Something that I read, from one month ago, noted that there were 300 amendments to the Immigration Reform Bill, which the bi-partisdan “Gang of Eight” Senators had been working on for approximately eight months. No doubt that that list has grown by now. Leading the league (positive or negative?) is Senator Chuck Grassley (R-IA), with 77. The link on FiscalTimes, is: http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/Articles/2013/05/09/5-Controversial-Amendments-to-the-Immigration-Reform-Bill.aspx?p=1.
Five proposed amendments, by themselves, will likely ruin the the efforts of bi-partisan cooperation. These amendments: bar South Koreans from entrepreneurial visas, limit undocumented workers to low-paying jobs, removing the “Pathway to Citizenship”, requiring DNA samples and requiring proof of an estimated $46,000 annual income are the five. Do these mostly GOPers talk to each other?
I recall, during the congressional Hearings, after the Boston Marathon Bombings, when some Republicans were suggesting that that might be reason enough to cancel Immigration Reform. Apparently Sen. Grassly hadn’t heard of Adam Lanza (Newtown, CN), James Holmes (Aurora, CO) or Timothy McVeigh (Oklahoma City, OK)–all mass murderers born in the U.S. But, really, Sen. Grassley, how can you possibly make $46,000 per year if you are limited to the “domestic service” jobs (i.e. babysitter, janitor, maid, etc.), which Senator Mike Lee (R-UT)’s amendment requires?
There appears to be, at least to me, a number of orchestrated delaying tactics which the Republicans are using–to appear FOR it, while really being AGAINST it. Remember that this is the same party that is trying to entice younger voters to join their ranks, as Conan O’Brien’s says, by FAXing them.
It appears to me that amendments have been a convenient delaying tactic. Congress has really passed very little actual Legislation recently. Amendments are nothing new; but, not to the extent that they are today. Accordingly, President Obama (and any future President) should have the ability to sign Legislation into Law, while striking out parts that he or she might deem unnecessary. That’s just carrying “Signing Statements” to their rightful goal.
Whatever the Political Party, the President was generally elected by the American People. So, they should have the ability to separate the Wheat from the Chaff. Let’s start giving every administration the benefit to narrow a Bill, deleting the Chaff and get on with Business. Dare we assume that the Parties will ever agree on anything?