I just received this
excuse letter from Senator Jon Kyl. Read it carefully...it seems he gets what Americans want, yet voted for the opposite. My message to Senator Kyl and every Senator that voted for cloture today: You're right about one thing. This amnesty bill was definitely a compromise...a compromise of our national security, not to mention our core values. UNACCEPTABLE.
The Senate voted this morning against invoking cloture on the immigration reform bill, taking the issue off of the Senate’s calendar for the time being. While there is still a chance that a reform bill could be resurrected, the legislative schedule for the remainder of the year is such that significant immigration reform is unlikely to be considered again in the near future.
The result of the cloture vote demonstrates just how difficult it is to achieve the consensus necessary to overhaul the nation’s immigration laws. The bill before the Senate had something for everyone to love, and hate. For conservatives, the bill included unprecedented additional resources to help secure the border (including the dollars upfront to pay for them), an end to chain migration, an effective employee verification system to prevent illegal immigrants from gaining employment, and a temporary worker program that is truly temporary. For liberals, it offered a way to deal with illegal immigrants who are already here, though the automatic pathway to citizenship they wanted was eliminated.
To get something done, both sides had to make concessions. Considering that Republicans are in the minority, I believe we won far more than we gave up. I’ve linked to an editorial from the Washington Post that illustrates how the liberal media and Democrat politicians scorn the bill’s strong enforcement bent and the common-sense amendments some of us offered. Nevertheless, Senators from both the right and the left ends of each party united to block the bill’s further consideration. It was a case of letting the pursuit of the perfect become the enemy of the good.
Many people have rightfully criticized the federal government for failing in the past to enforce the law and deal effectively with the problem of illegal immigration. I agree with them. And they understandably look skeptically on our current efforts to strengthen the law, even while they demand that Congress act. But we will never be able to solve the problem by saying “no” to new legislation because of past failures. And we cannot simply say “enforce the law.” As I’ve said before, much of the current law is unenforceable. The Senate’s vote today regrettably means the status quo will continue, with thousands of illegal immigrants continuing to pour across our borders every day and millions who are already here continuing to receive silent amnesty.
Senators have been listening to their constituents around the country – the number of calls, letters, faxes, and emails has been unprecedented, even jamming phone lines into the Senate earlier today. I, for one, have tried to turn constructive suggestions into meaningful amendments to enhance the enforcement provisions of the bill. Though the current legislation has been defeated, I’ll keep fighting for additional resources in upcoming appropriations bills for more Border Patrol agents, the construction of border fencing and other barriers, and improved technology along the border. I will urge the Bush administration to enforce those parts of the law that are enforceable in order to demonstrate to a skeptical public that our government is indeed committed to enforcing the law. I also intend to introduce legislation that will focus on enforcing immigration laws at the workplace and securing the border. Clearly, the American people want more enforcement before doing anything else.
I’ll continue to listen, and I invite your comments, suggestions, and criticisms. Thank you.
So, he realizes the American people want enforcement first, AND he understands we want enforcement first because we don't trust the government to do any enforcement otherwise (like in the past)...yet he voted against what he knows his constituents want. He says much of the current law is unenforceable. So we do NO ENFORCEMENT? Hey Senator Kyl, guess what? Many parts of the current law ARE enforceable - so let's start enforcing. And how about that fence that was already approved - where is it? SHOW ME THE FENCE! Senator Kyl says, "we can't simply say 'enforce the law'." Why not Senator? Aren't laws intended to be enforced? I'm so sick of hearing "we can't" and "it's the best we can do". Then move aside and make room for someone who CAN and WILL get the job done.
Senator Kyl says, "It was a case of letting the pursuit of the perfect become the enemy of the good." Is he smoking crack? They weren't pursuing anything close to perfection and passage of this bill, not defeat, would have been the "enemy of the good".
This Senator aknowledges "the number of calls, letters, faxes, and emails has been unprecedented, even jamming phone lines into the Senate...", yet he refused to listen to the messages being sent by his constituents. Either he's deaf, hard-headed or just plain doesn't care what his constituents want.
Senator Kyl says, "we will never be able to solve the problem by saying “no” to new legislation because of past failures." Well we'll never solve any probelms by REPEATING past failures either. Are our elected officials really too stupid to learn from past mistakes?
The Washington Post editorial referenced is such B.S. that I excluded the link. This Senator is just truly clueless. Apparently, Washington will do that to you after awhile. Perhaps it's time to re-examine term limits?