That's actually enlightening. Thanks for the insight. What this means is that any argument about cost to state for medical expenses is no longer valid (w.r.t. legalizing the illegals). In fact, by legalizing this invisible cost would in fact be reduced. Of course other expenses may still apply.Quote:
Originally Posted by indiani
From Senate's website:Quote:
Originally Posted by gs1968
"Friday, Jun 07, 2013
9:30 a.m.: Convene and resume consideration of the motion to proceed to S.744, the Comprehensive Immigration Reform bill."
Lawmakers know all these stuff but everything they say and do is based on politicsQuote:
Originally Posted by seahawks2012
He is saying that is he is unsure how many bills house can do, whether they have the bandwidth to do it and that house won't take up the senate bill and that senate is wasting their time on the CIR since they are not going to take it up.Quote:
Originally Posted by gs1968
Well, we'll find out soon enough as the Senate calls their bluff. I think there will be significant pressure on them to take up the Senate bill if they don't have one of their own by then. My guess is that the Senate bill comes to the floor soon after the August recess. I also think it passes with a majority of democrat and about 20 to 30 Republican votes.
Still, let's take one step at a time. The floor of the Senate first.
Another article along the similar line.Quote:
Originally Posted by rupen86
http://www.businessinsider.com/immig...abrador-2013-6
From Oh Law firm,
06/06/2013: Sen. John Cornyn Reveals his Proposed Compromised Amendment to Senate CIR 2013, S. 744
Sen. Cornyn is one of the Republican Senators who objected to the S. 744, as amended, at the end of the markup sessions in the Senate Judiciary Committee. He now reveals his proposed amendment which is likely to be introduced on the Senate floor next week. This will be one of the important compromise amendments which will be introduced to expand the number of Senators to support the S. 744. Please read the following outline and news report
Outline
Statement
Sen. Cornyn is the Republican Ranking Member of the Senate Judiciary Immigration Subcommittee.
NEWS: Sen Reid filing a cloture motion S. 744 on Friday June 7th 2013Quote:
Originally Posted by rupen86
The following one might be a reminder for all of us.. to know about /cloture motion.
cloture - The only procedure by which the Senate can vote to place a time limit on consideration of a bill or other matter, and thereby overcome a filibuster. Under the cloture rule (Rule XXII), the Senate may limit consideration of a pending matter to 30 additional hours, but only by vote of three-fifths of the full Senate, normally 60 votes.
http://www.senate.gov/reference/glos...rm/cloture.htm
To immitimeQuote:
Originally Posted by immitime
The cloture motion is not on the Bill itself but merely on the motion to proceed to consideration of the Bill.60 votes are needed to overcome any holds although this seems unlikely. In fact when Mr.McConnell did not object,many observers felt that this additional step was not necessary but I guess Mr.Reid followed his usual playbook. If the cloture prevails then there will be a few weeks of debate followed by amendments.There will be a second cloture motion to close off debate at some point when everybody has had their say followed by the actual vote on the Bill for which only a simple majority is needed
You underestimate a certain Mr. Jeff Sessions of the great state of Alabama.Quote:
Originally Posted by gs1968
To abcx13
Not to mention 200+ of his clones in the House!
A different perspective from an die-hard conservative columnist
http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blo...rm-still-alive
That actually makes lot of sense:Quote:
Originally Posted by gs1968
"The key in the House will be to make any amnesty or citizenship path wholly contingent on border security enforcement, specifying that the process cannot begin until the border is sealed. This means that immigration reform, Republican-style, is a border security bill with amnesty and citizenship thrown in as an incentive and a reward for compliance. In that context, it will probably clear the House.
The Senate and the White House may rail against the Republican alternative, but they have no real choice but to pass it and sign it."
It is a good analysis.Quote:
Originally Posted by gs1968
Is there a good article that explains why stricter border control conflicts with the amnesty proposal?
I don't know any article but the reason it conflicts with CIR because of 2 reasons.
A) Stricter (border control) is vague and full (border control) is unattainable. Thus either only serves as a mokey wrench in any immigration reform talk.
B) Under Obama border is much better controlled than it was under Bush. Homeland security statistics prove that. So any talk of border control is mostly political and in opposition to any immigration reform effort.
Quote:
Originally Posted by seahawks2012
Funny that the article starts with the word posturing! That is a good sign!
Quote:
Originally Posted by gs1968
I like today's mood on this forum better than yesterday.To make everybody smile-here are a few of Rep King's famous Quotes for weekend reading-
http://www.deathandtaxesmag.com/1999...eatest-quotes/
Generic reply from Rubio
Dear Dr......,
Thank you for writing to me to express your concerns regarding the ongoing debate about immigration reform. I understand this is an important issue and I appreciate hearing your thoughts.
As the immigration proposal comes to the Senate floor for debate and amendments, I am hopeful that we can strengthen enforcement and security mechanisms in the legislation while still offering an arduous, but fair path forward for illegal immigrants currently in the United States. However, if enforcement and security is not strengthened during the amendment process, I will not support the immigration bill before the Senate. Thank you for your comments and concerns, I will certainly keep them in mind as immigration reform measures move forward and inform you of my approach to immigration reform following the Senate floor debate.
It is an honor and a privilege to serve as your United States Senator. I appreciate you offering your opinion on this important issue. If I can ever be of assistance to you, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Sincerely,
Marco Rubio
United States Senator
Generic reply from Rubio
Dear Dr......,
Thank you for writing to me to express your concerns regarding the ongoing debate about immigration reform. I understand this is an important issue and I appreciate hearing your thoughts.
As the immigration proposal comes to the Senate floor for debate and amendments, I am hopeful that we can strengthen enforcement and security mechanisms in the legislation while still offering an arduous, but fair path forward for illegal immigrants currently in the United States. However, if enforcement and security is not strengthened during the amendment process, I will not support the immigration bill before the Senate. Thank you for your comments and concerns, I will certainly keep them in mind as immigration reform measures move forward and inform you of my approach to immigration reform following the Senate floor debate.
It is an honor and a privilege to serve as your United States Senator. I appreciate you offering your opinion on this important issue. If I can ever be of assistance to you, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Sincerely,
Marco Rubio
United States Senator
Some perspective from the House
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/...on-everything/
The withdrawal of Rep Labrador is unfortunate as he is the only member of the Group of 8 that sits on the Judiciary committee.However the others have been at it much longer and have higher stakes (more skin in the game according to Rep Carter) and may come out with a better package.
I do not know what to make out from the interview. It seems little pessimistic or as in the end as he says cautiously optimistic. I do not get clear directions from that whether it is comprehensive vs piecemeal or whether it is path to citizenship or whether it is H1B. The questions were corrected and pointed but answers were not.Quote:
Originally Posted by gs1968
Positive news but again she is from NH and is already feeling the heat for her gun-control vote
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-3460_162...igration-bill/
The House is clearly not rushing to immigration reform any time soon as we probably know already.The only positive is that the House Judiciary Committee has scheduled a hearing (not a mark-up) of the SAFE Act this week sponsored by Rep.Gowdy which increases interior enforcement of immigration laws in local communities. This is part of the piecemeal Bills being worked on by the Judiciary Committee
Chairman Goodlatte wrote an op-ed in the Roanoke Times yesterday and the link is below
http://www.roanoke.com/opinion/point...gislation.html
"We plan to build upon this work to build consensus on these important issues in the weeks and months ahead. This process of regular order allows every representative to fully vet the issues and provides the opportunity to have the voices of the 6th Congressional District and folks across the nation heard."
gs/others - is there a consolidated list of 'S.744-what happens in next 1-2 weeks on senate floor' information ? senate judiciary website was such place during judiciary process.
i read somewhere that they were going to vote starting tomorrow. i understand this is one of many (up/down, amendment,final bill) votes and hence the question. tx.