Wednesday, June 07, 2006

Bush Backpedalling on Immigration?

Sheryl Gay Stolberg reports in the NYTimes this morning that President Bush "shifted his tone" yesterday in an immigration appearance, seeming to edge away from his support for the Senate's "comprehensive" plan in favor of a stricter bill dealing more closely with border enforcement.

I'm not entirely sure where Stolberg's getting that line of argument from, however (aside from the fact that Bush was speaking at the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center, in front of a bunch of border patrol agents). Reading the speech, I see that he used the word "comprehensive" at least eight times, and once noted that any comprehensive plan needed to include a temporary worker program. Later he said "I believe strongly this, that [sic] if we don't address all the elements together, none of it is going to be solved at all. The reason I called for a comprehensive bill is because I understand that in order for these good folks to do their job, we've got to link all five aspects together. We've got to be realistic about what it takes to enforce the border. So I look forward to working with Congress on this important issue."

It's become fairly clear that the only way to pass the comprehensive bill through the House is through the suspension of the moronic "majority of the majority rule" that the leadership of that chamber has instituted. Enough Republicans and Democrats could then come together to pass the bill already supported by the Senate, and send it to Bush before the end of the summer. With each passing day, that prospect (of anything happening prior to the elections) grows dimmer. Let's get it done.


At 12:20 AM, Blogger coachhollywood67 said...

President Bush has remained pretty consistent since his election with his stance on immigration and the need to assimilate most immigrants (legal or otherwise) in this country who he believes (as do I) came to work and contribute to the American Dream. Why some members of his own party can't understand this is becoming a mystery (well, maybe not a mystery - but when are they going to understand that he means what he says and he says what he means on this issue?).
I'm not very sanguine or optimistic that the House diehards will allow a compromise bill to come out of committee, nor am I sure I would be happy with it if they did, but I guess time will tell.


Post a Comment

<< Home