The Great Immigration Ruse
How can the Senate vote on a bill which has not yet been written?
By Jeff Emanuel Posted in Congress | Ethics | Immigration — Comments (6) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
Note: For RedState's official position on this issue, please refer to this post from The Directors.
Early this week, RedState's Rob Bluey broke the news that key members of the Senate, representing both parties, were cloistered in a dark back room, conspiring with the White House to draw up “comprehensive immigration reform” legislation which would be sprung both on the Senate as a whole, and on the American populace, late this week, with little or no warning or time for debate before it was voted on early next week.
Less than 24 hours later, key provisions of the forthcoming Senate bill leaked to the public via RedState, again thanks to the stellar work of Mr. Bluey. These details included the so-called “Amnesty” provisions, which, through the issuance of “‘Z’ visas,” would allow “aliens, along with their dependents, ...to legally remain in the United States under certain conditions for an indefinite period of time, even if they chose not to pursue the so called ‘pathway to citizenship’.”
On Thursday afternoon, the bill was reportedly released to the Senate, and politicians, pundits, and candidates came out of the woodwork to issue statements about its contents. “I strongly oppose today’s bill going through the Senate,” said GOP presidential candidate Mitt Romney, who called it “the wrong approach.” Massachusetts Senator Ted Kennedy boasted that “the agreement” was “the best possible chance we will have in years to secure our borders, bring millions of people out of the shadows and into the sunshine of America.”
Read on . . .
President Bush lauded the proposal which he said “will help enforce our borders, but equally importantly, ...will treat people with respect,” and the White House communications office sent out a fact sheet touting this successful “bipartisan agreement on comprehensive immigration reform.” South Carolina Senator Jim DeMint disagreed, saying “the little we do know about the bill is troubling.”
“This rewards people who broke the law with permanent legal status, and puts them ahead of millions of law-abiding immigrants waiting to come to America,” DeMint continued. “I don't care how you try to spin it, this is amnesty.” Despite this, though, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV), appearing at a news conference with Senator John McCain (R-AZ) and others, expressed concern over “undue limitations on family immigration” included in the bill, as well as other provisions.
Others took a more measured approach. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) called the agreement “is far stronger than the bill the Senate produced last year,” but stipulated that border security and “a real security infrastructure” were “requirements for [his] support of any legislation.” Georgia Senator Johnny Isakson said in a release that he would "reserve judgment on supporting the final bill until the debate is complete," but that "at a minimum the bill must include [a] border security “trigger” prohibiting implementation of a temporary, probationary work permit program until the Department of Homeland Security certifies to the President and to the Congress that the border security provisions in the immigration legislation are fully funded and operational."
Former Tennessee Senator Fred Thompson, posting right here on RedState, called on Washington to “scrap...the whole debate until we can convince the American people that we have secured the borders or at least have made great headway.”
The media – print, online, and television – were swarming Thursday afternoon with this and other commentary on the sudden immigration legislation. However, amidst the debate and the rush to support or condemn specific provisions of the bill (or the bill as a whole), one very key aspect of this issue was completely overlooked:
There was no actual immigration bill.
Multiple Senate sources confirmed that, despite Senator Kennedy and others’ original statements, as of 10:00 PM eastern daylight time Thursday night, “no bill presently exists and probably won't until tomorrow at the earliest” because “the lawyers are still behind closed doors putting it together.” Senate sources also confirmed that “the bill probably will not be online [and available to the public] in its final form until after the Senate has voted on it.” Furthermore, even Senators involved in the process itself offered contradictory reports on its contents. For example, at the same time that John Kyl (R-AZ) was on one news channel praising the bill’s elimination of chain migration – a key provision he himself had championed – Reid was telling another network that that provision would not be in the bill’s final draft.
Once completed, the proposed legislation will reportedly be up to 1,000 pages long, and legislators will have a mere two days to read the proposal before it comes to the floor on Monday. Even more disquieting is the fact that the Senate Judiciary Committee will apparently be completely bypassed in this process, with the bill coming to a vote at the beginning of next week without ever going through the process of committee review and hearings.
Proceeding in such a hasty, guarded fashion reflects poorly on the intentions of those crafting it in such secrecy at the very least, as well as on the potential legislation itself, and such backroom dealings speak volumes more about the open, ethical nature of this Congress than has already been demonstrated to this point. Unfortunately, several Republicans, including Senate “maverick” (and co-author of last year’s McCain-Kennedy immigration bill) John McCain, have gone along with this process willingly – as has the administration itself, which has long sought such “comprehensive” reform, as opposed to the border security- and- enforcement-first approach many conservatives in Congress and in the citizenry have favored.
The provisions of this “agreement” aside, the fact that so many statements have been made when such an important piece of legislation has not even been completely written yet – as well as the fact that, even when completed, the bill is poised to be rushed through the Senate, and only made available to the public after its passage – should sound alarm bells in the head of every citizen and lawmaker who prefers honest, open government to backroom dealings and votes on bills which have not even been read before they hit the floor for debate. This is a prime example of the latter, and the state of affairs it represents is, unfortunately, becoming a hallmark of the 110th Congress. The fact that the administration, along with a number of Senate Republicans, is so deeply complicit in this affair clearly shows where some key individuals’ priorities really lie. Regrettably, those priorities are neither in tune with the American populace, nor with the spirit of our Republic, which demands open, honest, and accountable government – regardless of the subject of the legislation in question – in order to function as it should.
« Bank of America's Bailout Bill — Comments (13) | A radically common-sense idea — Comments (10) »
The Great Immigration Ruse 6 Comments (0 topical, 6 editorial, 0 hidden) Post a comment »
I think one thing we've all learned is that you get good results when you act in haste and secrecy while asking people to vote on laws they haven't had time to read yet.
They that are with us are more than they that are against us.
The internet has made it possible for these leaks to get out and the leakers on our side to be effective. Without it, we wouldn't have known about this until it was sitting on the presidents desk waiting for his signature. Any newspaper or tv station that got the story would have quashed it. Heck they might have ratted out the leaker.
We would have all been left asking why our taxes were going up to pay for more social services.
______________________________
"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
The picture of Johnny and Saxby with Ted Kennedy that's all over the media sites only adds to it.
Our collective attention has been focused on Iraq. We even thought that our leaders were as focused.
Yet this bill becomes a matter of extreme urgency. Why?
If the Senators recent agreement was truly "reform," could not the agreement withstand a meaningful deliberation? The fact that the Senate is rushing to vote on it too quickly, with only a farcical debate that can not pass a simple smell test can only lead to one conclusion.