Immigration Deal Survives GOP Threat

(AP)  A bipartisan immigration bill narrowly survived a potentially fatal challenge on Wednesday when the Senate turned back a Republican bid to limit the illegal immigrants who could gain lawful status.

The close vote on a proposal by Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, to bar felons — including those court-ordered to be deported — from legalization reflected the delicate position of the contentious immigration bill, which remains under threat from the right and the left.

The vote was 51-46 against the amendment. Democrats succeeded in sucking support from Cornyn's proposal by winning adoption of a rival version that would bar a more limited set of criminals, including certain gang members and sex offenders, from gaining legalization. The Senate backed that amendment, 66-32.

Cornyn had painted his effort as a "defining issue" for any presidential candidate — a sign of the degree to which the contentious debate is bleeding over into the GOP campaign fray.

Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., alone among his party's presidential aspirants in backing the immigration measure, opposed Cornyn's bid and backed the Democratic alternative offered by Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, D-Mass.

McCain was joined in opposing the amendment by the Senate's four Democratic presidential hopefuls, Sens. Joseph Biden of Delaware, Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York, Christopher Dodd of Connecticut, and Barack Obama of Illinois.

After his defeat, Cornyn said those who voted against the proposal "failed to take an opportunity to help restore public confidence that we're actually serious about passing an immigration law that could actually work." Many Americans will conclude instead that the bill's enforcement provisions will not be rigorously enforced, a problem that deeply undermined a 1986 immigration overhaul, he added.

Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., called Cornyn's measure "a stealth, Trojan horse amendment to kill the bill."

The underlying bill would legalize an estimated 12 million unlawful immigrants, tighten border security and institute new enforcement measures to prevent employers from hiring illegal workers. Its proponents were laboring to push through the compromise under new time constraints imposed by Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., who plans to force a test-vote as early as Thursday morning to end debate on it and move on to other matters.

Senators in both parties implored Reid not to yank the measure, as he has threatened to do if the test vote fails.

"I think it's safe to say that the United States Senate would be the laughingstock of the country if — after all of the hyperbole and all of the publicity and all of the proposals and objections — we're not able to finish this bill," said Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pa., a framer.

Reid, who has charged that some Republicans are trying to stall or kill the measure, began the day with a plea for swift progress on immigration. He resorted to quoting a passage from Dr. Seuss' "The Cat in the Hat" to describe the depth of the dilemma the issue poses for lawmakers: "This mess is so big and so deep and so tall, we cannot pick it up at all," the Democratic leader rhymed, adding, "Some would say that is what we have in the Senate today."

Still, lawmakers in both parties said they were making headway in fighting off damaging amendments and moving the measure closer to passage.

"We have made very important and significant progress," Kennedy said.

More votes were expected Wednesday on key proposed changes, including a Democratic effort to alter the controversial new temporary guest worker program created by the bill. Sen. Jeff Bingaman of New Mexico was seeking to allow workers to come for six consecutive years. The bill requires most guest workers to go home for a year between each of three two-year stints.

Republicans were seeking to change the "Z visa" program whereby illegal immigrants could gain lawful status. Sen. Jim DeMint, R-S.C., proposed requiring them to buy high-deductible health plans to be eligible for visas, while Cornyn would allow the information illegal immigrants provided in their visa applications to be used in removal proceedings should their application be denied.

Still looming were several Democratic attempts to add family preferences to the measure.

[sharncedar]

(from msnbc) "Sen. Dianne Feinstein , D-Calif., said in an interview that Cornyn's amendment was "not a deal-killer" but would have to be changed in House-Senate negotiations."

So much for democracy, eh. Even legally voted amendments to bills don't count, they get thrown out in an undemocratic process called House-Senate negotiations. And what's more, the anti-democracy crowd now admits it openly to the people. It's an in-your-face hubris we've never seen before.

I guess when you bring in 30 million lawless people who commit multiple felonies and your approach is to reward them, why have any regard for law or democracy or anything. I guess Feinstein is revealing her real self, unadorned with a pretense that there will be any regard of the American people, she is filth misruling our nation.

Perhaps that is another benefit for them of the 30 million (not 12 million) little criminals they have imported - the final nail in the coffin for the idea of democracy itself, I suppose it was a terrible burden for the Kenneddy's and Feinsteins of the world to have to follow democratic process. Well, with the chaos in the streest from their shock troops, they can rule by fiat, by superiority or whatever they imagine is their right to rule.

[tbweb]

pixelslinger wrote:

Ok, seriously - some of you 'desperately' need to improce the quality of your research if you're going to make statements here as fact:...

2) Tbweb - the fact that you think every illegal immigrant is mexican (as is shown by your own posts) only highlights how ignorant you are...

Posted by pixelslinger at 04:54 AM : Jun 07, 2007

pixelslinger,,,

It's obvious you didn't do too well in school, especially in spelling (as evidenced by your first sentence above, what's a improce?, I think you mean improve) and didn't do well in reading and comprehension either by not seeing my obvious qualifiers focusing on illegal Mexican immigrants! The only way from a comprehension perspective you could gather I thought all illegal immigrants were Mexican is if I left off the qualifiers like 12 million, or illegal Mexican. If I just said "illegal immigrants" all by itself without the 12 million or Mexican qualifier then you would be right. I'm fully aware that all illegal immigrants are not Mexican but they are the topic and focus of my Post because they are crossing U.S. borders by the hundreds daily and clearly the largest illegal immigrant group problem. So you got a free mini English lesson in this Post and so did the illegal Mexicans! See, you and the illegal Mexicans can even learn something of value when being criticized. Read and understand everything very carefully, things are not always what they seem!

[pixelslinger]

Ok, seriously - some of you 'desperately' need to improce the quality of your research if you're going to make statements here as fact:

1) If an American citizen is married to a foreign citizen, it is not the whole 'lived in the US for 5 years' speil. It used to be that you could apply for a green card almost right away and then citizenship after at least two years of marriage - now, the waiting time has been extended to 'at least' three years.

2) Tbweb - the fact that you think every illegal immigrant is mexican (as is shown by your own posts) only highlights how ignorant you are. Hispanic immigrants sneak in from ALL latin american countries - El Salvidor, Chile, and Mexico having the most.

3) Round them all up and deport them. Every single one. Then, after our economy nosedives and every unscrupulous *** exploiting employer goes bankrupt, and the costs of fruits and veggies double, we'll start offering real wages to Americans to fill the jobs - and the vaccuum of work left over can be approached by legislation such as this. Sorry, no rose garden here - 12,000,000 people have the capacity to move mountains in their own countries - and get leaders elected that aren't as half-retarded about the economy as most opponents of this bill are.

[makeafence]

it is very easy for many people to coment about immigration reforms , but, when you are one of those 12,000,000 ,expecting a positive change, is a different story
Posted by saulord at 03:00 AM : Jun 07, 2007

Must be nice to expect a positive change. Most of us have come to expect something much worse.

[saulord]

it is very easy for many people to coment about immigration reforms , but, when you are one of those 12,000,000 ,expecting a positive change, is a different story

[tbweb]

nottellin1 wrote:

It is a hideous situation, repeating past mistakes wont fix anything... I guess it won't bother him one bit if he has to work illegaly in Mex. Let us hope that the ugliness remains on these comment boards ansd does not spill into the streets.

Posted by nottellin1 at 12:28 AM : Jun 07, 2007

nottellin1,,,

That's the acid test Americans need to explore and consider and then maybe this illegal Mexican immigrant nightmare will sink in; and that is how would 12 million illegal Americans be received and treated in Mexico, refusing to learn Spanish and sticking with English, demanding rights and benefits and bringing in American families if Americans did the same thing to Mexico? The answer to that million dollar question is how the U.S. should treat Mexican illegals, end of story! Mexico would look at Americans like we lost our mind, the same way Americans should be looking at them. As far as anything spilling into the streets, it already has, the only problem is Americans are spectators watching and sitting in disbelief on the sidelines, 12 million illegal Mexicans have already spilled into America's streets! We have already been intimidated from addressing this issue properly by enforcing current U.S. laws and acting like sissies seeking to make these illegals legal, now we can't discuss it either for fear of it spilling into the streets? All I can say to that is they can kiss-my-***.

[nottellin1]

In the early 20th Century, if you were an American and married someone from another country, then your foreign spouse was considered a US citizen as well.
Posted by rudy654

You are correct it is not automatic, it never has been, ever, there are requirements to be an American citizen written in our constitution. The requirements start with: 7 Be at least 18 years old
7 Have lived in the U.S. as a legal resident for at least 5 years
7 Be of good moral character and loyal to the U.S.
7 Be able to read, write, speak and understand basic English
7 Have basic knowledge and understanding of the history, government structure and the Constitution of the U.S.
7 Be willing to take an oath of allegiance to the U.S.

Check out the interactive on the left panel of this page.

[rudy654-2009]

"I've seen posts like this before and I have to ask you, if your husband is married to an American citizen, why isn't he already pursuing citizenship?"

Today, marrying a US citizen doesn't mean that one is automatically legal, which is necessary for the pursuit of citizenship. In previous decades it was automatic. In the early 20th Century, if you were an American and married someone from another country, then your foreign spouse was considered a US citizen as well.

[nottellin1]

Posted by lestb35

Thanks, I really may. Probably would only last one term though because I would actually reprsent my constituancy and not play their reigndeer games.

[lestb35]

I am seriously thinking about running for US congress because we may need a whole bunch of new ones.
Posted by nottellin1 at 12:34 AM : Jun 07, 2007

Do it. We need real people.