« This War is Right | Main | Underpants, lies, and statistics »

The Senate Votes for Cloture on the Immigration Bill

The Senate managed to get cloture for the immigration bill that the vast majority of Americans don't want. What happened to the "will of the people" that Harry Reid repeated ad infinitum when he wanted to retreat from Iraq. Suddenly, when it comes to the immigration bill, the will of the people doesn't seem to matter anymore. The Republicans who didn't sell out but, instead, maintained their principled positions against the bill managed to temporarily stall its movement forward. From the AP:

The Senate resurrected the immigration bill that could legalize millions of unlawful immigrants Tuesday, but the delicate compromise faces the same threats that derailed it earlier this month.


The White House and Republican and Democratic architects of the bill hailed the crucial test vote that revived the legislation, and they predicted approval of the measure by week's end.

Their victory was fleeting, though, giving way just hours later to stalling tactics by GOP foes. Conservatives succeeded in delaying until Wednesday consideration of a package of amendments designed to pave the way for a final vote on the bill.

They did so by using Senate rules to insist that the entire 373-page package be read aloud, relenting only when Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., agreed to postpone action on the amendments.

That was just the first in a series of formidable obstacles lying in the bill's path. The Senate is slated to consider 26 amendments, mostly from senators seeking to change key elements of the bill, that have the potential to either sap its support or draw new backers.

After that, the legislation must overcome another make-or-break vote as early as Thursday. And there is no guarantee that it will ultimately attract enough support to pass.

Republicans and Democrats alike are deeply conflicted over the bill, which also would create a temporary worker program, strengthen border security and institute a new system for weeding out illegal immigrants from workplaces.

Masking those divides, the Senate voted 64-35 to revive the bill, which stalled earlier this month when it failed to muster the 60 votes it needed to scale procedural hurdles.

The House will probably kill the bill anyway, so the Senate's cloture vote may turn out to be an exercise in futility. Nonetheless, Bryan at Hot Air tells us where things need to go from here:

So where do we go from here, over the next few days? We have to fight our own party leadership and kill the amnesty bill. This time we have to make sure it's dead. We have to fight our own president. We'll have to field candidates to challenge senators like Lindsey Graham from the right, if for no other reason than to remind them that we still have a vote for them to ignore. And we have to do it before the Democrats solidify their hold on Congress next year, and probably take the White House, and move to re-instate the Fairness Doctrine to squelch debate and criticism of them. That's the coming battle after the 2008 elections: Whether the free speech environment we've enjoyed for the past 20 years will remain free or not.

So the pro-amnesty Republicans are fostering a horrible ill will between themselves, the conservative base, and the American people, and for what? A bill that will probably die in the House anyway. What a complete waste of time and energy.


TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
/cgi-bin/mt-tb.cgi/22082.

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference The Senate Votes for Cloture on the Immigration Bill:

» Unpartisan.com Political News and Blog Aggregator linked with Immigration bill advances in Senate

» Bill's Bites linked with 2006.06.27 "No Illegal Left Behind" Roundup

» Techography linked with Amnesty Bill back on the Table

Comments (38)

A perfect example of why we... (Below threshold)

A perfect example of why we need term limits. Those Senators, including one in particular from Arizona, have been there so long they forget what life is like in "flyover country."

I emailed my Senators and told them that if they votes yes on this bill at any stage, they can count on me NOT to vote for them even if they're running for second assistant dogcatcher of Mayberry.

The folks at Hot Air have a... (Below threshold)
Jim:

The folks at Hot Air have an awesome video that presents a great idea for how to get our Senators to listen.

We should simply speak their language!

Do not count on this bill b... (Below threshold)
jdavenport:

Do not count on this bill being killed in the house.

Instead, the senate and white house want it so much they will allow anything to be attached to it. Like HUGE pork and other crap.

Get it through your heads t... (Below threshold)
kim:

Get it through your heads that Spanish is a highly accented regional variant of English, and get it through your legislature a better law.
=========================

Makes me wonder just why, w... (Below threshold)
JLawson:

Makes me wonder just why, when public sentiment seems SO set against this bill, that they're trying to push it through. Who's got them by the short & curlies on this that they'll risk losing the next election? This won't be forgotten, not at all.

There are so many takes of ... (Below threshold)
Robert the Original:

There are so many takes of this. Does it mean?

1) There is a deal and the Bill will pass?

2) Some more temp. stuff and negotiating?

3) Pork is flying about?

Isn't there several third p... (Below threshold)
Scrapiron:

Isn't there several third party candidates we can put in office in 08? Someone that both major parties of today can back (even if they are idiots, they can't be worse than the current retards) to teach the wimps now in congress a hard lesson. I know I'll never vote for anyone who voted for Amnesty. I'll vote for the third, fourth or fifth party candidate.

A perfect example ... (Below threshold)
John in CA:
A perfect example of why we need term limits.

Of all the reforms I would like to see in elections, this is one I don't like.

We have term limits in CA. Doesn't help much at all. All they do is serve their term limit in one office, then move onto get elected in another office. Move from the assambly to state senate to state treasurer to Lt. Governor, etc.

If I have a legislator that I'm happy with, who is doing a good job, why should I have my choice limited?

One fatality of CA term limits was Tom McClintock, a state senator from the San Diego area (not my state senator). He was term limited out of office. A rock ribbed conservative. Railed against growing budgets, state entitlements, all of it. But, the people of San Diego lost a very good state senator, not because they were tired of him, but because he got termed out. He wasn't just a good senator for San Diego, he was a good senator for all of CA's conservatives.

He ran for Lt. Governor, but lost, in large part because the jelly spined Arnold would not strongly endorse him. Arnold was too scared of alienating the liberals who were going to vote for him. McClintock being Lt. Governor would have positioned him well for a solid run at the Governor's Mansion in 2010. So, now we've lost a good state senator, and a good chance for a solid conservative as governor.

I just notified Warner (RIN... (Below threshold)
Scrapiron:

I just notified Warner (RINO Va) that the local republicans will thank him after they lose all county offices in Nov, and they will lose. Enough people want to pi** on Warner to insure that.

ok......everyone take a dee... (Below threshold)
Knightbrigade:

ok......everyone take a deep breath and exhale...................


64-35 today was for keeping things OPEN for debate. Some who are against this disaster of a bill voted to keep debating to try and see if they could CHANGE some things for the better, and give MORE time to expose the crap that is this bill.

Come Thursday all we need to do is swing (5) votes back...................Pretty decent sources say we GOT the votes to end this sh*t.
Cross your fingers and TRY to relax........IF and I do mean (IF) we lose and this bill goes to the House, raise HOLY HELL.......and knock their sox off!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

While echoing John in CA on... (Below threshold)
Rovin:

While echoing John in CA on term limits, this is only a portion of what could further fracture an already fragile party. The left has got to be salavitating over this division, while Bush and many others heed nothing short of denial of the wishes of a majority electorate.

And again, no one cares to take the time to do this right------just pass it and pat eachothers backs seems to be the terms of the day. Two days of "porking" up this bill is like throwing fuel on the fire.

"Not one dime" doesn't even seem to resinate with this trillion dollar give-away run by the worst of any bureaucracy.

ok......everyone t... (Below threshold)
John in CA:
ok......everyone take a deep breath and exhale...................,

KB, all in all, I'm not really upset about today's cloture vote. I'm willing to let them work on this bill as long as it doesn't get passed looking anything like it does now. I doubt that can happen. Illegal immigration is something that has to be addressed, it just can't be addressed with amnesty.

I'm more pissed with the coterie of Senators who tried to ram it down our throats, and the ones who are squawking about the resistance from the voters.

The longer this bill is debated, the longer it stays in the news and the more aware people are of the problem.

As mad as we are at some of the Republican Senators who connived with Teddy Kennedy, at least they got us to a starting point. Two and half years ago, President Bush was pushing for Social Security reform. Remember, the g-d democratics wouldn't even address SS if personal savings accounts were on the table. They, and their PR wing, the driveby media, demagogued the issue to death. But, the demos never once sat down to try to hammer out a starting point on an issue that is of paramount importance to the future of this nation.

I always marvel at commenta... (Below threshold)
rob:

I always marvel at commentators like Kim who are so offended that politicians don't heed the will of the majority of the people on issues they agree with like this, yet treat he majority of Americans like children who don't understand the complexities of the world when they say they want America out of Iraq.

The vast majority of Americans also wans universal healthcare. where is the indignation on that issue?

Speak for yourself re Unive... (Below threshold)
JLawson:

Speak for yourself re Universal Health Care, Rob. The concept is far more attractive than the actuality.

I'd rather see tax rebates for private insurance, having lived under the military health care system for a decade. It's fine, as long as you're healthy and don't need anything FAST. Want to wait three months to see an optometrist for contacts? A year or more for a hernia operation? There's already plenty of stories out of Canada where waitlists for what's seen as simple procedures here in the US are months long.

I'll gladly go for the idea of private isurance rebates - I don't want to see a monolithic health care that's as responsive as, say, the Post Office when it comes to customer complaints. ("I'm sorry, but near as we can tell your artifical hip got put in someone in Omaha. We're ordering another one for you, but don't expect it for at least six months.")

It's amazing to me that people want to toss health care on the government, when there's so many other things that it doesn't do well. You want a medical system that's as well-funded and comprehensive as the Border Patrol? Is there some indication you can even MAKE a health care system that can suddenly ramp up and take care of 350+ million people and provide them ALL with what THEY would consider decent health care?

Tax rebates for private insurance, yes. Universal health care? Thinking about it - no way.

Good thread derail, by the way. Got me into it good and proper...

rob, that is a red herring.... (Below threshold)
WildWillie:

rob, that is a red herring. Stay on topic.

The topic is why would the rebublican senators cause ill will with their base for a bill that will not pass? A very interesting question. What I think is congress, both sides, needs to fix Social Security. In a very short time the baby boomers are retiring and SS will not survive. So, the politicians need to get more people to pay in. If you legalize immigrants, they and their employers have to pay SS. Just a thought. Nothing else makes sense. ww

I always marvel at commenta... (Below threshold)
Rovin:

I always marvel at commentators who refuse to believe that there is a world-wide califate who's soul purpose is to brutally end our way of life, and if/when we pull out of Iraq they will just fade away into never-never land. What part about the statements of "death to the west" by Bin laden and al-Zawahiri don't some commenters understand?

And, as for universal health care-----I'm all for it, only if it is totally privately funded. Unfortunatly, government funded and controlled UHC systems are a joke in other nations that have attempted to provide total care to the masses.

But there are some commenters that believe that it is the governments responsibility to supply and control all of our needs and that's a dependency many care not to embrace.

This is frightening. I am ... (Below threshold)
Judith:

This is frightening. I am a chaotic person. When starting a serious undertaking, I manage to put all kinds of smaller obstacles in the way of achieving my main objective. WE ARE AT WAR. Watching c-span, I realize it is easier to handle the immigration problem (a serious undertaking....but WE ARE AT WAR), then do something about OUR BEING AT WAR. I watch the dems get all hyped up about global warming, health care and immigration and ignore terrorism and 9/11. The pubbies have decided to join them in this alternative universe because BEING AT WAR is just to hard to handle. God help us.

This bill should was dead, ... (Below threshold)
kevino:

This bill should was dead, and now it's back. It should have been killed again, yesterday, but it wasn't. And this is alarming - alarming for the Left and the Right and all of us in between. This is one party rule, ladies and gentlemen.

We, the American people, have numerous reasons to not want this bill. The polling data on this is perfectly clear, and the more people find out about the details, the worse the polling gets. This is a bill that was, quite literally, cooked up in back rooms, never really discussed, and is being rammed down the American people's collective throats by powerful people in both parties. The fix is in, and Washington will go all out to pass this bill no matter what the peasants think.

Paul Weyrich said it very well:

In all of the years I have been [in Washington] I never have known a time when the establishment really wants something that the establishment cannot obtain it. And the establishment really wants this bill.

I'll tell what is worrisome... (Below threshold)
kim:

I'll tell what is worrisome and that is the energy about this immigration business and the fact that no demagogue has channeled it yet. Yet.

Sometimes, I feel sorry for the willfully unassimilable.
============================

Pere Ubu, ahoy.=====... (Below threshold)
kim:

Pere Ubu, ahoy.
==========

Wild Willie has a point, to... (Below threshold)
Matt:

Wild Willie has a point, to a degree. One of the reasons for this big push for legalization and amnesty by the government is to convert the 12-20 million illegal aliens into instant taxpayers. Voila' you save Social Security.

Small Fly in the ointment though. If the border and unchecked illegal immigration isn't stopped first, the 12-20mil already here lose there jobs as soon as they become "legal." There is no incentive for an employer to retain an employee that will cost him more if he can readily replace him with an illegal that will cost the employer less.

The upside, is the fact that the newly legalized, newly unemployed will require entitlement programs, and could possibly be more inclined to vote for the party that takes care of them.

kevino's citing of Weyrich ... (Below threshold)
bryanD:

kevino's citing of Weyrich are words to consider alright.

In that vein, Gibson on FOX(!) Radio has come out of the SPP closet. Acknowledged the corridor from Mexico to Canada at the behest of the Chinese (Our Creditors), best known as the Trans-Texas Corridor. (Cloture vote coincidence?)

Nothing new to me (it's hiding in plain sight), but I think with the Cloture vote's small hurdle crossed, the globalists are starting to drool. They can taste that New World Order souffle! And a Bushbotic personality floating the thing is no accident.

Of course, Gibson said our sovereignty will not be abridged. (Why would he think WE think our sovereignty would be abridged?)

No coincidence, bryanD.... (Below threshold)
jdavenport:

No coincidence, bryanD.

And our sovereighty will be abridged. New World Order, for sure.

We are at a dangerous junction. We need to stop this bill.

Matt and Wild Willie:... (Below threshold)
kevino:

Matt and Wild Willie:

These workers won't save Social Security because there aren't enough of them to make a difference.

Why would Republicans want this bill?
The main reasons are:
1. Many large corporations have been violating the law by hiring illegals for years, and they want to get away with it. If the day ever comes that real enforcement takes place, they are in big trouble.
2. Big business sees an opportunity to push up the supply of labor and not just lowest-level jobs. (Look at Bill Gates' statements on the need to get more visas to bring in IT professionals.) An increase in the supply means that wages will be depressed and profits will increase.
3. Reductions in real wages means more that just good profits. Big business sees a thrid-world labor force inside the US as a way to keep ahead in a global economy.
4. Republican political experts see illegal aliens voting today (illegally) and will certainly be voting if they get citizenship. They want to suck up to this voting block or at least not offend this voting block to stay competitive.

A vote that continues debat... (Below threshold)

A vote that continues debate on the immigration bill is a victory for opponents of the bill, not supporters. Cloture, or ending debate, when approved means the end of a filibuster, that the Senate could then vote for the bill itself, something opponents would prefer to prevent.

I am having difficulty finding the exact form of the vote that occurred yesterday. But it does not appear to have been cloture.

Robin, <a href="http://sena... (Below threshold)

Robin, here is the roll call, straight from the Senate website.

The title: "On the Cloture Motion (Motion to Invoke Cloture on the Motion to Proceed to Consider S.1639)"

The reason so many people are up in arms about this is that this bill would be dead again if this vote had failed.

Not to mention that some of the back-room arm twisters just might have said, "okay, you can vote no on the first vote, because that's the one that everyone is watching, as long as you vote yes on the others." So we may have just tossed away our best hope of killing this bill.

But, hey, we gotta make sure the rich RINOs in the northeast have their maids and chauffeurs, right?

S. 1639 began in a b... (Below threshold)
Who's John Galt?:

S. 1639 began in a backroom and it will be adapted in a backroom. Unless those against it really start screaming, it will become law. There are so many deals flying on this one that congress has become deaf to the bill's opponents and the real issues associated with this POS legislation. The decibels have to rise. Go to Roy Beck's site at http://www.numbersusa.com and send some free faxes to your congressmen. Consider donating a few bucks to the cause. Don't sit down and don't shut up.

John, they've been getting ... (Below threshold)

John, they've been getting tons of faxes, calls, and emails. They're ignoring them. One more isn't gonna do much, in my honest opinion.

The only thing we can do is remember this and vote those suckers out of office the next chance we get. Of course, by then the damage will be done by the amnesty they seem bound and determined to shove down our throats.

Welcome to Mexamerica.

C-C-G:I disagree. ... (Below threshold)
kevino:

C-C-G:

I disagree. There are a small number of Senators, all of them Republican, who have switched votes to make this possible. One of them is my Senator, Judd Gregg. One the one hand, he's a moron who doesn't understand Civics 101. However, he is vain individual who dearly loves being a senator. If people in NH call him and explain why they oppose this bill and how they intend to work against him when he goes for re-election, it may work. Now, he won't understand WHY you oppose it, but he will understand the threat. He switched his vote once, and he may switch it again.

After all, if Judd Gregg switched votes because of a change in the wind, what do you think he'll do if he thinks the wind direction changed again?

(202) 224-3324 home office, Washington, D.C.
(603) 622-7979 Manchester
(603) 577-3823 Nashua

The big danger in the vote-them-out-of-office-next-time plan is that the GOP power-brokers will back Gregg, no serious primary challenge will take place, and then the argument will be that Gregg is better that the Dhimmicrat. Besides, I'm not prepared to let this abomination pass without a fight.

I'm not saying I will vote ... (Below threshold)

I'm not saying I will vote for the Donkey... I'll either not vote or write in Mickey Mouse before I ever vote for anyone that's supported this bill.

C-C-G:I'll vote fo... (Below threshold)
kevino:

C-C-G:

I'll vote for the Dhimmicrat, but then again I'm a Libertarian. I vote for whoever will promote and defend individual rights best. This shows that our Republican form of government is hopelessly broken. My right to representative government is being undermined. Senators Lott, McCain, et. al. want "government of the Elite, by the Elite, and for the Elite." And I'm not alone. Not too long ago polls showed about 30% of Americans were Republicans and 30% Democrats. Recent polls show real movement to 25% Republican and 35% Dhimmicrat. That shift will take years to overcome as party loyalty is hard to change.

Dhimmicrats don't believe i... (Below threshold)

Dhimmicrats don't believe in individual rights, they believe in group rights. The individual is to be completely controlled by the state. Just read Marx... and I don't mean Groucho.

As this event shows there i... (Below threshold)
kevino:

As this event shows there isn't a bit of difference between the two parties: both are willing to sell us out for their own ends. Guys like Senators Lott, McCain, or Gregg don't respect you or your rights.

I give you Jeffrey Snyder:

The liberal elite know that they are philosopher-kings. They know that the people simply cannot be trusted; that they are incapable of just and fair self-government; that left to their own devices, their society will be racist, sexist, homophobic, and inequitable -- and the liberal elite know how to fix things. They are going to help us live the good and just life, even if they have to lie to us and force us to do it. And they detest those who stand in their way.

This episode is a direct rupudiation of Republican principles. And I don't mean GOP principles: this is a direct attack on the basic functions of the Republic. After this, anything is possible.

By the way, for those that ... (Below threshold)
kevino:

By the way, for those that missed it, Mark Steyn reflected on this:

I have no serious expectations of Senators these days, but I would like them at the very least to try and sound a little less like the plump complacent emirs of the one-party-state of Incumbistan. Trent Lott fails even that test.

I've noticed that Glenn Reynolds and other commentators are running with the "Incumbistan" label. And their right, of course. Most of the idiots that are pushing for this will not suffer any fallout from it.

Just read Marx... ... (Below threshold)
John in CA:
Just read Marx... and I don't mean Groucho.

To paraphrase Ronaldus Magnus Reagan, "Communists are people who have read Marx; anti-communists are people who understand Marx."

Guys like Senators... (Below threshold)
Guys like Senators Lott, McCain, or Gregg don't respect you or your rights.

That's why they're called RINOs.

What is wrong with enforcin... (Below threshold)
todd:

What is wrong with enforcing the laws we already have on the books to deal with this? I am all for immigration reform but close and enforce the border first.

You need to repair the levees before you can take care of the water that got in. We saw how well the government took care of that issue. What is God's name is supposed to make us believe that this time they will really close the borders.

Maybe the push is the timing. We are about to have a housing crash with foreclosed properties nationwide. what better way to cover the bases than allow a couple million people access to all that cheap property.

As for me I have a Ron Paul Revolution sticker on my car. I don't believe he will be the next President but I hope he will get people to talk about some real issues that are vital to saving this country. Fiscal Policy, Trade, Federal Reserve, Taxes, Healthcare, Immigration...just a few to start with. He is portrayed as a kook by the media but listen to his values. If you want the good days of Reagan back you should give Dr. Paul a listen.

Write your "representatives." This country was supposed to be governed by the people and for the people. The people need to be involved. If you haven't written and called you have no right to complain.

todd, Paul's a truther. Th... (Below threshold)
kim:

todd, Paul's a truther. These days that means 'kook'. He may be able to construct lovely political scenarios, but his attitude about 9/11 means to me that he cannot evaluate and judge data.
====================================




Advertisements









rightads.gif

beltwaybloggers.gif

insiderslogo.jpg

mba_blue.gif

Follow Wizbang

Follow Wizbang on FacebookFollow Wizbang on TwitterSubscribe to Wizbang feedWizbang Mobile

Contact

Send e-mail tips to us:

[email protected]

Fresh Links

Credits

Section Editor: Maggie Whitton

Editors: Jay Tea, Lorie Byrd, Kim Priestap, DJ Drummond, Michael Laprarie, Baron Von Ottomatic, Shawn Mallow, Rick, Dan Karipides, Michael Avitablile, Charlie Quidnunc, Steve Schippert

Emeritus: Paul, Mary Katherine Ham, Jim Addison, Alexander K. McClure, Cassy Fiano, Bill Jempty, John Stansbury, Rob Port

In Memorium: HughS

All original content copyright © 2003-2010 by Wizbang®, LLC. All rights reserved. Wizbang® is a registered service mark.

Powered by Movable Type Pro 4.361

Hosting by ServInt

Ratings on this site are powered by the Ajax Ratings Pro plugin for Movable Type.

Search on this site is powered by the FastSearch plugin for Movable Type.

Blogrolls on this site are powered by the MT-Blogroll.

Temporary site design is based on Cutline and Cutline for MT. Graphics by Apothegm Designs.

Author Login



Terms Of Service

DCMA Compliance Notice

Privacy Policy