Sunday, July 1, 2007
We'll put this site on hiatus until the next horrible bill comes forward. It might be a bad healthcare reform bill, it might be a contentious Supreme Court nomination, who knows?
Tuesday, June 26, 2007
The next MAJOR hurdle is the cloture vote required as a step prior to the vote on the bill.
Friday, June 22, 2007
Thursday, June 14, 2007
The chance of this passing in the Senate is very high - why?
=There are more than 50 Senators who would vote for this bill (see our spreadsheet).
=There are enough votes for the bill that vulnerable Senators can vote against S.1348 as long as they help by voting for cloture.
="Killer Amendments" won't hurt this bill because they won't pass -- Reid is limiting amendments, McConnell is protecting the bill from the Republican side, and Kennedy is protecting the bill on the Dem side. And the "compromise gang" will vote en masse.
=A magic amendment to spend money on the border immediately is thought to provide political cover for Kyl/Isakson/Chambliss/Hutchison types.
=Lott and McConnell probably have enough muscle to get Hutchison, AK Senators, both Maine Senators, etc. to vote for cloture. McConnell and Lott themselves voted against it last time, but both favor this bill -- so as long as they get Reid to allow their favorite amendments, they're in, and this thing goes for a real vote.
Our prediction: This bill passes before Independence Day and the battle moves to the House of Representatives.
Link to spreadsheet here: http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=p
Please click through to these can't-miss articles. First, from RIGHTWINGNEWS:
Yesterday, a GOP aide, who is one of my sources in the Senate, gave me the rundown on what's happening with the Senate immigration bill (this is the same person who I talked to last week about the bill).
First off, it does look like the Senate immigration bill is coming back. The conventional wisdom seems to be that it's going to be brought up right before the July 4th break, so that the Senate Republican leadership can try to use that as leverage to get votes (in other words, "vote for the bill or we'll have to waste your vacation time until you do").
This is despite the fact that the conservative leaders of the anti-amnesty movement are refusing to cooperate, and won't give Mitch McConnell a list of amendments that they want considered. My source tells me that the reason for this is that the game has now been rigged. McConnell is essentially promising to bring the amendments up in exchange for cloture votes, but he's publicly saying that they will strip any problematic amendments out in committee.
Also read Michelle Malkin today.
The $4.4 billion grand ruse
WashTimes reports that President Bush will offer his amnesty "confidence-builder" in a speech this morning:READ IT ALL HERE
Thursday, June 7, 2007
Votes on cloture shouldn't be confused with votes on the substance of the bill. Several Republicans and Democrats who favor this bill still voted against cloture because of a dispute over the amendments which were being considered. For example, John Kyl voted against cloture tonight.
Once the amendments limiting the guest worker provision passed, Republicans wanted their amendments considered. So Mitch McConnell, even though he generally favors "comprehensive immigration reform" worked to keep many Republicans together and voting against cloture.
Senators Murkowski, Stevens, Collins and Snowe -- all who are quite likely to vote for S.1348, stuck with their leader and voted against cloture so that Republican amendments wouldn't get squashed by Reid. Delaying this bill also helps some Senators avoid the intense ire back home.
Here is the roll call the key cloture vote today.
|Menendez (D-NJ) |
|Murkowski (R-AK) |
|Not Voting - 4|
The main point so far is that the "coalition" of Senators are voting essentially as a bloc. Other Senators are clarifying their general position as well. Murkowski and Voinovich both are now most obviously for the "compromise bill" despite their trying to keep quiet about it.
Please follow frequent updates on the Amendments at the MICHELLE MALKIN blog.
The full spreadsheet is here:
Friday, June 1, 2007
Summary: With 53 Senators currently in FIRMLY FOR or LEANS FOR, and 11 "Undecided," it looks very likely that this bill will pass in the Senate. It is possible an amendment will pass which will break up the compromise coalition, but Kennedy & Kyl have been using their influence to defeat amendments which threaten the delicate balance.
We had previously had Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton as "Undecided" beacause of their initial guarded comments. But common sense, and their interest in provisions that weaken this bill's restrictions by removing the point system illustrate that the LEAN FOR this bill at a minimum.
We moved Russ Feingold from UNCERTAIN to LEANS FOR this bill based on comments to the Appelton Post-Crescent in conjunction with his vote against the amendment which would strip the bill of the immediate provisional Z-Visas. Both Wisconsin Senators are in LEANS FOR partly because they both have mild reservations about guest worker provisions and the point system.
John Sununu is now FIRMLY AGAINST to this bill (from Leaning Against) based on the article in the Manchester Union-Leader.
Sam Graves (R-MO) is FIRMLY AGAINST the bill based on a report from a radio listener.
Ron Paul (R-TX) is FIRMLY AGAINST the bill based his recent "Texas Straight Talk." http://www.house.gov/paul/tst/tst2007/tst052507.htm
Luis Gutierrez (D-IL) is a sponsor of the house version of "comprehensive immigration reform," so he's in "FIRMLY FOR."
The full spreadsheet is here:
On this spreadsheet, you can click to see multiple tabs. Click on the word SENATE or HR to see your representative's position. And call!
Wednesday, May 30, 2007
We find it interesting that his support for the bill has been rather quiet, it is possible that he'd prefer to keep calls from constituents at a minimum.
You can find a link to the audio file HERE.
We have transcribed the Senator's remarks here:
Question: "What's your attitude about the immigration bill."
SENATOR TED STEVENS: I am supporting the substitute, which I think is really a very good one. And I want to emphasize that it is not amnesty. There is no amnesty there. If a person wants to go towards a green card, they have to leave the country and come back in under a quota.
Now, no one seems to be picking that up. All these people are talking about amnesty. Amnesty would only be in effect if someone was here and they're allowed to say here and work towards getting a green card. That is not possible under this bill.
So I do think that people should understand -- we've got two new type of visas. We used to have H-Visas, now they're going to have Y and Z Visas. And the H-2B Visa, which is one that our tourist facilities in Alaska have used will become the Y-2B, and it will be increased in terms of National use from 66,000 to 100,000 people a year. They come in for a specific purpose. They can not become eligible for any kind of green card, they can only come in for a specific job. The employer has to show that they have advertised and no one has responded to the advertisement and they have to have these people to in order to fill their jobs and conduct their business.
Its an annual thing and its limited to how many times you can have that. My memory is you can have it for 2 years, and then another two years ... (Stevens' aside: what's the final limit, does anybody remember?) It has a limit in terms of how many times you can come in as a Y-2B Visa worker.
Question: So that would deal with issues like the roe workers...
SENATOR TED STEVENS: This is important for the fishing where the Japanese buy the roe but they only buy that's been packed by their people because of the cultural way of dealing with them. It also deals with ... I was visited by some people that operate rural hotels and they're only open from May to September. They cannot afford to pay someone year-round salaries. And under the circumstances, they also don't want to be involved in paying for retirement.
These are young people. Young, college-age people mostly, and they can come in from foreign countries and work there for a summer, but there's a limit on how many times they can come in under the new Y-2B. The old H-2B there was no limit -- there's a limit to the number of visas -- but no limit on how many times you could apply for one.
I think that immigration bill is good. A lot of people...again, it's like the FAA bill, misunderstand it. They still think we're talking about the original bill. It's a long way from the original bill. It's a good bill. I really commend Sen. Kyl and Sen. Kennedy, they have put partisanship aside, they've taken time to work with people from both sides of the aisle, and I think they've got a substantial majority and will pass that bill soon after we get back.
We've moved Sam Brownback to UNDECIDED from LEANS FOR despite his former sponsorship of "comprehensive immigration reform" bills. An article in the KC Star today (linked in spreadsheet) explains how he's distanced himself from the bill and, in my opinion, sees that a vote for the bill will affect any donations he's receiving in his Presidential campaign.
John Thune is FIRMLY AGAINST this bill based on an article from the Argus Leader.
We're moving Bob Bennett to FIRMLY FOR from LEANS FOR this bill. A staffer has told The Salt Lake Tribune that he plans to vote for the bill. He also voted FOR the 2006 bill, S. 2611, so this is expected.
Deborah Pryce (R-OH) is FIRMLY AGAINST the bill.
The full spreadsheet is here: