Image 01 Image 03

Immigration reform “toast” due to citizenship issue?

Immigration reform “toast” due to citizenship issue?

I have long predicted that the central, yet in some ways least debated, issue in the Gang of 8 bill was the pathway to citizenship.

There was unanimity on the Democratic side, but not on the Republican side.  Democrats repeatedly threw down the gauntlet that no citizenship, no deal.

It appears that “immigration reform” is likely to fail in the House on that very issue according to Greg Sargent at WaPo:

The Morning Plum: House GOP won’t cross citizenship Rubicon:

There are reams of reporting out there on yesterday’s House GOP meeting about the way forward on immigration. But unless I’m missing something, one of the most basic questions about the debate still remains unanswered: Is there anything, under any circumstances, that can get House Republicans to embrace a path to citizenship later? …

In other words, the reporting confirms what we already know: That House Republicans don’t currently support citizenship, and remain more focused on border security, on initial legalization, and on the general political need to appear to be doing something to fix the broken immigration system.

But here’s what we still don’t know: Whether there are any conditions, ever, that could induce House Republicans to embrace citizenship at any point in this process.

As best as I can determine from all the reporting, the basic question of what House Republicans would require in order to support citizenship at any point remains unanswered. Which means we still simply don’t know if there is anything that can get them to support it, under any circumstances. For now, we should assume the answer is No.

And so, if we take John Boehner at his word — that nothing gets a vote in the House unless it has the support of a majority of House Republicans — then this means there remains no path to even getting a House vote on comprehensive immigration reform.

I’m not as confident as Sargent that “reform” including citizenship is toast.


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


A couple of the teaparty House members have stated that Boehner’s plan all along has been to pass a “conservative” immgration bill; and then when conferenced with the Senate bill, it will have security/enforcement measures stripped out and amnesty inserted – allowing Repubs to raise their hands in surprise and declare it’s not their fault.

I suspect that, even after all the hoopla, this is still running through Boehner’s weasel mind.

Spiny Norman | July 11, 2013 at 11:32 am

In other words, “No 11 million new Democrat votes, no deal.” How any reasonable GOP congressman would be against that is a complete mystery…

MaureenTheTemp | July 11, 2013 at 11:35 am

What about hard core voter fraud reform? Tell the Dems they don’t get their new illegal immigrant voters unless we have mandatory ID presentation to vote, mandatory address verification, no same day voter registration, Social Security must notify Registrar of Voters when it receives a death certificate, mandatory proactive cleaning of voter rolls, etc etc. You’ll see the Dems run so fast from this it will make your head spin.

Please this immi reform amnesty push is like a shell game. Keep up, don’t take your eye off the bill or they’ll screw us.

Were they smart the Republicans would announce they are shelving any amnesty discussions (and use that term explicitly) to focus on the economy – and start generating bills to rein in the EPA and other regulatory agencies;

“The American people have told us that their priority is fixing Obama’s broken economy, did fiddling around with other issues.

We invite the President to join us in finding ways we can get Americans back to starting businesses and working. “

    thorleywinston in reply to 18-1. | July 11, 2013 at 12:01 pm

    Exactly! The amnesty bill much like gun control was nothing more than an attempt by the administration to take attention away from the economy and the even sorrier state of our nation’s finances.

    If Boehner were smart he’d say that immigration reform or any bill related to it is off the table until (a) real unemployment is below 5 percent for three consecutive quarters and (b) the federal deficit has been at or below $200 billion for an entire year.

    princepsCO in reply to 18-1. | July 11, 2013 at 1:29 pm

    “Were they smart…” sure assumes so much that I fear the 11 million criminals will win…

    Which reminds me of the following: Only three rats want to destroy American values and hopes: Democrats, Republicrats, and bureaucrats.

Citizenship shouldn’t be considered for Illegal Immigrants. I think that getting them on work visa’s should be a part of it, making it easier for them to get work visa’s and actually be working for a number of years then apply for citizenship through normal channels, no amenisty.

I can’t believe that Republicans aren’t at least trying to create leverage with the Black community, who will most likely be hurt the most by an influx of newly legalized immigrants.

The only explanation for the CBC going along … Democrats love poor people so much that they keep making more of them.

If only Gérard Depardieu had come to the U.S. instead of Russia, we’d have French “Toast”..


Put it down.

Step s-l-o-w-l-y away…

It is a bomb…!!!!

I think Republicans should remind the public frequently that they DO support a path to citizenship–the one that already exists, and that hundreds of thousands of people across the world are currently on. Sargent is smearing with his inaccurate language.

    Ragspierre in reply to Dr. P. | July 11, 2013 at 1:12 pm

    Yep. Casting the right as “anti-immigrant” is like casting us as “anti-sex”.

    It REALLY depends on what you mean.

    Not that that ever impedes them…

    Unfortunately that ship has sailed.

    With the Traitor Robert’s decision in upholding the Affordable Care Act, it no longer matters if a piece of legislation which imposes a “Tax” originates in the house or in the Senate. There is now SCOTUS precedent that, if passed, a piece of legislation will be upheld as constitutional, even if a tax, when it originates in the Senate, as opposed to the House.

It’s not really a pathway to citizenship. It’s a pathway to SUPER-citizenship for most of the illegal aliens whose status would be legalized.

Most are Hispanic or non-White, which means they would qualify for all sorts of privileges and immunities that 60% of current citizens do not get.