Reid kills Senate Immigration reform bill on 3rd day.

[OriginalShroom]

Reid lies again.

He promises an open, regular bill and blocks the 1st Amendment to it that would require Border Security.

Some how the Democrats will get the media to blame the Repuiblicans for this.

Reid Blocks Senate Vote on Border Security Amendment to Immigration Bill


On Wednesday, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) blocked a vote on the border security amendment to the “Gang of Eight” immigration bill offered by Senate Judiciary Committee ranking member Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA).
Grassley was pushing for an up-or-down vote by the Senate on his amendment, which would have required the border to be secured for six full months before any legalization of illegal immigrants in America began. Reid objected to Grassley’s motion, effectively implementing a 60-vote threshold that completely blocked any attempt at a fair vote on the amendment.

Grassley protested Reid’s plan, which the Senate Majority Leader laughed off. “I’m somewhat surprised at this request,” Reid said in response. “How many times have we heard the Republican Leader say on this floor and publicly that the new reality in the United States Senate is 60?"

So I just thought I was following the direction of the Republican Leader. I mean, this is what he said. That’s why we’re having 60 votes on virtually everything. And with this bill, with this bill, no one can in any way suggest this bill is not important and these amendments aren’t important. So, I care a great deal about my friend, the ranking member on this committee, but I object.
Grassley responded with fury to Reid’s obstruction. “Well, it’s amazing to me that the majority has touted this immigration bill process as one that is open and regular order, but right out of the box, just on the third day, they want to subject our amendments to a filibuster like a 60-vote threshold.”

“So I have to ask, who is obstructing now?" Grassley said. "There is no reason, particularly in this first week, at the beginning of the process, to be blocking our amendments with a 60-vote margin that’s required when you suppose there is a filibuster.”

Grassley said the Senate should “at least start out” the immigration process with “regular order.”

“Otherwise, it really looks like the fix is in and the bill is rigged to pass basically as it is,” Grassley said. “Bottom line, you should have seen how the 18 members of the Judiciary Committee operated for five or six days over a two-week period of time."

"Everything was open, everything was transparent," he explained. "There was a complete cooperation between the majority and the minority, and there is no reason why we can’t do that out here in the United States Senate right now and particularly at the beginning."

"This is a very provocative act,” Grassley warned.

Grassley was not the only senator who expressed dissatisfaction with the process Reid was using on the Senate floor. Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-UT), who voted in favor of the bill coming out of the Senate Judiciary Committee, said during a floor speech that he is concerned votes on his amendments will be blocked as well.

“I was promised by leaders in the Gang of Eight they would work with me, that they would help me to get these things done,” Hatch said. “I consider those promises to be very important, and yet I’ve had some indication over the last few days that maybe they’re not going to work with me."

"I don’t think anybody’s acted in better good faith than I have," Hatch claimed. "As I’ve said, I’d like to support the bill, and make no mistake about it, I don’t want people stiffing me on things I consider to be important without even talking, without even working with me to resolve any problems they may have. And, I’m not the kind of guy who takes that lightly.”

Hatch went on to say he thinks there is “too much partisanship around here anyway.”

“If this is going to be a political exercise, count me out,” Hatch said. “If this is an exercise to really try and resolve the amnesty issues, if it’s an exercise to really really try and resolve these critical issues, I can be counted in."

"Maybe I don’t mean that much in this debate, but if you look at some of the major sections of this bill, I helped work them out and I’ll help work out this bill not only with colleagues on this side but with colleagues on the other side of Capitol Hill. And I don’t want to be stiffed at this time and I’m not the kind of guy who takes stiffing lightly,” Hatch warned.

 

[Dugdale_Jukes]

We don't need border security.

We need laws that punish corporations for hiring illegals. Once those laws are enforced there won't be any reason to come to the US illegally. We can lay off border guards and a lot of people providing government paid services to illegals and move the country forward to fiscal responsibility.

 

[Lakhota]

He just blocked some of the wingnut bullshit which was known to be coming. Wingnuts wants to have their cake and eat it too.

 

[TemplarKormac]

We don't need border security.

We need laws that punish corporations for hiring illegals. Once those laws are enforced there won't be any reason to come to the US illegally. We can lay off border guards and a lot of people providing government paid services to illegals and move the country forward to fiscal responsibility.

^^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^^^

 

[TemplarKormac]

What to Liberals have to say for themselves now? Harry Reid is more obstructive than the last burrito I had. That's saying something.

 

[bripat9643]

He just blocked some of Rubio's bullshit which was known to be coming. Rubio wants to have his cake and eat it too.

You mean Rubio actually wants border security? Is that what you call "both ways?" SO you obviously oppose any bill that actually includes border security?

 

[Wry Catcher]

We don't need border security.

We need laws that punish corporations for hiring illegals. Once those laws are enforced there won't be any reason to come to the US illegally. We can lay off border guards and a lot of people providing government paid services to illegals and move the country forward to fiscal responsibility.

It's not only corporations. Have you driven by the local Home Depot lately. Let's print the names of the "John's" who hire illegals in parking lots across the county in their local paper and make them pay paroll taxes.

When the "John" is a contractor suspend the assholes license.

 

[blackhawk]

We don't need border security.

We need laws that punish corporations for hiring illegals. Once those laws are enforced there won't be any reason to come to the US illegally. We can lay off border guards and a lot of people providing government paid services to illegals and move the country forward to fiscal responsibility.

Don't know where you live but as someone who lives in a border state I have to disagree we do need border security and the laws you talked about as well.

 

[Dugdale_Jukes]

We don't need border security.

We need laws that punish corporations for hiring illegals. Once those laws are enforced there won't be any reason to come to the US illegally. We can lay off border guards and a lot of people providing government paid services to illegals and move the country forward to fiscal responsibility.

It's not only corporations. Have you driven by the local Home Depot lately. Let's print the names of the "John's" who hire illegals in parking lots across the county in their local paper and make them pay paroll taxes.

While you are correct (here it is Wal Mart), corporations are easier targets cheaper to prosecute because few in the retail sector can stand the negative publicity.

Again, totally know your point is correct. But IMO on a practical level it is bad publicity for government to chase down mom and pop businesses, not to mention on a practical level where bad publicity is an issue it is easier to take on the bigs.

Most of America is fed up with illegals. I'd bet something that the big retailers could be brought on board checking citizenship pretty quick after three or four successful VERY PUBLIC prosecutions followed by serious penalties for hiring illegals at lowball wages.

YMMV

 

[Avatar4321]

If they want to play games with border security, we dont need to pass any bill.

 

[Dugdale_Jukes]

We don't need border security.

We need laws that punish corporations for hiring illegals. Once those laws are enforced there won't be any reason to come to the US illegally. We can lay off border guards and a lot of people providing government paid services to illegals and move the country forward to fiscal responsibility.

Don't know where you live but as someone who lives in a border state I have to disagree we do need border security and the laws you talked about as well.

Agreed.

 

[OriginalShroom]

Without border security in the bill, there can not be a reform bill.

 

[Wry Catcher]

During my career in LE the agency would notify INS when we arrested someone in the country illegally.. They didn't seem to care unless the local arrest was one of high publicity. Hence, local government would pay the tab for incarceration, prosecution and for the defense. Many would be placed on probation, again a cost to local government.

I'm now retired, but as I understand the situation today, ICE (which replaced INS) responds and takes the offender into custody and we are lucky not to see them again. However, even when the system knows the offender has been taken into Federal Custody a warrant for FTA is obtained to make sure the defendant does not escape consequences if he returns to California.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Without border security in the bill, there can not be a reform bill.

The border security amendment wanted by Sen. Grassley is a poison pill. The cost associated with what he 'wants' is too great and would never get by the H. of Rep. He knows this and is simply being dishonest.

 

[Geaux4it]

Build the fence. Enforcement first

-Geaux

 

[Jackson]

Just how long have we talked about this damned fence and border security? If anyone in Washington was serious about working on the problem, that fence would have been built by government give aways long before this.

Of course we need a fence and we have to maintain security at the border. Fines for companies hiring illegals is a no brainer. The real perplexing problem is getting Senators and Representatives to work instead of playing political games.

 

[tinydancer]

Build the fence. Enforcement first

-Geaux

Hasn't Mexico built a fence on its southern border?

 

[MeBelle]

just how long have we talked about this damned fence and border security? if anyone in washington was serious about working on the problem, that fence would have been built by government give aways long before this.

Of course we need a fence and we have to maintain security at the border. Fines for companies hiring illegals is a no brainer. The real perplexing problem is getting senators and representatives to work instead of playing political games.

1986?

 

[BreezeWood]

OriginalShroom: Some how the Democrats will get the media to blame the Repuiblicans for this.

some how ?

when it looks like a duck and quacks ... it is a duck.

 

[OriginalShroom]

I just did a word search in the 844 page bill, as it is right now prior to any amendments.

Interesting facts.

Waivers - 48 times
Waiver - 13 times
Except - 106 times
Exception - 25 times
Exceptions - 8 times
Required - 123 times
Not Require - 3 times
Not Required - 6 times.