The New York Times' headline seems accurate:
Republicans’ Immigration Blueprint Leaves Party at Odds and Democrats Hopeful
CAMBRIDGE, Md. — The House Republican leadership’s call on Thursday to provide legal status for 11 million undocumented workers, and possible citizenship for those brought to this country as children, caused sharp division within the party even as it provided a starting point for negotiations with Democrats on overhauling the nation’s immigration system.
Many Republicans rejected the one-page “standards for immigration reform” outright, and others said now was not the time for a legislative push on a number of contentious issues in an election year with trends going their way. Even their leader was cautious about where the issue will go from here.
“It’s time to deal with it, but how you deal with it is critically important,” Speaker John A. Boehner of Ohio said Thursday at the Republican leaders’ annual issues conference retreat here. “It’s one thing to pass a law, it’s another thing to have the confidence of the American people behind that law.”
A closed-door discussion on immigration at the retreat was described by a House member as “very passionate,” with a “sizable bloc” opposing the leadership’s position. Members took turns expressing their distrust of President Obama and Senate Democrats as negotiating partners, and many of the Republicans said they were torn over whether to turn the principles into an actual legislative effort.
... Still, Democrats from Obama to Senator Charles E. Schumer of New York and Representative Luis V. Gutierrez of Illinois expressed optimism for an accord. ... “I actually think we have a good chance of getting immigration reform,” Mr. Obama told Jake Tapper of CNN in an interview in Wisconsin.
Hey, Republicans, if you can't trust Schumer, Gutierrez, and Obama to have your best interests at heart, who can you trust?
... The deepest skepticism emerged around immigration. The Republican blueprint issued Thursday specifies that “there will be no special path to citizenship for individuals who broke our nation’s immigration laws,” and lays out the party’s belief that “specific enforcement triggers,” as well as border security and interior enforcement measures, must be in place before any undocumented immigrant can gain legal status.
Because nobody would ever, ever lie about how well things are going vis-a-vis immigration. Look how well social scientist Jason Richwine was treated last year -- maybe some people disagreed with his interpretations of generations of data, but nobody disputed his right to say that immigration wasn't working out well.
At least in its broad strokes, it does not guarantee a path to citizenship but does not necessarily preclude one — something that is likely to be a deal-breaker for Democrats and immigration activists.
Amnesty plus "not necessarily preclude" citizenship sounds like about 4/5ths of the loaf for the Democrats.
“There will be no special path to citizenship for individuals who broke our nation’s immigration laws — that would be unfair to those immigrants who have played by the rules and harmful to promoting the rule of law,” according to the document. “Finally, none of this can happen before specific enforcement triggers have been implemented to fulfill our promise to the American people that from here on, our immigration laws will indeed be enforced.”
"From here on ..." Man, those three world just make me feel all warm and confident inside.
Even the order of the principles was calculated to win over Republican doubters.
The principles start with border security, the enforcement of laws preventing the hiring of illegal workers, a new visa tracking system and a beefed up employment verification system, before there is any discussion of expanded guest worker programs and the status of illegal immigrants already in the country. Many activists also said they were heartened that the Republican proposal, at least in its broad rendering, does not seem to preclude citizenship for many of the undocumented immigrants who receive legal status.
Posts
28 comments:
No citizenship? Then the only fair thing to do is extend voting rights to all residents . . . and protected status, affirmative action, and Social Security "quarters" that they weren't able to acquire because they were forced to live in the shadows.
Grand Old Prostitute
"The principles..."
Are a scam to try to con 50%+1 of the House Republican membership to sign on to something, anything. Then the Chamber Pot of Commerce can go to town on all its new EL CHEAPO labor.
Remember, any "enforcement" is entirely in the jurisdiction and at the pleasure and discretion of the President.
I know the democrats don't care about American citizens but aren't these republicans supposed to be representing the interests of American citizens and not foreigners and corporations? Boehner Ryan and the amnesty proponents are either insane or on the take.
OT, I'm surprised Steve has posted something in response to Rod Dreher, who quoted him at length in a recent blog post that generated hundreds of comments.
http://www.theamericanconservative.com/dreher/evolution-the-culture-war/
There will be no special path to citizenship for individuals who broke our nation’s immigration laws....
Shouldn't that be a special path to SPECIAL citizenship? Almost all of these illegals will qualify for privileges and immunities that White citizens don't get. It's obscene.
On Monday I left a comment on the earlier amnesty post detailing one way to oppose it: by submitting questions to the Whitehouse's #AskTheWH effort. My bot posted 100s of questions to a couple dozen WH hacks. I got some help with my #AskTheWH effort, but not enough.
Because there was little backup, I only got one reply. That was from @Cecilia44 (a former NCLR hack). She didn't answer any of my many previous questions or my followups but just offered more boilerplate.
How would things have been different if dozens of people had joined in? How would things have been different if Breitbart, @NumbersUSA, Kaus, Krikorian, etc. had joined in and called @cecilia44 on not answering any of my questions?
There's a very serious problem when people do things that don't work, and ignore things that could work wonders if enough people joined in.
"Anonymous said...
I know the democrats don't care about American citizens but aren't these republicans supposed to be representing the interests of American citizens and not foreigners and corporations? Boehner Ryan and the amnesty proponents are either insane or on the take."
They may be both. And I'll throw in a third option as well. They are perhaps being blackmailed. What do you think telephone meta-data is for?
I propose a path to banishment for Republican Congressman. Why don't they take that up this session.
Let's just go ahead and start calling any immigration "reform" "Boehner-care" or "Ryan-care".
Shouldn't that be a special path to SPECIAL citizenship?
Dual citizenship.
They are already citizens. Elsewhere.
Somewhat OT, but this does pertain to citizenship. Here is a story about a guy with dual US/UK citizenship. He joined the USAF to become a pilot. In doing so, he was forced to renounce his UK citizenship.
Question: Do others serving in the government have to do the same? We hear a lot about dual citizens in the federal government. Is this true? Or do they have to renounce foreign citizenship to serve like this air force pilot did?
Jeff Sessions for President!
OT
NYC school cuts popular gifted program over lack of diversity
One of the commented at Kausfiles suggests that this plan is deliberately this bad so that it will fail, but not until after the leadership collects some payoffs from the chamber of commerce types for at least trying.
Anon it is the King business. You can be dual citizenship of Republics but not Monarchies when naturalized.
"OT, I'm surprised Steve has posted something in response to Rod Dreher, who quoted him at length in a recent blog post that generated hundreds of comments."
Steve does that from time to time. It's always hilarious when Rod quotes Steve because all the old white liberals and homos who read TAC pitch a fit and the comment threads go on forever. I swear Dreher is the only reason anyone still visits TAC.
Bert said: I swear Dreher is the only reason anyone still visits TAC.
Hunsdon said: I like Phil Giraldi.
The end of Democracy.
Anon it is the King business. You can be dual citizenship of Republics but not Monarchies when naturalized.
Well isn't that convenient.
It’s one thing to pass a law, it’s another thing to have the confidence of the American people behind that law.”
Yes indeedy, Mr. Boehner. And as the last few years have shown, you guys just keep getting more adept at pulling off the former while ignoring the latter.
I don't think we have to go as far as saying the Republican leadership are on the take or being blackmailed. They simply have no principals past staying in power and being invited to all the right cocktail parties. There are many Republicans with real principals but they have no power in the party, and are in fact scorned by the GOP leadership.
The Republicans will simply not win elections by playing "Democrat lite". So they might as well stick to the principals they used to have and at least earn some respect. Now they have nether.
90% high level GOP politicians = bought
if they weren't they'd never have got the campaign contributions to get there in the first place.
Would any DC insider reading this site comment on the GOP plan to provide amnesty? Is it just a ruse to separate greedy businessmen from their money, a public relations ploy to foil the leftist depiction of the republicans as racist or is it a genuine betrayal of republican party's constituents?
The money for the Bread and Circuses is long gone. The Legions are pissed, and the Imperial Senate wants to invite the Huns to the Royal Celebration of the Dumbest African Ever.
This Election Crap is So Yesterday! Lets try something different for 2016, that doesn't allow for fraud and that even the immensely STUPID can Understand!
From the zuckerberg memo:
"It’s a different story for the small minority of anti-immigrant groups reflexively opposed to any attempt to fix our broken immigration system. "
So, most anti-immigrant groups reflexively opposed to any attempt to fix our broken immigration system actually support amnesty, only a small minority of them don't.
Actually when you think about it, people like Zuckerberg are vile racists. Who gets hurt the most by massive influx of low wage illegals? The black lower class who used to be doing many of those jobs. Those jobs have been stolen from them by left wing white racists like Zuckerberg. All they have left are government handouts, drug dealing and NBA/rap star dreams.
"The black lower class who used to be doing many of those jobs. " - whiteys fault for not giving them middle class jobs and status.
Here's a Path to Citizenship for illegals, ship 'em back to their home country. (Duh.) That'll solve the 'undocumented' problem too 'cause that's where their documents are. (Double duh.)
P.S. Who else remembers the promise that the 1986 amnesty would be a one-and-done deal, not a perpetual demand for another and another and another?
Post a Comment