House Republican firm on immigration

WASHINGTON - The House author of a border security bill that triggered massive street protests stood firm Friday against amnesty for illegal immigrants and predicted tough negotiations with the Senate on compromise legislation.

The Senate passed its sweeping bill 62-36 Thursday after two weeks of debate and difficult votes that tested the strength of a coalition of bipartisan senators who supported the opportunity for U.S. citizenship that their bill would give most of the estimated 11 million to 12 million people who are in this country illegally.

"This will set up a very difficult House-Senate conference committee because the approaches taken by the House and Senate on this issue have been 180 degrees apart," said Rep. James Sensenbrenner, chairman of the Judiciary Committee and principal author of the more stringent House bill.

"Amnesty is wrong," he told a news conference.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060526/ap_on_go_co/immigration_60
- - -
If they can't pass this legisislation, despite controlling the House, Senate and Executive Branch, it will clearly be the fault of Bill Clinton.....

that getting the religiously insane to hate gays won't be enough to keep the house in 2006. Hating immigrants is imperative.

it would be harder to use them for slave labor, too

That subject line had me do a double take and laugh out loud. . .thanks for the morning laugh.

for lack of a compromise. The anti-illegal alien bunch see any compromise as a sign of weakness. It will then only get worse for the GOP.

No, they see it as a sell-out of the American worker and the American middle class.

It's not a sign of weakness. It's a sign they're concerned with the interests of their constituents, instead of those of Corporate America and it's unrelenting quest for still the cheaper labor provided by illegal immigrants.

Middle class and working Americans are very concerned now because Illegal Immigration Suppresses Wages

minimum payout is what, $600/month. Given the path to amnesty rewards those who have been here illegally the longest, this also implies that they are the oldest of the groups as an average. Since social security is already floundering, have the fearless "leaders" thought through the consequences on all of the native legal citizens who might be depending on social security?

But we need new workers to keep it strong.

The legislators will have government pensions; they don't care about Social Security. I fear them more than the "illegals."

boomers that are currently retiring, I personally would call that floundering, even if at this very second people are getting their benefits because the gov is borrowing money to do so. Regardless, I think it is an interesting question that I have heard only a few people asking to this point.

I personally have mixed feelings.

BTW, they are "illegals" by definition.

Does that term define you 100%?

had a heart attack and retired. So to keep my mind active I trade stocks and am moving into foreign currencies.

the goal of the GOP is to gut social security. Can you think of any better way to achieve that goal than to open the floodgates to immigrants so more can collect SS?

The Republicans have better ways to achieve their goals.

minimum.

This coming from the author of the REAL ID act, who only managed to get the unconstitutional, police state abomination passed - despite widespread resistance from both sides of the aisle - by using his pull with the majority leadership to get it attached to a must-pass appropriations bill. So yes, Mr. Sensenbrenner, we know you're barking mad, now kindly shut the fuck up.

Unfortunately he is completely untouchable electorally. There could not possibly be a more right wing district in this state than his.

Supply and demand determine the value of labor.

Allowing 10+ million people into the workforce and giving them citizenship will really pressure the middle class for decades to come.

Republicans like the Senate bill because their corporate donors profit handsomely by hiring illegals.

I don't see why we would support such a bill.

This bill should have been called the "NO ILLEGAL LEFT BEHIND BILL". Thanks to the Democracts for standing strong with the corporations and special interests. To hell with the rule of law.

Just interested.

suffer because contrary to what Bush says, they are NOT doing jobs that Americans won't do, they are doing jobs that Americans would love to do. Only 4% of illegal immigrants actually work in the fields, the bulk work in construction as subcontractors for licensed electricians, plumbers, carpenters, etc.
I have read that this influx has decreased the income of high school educated white males by 10%. The impact is much higher for white males with no high school education. On the high side, the influx of workers has not impacted the college educated group, but the outsourcing of white collar jobs to India, China, Costa Rica, and others definately has. The middle class is being squeezed on both sides.

People like me benefit as the investor class because we use money to make money and simply move the money into markets and commodities where optimal returns exist. Unfortunately, this clearly does not work for everybody. Investors always profit regardless, Bush reduces capital gains on investments and offers incentives to use money.

I don't have strong feelings about this issue either way, but I can see some clear dangers ahead. I like to keep my positions liquid so that I can move if things get bad and I never hold a position overnight.

Just thoughts.

But I've seen that thread you keep linking. I'm not imporessed.

See my comments posted on this thread
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=1291829&mesg_id=1291829

You'll see where I'm coming from.

Just wait until each of them brings in the rest of their 30 person families. America, kiss your ass goodbye. And yall are hating the crazy right wingers in the house for seeing this coming. That's the funny part. Trust me, they want immigration. They love low wage workers. But they know that the senate bill will destroy this country. Well I don't mean destroy really, I just mean in 10 years we'll be as poor as most latin American countries.

As we approach the 2006 elections, the "immigration fever" will build to a fever pitch. You won't go a day without hearing a politician spout that illegal immigrants are destroying the nation and have to be stopped. They'll assure you, promise you, that their foremost concern is securing your job and kicking out anyone who they believe doesn't belong.

Then comes the election. A week passes, then a month, and then nobody remembers the whole illegal immigration thing. They promised what? They wanted to kick who out? The people who helped to elect the Republican politicians will then go back to employing the very people who were scapegoated to pad the poll numbers, the illegal immigrants.

This entire fiasco is the "gay marriage" issue of 2006.

of the conservative base, I don't see how the House Republicans could afford to agree to any compromise before the election. Those Freepers have been up in arms over illegal immigration forever it seems.

Their hard-core base is about all the House Republicans have left at this point. And don't forget that with re-districting most of the Republican districts are deeply conservative. So it seems like a no-brainer politically for the House Republicans not to agree. It's not like they are being judged by the entire country- it's just their conservative districts.

I was just listening to a radio station in LA and this group wants Canada, Mexico and the US to be one nation. No more dollar bills, the money will be called Amero (just like in Europe, all money is the same), you can move and live in each country legally, there will be (cough, cough) one leader, everyone will be a legal citizen.

What do you think about that?