My software never has bugs. It just develops random features

« | Home | »

Cautious Optimism About The Upcoming Immigration Vote

September 24th, 2007 by Kevin

First of all, while it appeared as if the vote was imminent several times last week, it didn’t happen.  And while Reid refuses to set a date, it is likely that it will occur sometime this week.  It’s hard to say, but I can say that the Senate agenda for Monday does not include this bill, so unless some shenanigans are in order, we have another day.

So make your calls to both our Senators, and the rest….

Senator Coleman – 202-224-5641
Senator Klobuchar – 202-224-3244

They are both still waffling.  One that should be expected, one that’s a disappointing evidence of lackospineitis.

If you’ve ever wondering how conservatives can be so bitter towards legislators, especially ones on their side, this is part of that reason.   Like I’ve said before, I would almost prefer if they took the opposing view than just sitting in the middle.  At least you know where they stand, or indeed if they stand for anything, other than their own personal ambitions.

However, there is reason to be cautiously optimistic.  First of all, if you take a look at the list of Republicans who have pledged to vote against this amnesty, there are several bright points.

First of all, both Lott and McConnell, the Republican leadership….at least in title, have agreed to vote against this amendment.  The idea of other Republican senators not only voting against their base, but also their leadership seems a bit unlikely.  Although the fact that quite a few of them, including Coleman, still refuse to take a stand one way or another does make that a little perplexing.  Political cover has been provided, why the delay?

The champions of the last anti-amnesty effort are still there and still committed.  They already proven the ability to lead (in more than title) their fellow Republicans against such an awful bill.  Plus they have the additional tool of past collective experiences.  All of the Senators they are lobbying have already been through the amnesty hell and surely many of them remember the lessons they should have learned and adhered to.

Some of the leaders, Senators Isakson and Chambliss, of the Republican pro-amnesty faction have already defected to the anti-amnesty side, as well as Senators like Lindsay Graham.  And Senator Cornyn, while refusing to commit for sure, has been repeatedly telling callers than he is a “No” vote.  I have to hope that if even those that are committed to amnesty have determined the cost is too high, others will see the light as well.

Speaking of Senator Cornyn, despite there only being 21 Senators committed to “No”, he appears to be convinced that this amnesty doesn’t have a chance.  I’m not sure what inside baseball talk this is based upon and Cornyn has been anything but reliable when it comes to anti-amnesty, so several boulder sized grains of salt should be kept in supply for all Cornyn statements.   However, since he does appear to be generally favorable to a reasonable DREAM Act, if there is such a thing (hint : there isn’t), he presents a fairly good glimpse of what it’s supporters are facing.

So while it appears things are favorable to defeating this amendment, we’ve been here before.  So now is not the time to slack off.  Make your calls and let your Senator know what you think.

Email This Post Email This Post | Print This Post Print This Post
Posted in Immigration | 1 Comment »

One Response

  1. J. Ewing Says:

    Coleman is always a reliable make-up-your-mind-such-as-it-is-at-the-last-moment kind of guy, which of course is hard on the nerves, but he’s mostly reliable to principle. That’s 80% good and 20% bad, of course.

    What concerns me about this vote, as far as Coleman goes, is that it is attached to a defense bill– a great strategy by Dems that makes it tough for R’s to vote against.

    Even more worrisome is that I believe he holds to the principle that those who crossed the border illegally (or were born here of illegal parents) and have been “contributing to society” ever since shouldn’t be penalized now. They shouldn’t be rewarded, either, IMO, but that’s a moral quandary that Norm is trying to resolve, I think.

Leave a Comment

Please note: Comment moderation is enabled and may delay your comment. There is no need to resubmit your comment.