Bush pleads with fellow Republicans for immigration support

By: DAVID ESPO - Associated Press | Tuesday, June 12, 2007 9:00 PM PDT ∞

WASHINGTON -- His party divided and his polls sagging, President Bush prodded rebellious Senate Republicans on Tuesday to help resurrect legislation that could provide eventual citizenship for millions of illegal immigrants.

"It's a highly emotional issue," said Bush after a session in which several lawmakers bluntly told him their constituents do not trust the government to secure the nation's borders or weed out illegal workers at job sites.

To alleviate the concerns, the president said he was receptive to an emergency spending bill as a way to emphasize his administration's commitment to accelerated enforcement. One congressional official put the price tag at up to $15 billion.

"I don't think he changed any minds," conceded Sen. Mel Martinez, R-Fla., a supporter of the legislation. But Martinez added that the president's appearance had helped nudge "people on the fence" to be more favorably inclined.

One Republican widely viewed as a potential convert, Sen. Bob Corker of Tennessee, said he was not yet persuaded. "At the end of the day, I've got to be able to sit down and know myself that we are going to secure our border," he said. "Today, I do not feel that way."

Bush's trip to the Capitol marked only the second time since he became president that he attended the weekly closed-door senators lunch, a gesture that underscored the importance he places on passage of comprehensive immigration legislation.

Despite the president's commitment, many conservatives in his own party have criticized the measure as amnesty for millions of lawbreakers. Additionally, job approval ratings in the 30-percent range make it difficult for the president to bend even Republican lawmakers to his will.

Compounding the challenge is a stream of statements from Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., that it is up to Bush and the Republicans to produce enough votes to revive a measure that was sidetracked on the Senate floor last week. "We'll move on to immigration when they have their own act together," he told reporters during the day.

"Fourteen percent of the Republicans supporting the president's bill won't do the trick," he said, referring to the fact that only seven GOP senators supported a move to free the bill from limbo last week.

Several participants in the Republican meeting described the session as friendly and rancor-free, and said Bush had even made a joke at one point when addressing Sen. Jeff Sessions, the Alabama Republican who is one of the bill's fiercest critics.

One senator quoted Bush as telling Sessions: "Don't worry, I'll still go to your fundraiser. We disagree about this, but we are friends."

Sessions was among the senators to question the president, pointing to polls showing widespread opposition to the legislation. Bush responded that there are other polls that show support, according to participants. They spoke on condition of anonymity, citing confidentiality rules covering the closed-door meeting.

These officials said numerous senators told Bush the public lacks confidence that the government would carry out the enforcement measures in the bill.

Sen. Saxby Chambliss, R-Ga., told Bush that he and fellow Georgia Republican Johnny Isakson had sent the president a letter outlining the concerns.

"The message from a majority of Georgians is that they have no trust that the United States government will enforce the laws contained in this new legislation and secure the border first," it said.

"This lack of trust is rooted in the mistakes made in 1986, and the continued chaos surrounding our immigration laws. Understandably, the lack of credibility the federal government has on this issue gives merit to the skepticism of many about future immigration reform."

The letter asked Bush to support a spending bill to secure the border before other elements of the immigration measure go into effect. It did not specify how much money would be needed, but one congressional official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said the advance costs could reach $10 billion to $15 billion.

"The administration should request the emergency funds, and the Senate should vote to provide them before resuming debate on the broader immigration measure," Chambliss said in an interview.

Apart from the additional funds, Republican and Democratic supporters of the bill hoped to complete work on an agreement that could free it for final passage by month's end.

Discussions center on a plan to allow votes on about a dozen Republican-sponsored amendments as well as several proposals by Democrats. In exchange, GOP holdouts would then support a move to end debate and advance the bill to a final vote.

Among the amendments was one by Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison, R-Texas, to require all illegal immigrant household heads to return to their countries of origin before obtaining legal status. Under the legislation, only those seeking green cards -- permanent legal residency -- would be required to return home first.

After an early evening negotiating session between Republican and Democratic senators, Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., said the group is trying to craft an amendment to assure Americans that the bill will include ample funding for tighter border security and tougher workplace enforcement. The plan could involve "pre-funding" the effort with billions of dollars eventually to be repaid through fines and fees, he said, or through a more traditional supplemental spending bill, such as those recently used to pay for the Iraq war.

Graham said the bipartisan negotiators also are looking at harsher penalties for immigrants who overstay their visas or re-enter the country illegally. "If you had mandatory jail time" for such offenses, he said, "I think it would create a deterrent."

Another possible amendment, Graham said, would ban employers from participating in a new temporary worker program if they repeatedly break the law by hiring illegal workers.

"I'm looking for ways to break the cycle of skepticism" among those who feel a new immigration law would be as poorly enforced as the 1986 law, he said.

The administration pushed back against Republican critics of the bill later Tuesday. In a letter to nine conservative senators who bitterly oppose the measure, Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff said the administration has committed manpower and money to improving border security and enforcement, and needs the immigration bill to step up its efforts.

"Failure to act on this legislation will deny the country the safety and security provided by these enhanced enforcement measures," Chertoff wrote.

Next

More Stories

Tags:

Bookmark and Share

Ads by Yahoo!

Advertisement

Pre-Registration Comments[-]Go to Top

Don't be fooled wrote on Jun 13, 2007 3:02 AM:This bill is very very bad for the country. Enforcement of the laws already on the books is all that is needed at this time along with securing the borders. Keep the pressure on our out of touch politicians who would sell us out. Any politician who votes with Pres. Bush on this should not be re-elected.

Bush Deporter wrote on Jun 13, 2007 5:58 AM:As a failed president who has done his own will and not the will of the people, it is time to reward George W. Since their is one country that actually likes the Decider, we should deport George and the 20 million plus illegals to Albania. It seems that United States does not want George and Mexico does not want its citizens so this would be perfect for Albania. A third world Muslim country , with third world Catholic citizens and an evanglelical Christian from the the most powerful nation in the world. With all the prayer from all the faiths they are sure to turn Albania around.

Carter: wrote on Jun 13, 2007 6:56 AM: Our President is intent on giving away our country, it seems. He also seems to be intent on losing the next election for the Republicans.

Concerned-1 wrote on Jun 13, 2007 8:28 AM:It irks me to no end to hear people lie, and lie and lie again to the public. This bill will do nothing to secure our borders that our current laws, and the fence appropriation, are already in place to do. As my dear old dad used to say, the secret is in the doing.

Question? wrote on Jun 13, 2007 8:42 AM:The question is, why is Bush in such a hurry to pass this awful bill? There is something driving him and he is not to be trusted. The republican senators are right to be against this.

Reardon wrote on Jun 13, 2007 8:51 AM:The Grand Bargain includes provisions for convicted Gang Bangers to get a path to citizenship, and for the 600,000 currently under federal deportation orders because of crimes to have the deportation revoked. With the government only given 24 hours to run a background check on each applicant, there is the certainty that still more bad guys will get to continue to live amongst us. An amendment to correct some of these obvious flaws was defeated in the Senate on an uncompromising take it or leave it basis so the opposition left it! The proponents of this bill tried to ram it through with glaring flaws that could not withstand a sanitizing sunlight of scrutiny. I favor a comprehensive approach, or a piecemeal approach but this Bill stunk to high heaven! There are many areas of agreement on immigration lets pick the political low-hanging fruit and argue at length about the more debatable parts of the whole. We need solutions, not political victories. Proponents of this Bill should be defeated for even proposing such a flawed and overreaching approach without permitting deep discussion or amendments. Even in defeat, they are not chastened. They should be defeated at the polls for incompetence and arrogance.

Where's The Fence wrote on Jun 13, 2007 11:44 AM:He can plead all he wants. He signed the Secure Fence Act that instructed him to build 500+ miles of fence. How many miles of fence has he actually built to date? If he was bargaining in good faith, he would have come to the table and said, "Look, I'm building 10 miles of fence per day because I am committed to securing our borders. How about a guest worker program and a path to citizenship?". But he cannot say that because he has not even built 10 miles yet. Opponents can only give face time to Bush out of respect for the office of the President, not out of respect for the man holding the office.

Lame Duck Soon Gone wrote on Jun 13, 2007 1:10 PM:Bush will be gone in 18 months. He is willing to promise to enforce the 'new' border security provisions within 18 months. Oops! He will not be in office to answer for his failure. The new President will blame the Bush adminstration, and the cycle of Federal corruption and/or incompetence on enforce the immigration laws will continue. Here's an idea: ENFORCE THE EXISTING IMMIGRATIONS LAWS! At least we should have some Senate committee hearing on why the existing immigrations laws are not being enforced.

Federal Rental Ban wrote on Jun 13, 2007 1:12 PM:The underground economy will undermine tougher employment sanctions. Tougher interior enforcement is needed. A Federal ban on renting or providing housing to illegal aliens will be much more effective than trying to chase employers in the underground economy. 20 years is enough to prove that. Require every landlord to verifying residency status before renting to a tenant, similar to what employers are supported to do. Now that would be effective.

Reardon thank you wrote on Jun 13, 2007 2:10 PM:for pointing out just a few of the REALLY bad points in this bill. John McCain should be running as a Democrat for supporting this give a way. I feel it is a reward to big business.

garth wrote on Jun 13, 2007 3:20 PM:so landlords are police now? you have to be able to spot fake residency papers or IDs? do you ask all renters, whatever they look like, for papers? what about people walking down the street? "Present your papers". Sounds American doesn't it?

Federal Rental Ban wrote on Jun 13, 2007 5:41 PM:Renting property is a business. The business relationship between landlord and tenant is a long term relationship lasting for months or years. Asking a landlord to spend a few minutes to verify residency status using something like an I-9 form, much like employers are now required to do, is not a big deal except to the illegal immigrant who is trying to blend into the existing community undetected. For the last 20 years, I have had to provide documents to my employer to be able to work. Fake documents is the currency of criminals and are no excuse for not implementing effective policies, such as a Federal rental ban. By the way, legal immigrants are required to carry papers at all times (8 U.S.C. 1304(e)) and to submit a change of address within 10 days of moving (8 U.S.C. 1305 and 1306). Foreign nationals do not have the right to invade the US and reside here without consequence because they claim some civil right violation. That is a perversion of civil rights, and if allowed to continue, may result in tyranny imposed by the foreign invaders. (Ever hear the slogan, 'today we march, tomorrow we vote'?) Every citizen of the US, including landlords, should welcome the opportunity to assist in the effort to address the problem of illegal immigration.

do we have a say wrote on Jun 13, 2007 6:34 PM:Are'nt american citizens involved in passing or rejecting a bill like this? I don't remember being able to vote on this issue. or am I missing something here.

The Silent Majority wrote on Jun 13, 2007 7:10 PM:THE GRASS ROOTS ROARED Talking is great . its the american way , Help with this invation of our county .GOOGLE numbersUSA . Its FREE !!!the'll hook you up . Also keep talking that will inform everyone .

Singer wrote on Jun 13, 2007 9:31 PM:In response to Garth - No, Garth landlords aren't police - and they don't even HAVE to be able to spot fake ID's. However, they can do a search on the Soc Sec card (one is done on many mortgage loan applicants - it's an easy process, and you get results within 1-2 days, max.). I think this should be done on EVERYBODY, who applies for a rental. No discrimination - simply asking, "Are you who you say you are?"

Registered Comments[-]Go to Top

Advertisement

Videos