Immigration Bill Faces Tough Odds in the House

When the debate resumes after the holiday, the action shifts to the House of Representatives, Washington's legislative killing field.

  • Share
  • Read Later
Jonathan Ernst / REUTERS

U.S. House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) at the U.S. Capitol in Washington, June 20, 2013.

Barring a surprise, the bipartisan immigration bill on the floor of the Senate will be approved by the end of the week. Two-thirds of the chamber, including 15 Republicans, voted to break a filibuster in a key procedural vote Monday night, clearing a path for a similar number to support final passage before members scatter for the July 4 recess. Perhaps the bill’s architects will win the splashy 70-vote majority they have sought. Perhaps they fall a few votes shy of that target. Either way, success in the Senate is a significant milestone in the push to overhaul U.S. immigration laws for the first time since 1986.

It may also be its apogee. Because when the immigration debate resumes after the holiday, the action shifts to the House of Representatives, Washington’s legislative killing field. As things stand now, it will take a change of heart from rank-and-file Republicans or a hairpin turn from their embattled leader John Boehner to thread legislation through the House.

(MORE: Boehner in a Bind on Immigration)

Here is the grim reality for the bill’s supporters: the past three years have proven that a big portion of the House Republican conference are willing to defy both popular opinion and political pressure in service of ideology and self-preservation. To this group, which numbers perhaps 100 members or more, the Senate bill is unacceptable. It is too big and too expensive. It rewards law-breakers with health-care benefits, and kicks off the citizenship process before the border is secure. Instead of stemming the tide of illegal immigration, the party’s opinion-makers warn, it will open the floodgates for millions of new “undocumented Democrats,” as Rush Limbaugh puts it.

The House Republican conference both dislikes and distrusts the Senate, which is why the suggestion that a formidable margin in the upper chamber will impact the House strikes many conservatives as laughable. “Ooh, I’m scared,” scoffed House Republican Raul Labrador of Idaho, an influential Tea Partyer and former immigration lawyer. The Democratic-controlled Senate is so toxic in conservative circles that those who deign to cut deals there are regarded as heretics. Witness the excommunication of Marco Rubio, who until recently was ordained as one of the high priests and potential saviors of conservatism. Now he’s getting booed at Tea Party rallies and panned as Chuck Schumer’s dupe by the very people who touted him as presidential timber.

Proponents of immigration reform, as well as some political handicappers, argue that the clout of the GOP’s anti-immigration wing has waned in the wake of Mitt Romney‘s drubbing last November. Comprehensive reform could boost the party’s paltry standing with Latinos, GOP Beltway grandees argue. While the House bristles at taking direction from the Democratic Senate, they argue, it might listen to business lobbies like the Chamber of Commerce, anti-tax icons like Grover Norquist, evangelical churches, and a high-tech community it sees as an emerging donor base. Immigration reform has a powerful advocate within the House in former vice presidential nominee Paul Ryan, plus a cadre of conservatives who support the concept if not the Senate bill. Few people dispute the U.S. immigration system is broken, and an overwhelming majority support efforts to fix it.

(PHOTOS: Fatal Frontier, The Perils of Crossing the Rio Grande)

These are logical arguments, but logic has had little or no effect on many House Republicans in the recent past. They have a strong record of bucking pressure and making unpopular choices on issues ranging from the debt ceiling to disaster relief. The conference will meet on July 10 to map out a battle plan on immigration. The House has three paths at its disposal. One is to try to move its own comprehensive measure. The odds of that appear long, since the working group tasked with assembling a bipartisan plan has so far come up empty. Many conservatives prefer a piecemeal approach, passing one or more bills that beef up border security and enforcement standards without the citizenship path Democrats seek. There is also a faction in the House that doesn’t want to pass anything at all, because of fears that sending immigration measures to a conference with the Senate could backfire.

And if the obstacles on the right are many, hurdles await on the left as well. Republicans on the Hill — and even some liberals — suspect that Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi could opt to keep immigration as a cudgel for the 2014 midterms rather than rally her members behind a diluted measure. Adherents of this theory can point to the recent failed vote on what had been a bipartisan farm bill, when Pelosi quietly yanked Democratic support after the late addition of a controversial amendment, then denounced the GOP leadership as “amateur hour.”

All these factors must be swirling through Boehner’s mind as he wrestles with how to approach immigration. Sometime in the coming months, the House Speaker may face a choice between the preference of his members and the future of his party. Boehner says he will observe the will of the House. Unless he changes his mind, the bill looks destined to die.

MORE: CBO: Senate Immigration Plan Reduces Deficit, Would Put 8 Million On Path To Legal Status

51 comments
arewethereyet
arewethereyet

I don't trust the Republicans to not pull a dagger from its cloak and stab the American worker in the back like 1986........... REMEMBER in this bill employers do not have to give these people heath care ....it will be provided by the taxpayers ..when they visit the emergency room

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LPjzfGChGlE  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2q08BoYyoFM http://www.forbes.com/sites/kellyphillipserb/2013/06/28/what-back-taxes-senate-passes-immigration-reform-bill-goes-easy-on-tax-repayment/

terryclifton1
terryclifton1

One only has to follow the money to know who is behind this vote buying scheme. Big business, unions, and the agriculture/farming lobby are going to be the big winners in this scheme. Imagine you work in a factory, and your rate of pay is $25.00 per hour; along comes someone who just walked over the border, and says he will do the job for $15.00 per hour..Guess what happens to you? How are you going to pay for Obamacare, if you don't have a job? The middle class will see their wages drop over the next 12 years, and if you're a minority, then you will be lucky if you don't end up on the street. Obama and friends have stopped enforcing immigration laws all together, and are literally promoting more illegals to come to our country. It's like rewarding someone who has broken into your home, not only are they not arrested, they get to keep what they steal from you. It's no secret that companies like Microsoft have been behind this scheme. For the longest time, they have abused the Worker Visa program to rid themselves of American born programmers, and replace them with cheaper labor from India. Look where Bill Gates throws his charity cash, in America? Yeah right, lol. Try India..He's propping up the next generation of cheap labor, and he's far from alone. Everyone gets caught up in this game, Republicans versus Democrats, both parties are sticking the boot up our behinds, and robbing us of our right to work for a living a wage that can support a family. You people keep arguing over abortion, taxes, and whatever.. The crooks are stealing you blind, and laughing all the way to the bank. Whenever there is some new controversy, I always follow the money trail...

ShellyTamara
ShellyTamara

I think the title needs correction, Amnesty Bill for illegal-immigrants Faces Tough Odds in the House

JohnBrown
JohnBrown

There is no anti-immigration wing of the Republican party.  The large majority of Republicans know that we will never deport the 12 to 20 million illegals currently in the country.  So we support border security and control First, and the legalizing the 12 to 20 million.  We want to make sure that when we finish legalizing the 20 millionth illegal that there aren't another 20 million in the country demanding that they be legalized.  Most Americans support that.  The majority of Americans to not support what Obama and the democrats are demanding which is amnesty now for all 20 million and an open border so another 20 million will be here when the first 20 million are legalized.  Unfortunately for our nation it looks like Sen Rubio and a bunch of other Republican Senators have added a little camouflage which Obama will just block, and caved completely to Obama.  Make no mistake folks, despite the lies from democrats and republicans in the Senate the bill is Obama's Amnesty First and Wide Open Borders.  The House, and Speaker Boehner have to come up with a bill that gives us border security and control first and guaranteed, and then legalization and a path to citizenship.  If Speaker Boehner allows an Amnesty first and open borders bill come up for a vote he is done, and if the House passes an amnesty bill without guaranteed border security first the Republican can kill their majority goodbye in 2014.

TatianaRomanova
TatianaRomanova

How does one defy popular opinion to stay in office?  One would pander to popular opinion  to stay in office, Time is so silly.  Nor can anyone seriously believe that the House members are such bad politicians that they would believe the "we need immigration reform to attract Hispanics" argument.  There just aren't any elections in 2014 where  the Hispanic vote is going to be decisive and even if it was, there's no reason to believe that Hispanics vote only on immigration.


And how is Pelosi going to use immigration as a club?  The people are about to explode when they see their Obamascare bills in October.  Coupled with the massive unemployment the plan is going to impose on the people, do you think anyone is going to want to import 11,000,000 criminals?

valentine.godoflove
valentine.godoflove

The SENATORS.......HAVE BEEN THERE A LONG TIME......INBREEDING......DSTROYS THE QUALITY OF THE HERD.......TIME TO GET THE SENATORS OUT AND FILL THEM WITH NEW BLOOD.........GET THE RASCALS OUT !

AMNESTY.....TO 11 MILLION PEOPLE......TIMES THIER SPOUSE.......TIMES THEIR 4 CHILDRE TO 6 PER AVERAGE FAMILY.....LIKE A POLITICIAN SAID.....THEY ARE MORE FERTILE THAN THE AVERAGE AMERICAN WHO ABORTIONS/KILLS THIER BABY.......TIMES THIER PARENTS.....EQUALS....45 MILLION !!!!!!!!!!!

I SAY........WORK PERMITS........NOT AMNESTY !!!!!......OBAMA IS TO BLAME AND HIS DEMOCRAT CREW......MORE MOUTHS SUCKING INTO THE FOOD STAMPS PROGRAM,,,,,,,THE OBAMA CARE WHICH IS FOR CRAP......AND GOD KNOWS WHAT OTHER WELFARE PROGRAM.......IS GOING TO BANKRUPT US AND MAKE US WORSE THAN AFTRICA........WHICH IS WHAT OBAMA WANTS......TO DESTROY AMERICA......

WHO IS GOING TO GET RID OF OBAMA WHO HATES AMERICA AND IS DRIVING US INTO THE GROUND?.....WHO OR WHERE ARE THE SAVIOURS?

VALENTINE, COMEDIAN.....LOL

Whoopin_Warren
Whoopin_Warren

Public cares about jobs, not immigration "reform".  No one is going to blame their congressman for letting this bill die.

Especially because this "reform" just translates into "more people coming here to compete for jobs with unemployed Americans."

Plus, there are other issues.  Eg this does not make illegals pay back taxes (that was a lie.)  It forgives illegals who have stolen Americans' identities.  It allows illegals access to expensive benefit plans (better than amnesty, it is a huge Reward!)


DaveFrancis
DaveFrancis

President Obama’s legacy All President Obama has managed to do within this nation is to divide the people. The Senate 477 immigration bill is not far different from the 1986 Simpson-Mazzoli bill, which remains an enigma? Whether it’s the keystone pipeline, his nationalized health care or the illegal alien bill flowing through Congress? The law promised to the American people that that the previous amnesty for 3 million people at its inception would finally end the illegal immigration problem. But because special interest lobby was more financially important than the American people, the laws to put innocuous employers in prison for hiring unauthorized workers faded away. The new immigration Senate bill is just make-believe—once upon a time tale. Because that nasty piece of work Homeland Secretary Napolitano has the final say on how the enforcement funds are distributed. Millions of Americans don’t trust the U.S. Government and I wouldn’t trust Janet Napolitano, as far as I can spit—or vomit. Swearing an oath to the people of this country that she would uphold the “Rule of Law”? Then in front of a Judicial Committee when addressed by a mixed batch of Democrats and Republicans, that the border is Secure. I watched this women downright lie to this Congressional oversight. Her features were a leer, when she stated this intelligence to all these politicians, changing to a smirk.

The implausible S.477 passed today in the Senate would spend $38-billion on border security, including the adding of 350 miles of fence (Doesn’t say double parallel fencing) between the U.S. and Mexico and doubling the number of Border Patrol agents to 40,000. In his auditory Senator Grassley says it’s just throwing money at the problem. One new highly advanced technology is the Sonic Barrier that these chumps in Washington, have not even bothered to assess, or recognize, as they would rather use the inferior, sensors they have now. I have no connection with the Sonic Barrier, introduced by www.american patrol.com but it’s been viewed by foreign TV companies who were surprised at the success. I have written to Sen. Cruz, and Jeff Sessions but not heard any word as yet.

Sen. Chuck Grassley further stated “We weigh too much on input, in other words, dollars spent,” then added. “There’s no metrics to measure the outcome. Not only that, they say you can spend this money, they say the border will be secured if you spend this amount, but it gives the secretary of Homeland Security the authority to not spend the money or to shift the money around.”

Sen. Grassley queried how much of the $38-billion proposed in the amendment would even be spent on border security. “We don’t know whether it’s really going to happen,” Grassley says. “We have a secretary of Homeland Security that says the border’s already secured. Think about the sincerity of trying to get her to do exactly like this amendment does, particularly if it gives her an out not to do it.”

Grassley offered several amendments to the immigration bill. Only one was considered and it failed during the mark-up. Grassley says he will not support the bill when it goes that was voted on today.

 

DaveFrancis
DaveFrancis

IT SHOULD BE DULY NOTED THAT THEIR WAS NOTHING IN THE AMENDED BILL THAT STATES THAT THESE 11 MILLION PLUS FOREIGN NATIONS SOULDN’TBE GARNERED LEGAL STATUS, PRIOR TO ANY OF THE ENFORCEMENT TRIGGERS BEING FULLY FUNCTIONAL IN THE NEXT TEN YEARS. IN OTHER WORDS IT’S A TRAVESTY OF THE LAWS AND MEANT TO DELUDE THE PEOPLE, SPECIFICALLY WHEN TRYING TO RECRUIT 20.000 MORE AGENTS FOR BORDER WATCH. Problem is, the bill's loaded with loopholes, kickbacks and waivers they'll come back to haunt America.

Has the lawmakers in Washington lost their marbles, to give complete control of the border to this Liberal Progressive.This is why I cannot see the house passing this 1000 page piece of crud, which with that sort of money involved you, could transport the majority of foreigners to the border or fly the overstays home to wherever? There is going to be no accountable again, just as in 1986? Further—this is just like the Obama national health care premise that it would be of great benefit to every American. Of course just like most of the anemic amendments to the immigration reform bill it a means to an end for their favorite entities. Not for regular Americans who go out each morning commuting to job and pay their taxes, but the people who are like a virus and live off the rest of taxpayers. In the presidential election millions gathered round him, because he emanated a promise of free stuff? Democrats have assured themselves that some time in the future, all the illegal aliens will mostly vote for the left side of Congress. But then the republicans have a unrealistic view that if they become puppets business and corporation their bread financially buttered, with good jobs as lobbyists after they leave Washington, with all the lucrative favors of speaker-ships in holiday locations and other unique opportunities, like under-market cash for fancy properties. This is why the Democrats are poised, along with a few GOP collaborator to press forward rapidly with the reckless immigration bill.

When you offer a cornucopia of free handouts as President Obama has, he is sure to gain a large proportion of votes. Thousand of votes came his way from the Deadbeats and freeloaders, as with welfare illegal immigrants and low income people who are a component 40 percent who has never paid anything into the system. Many are truly incapable of work, but this isn’t the case of every citizen. Both the main substance of the immigration bill and Obamacare, were negatively perfected behind closed doors. Direct recognition of the mega-unions, the radical La Raza other ethnic groups, the U.S. Dept of Commerce the giant agricultural giant companies, technology businesses, pro-immigration organizations, construction and development and other special interests lobby, who grease the palms of politicians. This is the main reasons we need a Fair tax system so everybody pays a little. It would be very simple to collect revenue from everything you buy, with no immunity and no special privileges to anybody. You could abolish the IRS and save hundreds of billions of dollars supporting fortress IRS, reducing it to a small agency of the government. Apple and all these giant organization would pay their fair share of taxes and no escape for the wealthy politicians. Then regards to Obamacare their will be no penalty for the low income people or the spongers, because if you earn under a certain amount of money or on welfare, you will walk off free and clear and will not be harassed by the—you guessed it—the IRS for payment like the rest of working Americans.

Contact by phone100 Senators and 435 Representatives for State or Federal at toll-free number -- 1-888-978-3094--.You may phone the United States Capitol circuit at (202) 224-3121. A terminal operator will connect you directly with the Senate office or just about anybody in Washington you request to speak with.

Ale
Ale

The article misses the point. Why should Republican leaders in the house have the power to block the vote on the bill?

Should their votes count more than the others?

The bill needs 218 votes for passing. 170 democrats(out of 195) and 48 republicans (out of 240) it is not hard to do at this point.

Are most Americans aware of this absurdity? 

AngelicaS
AngelicaS

Most Americans (including most Democrats in the non-vocal majority) DO NOT WANT to grant rewards-and-special-treatment-for-immigration-lawbreaking! Further, most Americans DO NOT WANT a system by which millions more immigrants can compete with American workers (including, both working class and professionals), and thus further depress already-stagnant wages!

The Black American Leadership Alliance has come out against amnesty, as this group realizes that Congressional Representatives on both sides are in the process of selling out minorities by granting special treatment to ILLEGALS to be rewarded for violating out immigration laws and to enable them to compete for working class jobs, thus depressing wages and devastating the rights of American CITIZENS and LEGAL immigrants, and particularly minorities. Further the Tech Engineers Union is against amnesty, and for good reason. Engineers know that there are NOT thousands of jobs not being fulfilled by American Engineers. Engineers correctly do not want for their job opportunities diminished and do not want for their wages to remain stagnant.

American wages have been stagnant since the 70s. Opening the immigration floodgates only serves the agenda of the globalizationistas. Granting amnesty to ILLEGALS will impose enormous costs upon American taxpayer services, as these largely poor and uneducated workforce consume far more in American social welfare services than they ever pay in taxes. A GOVERNMENT WHICH REFUSES TO ENFORCE ITS OWN LAWS IS INTOLERABLE! REJECT GLOBALIZATION, AND THUS, REJECT AMNESTY! Call and ask for your Congressional representative to say HELL-TO-THE-NO to this PRO-AMNESTY BILL: 202.224.3121!!! ABSOLUTELY NOT!!!

CharlesEdwardBrown
CharlesEdwardBrown

NO AMNESTY and No Pathway to US Citizenship for illegal aliens. We tried Amnesty in 1986 for 3 million illegal aliens and our Government lied to us. We now have 11 million more illegal aliens and the Federal Government has failed to enforce the law. Deport all illegal aliens and secure the border.

MichaelJose
MichaelJose

"Here is the grim reality for the bill’s supporters: the past three years have proven that a big portion of the House Republican conference are willing to defy both popular opinion and political pressure in service of ideology and self-preservation."

Except that this bill does not have popular support.  You keep making it sound as if extremist Republicans are trying to block a popular bill.   Legalization (amnesty) first immigration reform is highly unpopular across all sections of the American public.

"The House Republican conference both dislikes and distrusts the Senate, which is why the suggestion that a formidable margin in the upper chamber will impact the House strikes many conservatives as laughable."

This Senate Bill is more than a thousand pages, and most of those pages have last-minute changes to them.  If there is a high margin, it is because Reid bought the Senators off by giving them pork.  Why should an unpopular bill, passed largely due to bribing Senators, have serious momentum in the House due to a high margin?  If it passes with a 70-vote margin, it is not due to it being popular.

"Proponents of immigration reform, as well as some political handicappers, argue that the clout of the GOP’s anti-immigration wing has waned in the wake of Mitt Romney‘s drubbing last November."

John McCain, the head of the amnesty wing of the party, did almost as terribly with Latinos in 2008.  No one who studies the issue actually believes that Romney lost the election due to being too tough on immigration.

 "Comprehensive reform could boost the party’s paltry standing with Latinos, GOP Beltway grandees argue."

No one who knows the issue believes this.  The grandees who claim this to be the case are liars.

 "While the House bristles at taking direction from the Democratic Senate, they argue, it might listen to business lobbies like the Chamber of Commerce, anti-tax icons like Grover Norquist, evangelical churches, and a high-tech community it sees as an emerging donor base."

Translation: they want businesses to bribe the House to accept amnesty.  How can you report on this and not point out how corrupt it is?  As for evangelical churches, the polls clearly show that evangelical Christians oppose amnesty.  It is only a few evangelical political leaders who are pushing for it.

"Immigration reform has a powerful advocate within the House in former vice presidential nominee Paul Ryan, plus a cadre of conservatives who support the concept if not the Senate bill. Few people dispute the U.S. immigration system is broken, and an overwhelming majority support efforts to fix it."

Again, bait and switch.  A majority of people want to fix our broken immigration system. That same majority by and large believes that it needs to be fixed with enforcement, not amnesty.  What you are implying is that "an overwhelmingly majority want to do something.  This bill is something.  Therefore, an overwhelming majority want this bill."  That's like promoting a bill to euthanize poor people by saying that  "An overwhelming majority of people want to reduce poverty in the U.S. and find current policy unacceptable."

"These are logical arguments, but logic has had little or no effect on many House Republicans in the recent past."

The overwhelmingly majority of the American people oppose the path to "reforming" immigration that this bill proposes.  How is it illogical for House Republicans to follow the will of the people?

"Sometime in the coming months, the House Speaker may face a choice between the preference of his members and the future of his party."

Again, you are implying that this bill will help the GOP when everyone knows it won't.  Why are all the newspapers printing such propagandistic lies?

reallyNow2
reallyNow2

The thing that isnt mentioned much is that there is also attached to this bill a huge increase in the number of highly skilled workers brought in, and there is no provision they have to pay them prevailing wages.  The CBO report estimates this to be about ten million high skilled workers brought in, but it could be as many as twenty million.  When they take ten million jobs from ten million people, (there are only about 100,000 new jobs created in the fields they are being brought in for)  those people will bump others, and they will bump still others.  No one knows how it will finally shake out except that there will be ten million more "chronically unemployed' added to the rolls and no longer counting. and everyone's pay will go down. 

IMO this is done from pure greed and is an attempt to hold down wages, while prices spiral upwards.  It is also being done under the cover of the illegal immigration bill, but this is why it has any chance of passing.  Because it will make corporations trillions as they can depress everyones wages in the decades to follow much more than the small amount admitted to by the CBO report.

MrTemecula
MrTemecula

Everybody thinks Speaker Boehner is the key, but the decision belongs to the business lobby and the 'establishment.' Right now, they are calculating whether they can use the Supreme Court, the gerrymandered House districts and unlimited money to subvert democracy or realize they need to compromise and reaffirm their commitment to American democracy. It's going to be a close call. I'm thinking they choose their future Latino customers over the tea partiers. So, Boehner, in an act of statesmanship, allows the Senate bill to be voted in the House and then loses his job. Or, perhaps, the establishment is more worried about the upcoming debt ceiling and lets immigration fail, but lets Boehner and Obama do the Grand Bargain.

mqurashi8
mqurashi8

Immigration bill in the Senate is hailed as how bipartisan governing can work after it added, upon Republican insistance, $45 B to strenthen the border control that will stop the illegals. We have spent Trillions of $ in preventing another illegal border crossing - the drugs. It has not made much dent over the years. Why? Because there is a market for the illegals drugs just as there is a market for illegal aliens. In the case of the aliens, it the empoyers who use middle men to import cheap labor. The illegals pay good money to the middle men who transport them into the US or show them the way to get in. All the interviews with the illegals have confirmed that these people pay good money for cross the border. There is nothing in the bill that criminalizes the employer for hiring illegals. May be the Republicans think that it will be hardship for the empoyers, who by doing so not only disrupt the fair competition but also depress the wages. Then there is the question of the underground economy created by the illegals and their empoyers. As they are undocumented, they are prevented from paying any taxes and contrary to the declaration that they place heavy burden on our social services, they must stay hidden to avoid deportation.

$45 Billion will be sucked up be contractors and new technological interceptrion devices that will not do much to stem the tide as long as there is market willing to have slave labor. We will be sending agents or private contracors to Mexico. This will result in tension in the same way the drug war has done in the Latin America.  The Republicans throw corporate profits disguised as ideology to every national and international problems with a hint of pragmatism.  

Paul,nnto
Paul,nnto

"Adherents of this theory can point to the recent failed vote on what had been a bipartisan farm bill, when Pelosi quietly yanked Democratic support after the late addition of a controversial amendment, then denounced the GOP leadership as “amateur hour.

AA you do realize that is self refuting as evidence that Democratic support dropped as a political move rather than a policy disagreement, right?

PaulDirks
PaulDirks

 These are logical arguments, but logic has had little or no effect on many House Republicans in the recent past.

The kick in the a$$ is that this country actually NEEDS a sane Conservative party. But hate sells like nothing else.

Ohiolib
Ohiolib

These are logical arguments, but logic has had little or no effect on many House Republicans in the recent past.

-

Logic has had no effect on any republican, anywhere, for years. Get used to it.

Ale
Ale

@Whoopin_Warren 

Jobs and immigration are irrelevant to each other. Unemployment in the 90's was 2% in some areas and illegal immigration was way higher than now, yet those opposing reform then were the same ones opposing now and with the same old, tired arguments.

The 11 million undocumented are already here and already have jobs and about 3 million will not qualify for PROVISIONAL legalization, for several different reason, as the bill reads right now.

Last but not least, this bill does require payment of back taxes OWED, exclude illegals who have been convicted of felonies(ID theft is a felony) and those who qualify are specifically excluded from all federal benefits, including welfare and health reform, for as long as they remain non-citizens, about 15 years.

Further, most of those PROVISIONALLY legalized will not qualify for legal PERMANENT residency and will leave when their 10 years are up(happily, as that is what they want, no more). May be 1 or 2 million will become citizens and by then, the entire electorate may realign several times over. So electoral consequences for either party are nothing but garbage media speculation.

TatianaRomanova
TatianaRomanova

@Ale  Each house is free to write their own rules and does so freely.  The House has chosen a system that allows the Republican caucus to decide what gets put on the agenda (just like the Senate has its filibuster rule).  Now, if you don't like the rules, you could have changed them back in 2009 but they were fine then.


And if the Democrats really did want immigration reform, one wonders why they didn't pass it back then.

reallyNow2
reallyNow2

 It is called the three branches of government, and yes, probably half the people or more are aware of how it works.

Ale
Ale

@MichaelJose

Every poll shows overwhelming support for a path to Citizenship and even more for legalization without citizenship. Whether or not voting for either is going to help GOP elected officials with their base or with independents outside of their base is another story. Their job is to do what THEY think is best for the nation  regardless of polls, reelection possibilities or what their base wants. We are a Republic, not a direct Democracy.

So if Republicans in leadership positions in the house, think this is bad for the nation, that is fine, they are entitled. But their vote should be counted as one(1), just like everybody else's. They should have NO power to block the chamber from proceeding with the vote. Yet, no only they seem to  have such power but they arrogantly brag about it as they are ready to abuse it.

Let's vote and see what happens, once and for all

dr_corvinus
dr_corvinus

@MichaelJose Lenin once said, "A lie told often enough becomes the truth." This constant harping on Romney's loss due to being "tough" on immigration is one of those lies. Heck, the immigration system being "broken" is also a lie. The system is just fine. It's the lack of enforcement that's broken. I predict a mass barbeque of Democrats in the 2014 elections if this turkey passes.

tom.litton
tom.litton

@reallyNow2 Speaking as an engineer, i don't mind a bit of competition.  Having too many engineers is better than having too few of them.  It's certainly better than companies shipping their engineering work over seas because they can't find people here.  That would cost the economy not only engineering jobs, but also other jobs (as their salaries go over seas).


The real solution, of course, is to increase the number of engineers in America, through subsidies and loan grants to students getting engineering degrees, STEM out reach (which was cut recently), higher math and science standards, etc.  But that takes time to take effect.

Ale
Ale

@MrTemecula 

It would not be "an act of statesmanship" but one of common sense, humbleness and respect of  majority rule.

And there should not be any job to lose or gain from it.

MichaelJose
MichaelJose

@MrTemecula"So, Boehner, in an act of statesmanship, allows the Senate bill to be voted in the House and then loses his job."

Why is helping a bill to pass that would destroy the American middle class "an act of statesmanship?"

AlexAltman
AlexAltman

@Paul,nnto Disagree. The policy disagreement could have been a pretext for the political move. 

MichaelJose
MichaelJose

@PaulDirks  

So you think that exploding the U.S. population and cratering people's wages, destroying the middle class, and creating a balkanized country are logical actions?  You think that this would be the act of a sane conservative party?

ShellyTamara
ShellyTamara

@Ohiolib so true, but one small correction, replace Republicans with Democrats.

ShellyTamara
ShellyTamara

@Ale @Whoopin_Warren bill does require payment of back taxes OWED? They are undocumented illegals, they are here to take not give, there is no proof they made taxable income. If they lied they entered illegally just recently enough to be eligible for amnesty so don't owe taxes there is nothing to prove that they are lying.

Ale
Ale

@TatianaRomanova @Ale 

I was not aware of them myself at the time..:) But you are missing the point: These rules are obscenely unfair and anti-democratic, regardless of issue, party or chamber.

They did not pass it back then because they knew they did not have the 60 votes needed to break filibuster in the senate

Ale
Ale

@reallyNow2 No. The other two branches have no relevance in this, as it is happening within one branch: the Legislative. It seems that the votes of the members of the party that holds the majority of seats in the chamber are worth more then those of the minority . That is obscenely wrong. Regardless of the issue, the party, or the chamber.

No, I don't think they do. It would not happen if they did.

MichaelJose
MichaelJose

@tom.litton@MichaelJose 

 Most of these polls give people two choices:   Mass deportation or legalization.  There is a third option, attrition through enforcement.   Moreover, look at these results from Pulse Opinion Research:

https://www.numbersusa.com/content/nusablog/beckr/june-21-2013/poll-finds-little-support-gop-who-favor-s-744-bill-increase-immigrant-wo

58% of likely voters support full enforcement first before considering giving work permits to illegal aliens

72% of Republicans support full enforcement first

62% of Independents support full enforcement first

74% of likely voters want legal immigration numbers reduced or to remain the same

76% of Republicans want legal immigration numbers reduced or to remain the same

70% of Democrats want legal immigration numbers reduced or to remain the same

Remember, this bill would not just amnesty illegals, it would increase future legal immigration.

Almost all of the polls showing people backing amnesty are specifically designed to get people to support amnesty.

Ale
Ale

@dr_corvinus @MichaelJose 

The system has been broken for half a century and through 8 administrations and luck of enforcement was never the problem. It is simply dysfunctional. Illegal immigration is a symptom, not the illness. It is also our punishment for not building a new system from scratch

reallyNow2
reallyNow2

Tom,

Glad to hear you are looking for a bit of competition, as you will surely get it.  There are currently 1.9 million working engineers in the USA and they are bringing 10 million engineers into the USA in the next decade (or more, 10 million is CBO's estimate.)  Along with this and the "No Poaching" agreements in force within most major corporations, you should find the challenge you are looking for.

The point though, is that even if you do, overall they will displace about 10 million people, there will be bumping, shuffling, to different kinds of positions, and eventually 10 million people will lose their jobs.

Ale
Ale

@MichaelJose @MrTemecula 

The effects of the bill, at this point, are pure speculation. Regardless of your views and possibly Boehner's, it seems to have the votes to pass in BOTH chambers. So let 's proceed to vote!

MrTemecula
MrTemecula

@MichaelJose Did Ronald Reagan destroy America's middle class when he passed an immigration bill? Or did NAFTA destroy middle class wages in America? Or was it Republican's anti-union policy destroying collective bargaining that lowered wages in America?

Paul,nnto
Paul,nnto

What do you base that on?  Cantor got through, as you report, a last minute cut to food assistance and the Democrats balked.

Although I suppose any policy disagreement could be labled a pretext. I just don't see that here.

MrObvious
MrObvious

@MichaelJose @PaulDirks 

How do you suggest immigrants becoming legal will lead to all that when the illegal employers are already doing just that?

Ale
Ale

@ShellyTamara @Ale @Whoopin_Warren 

That is why I said : "Owed"...In many cases what is owed are REFUNDS which IRS plays dumb and denies to them on the basis of discrepancies with Social security numbers, change of last name due to marriage, etc

They will have to prove presence in the US since 2011 or before (unlawful presence). Their word will not be taken for it. Even if they arrived in 2000, if they have been working minimum or lower wage jobs, chances are they owe nothing.

TatianaRomanova
TatianaRomanova

@Ale @TatianaRomanova  The rules are the rules.  They are designed to ensure  that the government acts by consensus and doesn't just rush to follow the crowd.  This is why America's government has withstood the test of  time.


If the founders were interested in Democratic rule, they would never have created the Senate that gives the same weight to the half million Wyoming residents as it does the 33 million Californians.  


Nor would they have used staggered elections


Nor would they have given the President a veto (a President who isn't exactly elected by democratic rules)



Ale
Ale

@ShellyTamara @Ale @MrTemecula

Read me again, please. I was writing about what Mr. Temecula described as a possible "act of statesmanship" from Mr. Boehner, if he allows the vote to proceed in the house.

It would not be so but only his duty and what would be right and fair. Let 's vote!

If it passes, so be it. If it does not, so be it as well. It should not matter which party the votes come from.

AngelicaS
AngelicaS

@MrTemecula @MichaelJose 

Both furthered the continuation and exacerbation of wage stagnation for middle class and low wage American workers.  We can hardly afford exponentially more amnesties and more globalization measures!

reallyNow2
reallyNow2

The company I work for has given everyone new fancy titles and set the minimum to be a Bachelors degree in anticipation of being able to replace most of us with cheap foreign labor, once this bill passes.  I can move to another field, but ultimately ten million people are going to lose their jobs, when they bring in ten million highly skilled low cost workers.  Reagan did not do that.  It is important to keep track of the fact that this bill (according to the Congressional Budget Office) will bring in more highly skilled than illegals. 

And my immediate boss flat out told me that my fancy title was solely so the corporation could replace me with new much cheaper labor, once this passes.

MichaelJose
MichaelJose

@MrTemecula @MichaelJose The amnesty bill Reagan passed certainly damaged America's middle class.  So did NAFTA. The only reason that Regan's bill didn't destroy the middle class is because the number of illegals was so much smaller than those that would be legalized by this bill.

 As for unions, do you actually think that bringing in millions of cheap foreign laborers helped unions?  There's a reason why Cesar Chavez was so anti-illegal alien.

reallyNow2
reallyNow2

The CBO estimates eight million illegals will get citizenship, but they also estimate that another TEN million highly skilled will be brought in too.  There is more highly skilled being brought in than illegals by at least twenty percent, and there is no real l imit on the H1B1s. 

You are obviously arguing over a bill that you got your information from a very slanted source.  It is not just about illegals.  There are more H1B1s and highly skilled to be brought in than illegals.

MichaelJose
MichaelJose

@MrObvious @MichaelJose @PaulDirks This bill does not just legalize immigrants, it increases the number of guestworker permits, H1-B visas, etc. dramatically.  Moreover, it encourages more illegals to come because of provisions which provide future amnesties for people who work here for ten years.

Legalizing these workers would also make it easier for them to change jobs, effectively opening up opportunities for them that are not currently on the table,  and putting more Americans in competition with them for work.

This bill would also amnesty the employers of illegal aliens, so that they would get away with their greedy exploitation.

Border crossings from Mexico have increased significantly since the Gang of Eight Bill was proposed.  Lots of aliens are looking to get in on the amnesty.

Do you actually believe that opening our borders will not increase the inflow of immigrants and lead to more competition for jobs?