Discussion On The Politics of Immigration Reform (Comprehensive Or Otherwise)

[idiotic]

Fight for high skill immigration ? That's a joke. No one would even fight for high skill immigration. Forget about fighting for that and loosing job.

Correct. It was a joke. Glad that we are on the same page here.

I am asking him to fight for his party and nation if he feels it is going to be beneficial which he has said it is.

How?

[gs1968]

Another interesting development and tough to judge in the present time if this will help or hinder CIR in the long run

http://news.msn.com/us/janet-napolit...ocid=ansnews11

As far as Speaker Boehner is concerned-it is his prerogative to decide what Bill to bring to the floor and when just like Senator Reid in the Senate. I have not seen any Bill brought to the Senate Floor by Sen.Reid that would pass with the help of a majority of Republican Senators. Caucus unity is key for either party and procedures like discharge petitions are pure fantasy. Speaker Boehner has no choice but to wait till his caucus coalesces around a reasonably united strategy to deal with immigration reform because at this time the GOP viewpoints are all over the place. One member on the House Judiciary to watch is Spencer Bachus of Alabama who might help bring some other conservatives around to the citizenship path as he has clearly stated he does not like the idea of a huge swath of second-class citizens

[idiotic]

If he loses his job by bringing the bill to floor, he is still a winner. He might loose his job, but will be remembered as the bold speaker who sacrificed his job for betterment for the immigrants. I am sure millions who will be legalized by this bill will remember him in their lifetime and generations to come.

What would he want ? A short term job or a legacy ?

gcq,

Even though we might be intersted in doing lot of good things how many of us are willing to sacrifice our job and livelihood for those things? When we won't do something ourselves, its not fair to expect it from others.

It's the people who block the good things need to take the blame.. not the people who didn't do enough

[idiotic]

Another interesting development and tough to judge in the present time if this will help or hinder CIR in the long run

http://news.msn.com/us/janet-napolit...ocid=ansnews11

I thought she resigning was intended to be a good thing for CIR in short term as they can put a nominee who is agreeable to both parties as new head, Right now she is face of administration not being credible even though I do not agree with that.

As far as Speaker Boehner is concerned-it is his prerogative to decide what Bill to bring to the floor and when just like Senator Reid in the Senate. I have not seen any Bill brought to the Senate Floor by Sen.Reid that would pass with the help of a majority of Republican Senators. Caucus unity is key for either party and procedures like discharge petitions are pure fantasy. Speaker Boehner has no choice but to wait till his caucus coalesces around a reasonably united strategy to deal with immigration reform because at this time the GOP viewpoints are all over the place. One member on the House Judiciary to watch is Spencer Bachus of Alabama who might help bring some other conservatives around to the citizenship path as he has clearly stated he does not like the idea of a huge swath of second-class citizens

Completely agree.

[qesehmk]

I think that question is so stupid it doesn't warrant an answer. Is there any other CIR you are aware of that all of us don't?

Which CIR are you taking about ?

[rupen86]

I think that question is so stupid it doesn't warrant an answer. Is there any other CIR you are aware of that all of us don't?

May be you have some inside knowledge that I and others do not. Anyone who is tracking immigration knows that house is not tacking up senate CIR and there is no house CIR yet. So which CIR are you talking about? I thought I did not have to elaborate question but am stupid to assume that.

[rupen86]

Correct. It was a joke. Glad that we are on the same page here.



How?

By bringing senate bill for vote

[rupen86]

gcq,

Even though we might be intersted in doing lot of good things how many of us are willing to sacrifice our job and livelihood for those things? When we won't do something ourselves, its not fair to expect it from others.

It's the people who block the good things need to take the blame.. not the people who didn't do enough

I am assuming not having speaker position is not the question of livelihood for person like Boehner.

[idiotic]

By bringing senate bill for vote

Good luck.. I do not want to take this further as it is already discussed many times in this forum.

[idiotic]

I am assuming not having speaker position is not the question of livelihood for person like Boehner.

Wrong assumption.. Whatever one does for an living is their livelihood.. Everyone will want to climb up the ladder in career chain and not climb down for earning an living.

It's not correct for us to expect and assume what they should be doing instead..

[qesehmk]

Let others say what they know and don't. You speak for yourself.

If you don't understand something I say - ask nicely and you will get all honest answers from me. But if you ask in a condescending manners such as "What CIR" then good luck - I am not interested in a dialogue with you.

May be you have some inside knowledge that I and others do not. Anyone who is tracking immigration knows that house is not tacking up senate CIR and there is no house CIR yet. So which CIR are you talking about? I thought I did not have to elaborate question but am stupid to assume that.

[qesehmk]

Sport- Your line of thinking is right. But in this particular case Obama views this as his legacy and democratic party senses an opportunity solidify their base for next generation or two. That's why they absolutely want this done.

The thing is - not having it done is not a big blow for them because with the bipartisan senate bill - they can already claim victory.

My 2 cents. If the democrats really wanted, passage of CIR in the house is a near certainty.

Think about it. All the democrats could vote along the party line. They would need 30 Republicans or so. Is it really difficult? I would say no.

However Democrats are in no urgency because they must be sensing a lot of anger from the white American voter. Remember them? Republicans take the white vote at 54-46 split, but the Dems do need that 46%...else, they won't be in power.

They need to play this carefully too. They have just done whatever they could in the Senate and are in a grand posturing mode now.

Sorry to be negative again...I don't see the CIR being passed and if it does get through at all, Dems will sure lose in the next election.

[gcq]

gcq,

Even though we might be intersted in doing lot of good things how many of us are willing to sacrifice our job and livelihood for those things? When we won't do something ourselves, its not fair to expect it from others.

It's the people who block the good things need to take the blame.. not the people who didn't do enough

He is not going to lose his job ( congressman). He may lose the speaker title in short term. But once CIR is signed by president, he will be the hero again. All the GOP members who oppose it now will turn around praising him. If they don't praise him post CIR, those house members will be history in near future. All what speaker need to do is allow the senate bill to come to floor. It is guaranteed to pass in the house and president will definitely sign it. Speaker is kind of "switch" between CIR enactment and failure. The moment he changes his stand, it is a done deal.

I think it will ultimately happen, let us give it some time for pressure to build up on GOP.

[bvsamrat]

I agree - If CIR is not passed, DEMs will loose for sure as they would get the blame of not supporting enough.
REP allways have a steady base and also could project present incumbent party's mistakes in next elections.

Frankly both parties would want CIR - but take credit some-how to thier side?

Sport- Your line of thinking is right. But in this particular case Obama views this as his legacy and democratic party senses an opportunity solidify their base for next generation or two. That's why they absolutely want this done.

The thing is - not having it done is not a big blow for them because with the bipartisan senate bill - they can already claim victory.

[idiotic]

He is not going to lose his job ( congressman). He may lose the speaker title in short term. But once CIR is signed by president, he will be the hero again. All the GOP members who oppose it now will turn around praising him. If they don't praise him post CIR, those house members will be history in near future. All what speaker need to do is allow the senate bill to come to floor. It is guaranteed to pass in the house and president will definitely sign it. Speaker is kind of "switch" between CIR enactment and failure. The moment he changes his stand, it is a done deal.

I think it will ultimately happen, let us give it some time for pressure to build up on GOP.

Unfortunately that's not the way things work in American politics..

[gcq]

Unfortunately that's not the way things work in American politics..

Need more proof about the "switch" factor ? Watch this video. It also has lot of information about the dynamics of CIR.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z3x4-xRBcpU

[GhostWriter]

WSJ reported today that "Congressmen Eric Cantor and Bob Goodlatte Are Crafting Legislation on Citizenship Path for People Brought to U.S. Illegally as Children" and that a consensus is emerging in GOP for that particular set of people.

The question I have us if house crafts a few piecemeal bills like these (assuming including one for skilled immigrants) and starts sending them to Senate (again assuming that they don't want to reconcile with Senate CIR in a conference), what happens then ?
What are the possible options. Basically what would the process look like if house stays adamant on not taking up CIR at all. Is there any chance democrats will budge and say that we have 50% of what we want in these bills so let us get that or will they do the same thing they did to HR3012 and not take up these bills at all.

Is there any possibility of partial immigration reform if CIR dies. Just want to see what people think.

[gcq]

WSJ reported today that "Congressmen Eric Cantor and Bob Goodlatte Are Crafting Legislation on Citizenship Path for People Brought to U.S. Illegally as Children" and that a consensus is emerging in GOP for that particular set of people.

The question I have us if house crafts a few piecemeal bills like these (assuming including one for skilled immigrants) and starts sending them to Senate (again assuming that they don't want to reconcile with Senate CIR in a conference), what happens then ?
What are the possible options. Basically what would the process look like if house stays adamant on not taking up CIR at all. Is there any chance democrats will budge and say that we have 50% of what we want in these bills so let us get that or will they do the same thing they did to HR3012 and not take up these bills at all.

Is there any possibility of partial immigration reform if CIR dies. Just want to see what people think.

I guess whatever bill house sends to senate won't have the items democrats want, illegal immigration component specifically. If that component is missing they are not going to accept it. If house tries to strip off illegal component of it, democrats may try to strip off the high skilled component of it as a tit-for-tat response. Once the bill is stripped of components that interests both sides, nobody would be interested in pushing that bill anymore. Net result, CIR fails. That is why senate bipartisan group was careful to put up a balanced package.

[rupen86]

Let others say what they know and don't. You speak for yourself.

If you don't understand something I say - ask nicely and you will get all honest answers from me. But if you ask in a condescending manners such as "What CIR" then good luck - I am not interested in a dialogue with you.

"I think that question is so stupid it doesn't warrant an answer. Is there any other CIR you are aware of that all of us don't?"
Here all of us means you are also talking about all. So according to your advice, you also speak for yourself.

This is not the first time, you have talked about CIR and not the first time I have asked. If by me just asking "what CIR are you talking about" looks bad manners to you, yours is much more bad manners when you say question is stupid.

[rupen86]

He is not going to lose his job ( congressman). He may lose the speaker title in short term. But once CIR is signed by president, he will be the hero again. All the GOP members who oppose it now will turn around praising him. If they don't praise him post CIR, those house members will be history in near future. All what speaker need to do is allow the senate bill to come to floor. It is guaranteed to pass in the house and president will definitely sign it. Speaker is kind of "switch" between CIR enactment and failure. The moment he changes his stand, it is a done deal.

I think it will ultimately happen, let us give it some time for pressure to build up on GOP.

I agree that he will still remain congressman. He looses job as speaker. If he has more broader aspirations, this might help him in that also. But I do not think he will take this risk. Some people want to play safe and kind of happy where they are.

[qesehmk]

That's ok. Next time if you ask without condescending remark - I would respond with my best ability. I am as much a learner as you are. I don't have any inside knowledge.

"I think that question is so stupid it doesn't warrant an answer. Is there any other CIR you are aware of that all of us don't?"
Here all of us means you are also talking about all. So according to your advice, you also speak for yourself.

This is not the first time, you have talked about CIR and not the first time I have asked. If by me just asking "what CIR are you talking about" looks bad manners to you, yours is much more bad manners when you say question is stupid.

[rupen86]

That's ok. Next time if you ask without condescending remark - I would respond with my best ability. I am as much a learner as you are. I don't have any inside knowledge.

Alright, here is the good way, I hope.

Senate CIR bill is not being taken up by house and house does not have its CIR. So, which CIR bill do we talk about when we call to congressman?

[vizcard]

I agree that he will still remain congressman. He looses job as speaker. If he has more broader aspirations, this might help him in that also. But I do not think he will take this risk. Some people want to play safe and kind of happy where they are.

On what basis do you say, he will stay a congressman? He represents the 8th district in Ohio - moderately rural, white majority, Republican stronghold. If one Tea Party Republican stands against him in the primary, chances are he loses the primary and consequently his job.

[vizcard]

Alright, here is the good way, I hope.

Senate CIR bill is not being taken up by house and house does not have its CIR. So, which CIR bill do we talk about when we call to congressman?

Maybe it's semantics but to me CIR is a concept. I would tell the Congresman to support (a) immigration reform and (b) a comprehensive approach as passing piece meal bills is a delaying tactic. Tell him/her to get the House CIR bill published and discussed.

Also, i would outline the components of immigration policy that need to be addressed and have them address. Worst case, they can copy/paste language from the individual policy docs/bills into one big document and now you have one bill that covers all topics. To have reform all pieces of the puzzle must be addressed or risk having no reform at all (and have de facto amnesty for illegals)
1. Illegal alien status
2. Border security incl entry/exit
3. Everify
4. Farm workers/Low skilled immigration
6. High skilled temp immigration incl STEM
7. Green cards incl STEM, family, Diversity and Entrepreneur Visas
8. Citizenship/ naturalization

Pass bill(s) related to these and then go to conference.

[qesehmk]

Rupen, I agree with Viz. We can always talk in terms of senate bill as a concept. The focus of making calls to congressman should be 3 fold:

1) It helps establish their position on senate CIR and clarify basis of opposition.
2) It helps strengthen support for CIR and improves their understanding of the need urgency as well as mass support behind it.
3) It creates ground for a discharge petition (if Boehner continues to refuse to table senate CIR or continues to stall senate CIR on one pretext or another).

Alright, here is the good way, I hope.

Senate CIR bill is not being taken up by house and house does not have its CIR. So, which CIR bill do we talk about when we call to congressman?