My new best pal, Senator Larry Craig, sent me some emails today, in response to the emails that I was sending him during the immigration bill battle. I wanted to share them with you all
Dear Bill:
Thank you for contacting me regarding immigration reform. I appreciated hearing from you and apologize for the delay in my response.
On June 28, 2007, the Senate failed to obtain the 60 votes necessary to cut off debate on the comprehensive immigration reform bill, S. 1639. That halted any likely future progress on this legislation for the duration of the 110th Congress.
Thank Goodness for that! Although we’ll be watching, just to make sure nothing, er, sneaky slips into some appropriations bill or something (damn, I hate it when that happens, don’t you Larry?)
Although S. 1639 was by no means a perfect bill, it was a vast improvement over previous reform measures. The American people demanded that certain provisions be included, and they were. These demands included triggers requiring successful installation of border security measures before other programs come into effect, English language requirements, employee verification systems, and provisions that would force illegal immigrants to leave the country and submit an application before achieving permanent legal residency. In addition, the bill would have required that currently undocumented individuals seeking temporary legal status maintain employment, pass a background check, pay fines and their back taxes, and forego any Social Security benefits tied to payments they made into the system while working illegally. Americans were, and still are, adamantly in support of these policies, as am I.
I MIGHT be wrong, but don’t we already have immigration laws? And didn’t we already get promised a fence? Oh yeah, Congress did a job on that, didn’t they? And we already have employee verification systems don’t we? At least, every time I’ve applied for a job, or a bank account for that matter, I have to provide proof of my citizenship… but hey, my 85 year old mother-in-law still has to take off her shoes at the airport when she hops up to Lewiston too, so we know you guys really mean it when you crack down on something.
Despite the inclusion of these popular provisions, the vote in the Senate demonstrated that many Americans do not trust the federal government to enforce these ambitious programs. In the end, that is probably what brought the bill down.
Ya think? Senator Craig, the Amnesty Bill in 1986 was a disaster, and you know it… you’ve been telling us for awhile now that it’s broken. This one was even worse, in the opinion of more than 70% of the American people! But it’s not only that we don’t trust you to “enforce these ambitious programs”… we know that you won’t, because you AREN’T ENFORCING WHAT WE HAVE NOW!
Unfortunately, because of this outcome, no problems have been solved, and the dysfunctional status quo remains. Communities in Idaho, and across the country, will still face the problem of undocumented workers who take advantage of our broken legal immigration system. Idahoans sent me to Congress to solve problems, which is why I voted to limit debate on the bill. Had sixty votes been cast for cloture, the Senate would have voted on several more amendments, including additional measures to strengthen border security, before a final up-or-down vote on passage of S. 1639.
Senator Craig, they aren’t taking advantage of a broken system, they are breaking laws, and neither you nor the President have the cojones to do anything about enforcing what we have. How do we know the fence won’t work? You guys passed a bill, then gave Mr Bush an out to never get it built. You make laws about employing illegals, then all you can do is arrest 3300 a year? Out of 12 million? And you’re critical of US because we don’t trust you to enforce >new< laws?
Despite the outcome, I remain open to other proposals to solve the problems of illegal immigration and an outdated, flawed legal immigration system. In particular, I will use my position on the Appropriations Committee to fund strong border enforcement measures, as I have done in the past. I will also continue to search for a solution to the serious labor shortages plaguing the U.S. agricultural community.
Ah yes, the ag community. I’m as pro farmer/rancher as other Idahoans are. But they won’t pay a wage that will attract legal citizens, so you want to ensure they get another year or two of really cheap Z-visa laborers. What are you going to tell them in a couple years when all of those newly “legal” workers move up to better paying jobs? Who you going to get for them then? (Perhaps we’ll have another 4 or 6 million new illegals by then, just like what happened after the last amnesty bill)
My first priority is, and will always be, the hard-working men and women of Idaho and their families. Protecting our homeland security and the safety of our people is the fundamental responsibility of the government, and I will continue to support policies that protect and benefit American citizens, treat immigrants fairly, and preserve our economy, resources and national security.
In other words, “It’s the economy stupid!”, am I right? You’re going to make your decisions based on what’s best for a certain economic group in our state, and the very real criticism and concerns of the rest of the citizenry are secondary. But when the major players in a bill like this are Ted Kennedy, George Bush, and a handful of other folks whose motives aren’t as “honest” as yours, and who could care less about the good citizens of Idaho, it’s tough to see you line up with them, and work so hard carrying their water… it’s very difficult to take what you just wrote at face value. I’m sorry, but that’s the way I see it, and I’m not alone there.
I kept an online floor journal during the final debate on the bill to let folks know my reasoning behind each vote. You can view the journal at http://craig.senate.gov/journal_immigration.cfm. If you have specific questions about these or any of my other votes on the immigration proposal, please do not hesitate to ask. Thank you again for contacting me.
Sincerely,
LARRY E. CRAIG
United States Senator
Thanks Larry, it was good hearing from you, even though I know you don’t really like hearing from me. If I come up with anything “specific”, I’ll be sure to write.
Sincerely,
BillH
Entries (RSS)