as much as said that that Democrats will need to throw the unions overboard if they are going to get McCain's and Graham's votes on an amnesty. The unions are insisting that the amnesty not include a giant new guest worker program. McCain and Graham said the U.S. Chamber of Commerce won't go along with it and, presumably because of that, McCain and Graham won't go along with a low-guest worker amnesty either.
Some Democrats indicated they very well might stiff their union supporters to allow for a lot more foreign guest workers if McCain would silence the right-wing critics of amnesty in Congress. McCain indicated that he would bring congressional right-wingers around.
After the meeting, though, union leaders said they had no intention of budging on their insistence against expanded guest worker programs.
So, will Obama and Democratic leaders stick it to the unions in order to get the Chamber's and McCain's support? Sounds like trouble in the amnesty family.
Pres. Obama left little doubt that he truly wants to reward more than 11 million illegal aliens with permanent work permits and U.S. citizenship. But the words of his spokesmen and his own words indicated that he is stalling. He is forming "working groups" inside the Department of Homeland Security to work on different aspects of an amnesty bill. Presumably, some Members of Congress will be invited to be part of that and report back later. The fact that Obama included in the meeting 3 A-Grade and 2 B-Grade Members also indicates that he wanted to impress on the amnesty zealots that the arguments against amnesty and in favor of unemployed Americans are not going to be easy to overcome.
Yesterday, Obama's words showed him to be an ideologue. But his actions and his announced actions showed him to be much more of a pragmatic politician. We will continue to root for the pragmatist.