Republicans can’t pass an immigration bill, and somehow that’s Obama’s fault

KingOrfeo

Literotica Guru
Joined
Jul 27, 2008
Posts
39,182
From Salon:

Wednesday, Nov 12, 2014 11:05 AM EST

GOP already in lame excuse mode: Republicans can’t pass an immigration bill, and somehow that’s Obama’s fault

Republicans say Obama's action on immigration would kill any chance of reform. Let's stop pretending this is true

Simon Maloy


When it comes to President Obama’s plan to take executive action to ease deportation, there’s one argument coming from top Republicans that, to my ear, really doesn’t make a lot of sense. Various media outlets have reported on Obama’s post-election meeting with congressional leaders and the messages top Republicans sent Obama on immigration. On one point they were unanimous: if the president takes executive action, he’ll have guaranteed that the new Congress will not pass any immigration bills.

“The Speaker warned that unilateral action by the president on executive amnesty will erase any chances of doing immigration reform,” noted Roll Call. “There was a lot of push-back from our guys. It would make not only passage of immigration reform more difficult but would also spill over to other areas of the agenda,” Sen. John Thune told the Wall Street Journal. Rep. Mario Diaz-Balart, one of the GOP’s most fervent advocates of immigration reform, told Bloomberg’s Dave Weigel that “there’s pretty much a guarantee we can’t get it done if he does something by executive order.”

Maybe I’m alone in this, but I recall very clearly the many months the Republicans in Congress spent earlier this year arguing that the reason immigration reform was not going to pass was that they just couldn’t trust the president to enforce the law. Did something happen to reestablish a sufficient level of trust in the president that Republicans feel they can move forward with him on immigration? Perhaps, sometime in between their vote to sue Obama and their vote to defund his DREAM Act-lite program, the Republicans found it in their hearts to maybe give him a second chance.

There’s not a whole lot of reason to believe any of this, and it’s not entirely clear what the threat to Obama is. Republicans spent more than a year sitting on their hands and saying they won’t work with the president because he’s a dictatorial socialist whom they can’t trust. It’s tough to see how vague hints of potential action on immigration would entice him, or how a promise to maintain the status quo would cow him.

If anything, Obama going forward alone on immigration should be an incentive for Republicans to act. The president has said that he’ll take action before the year is out, assuming that Boehner refuses to allow a vote on the Senate-passed immigration bill, which he will. Obama’s also said that he’ll gladly roll back whatever action he takes if the Republicans come to him with a bill he can sign. They’ll probably have around six months from the time Obama announces his action until the orders can actually be implemented. Republicans say they very much want to pass immigration reform – “It’s just time to deal with it,” Boehner said last week – and they very much oppose Obama’s executive action. Six months is more than enough time for the GOP to pass a bill, send it to Obama, and actually put his word to the test. If he signs it, the executive action goes away and everyone wins. If he vetoes it, they can attack him for standing in the way of common-sense reform or whatever and go back to calling him a communist tyrant.

That, of course, assumes that the Republicans would be able to pass any sort of immigration reform measure. And no one has a ton of faith that the GOP can do that, not even the most optimistic Republican members, who in one breath acknowledge that the conservatives in the House are a the major obstacle to reform, and in the next breath blame the White House for their party’s inertia on the matter.

Here’s John McCain, one of the Senate’s leading advocates for comprehensive immigration reform, talking to Salon’s Elias Isquith about the possibility of passing a reform bill even if Obama were to unilaterally disarm and forgo executive action:

Here’s my logic, real quick. My logic is that [Speaker Boehner] has now gained a larger number of members which, I believe — and I’ve been told by people around him — would allow him to override the hardcore people who under no circumstances would agree to any reform. I’m not sure he can do that … I think it’s possible that they would take it up in some form or another…

Mario Diaz-Balart also told Bloomberg that “there’s no guarantee that we can get it done.” The implied – or in McCain’s case, explicit – message in all this is that the big obstacle to reform remains the House Republicans, whose most conservative members are volatile and unpredictable and have an unblemished track record of success at bigfooting Boehner’s agenda on immigration.

Republicans and conservatives recognize the danger here. Blaming Obama works only to a certain point, and eventually they’ll have to kick in with immigration reform legislation if they ever hope to broaden the party’s appeal to emerging demographics. But their internal divisions make that an uncertain prospect at best. So instead they just fall back on what they know and preemptively blame the president for their failure to act.
 
Update:

Wednesday, Nov 12, 2014 12:00 PM EST

Tea Partyer’s messaging mistake: Admits executive orders don’t stop GOP from writing legislation

Sen. Ron Johnson is introducing some immigration bill? Well this complicates the "poison well" chatter

Jim Newell


The metaphors on the Republican side are crisp and violent: If Obama takes executive action on immigration, he will be “poisoning the well.” He will burn himself playing with matches. Executive action, according to Mitch McConnell, would be akin to “waving a red flag in front of a bull.” Internal poisoning, skin-charring and bovine assaults are among the corporeal injuries that President Obama is imposing on himself, the federal government and the American public through his tyrannical shifting and reprioritizing of certain resources within the executive branch.

The impression they’re trying to lock in is that if Obama announces some executive action on immigration — which he seems(?) like he’s still determined to do — this will somehow eliminate congressional Republicans’ ability to pass the immigration legislation that they claim to be so, so interested in passing. It’s an interesting argument. We’re not sure that the executive action will feature a clause reading, “Congress is no longer allowed to pass its own immigration laws.” Everyone can agree that that would be really unconstitutional.

So it’s almost like the “poisoning the well” rhetoric is just being used as a convenient pretext for congressional Republicans’ inevitable inaction on this matter.

But hey now what’s this? Tea Party Sen. Ron Johnson is putting together some sort of immigration bill? Hasn’t anyone told him about the poisoned well?

Even as President Barack Obama prepares to take executive action on immigration, an incoming GOP Senate chairman said Monday he is working on a border security bill and will aim to move it once the new Republican-controlled Congress convenes in January.

Sen. Ron Johnson of Wisconsin, who is in line to chair the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, said his legislation would include a guest worker program to reduce incentives for illegal immigration. It would build on work already done by Congress, including a House bill aimed at ensuring that 90 percent of would-be border crossers are stopped.

It’s great to see Sen. Ron Johnson, who once dumped all of his legislative staffers in order to “pivot to messaging,” get down to the critical work of lawmaking. It’s almost like he might have a difficult reelection coming up (“coming up” in two years) and will have to pretend to be a decent senator for a few months. So here we’ve got a blue-ish state Republican senator working to cover his ass by putting together a conservative, non-comprehensive immigration bill — but still one that will include some sort of vaguely defined guest worker program. That will be enough to earn him many conservative detractors, since it violates the current GOP immigration creed of “Don’t ever let anyone into the country to do anything else ever again.”

What was most interesting/funny about Johnson’s interview with the AP, though, was his take on the whole well-poisoning business (emphasis ours):

“Regardless of what President Obama does I’m going to move forward with a very strong border security bill,” Johnson said. “I hope President Obama doesn’t take that executive action because I think for many people that will poison the well and certainly make it more difficult to solve the immigration problem.”

Ron Johnson has let slip a serious messaging error here: He’s admitted that a) President Obama can take executive action and b) Congress can still do stuff.

This works against the McConnell-Boehner line that through some strange witchcraft, Obama taking executive action precludes Congress from doing its own immigration work. That the executive action will cast a spell on the Republican leaders that renders them unable to lift their arms to bring a bill to the floor. Johnson says he doesn’t want Obama to take the order because it will poison the well “for many people,” but apparently not him. He’s the sort of guy who might like to establish some bill-authorship cred before having, say, a rematch against Russ Feingold in a presidential electorate in Wisconsin.

It’s unusual the extent to which this well-poisoning line has worked for Republicans. The media is mostly buying into this strange logic that hurt feelings and a “lack of trust” are compelling reasons to forgo important legislative action — rather than an excuse that Republicans in less-dire electoral waters than Ron Johnson’s are latching onto to dismiss something that they have no interest in doing.
 
Fuck your bullshit KingOr"ugly"

You're insane and so is anyone who advocates immigration reform:

IT'S A FUCKING LIE. Immigration was fine until enforcement was turned into a joke by BO's executive orders.

Read these three posts, or not and just keep spewing bullshit from salon.
PayDay said:
http://forum.literotica.com/showpost.php?p=44802677&postcount=199
PayDay said:
Let's talk about how everyone is insulting the intelligence of people with Spanish/Latin/Mexican/South American Heritage.

What bring me to this is Carlos Mencia.
(Yes I know he's not all Latino in Heritage, and he steals jokes or whatever that means, but Jeff Foxworthy isn't a redneck, and neither is that gitrdone guy, so get over it?)

Anyway, he said something that I have actually heard from a Mexican friend of mine that I used to work as an assistant for.

"I call them my lazy cousins."

See, I used to be an assistant to a fellow(we'll call him Mr. Angel cause that was his name) who worked here legally, on a visa, and followed all the rules of law in this country, even though he was not born here. He even went as far as to comply with the loss of driving privs and fines, when he could have easily just faked his name and paperwork.

He was a stand up American, even though he was ESL, and not technically staying here.

When I asked him why he didn't become a citizen, he said: "Because I am going to go home."

He had a son, born here, and he was taking him back home as well.

He told me there was little work in Mexico to profit from.
He told me of corrupt police and lawless action.
He then told me it was no different than living here, short of, in America, it was hidden.
He also told me how lazy people were once they had what they needed, here and at home.

He was one of the hardest workers I ever met, and one of the most honest people I ever met. He followed the rules, even when they cost him.

Because I knew that man, and his brother, and his friends, I know that this is an entirely bullshit speech:
BS from BO said:
President Barack Obama said he would not be president if not for Latino voters, and then he pledged immigration reform in the United States to legalize those who are here illegally.

“Without the strong support of Latinos, including so many Mexican-Americans, I would not be standing here today as president of the United States,” Obama said. “That’s the truth.”

He touted the need for comprehensive immigration reform, which is currently being considered in the Senate that would provide a “pathway” to legal status for the at least 11 million illegal aliens in the United States.

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/obama-mexico-credits-latinos-winning-presidency

Besides, BO, I know you got elected because of a flawed voting system and a fake school shooting the day of the official election tallies. Otherwise that information would be available.

and then there is this blatant lie to the ME X I CAN people:
BO BS said:
"The truth is, right now, our border with Mexico is more secure than it’s been in years. We’ve put more boots on that border than at any time in our history, and illegal crossings are down by nearly 80 percent from their peak in 2000. But we’ve got more to do – not just to secure the border but to fix an immigration system that is badly broken," he said.
http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs...ship-11-million-country-illegally_720688.html

Well actually, he had nothing to do qwith that:
It was all GW and Clinton. So what's this 'we' ?
Verdad said:
Indeed, stopping immigrants at the border has become a bargaining tool for the last two administrations with Congress — fences and guards in exchange for reforming immigration laws,

Now as to this 'broken immigration system" crap: If these 'illegals' came here, and got a job, then someone hired them 'illegally' and broke the law.

Not to mention, how many individuals have become citizens using the current system?
verdad said:
In the last decade, an average of 700,000 people a year became naturalized citizens of the United States. That’s roughly one each year for every 500 U.S residents, or one every 79 seconds.

In the 1990s, the annual average was 500,000, and in the 1980s it was 200,000. These may sound like large numbers, yet as share of the total population, this is a change from 0.1% of the population becoming naturalized citizens each year in the 1980s to 0.2% now.

Naturalized citizens are only a fraction of the overall foreign-born U.S. population, which is 13% of the total population...

hmm.... wonder where they are from?
verdad said:
In recent years, the most new American citizens were from Mexico, followed by India, the Philippines and China. Since 1976, Asia has been the leading region of origin (before that it was Europe).

Wow, but those are only Citizens, surely green card holders are in trouble with no chance to stay here...
verdad said:
About 1 million people become legal permanent residents, or "green card" holders, each year in the U.S. Many others hold temporary work visas, given to a range of professionals from scientists and students to farm laborers and fashion models.

Wow, broken system or a bunch of people breaking the law?

Hmm... well I wonder why He would want illegals here? I mean, they have to know someone here or they would be homeless, right?
verdad said:
Nearly half of new citizens now live in just three states: California, Florida and New York. In recent years, 15% have lived in the greater New York City metropolitan area, 10% in greater Los Angeles and 8% in and around Miami.

http://globalpublicsquare.blogs.cnn.com/2012/06/07/immigration-nation-what-you-need-to-know/

Boy... those places sure do have giant Electoral College Numbers...

Suddenly it all makes sense why he would try and make Fascist & Furious happen, and then stifle all investigations when he got caught...

http://forum.literotica.com/showpost.php?p=57754766&postcount=473
PayDay said:
http://immigration.procon.org/view.resource.php?resourceID=000844
http://www.ojjpac.org/sanctuary.asphttp://immigration.procon.org/view.resource.php?resourceID=000844
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...republicans-threaten-action-over-immigration/

So this is weird, maybe, or not:

An average of 25000 to 30000 illegals cross the border into the US per month Since 1969

In 100 months, or 8.3 continuous years, approximately 3 million will have crossed the border.

The Democrats have had the majority in government (for the most part) for Sixty Years.

So: What's weird?::
Questions:
How many votes per state does it take to win the electoral colleges?
How many votes is that, total?
How many votes did it take to win the last election? (oh wait, no one knows)
How many votes did it take to win the election before the last one?

Also, what's 30000 times 12? What's that answer mutiplied by 45?
45(12(30000))) = 16.2 million illegal immigrants since 1969.

35000 crossed the border in April, 2014
50000 crossed the border in May, 2014

There is such a problem with illegals being housed that they are publically being dropped off in other states with no form of restrictions. ASIN: "Set Free"

How do the 'Drop-off' States vote as a majority?

Maybe it's all just coincidental?
http://forum.literotica.com/showpost.php?p=51250810&postcount=398
PayDay said:
SO:: The Amnesty push for Immigrants + Immigration reform

Why is this being done? Well I went amd looked into citizenship requirements while thinking of what it would take toNaturalize a Victoria's Secret model without marrying her right away.

iKnow... I'm weird.

NEway(s):: Check this out::
http://www.uscis.gov/policymanual/HTML/PolicyManual-Volume12-PartA-Chapter2.html
US CITIZENSHIP & Immigration Services said:
Deciding to become a U.S. citizen is one of the most important decisions an immigrant can make. Naturalized U.S. citizens share equally in the rights and privileges of U.S. citizenship. U.S. citizenship offers immigrants the ability to:
-Vote in Federal elections
-Travel with a U.S. Passport
-Run for elective office where citizenship is required
-Participate on a jury
-Become eligible for federal and certain law enforcement jobs
-Obtain certain State and Federal benefits not available to noncitizens
-Obtain citizenship for minor children born abroad
-Expand and expedite their ability to bring family members to the United States

Well no wonder they have to reform the current NOT SIMPLE CAKE EATING way.

If the government cannot be fiscally responsible or diligent in it's function & bureaucracy for it's current citizens, what will dumping 18 million more into the system do?

Methinks it will break it, asif almost on purpose... yes?

Orchestrated Intent NE1? anyone? bueller? wut?

What is wrong with having to do a little work to come and live here under our Constitution?
Wouldn't the fact that someone would be willing to do the work be Proof(D) enough that they are NOT a terrorist?

The entire USCIS website, made under DHS and not HLS
http://www.uscis.gov/us-citizenship/citizenship-through-naturalization
& In Spanish:: http://www.uscis.gov/es

The USCIS Easy-Peasy Manual In Order with Public Law references
http://www.uscis.gov/policymanual/HTML/PolicyManual-Volume12.html

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) IS NOT Homeland Security Agency (HLS)...
What does that tell you(see:U)---^
 
You're insane and so is anyone who advocates immigration reform:

IT'S A FUCKING LIE. Immigration was fine until enforcement was turned into a joke by BO's executive orders.

It was not fine before he took office -- at least, W seemed to think so and tried to reform it.
 
So you read the first line and quit. Gotcha.

Oh, I glanced at the rest, but since it included utterly nonsensical crap like

Besides, BO, I know you got elected because of a flawed voting system and a fake school shooting the day of the official election tallies. Otherwise that information would be available

it did not appear to warrant a closer reading.
 
What stops the process is Barack Obama, who will only sign the Senate passed bill that was DOA in the House. Obama didn't recognize the will of the American people who represented the House majority. Nor does he respect the will of the majority who established the new majorities in the House and Senate.

Both branches represent the will of the people in different ways -- I'm sure you kept that in mind all through the W years. Or did you insist he roll over and do everything the Dems wanted from 2006/7 through 2008/9?
 
Last edited:
Yeah sure the capitol hill phone system was shut down for days and the whole plan shelved because a few right wingers were upset.:rolleyes:

No, because a lot of RWs were upset -- but still only a faction of the GOP and a minority of the total population.
 
You seem to have missed the point of that article: "Securing the border" is all but impossible, otherwise all that money spent would have secured it.

Lies and slander. You have no basis of proof for that as we have never had a secure border. Ever. And the exploitation of it is getting worse.

What will all these new people do to the current systems in government?
As in Social Security, IRS, & Electoral College?

If the government cannot be fiscally responsible or diligent in it's function & bureaucracy for it's current citizens, what will dumping 18 million more into the system do?

Methinks it will break it, asif almost on purpose... yes?
 
Lies and slander. You have no basis of proof for that as we have never had a secure border. Ever.

Well, that would seem to strengthen the argument that securing a border that long is impossible, wouldn't it? Og knows this is not the first period when there has been political demand for a secure border.

And the exploitation of it is getting worse.

Yes -- coyotes exploit it, businesses that hire undocumented workers cheap exploit it, and cynical fear-mongering RW pols exploit it. The point of immigration reform would be to do something about all that.

What will all these new people do to the current systems in government?
As in Social Security, IRS, & Electoral College?

They have all survived previous waves of expansion of the American population, from the Baby Boom on.
 
Last edited:
It’s great to see Sen. Ron Johnson, who once dumped all of his legislative staffers in order to “pivot to messaging,” get down to the critical work of lawmaking.


Starting in January.

Well then, wouldn't you agree that as a junior senator in the minority party of a Senate that was reluctant to bring things up for a vote so as not to embarrass the president, that it made sense for Sen. Johnson to focus on message rather than legislating? At least until now?
 
Well, that would seem to strengthen the argument that securing a border that long is impossible, wouldn't it? Og knows this is not the first period when there has been political demand for a secure border.

Nice twisty twisty. If it has never been secured due to political crap how can you say a secure border is impossible?

Yes -- coyotes exploit it, businesses that hire undocumented workers cheap exploit it, and cynical fear-mongering RW pols exploit it. The point of immigration reform would be to do something about all that.

So because people are exploiting it illegally and we are doing nothing about it with the existing laws we should 'reform' the system. Ha... Or we could just enforce the law? Duh?

They have all survived previous waves of expansion of the American population, from the Baby Boom on.

Psssht. The 'baby boom' was slow and steady and the systems I mentioned had yet to be manipulated into 'surplus' spending. Nice try:

311: Always an Excuse
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tO9HY-4eG1s
 
Nice twisty twisty. If it has never been secured due to political crap how can you say a secure border is impossible?

Because (from the article you linked):

HIDALGO, Texas — As Congress debates border funding and governors demand more aid to curb illegal immigration and other problems, government records show that taxpayers have spent $90 billion over 10 years to secure the US-Mexican border.

The Associated Press tallied the combined costs using White House budgets, reports obtained through Freedom of Information Act requests, and congressional transcripts.

Among the expenses:

■ Deployment of 1,200 National Guard soldiers for one year: $110 million

■ One rail cargo X-ray screening machine: $1.75 million

■ Average annual salary of a Customs and Border Protection officer: $75,000

■ Cost of a drug-searching dog: $4,500

For taxpayers footing these bills, the returns have been mixed: fewer illegal immigrants but little impact on the terrorism issue, and no stoppage of the drug supply, officials said.

If that didn't work, what could?! Of course, it did work to some extent -- "fewer illegal immigrants." Indicating that "securing the border" is no longer an urgent priority, if it ever was (unless you mean securing it against drug smuggling, which is a different matter entirely, or terrorists, which is pretty much a non-issue -- how many successful attacks on U.S. soil have there been since 9/11?). But we do still have a lot of illegal immigrants here -- discussed below.

So because people are exploiting it illegally and we are doing nothing about it with the existing laws we should 'reform' the system. Ha... Or we could just enforce the law? Duh?

Obviously we shouldn't "just enforce the law." There are anywhere from 7 to 30 million undocumented immigrants in the U.S. at present, all producing and consuming -- the economy would really miss them if they were all deported, it would be a major shock. It has been said that if you walked into the kitchen of any restaurant in L.A. and shouted "La migra!" there would be nobody left to work the evening shift. What we need to do is find some way to regularize their status so they can keep working with the protection of the same minimum-wage and other laws that protect citizen workers.

The overall economic effect of illegal immigration to the U.S. is very much a two-sided debate; there are costs and there are benefits.

Psssht. The 'baby boom' was slow and steady . . .

Compared to the immigration-influx? Stats?

. . . and the systems I mentioned had yet to be manipulated into 'surplus' spending.'

What exactly do you mean by "manipulated into 'surplus' spending'"? Did you mean to say "deficit"?
 
Well then, wouldn't you agree that as a junior senator in the minority party of a Senate that was reluctant to bring things up for a vote so as not to embarrass the president . . .

I don't think the Congressional Pubs have ever been one bit concerned not to embarrass the president at any time since Obama took office.
 
Because (from the article you linked):

If that didn't work, what could?! Of course, it did work to some extent -- "fewer illegal immigrants." Indicating that "securing the border" is no longer an urgent priority, if it ever was (unless you mean securing it against drug smuggling, which is a different matter entirely, or terrorists, which is pretty much a non-issue -- how many successful attacks on U.S. soil have there been since 9/11?). But we do still have a lot of illegal immigrants here -- discussed below.

Obviously we shouldn't "just enforce the law." There are anywhere from 7 to 30 million undocumented immigrants in the U.S. at present, all producing and consuming -- the economy would really miss them if they were all deported, it would be a major shock. It has been said that if you walked into the kitchen of any restaurant in L.A. and shouted "La migra!" there would be nobody left to work the evening shift. What we need to do is find some way to regularize their status so they can keep working with the protection of the same minimum-wage and other laws that protect citizen workers.

The overall economic effect of illegal immigration to the U.S. is very much a two-sided debate; there are costs and there are benefits.

Compared to the immigration-influx? Stats?

What exactly do you mean by "manipulated into 'surplus' spending'"? Did you mean to say "deficit"?

Lol. Excuses: How many billion is heading towards ebola bailout, how much needlessly went to banks and cars and voodoo dolls?
 
BTW, although I use the terms "illegal immigrants" and "undocumented immigrants" interchangeably, I do not really like either. People are not "illegal," and "undocumented" implies they merely forgot to fill out some paperwork and all would be well if they did, when, in fact, they might well be deported if they tried. A more accurate term would be "impermissive immigrants," since they are in the country without the required official permission; and that terminology implies nothing as to what should be done about it.
 
Back
Top