Amnesty bill collapses? Sunset provision on guest worker program passes
posted at 1:37 am on June 7, 2007 by Allahpundit
Send to a Friend |
printer-friendly
Byron Dorgan’s been trying to kill the guest worker program for weeks to protect American labor. His first attempt, an amendment that would have eliminated it entirely, failed 31-64. So he tried another tactic tonight — a sunset provision that would eliminate the program after five years. And what do you know:
The three senators not voting were now-deceased Craig Thomas, still-recovering Tim Johnson, and … presidential candidate Chris Dodd. Dodd didn’t vote on Dorgan’s previous amendment, either. I wonder if he’s going to be pressured to come to the floor and offer his own amendment repealing this one, with the vote splitting 49-49 and our own beloved Vice President casting the deciding “yea” to repeal.
The fear (i.e. hope) now is that having one of the central planks of the bill marked for death in five years will cause the coalition supporting this travesty to fracture. Note the roll: it’s split mainly between Democrats who oppose the program because they fear cheap labor will suppress American workers’ wages (the Kausians) and open-borders leftists who want a permanent guest worker program, not a temporary one. But lo and behold, sprinkled within are the hardest of GOP hardliners — Jeff Sessions, Jim DeMint, and David Vitter, who object to “guest workers” on principle and smell blood in the water here. The question thus becomes: are there enough people among the 48 who voted no who are so disgruntled by this result that they’ll join Sessions et al. in filibustering the whole damn bill? If so, then we have our fabled “killer amendment.”
But do we have one? Stanley Kurtz wrote a smart piece a few weeks ago about the fact that the new merit-based “points system” for green cards won’t actually go into effect for another eight years, leaving plenty of time in the interim for big business and the amnesty lobby to lean on Congress and quietly have the provision stripped. The “no” voters here must be thinking the same thing vis-a-vis the sunset provision: this is their best shot at getting an amnesty bill passed so why not get it passed warts and all and “refine” the stickier points with a new Congress two years from now? Besides, the combination of passing the bill and having the clock ticking on the guest worker program would be a powerful stick and carrot (or carrot and stick) for a strong Latino showing at the polls next year. If it’s strong enough, some of the more recalcitrant Dems would no doubt want to revisit their calculus about the merits of a temporary worker program. (Especially the “temporary” part.)
I’m probably missing something obvious. Exit question: What am I missing?
Update: Verrrry interesting. Turns out this same amendment came to the floor two weeks ago and went 49-48 the other way. Dodd voted “yes” at the time so he probably won’t be the amnesty savior on this one. The boss tallies the vote-switchers:
Switched from nay to yea:
R - Bunning, DeMint, Dole, Enzi
D - MenendezSwitched from yea to nay:
R - GrassleySwitched from no vote to yea:
Dodd
Those four Republicans, DeMint especially, must have soured on the bill in its entirety and been looking at this as a killer amendment. But why would Menendez, who’s among the most fervent amnesty supporters, have switched when he held the swing vote? From the May 23rd edition of the Star-Ledger:
Menendez yesterday voted against eliminating the temporary worker program from the package, but wants to see it changed. He complained it would “create a permanent working underclass” by making use of immigrant labor without giving them a path to permanent residence.
“Without a chance at the American dream, these workers would be driven underground and could be exploited while creating yet another underclass of undocumented workers,” said Menendez.
In other words, his objection to guest workers is that they’re forced to remain guests. But how does the sunset provision help him get closer to a permanent worker program? All it really does is jeopardize the bill — which may be the whole point, if he’s betting on Democratic electoral gains next year (a safe bet) leading to an even broader and more comprehensive amnesty in 2009. The Dems will be preoccupied with health care by then, though, and we know from the Iraq funding fiasco that they don’t like putting their names on measures that risk alienating huge swaths of the population. So if he thinks Hillary’s going to solve this for him down the line, he may be in for a rude awakening.
Update: Dorgan’s got an op-ed this morning in, of all places, NRO making the case against amnesty from the left.
Update: Arlen Specter says they’ll try to get one of the 49 to change his or her vote and put this honey of an amnesty back in play.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
I’m not sure what you are missing. Ace is trying to figure this out too.
I hope to God this bill dies…
Bad Candy on June 7, 2007 at 1:43 AM
You’re missing the fact that this version of the Senate is the closest thing to a psycho ward we’ve seen in years. I mean, if you really look at some of those individual votes, it boggles the mind. I’m looking at ten senators who voted in a way I would not have thought possible.
Blood in the water? Killer amendment? You may be right. One thing seems certain: this is going to set the tone in a BIG way for a very long time.
wccawa on June 7, 2007 at 1:48 AM
Bad Candy on June 7, 2007 at 1:53 AM
Aww, dammit! Forgot to close the tag…first time I’ve done that too!
Bad Candy on June 7, 2007 at 1:54 AM
Well that’s quite interesting.
Spirit of 1776 on June 7, 2007 at 1:55 AM
Way way too much chess for this old man at 1 a.m.
Hell, who am I kidding, it is way too much chess for me at 9 a.m. So help me out here…..is it a poison pill or is it CPR?
Limerick on June 7, 2007 at 2:03 AM
Baja la shamnetia!
bdfaith on June 7, 2007 at 2:08 AM
er, uh, shamnestia.
bdfaith on June 7, 2007 at 2:08 AM
Limerick on June 7, 2007 at 2:03 AM
poison pill, it will sow discord in the democratic ranks like cyanide.
doriangrey on June 7, 2007 at 2:09 AM
Chess: ) I had a good vibe about you, lol.
Spirit of 1776 on June 7, 2007 at 2:10 AM
Thanks fellas. Tomorrow (tommorrow) the sun just might come up! :)
Limerick on June 7, 2007 at 2:14 AM
That is a HUGE understatement. I hope for the best, but I don’t think he will “recover”. The Democrats are keeping him alive to keep their power in the Senate.
Tim Burton on June 7, 2007 at 2:47 AM
Riiiight…
Nonfactor on June 7, 2007 at 3:17 AM
While I agree that the Illegal alien issue is one that needs to be addressed, it is something to which a solution needs to be found, not a compromise made. To many this may seem to be a distinction without a difference, but I assure you it is not. On most issues the congress-critters deal with, compromise is a good thing and required to make the republic function. But there are some things that shouldn’t and can’t be compromised such as our national sovereignty, or from the point of view of the Congress-critters, the essential responsibilities of their oaths of office. How does “compromising” the security of our national borders and the enforcement of our laws already on the books, something which all who have sworn to uphold the Constitution of the United States are responsible, serve anything but the interests of businesses wanting to pay sub-standard wages, and the interests of self serving politicians wanting to artificially increase their constituencies? We have laws on the books detailing the handling of illegal aliens. We have laws on the books detailing the penalties of employing illegal aliens. We have laws on the books calling for the securing the southern border and a billion dollar already appropriated to build it. But it’s been official policy to ignore the laws governing illegal aliens and of employers who hire them for so long, both written and unspoken, that Hollywood shows it in movies and television every day and its both presented and taken as simply the natural course of events. And the 700 miles of border fence that has been approved for more than a year? So far just two miles have been built. Given this lack of respect for the laws already on the book, what fool would believe that a new set of laws would have any effect at all, other than to “compromise” more of our national sovereignty?
The public arguments in Congress have been drug down to questions of false compassion and self serving expediency. If we are to believe these Congress-critters, in the name of compassion, we should and are spending massive amounts of national treasure supporting central America’s poor while cutting the jobs and wages of native-born Americans, building or rebuilding schools (Madrasas) in the Muslim nations in clear violation of the first amendment, support through “humanitarian aid” Palestinian schools that teach the next generation of Jihadis and the TV stations that broadcast the spectacle, and a host of other self destructive pet projects both at home and abroad. In the name of expediency we are to allow this travesty of an amnesty bill to supersede the laws already on the books that these same Congressmen have refused to enforce, to find a solution to an issue that they themselves have both created and encouraged. What will it take before the American people stand up and demand that their representatives not compromise on those things that can’t be compromised if we are to remain a nation? What will it take to force the Congress to respect the national laws that they themselves wrote? Our congressmen aren’t losing the nation, they’re compromising it away to foreign interests both here illegally and abroad.
As Ben Franklin was leaving the first Continental Congress, he was asked if a Constitution had be agreed upon. He said “Yes, you have a nation, for as long as you can keep it.” If this amnesty passes, it may not be the end of the nation, but it will be a massive nail in the national coffin.
The solution is simple. Our congressmen need to do their jobs by supporting and defending the Constitution and thereby the support and defend nation and its people.
P. James Moriarty on June 7, 2007 at 4:57 AM
P. James
A lot more calls and emails and snail mails from conservative constituents and a lot more participation by conservatives in the primary elections.
We will see how good our memories are in the coming primary cycle.
For whatever it is worth my senators will get another email from me today. Hutchison & Cornyn
roydee43 on June 7, 2007 at 6:54 AM
If MY tax cuts “for the wealthy” (Pfft!) can have a sunset, THEN SO CAN THIS SHAMNESTY Bill.
seejanemom on June 7, 2007 at 7:04 AM
Given the serious disconnect between voter and congress-critter, I doubt it. By all means continue trying, as am I, but I’m not hopeful. The paradigm has changed from representatives to carry out the will of the people, to voteing for those who will rule over us. We need people of character in office who both know and repect their Constiutional obligations.
P. James Moriarty on June 7, 2007 at 7:26 AM
This Kos Kid moment brought to you courtesy of Tim Burton…
Bradky on June 7, 2007 at 7:31 AM
Whatever is going on, it is due to pressure from lobbyists and not voters.
Michelle’s live blogging of this has been spectacular.
Valiant on June 7, 2007 at 7:34 AM
When did the PEOPLE lose control of the country? Why won’t our representatives represent US? How did we allow this to happen?
ctmom on June 7, 2007 at 7:36 AM
Something about the 60s and 70s…..It’s all still something of a fog to me, misspent youth and all. My own opinion is that it started with the liberal takeover of the public school system, but I’m biased that way, my old man was a school administrator.
P. James Moriarty on June 7, 2007 at 7:40 AM
DING DING DING…give that man a STAR!
seejanemom on June 7, 2007 at 7:52 AM
The problem is that conservatives sit on their behinds too much while liberals scream a lot (a mentao disease)
and when you do get up (20 yeas later cough) the problem may be too huge to overcome. Sitting home and pouting like in the last election does nothing to send a message other than cool we got them where we want them.
You helped make your bed…now you have to lie in it.
tomas on June 7, 2007 at 8:01 AM
That Drudge R.I.P. is quite humorous…if not a bit premature.
SouthernGent on June 7, 2007 at 8:12 AM
Nature of the beasts. Liberals view the right as representing everything evil in the world, and spend energy and vitriol in the effort to change things. Conservatives view the left as nieve and uninformed, so just wait for them to grow up……big mistake as we are seeing now, many never grow out of it. I have a good excuse, having grown up in a public education household, it took quite a number of years before I realized the true nature of the world. Not that one voice would have changed the march of American Marxism.
P. James Moriarty on June 7, 2007 at 8:34 AM
We have to remember how this bill was crafted. It was created behind closed doors, in conjunction with special interest groups. There were two groups: one that wanted amnesty, the other that wanted unlimited cheap labor - big business.
Big business wasn’t looking for cheap labor for 5 years - that’s nothing for them. They wanted it permanently. I’m sure they’re working the phones this morning.
amerpundit on June 7, 2007 at 9:27 AM
Could the Inhofe language amendment be a “second shooter”?
Kid from Brooklyn on June 7, 2007 at 9:35 AM
I’m certain it was my measly e-mail that I sent to my Senator (Martinez) two weeks ago. :~)
jatfla on June 7, 2007 at 9:41 AM
You raise a good point. Recall at the Democratic debate that most of the Democrats didn’t even think it should be called the official language. It would prolong the amnesty process, as well.
Also, John McCain, when asked about official language, went rambling on about native American treaties.
amerpundit on June 7, 2007 at 9:42 AM
According to the
impotentincompetent and lazy Homeland Security Director, Michael Chertoff, many of us want the illegal immigrants executed and their heads displayed in public on pike poles.According to Presidente’ Jorge Boosh, we’re unpatriotic, unAmerican, and against him (the last one’s true enough for me…). After all, he be the most powerful man in the world, and you’re screwing with his only opportunity for a decent legacy he has left.
Then there are the many
lolly-pop thievesbaby kissers who are looking for an additional 12,000,000 new votes from the undocumented Americans, once they are given a free pass and done git documented.No one wants to do the right thing or make the tough decisions, then do the actual work necessary to implement those tough decisions. It’s the path of least resistance to just call “King’s X” and at the same time make it appear they are the saviors of the modern day Grapes of Wrath. After all they are all hard working and want nothing more than a better life for themselves and their family. For God’s sake, think of the children!
The definition of good character is doing the right thing, when no one is looking. The definition of flim-flam is making it look like you’re doing the right thing, when all you’re doing is self-serving, when everybody is looking. The modern day politician is a self-serving flim-flam artist and wanna-be pop icon. They’re not interested in upholding the constitution or protecting America. They’re only interested in being popular and hedging their bets in an effort to reach the apex of the food chain.
This whole shamnesty thing is far from being dead. There will be version after version and rewrite after rewrite until a majority gets sick of dealing with it and/or they all reap some modicum of personal benefit. American politics is tantamount to an episode of Survivor and little else. In my estimation, that’s the driving force behind everything our reprobate politicians do… avoid being kicked off the island at all cost.
My question is, once they do implement their life-boat shamnesty bill, what are they going to do with those illegal immigrants who don’t, or can’t, comply? They don’t do anything comprehensive about it now, and they never have. What makes anyone think they will do anything comprehensive in the future? Oh yeah, that flim-flam thing…
SilverStar830 on June 7, 2007 at 10:04 AM
That was a very thorough assessment of the facts and a realist approach to the solutions. Nice.
csdeven on June 7, 2007 at 10:27 AM
It’s sad when a Democrat from North Dakota sounds more conservative than any Republican in the senate.
bj1126 on June 7, 2007 at 10:37 AM
seejanemom on June 7, 2007 at 7:52 AM
Make that a GOLD STAR……
doriangrey on June 7, 2007 at 10:39 AM
This so called sunset amendment is a trojan horse; don’t fall for it.
Once this stinker of a bill is passed, all that has to happen is for 51 senators next year to ‘amend’ the law by removing the sunset provision.
The bill must be stopped in its entirety. It must not be allowed to become law in any fashion or form.
Labamigo on June 7, 2007 at 11:00 AM
Suddenly the 60 or 70 vote passage isn’t seeming to be such a sure thing anymore. I wonder why …
thirteen28 on June 7, 2007 at 11:36 AM
PLATINUM STAR. ;)
seejanemom on June 7, 2007 at 12:00 PM
I think it`s time to start recalling all Senators and Congressmen that we`ve sent to Washington to do our bidding, that have conveniently forgotten what they`re are there. Replace EVERYONE of them. As you can see I live in a dream world.
Lou on June 7, 2007 at 12:15 PM
“…it’s split mainly between Democrats who oppose the program because they fear cheap labor will suppress American workers’ wages (the Kausians)”
Yikes! That’s why I oppose it. Are you saing I have something in common with the kos kidz? You will not be forgiven for suggesting this, AP.
Kevin M on June 7, 2007 at 12:24 PM
I was like two or three years old when the 86 amnesty went down, so don’t foist this crap on me. Second, I voted in the last election, even for that sh*theel Don Sherwood because I knew the House was in play, so don’t give me that either.
Bad Candy on June 7, 2007 at 12:32 PM