Don't Despair, Amnesty Bill Faces Another Hurdle
Focus Shifts to Cloture Vote on Thursday
By Bluey Posted in Featured Stories | Immigration — Comments (36) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
I'm sensing widespread disappointment among conservatives this afternoon in the wake of the 64-35 cloture vote on the immigration bill. I'm here to tell you not to be discouraged. An even more important vote will take place on Thursday, and there's already an indication that some of the senators who voted for amnesty today could switch in a couple of days.
There are two reasons this might happen: 1) several Democrats promised Majority Leader Harry Reid (D.-Nev.) they wouldn't embarrass him on this first vote, and 2) several Republicans wanted to have some cover in advance of Thursday's vote.
Conservatives need to continue educating their senators about the dangers of the bill. "We need to give it all we've got over the next 48 hours," one conservative ally told me. "The second cloture vote will be the most important vote of the year."
The list of the top 10 defects of the amnesty bill would be a good start. Haystack has provided a list of Republican "sell-outs" and Mark Krikorian identified on The Corner six targets: Sam Brownback, Kit Bond, Richard Burr, John Ensign, Judd Gregg and Ben Nelson.
« Republican Moderates May Walk Away From Veto Threat — Comments (17) | Top 10 Defects of the Amnesty Bill — Comments (10) »
Don't Despair, Amnesty Bill Faces Another Hurdle 36 Comments (0 topical, 36 editorial, 0 hidden) Post a comment »
We don't need six to switch. We only need five. But I agree this is crunch time.
One nation, in the courtrooms, with litigiousness and judicial activism for all.
Is that a cloture vote? We need 60.
Or is that for the passage of the bill? In that case we need 51.
Bluey:
some of the senators who voted for amnesty today could switch in a couple of days
In point of fact, of course, no Senators voted for amnesty today. No Senators even voted for the immigration bill today. The vote today was purely a vote to bring the bill back to the floor.
I recognize, in reading the comments to the Haystack piece, that this is a distinction without a difference to some people, but for those who are interested in making *informed* calls to Senate offices, it's a pretty big one.
But if you want to call people today and yell at them for being "sell outs" and voting for "amnesty" today, be my guest.
------------
[F]or by the fundamental law of Nature, man being to be preserved as much as possible, when all cannot be preserved, the safety of the innocent is to be preferred...
-John Locke
it won't be a vote for amnesty - it will be a vote to have an up or down vote.
And when people vote for the bill they won't be voting for amnesty since they don't think of it as amnesty.
All the semantics of it can be played whichever way anyone chooses.
"Semantically," as you put it, the bill is in fact not amnesty. However, insofar as we are prepared to call it amnesty, today's vote can't even semantically be stretched into a vote for "amnesty." The bill itself is not being voted on. They're not even voting to cut off debate and proceed to the real vote, which can at least arguably be called a vote for "amnesty." This is a vote to *consider* the bill.
That's a vote for the bill itself only in an alternate universe.
------------
[F]or by the fundamental law of Nature, man being to be preserved as much as possible, when all cannot be preserved, the safety of the innocent is to be preferred...
-John Locke
exactly what motivation any Republican senator might have for this bill to be reintroduced to the Senate, unless the senator(s) actually support the bill, OR they believe it to be salvageable? As Joliphant just posted - "what's the Republicans' excuse?"
______________________________
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
-Thomas Paine: The American Crisis, No. 4, 1777
It is a good thing to debate the bill and introduce the amendments. Better than do nothing. At least we'll see what everybody has to say and hopefully something good will come out of this.
I say let's give it a try and listen what the senators have to say.
After all it is an important issue and we cannot just scrap it and pretend that we don't need a solution for another 3 years.
So it's too bad that todays vote was a vote against doing that. If the Senate really wanted to debate the issues they would have killed this thing and forced the bill to go through the proper process, complete with hearings. Todays vote was a vote against debate. The next vote is scheduled for two days from now. How much debate is there going to be in that interval? Nobody has even had a chance to see the bill yet.
Whats the Republican's excuse ?
______________________________
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
-Thomas Paine: The American Crisis, No. 4, 1777
Wubbies World, MSgt, USAF (Retired):
public static void main(String[] args) {
System.out.println("An argument is a sequence of statements aimed at demonstrating the truth of an assertion.); }
Anyone who flipped out over this today needs to get a grasp of the facts and perspective in order to be useful in this big moment of activism, I think.
Run like Reagan!
To keep this in perspective, that needs to be answered.
Wubbies World, MSgt, USAF (Retired):
public static void main(String[] args) {
System.out.println("An argument is a sequence of statements aimed at demonstrating the truth of an assertion.); }
Which vote, and exactly which rule do you mean? I need to be able to check for myself in order to be sure, and vague langauge doesn't let me do so precisely. The Senate schedules a lot of similar-looking votes, and a lot of rules, so I need to be ABSOLUTELY SURE before I answer you definitively.
Run like Reagan!
...that there is another vote on Thursday. Because of that vote, we should not panic or hyperventilate. I am good with that reasoning.
However, there was a post here, and as soon as I post this I will respond with another comment to link it, but that post went on to describe a little used Senate rule to fragment a bill into smaller amendments as a way to bypass the cloture vote. It was used by the Senator from Oklahoma last year (I'm brain dumping his name right now)to challenge a bunch of earmarks. The bridge to nowhere was one of them.
The post went on to describe how this "clay pigeon" rule could be used to get this bill pasted a failed cloture vote.
Let me go find it and I will add a comment here with the link as soon as I find it.
Wubbies World, MSgt, USAF (Retired):
public static void main(String[] args) {
System.out.println("An argument is a sequence of statements aimed at demonstrating the truth of an assertion.); }
My understanding was that from here, the Senate will rush through a list of pre-selected amendments to vote on, and then will try to move to pass the bill. But to do that, they'll have to invoke cloture, because there are certainly some Republicans who will try to prevent that.
I THINK it's the plan to do that by Thursday.
But all I can find on a quick internet search on 'clay pigeon' are a few low-content articles on some trick Sen. Coburn tried on an appropriations bill. Nowhere was it said what rule was used, so I have no idea if it can be used here.
Run like Reagan!
The story was in a comment, but it linked to a story in the AP.
Under the tentative plan, Reid as early as Friday would launch his target - an amendment encompassing all 22 proposals - and shoot it into its component pieces. The Senate would then vote on ending debate on the immigration measure, which would take 60 votes and limit discussion of the bill to 30 more hours. After that interval, all 22 amendments would have to be voted on, with little opportunity for foes to interfere.
Now I ask again, will the clay pigeon get triggered on Thursday? If so, then hyperventilating today might be in order. I just want to find out first.
Wubbies World, MSgt, USAF (Retired):
public static void main(String[] args) {
System.out.println("An argument is a sequence of statements aimed at demonstrating the truth of an assertion.); }
My suggestion is to skip the whole clay pigeon bit and wait for the amended bill to come up for final passage. I haven't read the amendments that Reid and McConnell have agreed to allow, but I'm thinking the bill will still be terrible afterward.
If it is then the time to get worked up is when cloture comes up for the final, amended bill.
Sure, we should start lobbying NOW. But we should do so with the assumption that the Rs are on our side, because they haven't done anything substantitive yet to cross us.
Run like Reagan!
other than colluding in this process designed to subvert the normal Senate procedure and remove the rights of the majority of Senate Republicans to interfere with this bills progression. If you overlook those piddling little details then sure, the R's have been fine. Good old Jon Kyl has been downright heroic. Why, just think of all the wonderful things that are in this bill thanks his his heroic efforts. Go ahead, it won't take but a second.
...thinking along the same lines. Yes, we need to be lobbying them now, more than ever, but I am not ready to start crossing them off my Christmas list yet.
Gosh this sure is exasperating!
Wubbies World, MSgt, USAF (Retired):
public static void main(String[] args) {
System.out.println("An argument is a sequence of statements aimed at demonstrating the truth of an assertion.); }
here is a link (it is a pdf):
http://truthlaidbear.com/immbill_amendments_0626.pdf
"We should scrap this “comprehensive” immigration bill and the whole debate until the government can show the American people that we have secured the borders -- or at least made great headway."
Fred Thompson
It's not unreasonable for conservatives to distrust the GOP (greatly.) It does seem after all, that aside from the presence of Chappaquidick Ted, the prime movers and high profile advocates of this massive change to our immigration system all seem to be Republicans.
McCain...Kyl...Lindsey Graham...Bush.
If those with conservative political leanings overreact to every event surrounding this sham "reform" it's due to the way in which it was conceived and brought forth - with all the attendant game-playing and arcane rules exploitation that seem to follow this abomination every step of the way.
Most conservatives, and most of the average-joe, non-ideological voters I come into contact with believe that the fix is in and this "immigration reform" will continue to proceed through congress and ultimately end up on G. Bush's desk in perfect defiance of the will of the masses and in perfect accord with the interests of the very few.
This is the perfect time for fence sitting conservative (Republican) voters to get involved. It is these same riled up conservative voters that will hopefully end Lindsey Graham's time in the Senate in '08 after all...
I just wish people would understand the difference between cloture on the motion to proceed, and cloture on passage!
Run like Reagan!
I might not have. I just learned there was such a thing as a cloture to open debate when they brought this bill up before Memorial Day. Before that, I thought it was only used to close debate.
Any red or purple state Dem is a target. That means Jim Webb, Sherrod Brown, Ben Nelson, Bingaman, Pryor, etc. All these people were iffy on cloture and could switch if they don't get the amendments they want. As for R's, Bond, Burr, Ensign and Gregg seem most likely, perhaps John Warner, but even Trent Lott has indicated he might not vote for cloture on the final bill (Graham is probably a lost cause though). This is far from over.
By the way, if you're having trouble following the procedural ins and outs of all of this, the best website to explain it all is noamaskew.blogspot.com - Keep up the fight.
Here are the three press releases for yesterday (the day of the vote to reopen immigration bill) that are highlighted at his home page:
06/26/07 McConnell Secures Over $373 Million in Funding for Kentucky in FY’08 Energy & Water Appropriations Bill
06/26/07 McConnell Gets Committee to Approve His Requests for $5.8 Million in Funding for Kentucky
06/26/07 Senate Republicans Succeed in Protecting Employees’ Right to Secret Ballots
Maybe if enough of the $4.4B that was added to the Senate immigration bill gets spent in KY they've got his vote. I'm sure if you look at many Senators' websites you see similar things, but do we really expect these guys to push any sort of reforms when our leader has two press releases about bringing home pork and none about the immigration bill he played a critical role in reopening? This is discouraging.
Here is a comment from the first one (FY’08 Energy & Water Appropriations bill) and a high level summary of what it includes. Each of these headings has several bullets under it like in the list for the second release.
McConnell used his seniority on the Appropriations Committee to direct funding to the following Kentucky projects:
PADUCAH GASEOUS DIFFUSION PLANT ($133.4 MILLION)
WOLF CREEK DAM ($55.1 MILLION)
UNIVERSITY OF LOUISVILLE ($3.4 MILLION)
UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY ($2 MILLION of which UK will receive a portion)
U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS ($182 MILLION)
Here is a comment from the second one (FY’08 Commerce, Justice and Science Appropriations bill) and a summary of what it includes:
McConnell used his seniority on the Appropriations Committee to direct funding to the following Kentucky projects:
• $1.3 million for the University of Louisville Rejuvenating Injured Tissues for Enhanced Wound Healing Project.
• $500,000 for the University of Louisville Center for Child Abuse Assessment and Prevention.
• $850,000 for the Louisville Regional Computer Forensics Lab.
• $750,000 for the Western Kentucky University Environmental Monitoring Network.
• $275,000 for the Barren County Sheriff’s Department Communication Improvement Project.
• $150,000 for the City of Murray Police Department.
• $250,000 for the Ohio County Sheriff’s Department Mobile Data Terminal Installation Project.
• $750,000 for the Henderson County Sheriff’s Department.
• $500,000 for the University of Kentucky Legal Education Access Program.
• $500,000 for the Northern Kentucky University Crime Prevention through Internet Security Solutions Project.
Mitch McConnell is not 'getting far too buddy-buddy for a minority leader': he is following the lead of the President - who is still, despite the desires of a good number of people reading this, both the head of the country and the Party to which McConnell belongs - on a controversial Senate bill. He is also trying to reconcile not only the desires of his own caucus (both pro and con), but also past GOP rhetoric about how we like to see proposed bills come to a vote in a timely fashion. None of this can be simply ignored, again contra the desires of a good number of people reading this.
I am not saying that you or anybody else can't call for his resignation from the leadership over this. But there are reasons why the new Congress has done precisely two things* this session, and one of them is Mitch's ability to tie Harry Reid up in procedural knots. I'm not ready to toss him over this.
Moe
PS: You may safely assume that I have heard of all the polls that indicate that I am in the minority when it comes to immigration reform; and that I am, ah, sadly mistaken in my beliefs / motivations / priorities. I think that I would still be unwilling to toss the SML over this even if I was taking a harder line on immigration, but obviously there's no real way that I can prove it.
The Fuzzy Puppy of the VRWC. I've been usurped!
*Jack, and sh*t.
He's caught in a squeeze play because Bush is pushing this bill while most of us are not. A big part of his job is to help get the president's agenda passed. He held the troops (except Arlen) together yesterday and killed the union bill and also led the way on reopening the immigration bill, both things Bush wanted.
But at the same time he's got to use Senate rules to tie things up in knots where needed, and so far he seems mostly unwilling to do that. The process used on this bill is rubbish yet he's going along with it. And Reid and Leahy are screwing us left and right on judges without paying any price - there are at least four COA nominees that the Dems have been sitting on for months. Is he EVER going to put his foot down on this?
When I refer to him buddying up with Sen. Reid, I do NOT refer to support for the bill. Yes, clearly, by doing that he's working with the President.
However according to Sen. Reid, the only reason he felt he could get away with choking off the right of Senators in Committees and on the floor to amend this bill up for consideration, is that Sen. McConnell agreed to do so.
Wouldn't you agree that amendments are the way the minority gets heard after the majority proposes a bill?
Run like Reagan!
But that means the other 35 have to be thanked and kept in line, and pressure applied to those who need it. This is the crunch time.