05/26/2013
H/T One Old Vet
The Reuters news agency may be owned by a faceless Conglomerate nowadays but it retains much of the curious British concept that gave rise to the Westminster parliamentary process and the American political system — that political action should stem from evaluation of the relative merits of argument rather than the application of force, the method preferred by the American MSM.
So Will immigration reform get killed in Republican-led House? By Thomas Ferraro May 25, 2013 actually quotes Amnesty opponents and gives space to their arguments!!!The problem: House Republicans are far from convinced by arguments from party leaders that passage of the bill would help Republicans draw support from Hispanic voters. Many also believe any kind of amnesty for the estimated 11 million immigrants who are in the United States illegally is just plain wrong.
"There is no evidence to support this idea that Republicans will pick up a lot of votes if we give amnesty to 11 million folks," said Representative Tim Huelskamp, a Kansas Republican.
VDARE.com: or that they need to.
… the Republican National Committee endorsed comprehensive immigration reform in March, saying that without reaching out to the fastest-growing large segment of the U.S. voting population, the party could say goodbye to the presidency for generations to come…
But Huelskamp noted that Republican Senator John McCain failed to attract much Hispanic support in his 2008 presidential campaign despite having crafted and pushed a sweeping immigration bill the year before that was ultimately rejected.
McCain picked up 31 percent of the Hispanic vote in 2008 against Obama, just 4 percentage points more than 2012 Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney ended up with against Obama four years later.
Reuters notes
… many Republicans remain unconvinced, particularly in the House, where only 39 of the 233 members come from districts that are 20 percent or more Hispanic, according to a recent study by Alex Engler in the Georgetown (University) Public Policy Review.
And then under the sub head “POLITICS ASIDE” finds space for Congressman Mo Brooks, one of the most articulate and consequently least heard Amnesty opponents
Brooks said the political benefit to Republicans should not matter.
"We can’t afford to give amnesty to every person who wants to illegally cross our borders," he said. "We don’t have enough money in our piggy bank. Amnesty begets more amnesty.
"I cannot in good conscience ratify illegal conduct with my vote. Any Republican who advocates ratifying illegal conduct with their vote is subverting the very principles that made the United States a great nation."
This is not an anti Amnesty piece. Reuters also quotes
Representative Raul Labrador, an Idaho Republican and a member of a group of eight House members seeking to craft a bipartisan bill of their own, said: "We aren’t going to win any votes if we do immigration reform. But we might actually do the right thing for America, which is the most important thing
Or the right thing for a Puerto Rican Immigration Lawyer who is also a Mormon.
The illustration at the top is from One Old Vet’s presentation of Sen. Sessions: Senate immigration bill will 'hammer working Americans' by Bernie Becker The Hill 05/25/13“This is far, far too many low-skilled workers that are going to take jobs and pull down wages of people unemployed and underemployed right now,” Sessions, a senior member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, said on Fox Business.
As far as I can see, this is the only mention of this critical subject in all the weekend coverage of the Amnesty/Immigration Acceleration Bill.
This is a content archive of VDARE.com, which Letitia James forced off of the Internet using lawfare.