- White House: More changes to contraception mandate coming
- ‘Operation Normandy’ set to send 3,500 volunteers to border to ‘stop an invasion’
- Netanyahu’s spokesman: Safe to fly to Israel
- Oregon vandals smear cars with doughnuts, pastries, chocolate bars
- Obama’s ‘Katrina moment’ leaves his favorability factor at 42 percent
- Feds tout nearly 200 arrests, $625K in seized cash in Texas border crackdown
- Joy Behar: Sarah Palin should be ‘turning letters over on some game show’
- Rhino poacher in South Africa sentenced to 77 years in jail
- John Kerry defies FAA and flies to Israel to talk peace
- Beretta leaves Maryland over gun laws, heads for Tennessee
Sen. Harry Reid refuses to bend on core of ‘Gang of Eight’ immigration bill
Question of the Day
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid ruled out any major changes to the immigration bill he will bring to the chamber floor this week, saying in an interview that aired Sunday that he will battle to prevent anyone from altering the core of the bipartisan deal reached by the so-called Gang of Eight.
“If people have suggestions like they did in the Judiciary Committee to change the bill a little bit, I’ll be happy to take a look at that. But we’re not going to have big changes in this legislation,” Mr. Reid said on Univision’s “Al Punto” program.
It’s the same stance he took in 2007, when he strictly controlled the debate on the last major immigration bill and ended up with a measure that was unpalatable to a majority of senators, who blocked it in a bipartisan filibuster.
This year, Mr. Reid has vowed a more open process and likely can count on many more Democratic votes of support since the country’s top labor unions have signed off on the deal, but his announcement that he won’t allow major changes underscores just how fragile this bargain remains.
The bill also gained the support of Sen. Kelly Ayotte, a New Hampshire Republican who wrote in a column posted on her website that the bill meets her goal of border security — though she said she would vote for even stiffer provisions during the floor debate.
“The broken immigration system we have now is unworthy of a great nation. It’s time for Washington to tackle this problem head on,” she said.
The Senate is slated to vote Tuesday on whether to bring the bill to the floor and officially kick off the debate.
Ahead of that vote, Sen. Marco Rubio, Florida Republican and one of the eight senators who wrote the bill, said he will not vote for it unless those stiffer border security measures are attached. But he continued to press Hispanics and conservative Republicans to get behind the deal.
In his own appearance on the Spanish-language Univision network, Mr. Rubio tried to assuage some Hispanics who fear that their legal status will be held hostage to border security. Mr. Rubio said illegal immigrants will get quick legal status and work permits regardless of whether the borders are secure — but won’t be given a full pathway to citizenship until more enforcement is imposed.
“Nobody is talking here about preventing legalization. Legalization will take place,” Mr. Rubio told Univision in an interview scheduled to air Sunday.
“First comes legalization, then comes this border security measure and then comes the permanent residency process. What we are talking about here is the permanent residency system,” Mr. Rubio said. “Regarding legalization, a vast majority of my colleagues have already accepted that: that it must take place and that it must start at the same time we start with what has to do with security. That is not conditional. Legalization is not conditional.”
Opponents argue that giving illegal immigrants immediate legal status repeats the mistake of the 1986 amnesty, when millions were put on a quick path to citizenship but promises of tighter border security and interior enforcement went unfulfilled.
Mr. Rubio has acknowledged that overcoming fears of a repeat is the biggest obstacle to passing legislation this year.
Sen. John Cornyn, Texas Republican, has said he would offer an amendment on the Senate floor that would allow illegal immigrants to get quick legal status but would make the future pathway to citizenship be dependent on whether certain security goals are met.
The current bill requires only that money be spent, and it doesn’t require any definable security goals be met before illegal immigrants get citizenship.
© Copyright 2014 The Washington Times, LLC. Click here for reprint permission.
About the Author
Stephen Dinan can be reached at email@example.com.
- Lois Lerner emails reveal gaping open-records loophole
- Two-thirds of illegal immigrant children approved for asylum: report
- Top Justice official denies conspiring with IRS on tea party targeting
- Boehner: No bill on border surge
- Taking Obama to court a long shot but lawsuit not folly, Congress is told
Latest Blog Entries
TWT Video Picks
Retailer pays a price for getting too close to Obama
- CARSON: Costco and the perils of mixing politics and business
- David Perdue defeats Jack Kingston in Georgia Republican Senate primary runoff
- IRS seeks help destroying another 3,200 computer hard drives
- Beretta moving to Tennessee over Maryland gun laws
- D.C. appeals panel deals big blow to Obamacare subsidies
- 'Straight White Guy Festival' supposedly set for Ohio park
- HURT: The cost of 'free' water in Detroit
- EDITORIAL: Obamacare in intensive care
- Pentagon team dispatched to Ukraine amid crisis with Russia
- Contrasting judgments on Obama's health care hours apart; appeals court calls subsidies unlawful
Obama's biggest White House 'fails'
Celebrities turned politicians
Athletes turned actors
20 gadgets that changed the world
Fighting in Iraq