As the Senate immigration bill begins its first week under review, the key issues are border security, border security and border security. Opponents like Jeff Sessions, Chuck Grassley and Ted Cruz insist that the Border Protection, Economic Opportunity and Immigration Act, S. 744, lacks meaningful security measures.
Arguing successfully against Sessions is impossible because he's right. Anti-enforcement senators offer up Department of Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano's pack of lies about her plan, details and date of implementation undisclosed, that will deliver “90 percent effectiveness” on the border. If “90 percent effectiveness” is not reached, then Napolitano will form a commission. Who will determine effectiveness and what the commission might do if ineffectiveness rules is a tightly kept secret. Even if Napolitano keeps her promise, there would be months if not years more of illegal immigration
Through Tuesday, 44 amendments to S. 744 were filed. But whether Senate Majority Leader and amnesty advocate Harry Reid will allow them to be debated is another question. Reid is walking a tightrope. In 2007, Reid’s refusal to allow broad debate killed an amnesty bill that, like S.744, advocates expected to pass easily.
Reid took particular exception to Senator John Cornyn’s RESULTS amendment, a version of which the Senate Judiciary Committee defeated, 12-6.
In a testy statement indirectly aimed at Cornyn, Reid said:
“Be very, very careful of senators who have no intention of voting for this bill, zero, but they have this wonderful amendment they want to offer to improve the bill, understanding, as I do — and I hope you folks also understand this — they have no intention of voting for the bill no matter what happens on amendments.”
But Reid has no reason not to allow debate on Cornyn’s amendment since it too doesn’t avert S. 744‘s disastrous consequences—legal status before enforcement.
On his website, Cornyn posted this about RESULTS:
"….(it) requires DHS Secretary and GAO Comptroller General to jointly certify that these triggers are met before Registered Provisional Immigrants (RPI) can adjust to Lawful Permanent Resident ("green card") status."
Big deal; Cornyn is offering up more hocus pocus that means nothing.The barometer for gauging what’s happening on the Senate floor is simple: if an amendment that provides lock down enforcement at the border and in the interior is solidly in place before a single alien is granted legal status—provisional or otherwise—then it’s a positive. Otherwise, S. 744 is a formula for disaster.
As the 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act proved, amnesty before enforcement leads to more illegal immigration. Even lead Gangster Marco Rubio admits that enforcement is nowhere in S. 744. In an interview with Univision, Rubio said:
“Nobody is talking here about preventing legalization. Legalization will take place. 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.
“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.”
Remember those words: “Legalization is not conditional.” Not only is legalization unconditional, it’s also irrevocable. Once legal status is conferred, the amnesty deal is signed, sealed and delivered. Eleven million illegal aliens will formally become legal residents and on their way to citizenship.
Information about the CAPS Washington DC “Read the Bill” Rally that provided eyeglasses to Senator Rubio and other senators who may support S. 744 is here. FAX your senators through this CAPS Action Alert.