| Submit your comments on this article |
| Home Front: Politix |
| Frist: It's time to secure the border with Mexico |
| 2006-09-19 |
| "It's time to secure the border with Mexico," Majority Leader Bill Frist said last night before filing the parliamentary motions to force the House-passed bill onto the Senate floor in a final effort to get a major immigration bill on the president's desk before the elections. Guess the polling data tells him he'll never be President if he keeps up playing McCain without the war record. Jim Manley, a spokesman for Minority Leader Harry Reid, said the move "smacks of desperation" and was a "clear repudiation of President Bush's call for comprehensive legislation." Doesn't Reid repudiat all Bush's policies? The Secure Fence Act of 2006, which was easily approved by the House last week, contains none of the "comprehensive" measures that President Bush, Democrats and some Senate Republicans have demanded. Those include provisions to grant citizenship rights to about 10 million illegal aliens living in the country and a guest-worker program that would usher hundreds of thousands more foreign laborers into the U.S. All House members face re-election in six weeks. This kind of action makes me wonder if we should make House elections annual. They'd have less time between elections to soak lobbyists and more to make critical votes the electorate would remember. "Mr. Frist was for comprehensive reform before he was against it," Mr. Manley said. Where have I heard that before? On the Senate floor last night, Mr. Frist said he still supports comprehensive immigration reform legislation. But, he said, because no consensus can now be reached on other issues, Congress should move ahead with border security. It's not "enforcement only," he said, but "enforcement first." I hope he got a good discount when he bought that clue. "Border security is the essential first step of any effort to enact immigration reform," Mr. Frist said. "Only when we have convinced the American people of our commitment to securing our borders will we be able to reach a consensus on comprehensive immigration reform." Maybe. The last time the Senate considered a border-security-only bill, the measure failed, with all but two Democrats and 20 Republicans refusing even to debate it. Since then, several Republicans bent on comprehensive reform have told The Washington Times that they would now consider legislation that dealt only with stopping the flow of illegal aliens into the country. |
| Posted by:Nimble Spemble |
| #12 "The Secure Fence Act of 2006, which was easily approved by the House last week..." Of course they will have to agree on how to fund the damn thing. Something tells me the Dems will be doing some serious spoon-banging real soon. |
| Posted by: DepotGuy 2006-09-19 19:04 |
| #11 One detail, OP. Senators were appointed by the state legislatures, not the governors. |
| Posted by: Jackal 2006-09-19 18:18 |
| #10 Senators were originally appointed by the Governor of each state, with the consent of the upper body within the state legislature. The 16th Amendment changed that to direct elections. Things have gone to he$$ ever since. The original idea was for the lower house (Representatives) to represent the interests of the citizens (direct elections), and the upper house (Senate) was to represent the interests of the State (appointed). We need to go back to that policy. The direct election of senators has only given us another bunch of bought politicians whose only aim is to get re-elected, and both the citizens and the states have been screwed. Dr. Frist at least is limiting himself to two terms in the Senate, and appears to have finally started reading his email and the comments on his weblog. We need to get the rest of the US Senate online with both email and weblogs, so we can tell them directly exactly what we think of them - politely, of course. As polite as we are here to trolls... |
| Posted by: Old Patriot 2006-09-19 14:40 |
| #9 Senators should have 2 year terms. That is why the House gets it. Election day for every one of them is fast approaching. If Bush has any power at all, he will push this thru the Give it hell, Bushy. |
| Posted by: wxjames 2006-09-19 13:13 |
| #8 I agree Texhooey. Term limits on all of them. The House has been good overall. Apparently the senate for its part has worked all of 90 days this year. (Though I am sure it was worth the $162,500.00 the American tax payer pays each of them per yr.) (sarcasm/off) |
| Posted by: Broadhead6 2006-09-19 12:37 |
| #7 Actually, Bill, it's about twenty years too late. Which is about the right timing for the US Senate to do anything about anything... |
| Posted by: tu3031 2006-09-19 12:03 |
| #6 Win-win for the Reps. Who will filibuster this? Energizes the base, and puts the Donks on the spot. Hello McCain? Kiss your presidential bid buh-bye. Between the amnesty you proposed ("comprehensive" reform...sure) and your terrorist protection act (interrogation methods reform), you've been smoked out. |
| Posted by: Frank G 2006-09-19 12:01 |
| #5 Senators should have 2 term limits like the Pres. |
| Posted by: texhooey 2006-09-19 11:52 |
| #4 Sorry for the Dupe post Fred. Sure looks like Frist has finally read some polls. |
| Posted by: mcsegeek1 2006-09-19 10:15 |
| #3 If it was up to me the length of term for Senators would be reduced to three years, maybe four. And I agree wholeheartedly about where the |
| Posted by: Texas Redneck 2006-09-19 10:14 |
| #2 ....83 year old male, chain smoking Lucky Strikes, caughing, hacking, wheezing, phlegm, shortness of breath, labored breathing, suspected acute emphazima you say? Excellent prognosis Dr. Frist. Next patient please. |
| Posted by: Besoeker 2006-09-19 10:02 |
| #1 LOL. Um, yeah sure, we're for the "comprehensive" thing, too - you betcha. Fund the fence and plug the holes, putting enforcement first and make it effective... and then we'll talk about that. And talk. And talk. If it weren't for the House, which has risen to the challenge on every important issue - passing legislation that gives teeth to stopping Iran, doing what counts on immigration, funding security measures of every type, funding the military, revealing pork-barrel political whores, damned-near everything that matters, I'd suggest carpet-bombing DC. The House gets it and has stood up - leave them out of it or, rather, spend some money to help them and get out and vote for the Pubbies in the House. Now the Senate, on the other hand, is quite a different thing entirely. That is where our |
| Posted by: flyover 2006-09-19 09:56 |