PDA

View Full Version : Immigration bill dead


Cochise
06-07-2007, 07:35 PM
FNC reporting that a vote us underway to close debate, expected to fail, and effectively kill the bill.

The grassroots revolt seems to have worked.

Taco John
06-07-2007, 07:44 PM
I guess the Bush Cabinet wrote the bill... (http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601086&sid=aXhmExImUeKM&refer=latin_america)

I wonder what's going to pop up in its place.

mlyonsd
06-07-2007, 08:34 PM
I guess the Bush Cabinet wrote the bill... (http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601086&sid=aXhmExImUeKM&refer=latin_america)

I wonder what's going to pop up in its place.

Bush tricked Ted Kennedy? Wow.

Anything popping up in it's place is better than this bill IMO.

BucEyedPea
06-07-2007, 08:57 PM
I guess the Bush Cabinet wrote the bill... (http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601086&sid=aXhmExImUeKM&refer=latin_america)

I wonder what's going to pop up in its place.

I read it was certain cabinet members, and select members of Congress.

They WILL be back. They need to be put on a short leash...including Bush.
I got an email telling me the calls did make an impact. Good work for those who did.

Here's what Teddy said:
`The vote was obviously a big disappointment, but it makes no sense to fold our tent, and I certainly don't intend to,'' Massachusetts Democrat Edward Kennedy, a chief negotiator, said in a statement. ``I believe we're well within reach of a realistic solution.''

Silock
06-07-2007, 09:29 PM
w00t!!!!!!

Logical
06-07-2007, 09:53 PM
Sorry to report that the vote is not filibuster proof so it is expected to be overturned, at least that is what is now being reported by Mark Levin.

sportsman1
06-07-2007, 11:44 PM
I hope it not only fails but burns in the firey depths of Hell.

Pitt Gorilla
06-07-2007, 11:51 PM
Good.

Logical
06-08-2007, 12:23 AM
FNC reporting that a vote us underway to close debate, expected to fail, and effectively kill the bill.

The grassroots revolt seems to have worked.


OK I found a link, the bill is not dead, just not expedited.

You can read about it here.

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/ap/tx/4872287.html

Trench
06-08-2007, 10:14 AM
OK I found a link, the bill is not dead, just not expedited.

You can read about it here.

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/ap/tx/4872287.html

Looking at the Senate's records (thomas.loc.gov, if you're interested), yesterday's vote was a vote on cloture. No cloture means they can't stop a filibuster.

BucEyedPea
06-08-2007, 10:23 AM
Looking at the Senate's records (thomas.loc.gov, if you're interested), yesterday's vote was a vote on cloture. No cloture means they can't stop a filibuster.
I got an email saying it was a vote on cloture too. I thought this thread was after getting that.

StcChief
06-08-2007, 10:33 AM
Good. Lets get something fair.

caffeinated_virus
06-08-2007, 11:27 AM
I got an email saying it was a vote on cloture too. I thought this thread was after getting that.

It was a vote of cloture yesterday.

In fact, the bill failed TWICE on votes of cloture. Once in the morning, and then later yesterday afternoon.

Senator Harry Reid (NV) said he would pull the bill if he did not get the 60 votes needed on cloture yesterday. The bill failed 50 nays to 45 yeas....so he is pulling the bill.

BucEyedPea
06-08-2007, 02:06 PM
It was a vote of cloture yesterday.

In fact, the bill failed TWICE on votes of cloture. Once in the morning, and then later yesterday afternoon.

Yeah, I had recieved a 2nd email saying Reids was gonna do this again in the afternoon....but I was too busy to check at that time.

Senator Harry Reid (NV) said he would pull the bill if he did not get the 60 votes needed on cloture yesterday. The bill failed 50 nays to 45 yeas....so he is pulling the bill.

Thanks!

Garcia Bronco
06-08-2007, 02:32 PM
The sad thing is except for the amnesty...all that oter shit is already on the books.

Garcia Bronco
06-08-2007, 02:33 PM
It was a vote of cloture yesterday.

In fact, the bill failed TWICE on votes of cloture. Once in the morning, and then later yesterday afternoon.

Senator Harry Reid (NV) said he would pull the bill if he did not get the 60 votes needed on cloture yesterday. The bill failed 50 nays to 45 yeas....so he is pulling the bill.

Who where the 45 yays...

Can anybody get that list?

Garcia Bronco
06-08-2007, 02:41 PM
These are the 45.

Daniel Akaka (http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/members/a000069/), Evan Bayh (http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/members/b001233/), Joseph Biden (http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/members/b000444/), Sherrod Brown (http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/members/b000944/), Maria Cantwell (http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/members/c000127/), Ben Cardin (http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/members/c000141/), Thomas Carper (http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/members/c000174/), Bob Casey (http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/members/c001070/), Hillary Clinton (http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/members/c001041/), Kent Conrad (http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/members/c000705/), Christopher Dodd (http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/members/d000388/), Dick Durbin (http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/members/d000563/), Russell Feingold (http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/members/f000061/), Dianne Feinstein (http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/members/f000062/), Tom Harkin (http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/members/h000206/), Daniel Inouye (http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/members/i000025/), Edward Kennedy (http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/members/k000105/), John Kerry (http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/members/k000148/), Amy Klobuchar (http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/members/k000367/), Herb Kohl (http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/members/k000305/), Frank Lautenberg (http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/members/l000123/), Patrick Leahy (http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/members/l000174/), Carl Levin (http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/members/l000261/), Blanche Lincoln (http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/members/l000035/), Robert Menéndez (http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/members/m000639/), Barbara Mikulski (http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/members/m000702/), Patty Murray (http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/members/m001111/), Bill Nelson (http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/members/n000032/), Ben Nelson (http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/members/n000180/), Barack Obama (http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/members/o000167/), Jack Reed (http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/members/r000122/), Harry Reid (http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/members/r000146/), Kenneth Salazar (http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/members/s001163/), Chuck Schumer (http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/members/s000148/), Debbie Stabenow (http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/members/s000770/),
Sheldon Whitehouse (http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/members/w000802/), Ron Wyden (http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/members/w000779/),

Joseph Lieberman (http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/members/l000304/)

Lindsey Graham (http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/members/g000359/), Chuck Hagel (http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/members/h001028/), Richard Lugar (http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/members/l000504/), Mel Martinez (http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/members/m001162/), John McCain (http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/members/m000303/), Arlen Specter (http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/members/s000709/), George Voinovich (http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/members/v000126/)

Logical
06-08-2007, 04:40 PM
It was a vote of cloture yesterday.

In fact, the bill failed TWICE on votes of cloture. Once in the morning, and then later yesterday afternoon.

Senator Harry Reid (NV) said he would pull the bill if he did not get the 60 votes needed on cloture yesterday. The bill failed 50 nays to 45 yeas....so he is pulling the bill.

Actually that is not what he said, here is Harry Reids exact quote:


"I, even though disappointed, look forward to passing this bill," Reid said. "I have every desire to complete this legislation, and we all have to work — the president included — to figure out a way to get this bill passed."

Taco John
06-08-2007, 06:19 PM
Looks like it's not dead yet....


Bush Hopes to Revive Immigration Bill

CHARLES BABINGTON | June 8, 2007 06:15 PM EST

WASHINGTON — President Bush, trying to recover from a stinging setback on immigration, will personally try in a visit to the Capitol next week to revive the embattled plan for legalizing millions of unlawful immigrants.

He began his hands-on approach Friday, placing phone calls to three key Republican senators from Air Force One during a European trip.

The calls and Bush's scheduled lunch on Tuesday with GOP senators are part of a campaign by the White House and allies in both parties to placate or outmaneuver conservative Republicans who blocked the broad immigration measure this week. They said Friday they would try again to reach accord on the number of amendments the dissidents could offer.

Opponents of the bill promised to continue fighting all such efforts, and some House members declared the legislation dead.

Democratic leaders accused Bush of being too tepid in pushing the legislation, which would tighten borders and offer employers more temporary workers from abroad in addition to providing lawful status to an estimated 12 million illegal aliens and putting many of them on a path toward citizenship

Many Republicans defended the president's role. But the bill's backers nonetheless welcomed his plan to attend the GOP senators' weekly luncheon in the Capitol for the first time in five years.

The visit was scheduled before this week's immigration votes, and Bush will discuss numerous subjects with Republican senators, said White House spokesman Scott Stanzel. "But certainly immigration is a topic" high on the list, he said.

Stanzel said Bush called GOP Sens. Jon Kyl of Arizona, Trent Lott of Mississippi and Minority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky on Friday. He said Bush and the three senators "are optimistic that this legislation will be brought back for consideration."

Bush also planned to devote his Saturday radio address to immigration.

Senate backers of the immigration bill fell 15 votes short of the 60 needed Thursday to limit debate and allow a vote on the measure itself. Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., then set the measure aside, calling it "the president's bill" and saying Bush's direct intervention was crucial to reviving it.

On Friday, some key Republicans agreed. "Whose bill is it?" Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., said in a news briefing held by bill supporters. "Harry Reid says this is the Bush proposal. Harry Reid is right."

White House spokeswoman Dana Perino, talking with reporters traveling with Bush in Europe, said the president "continues to be regularly briefed" on the legislation. The administration, she said, is encouraging Reid "to keep the debate open. It's a very important issue; people want to have conversations about it."

Several Senate conservatives continue to say they were not allowed to offer enough changes to the bill. Some of their proposals would make it easier to detect and deport immigrants who have overstayed their visas or committed other violations.

Sen. Jim DeMint, R-S.C., a key opponent, said the bill as written "still unfairly burdens taxpayers, doesn't ensure secure borders and guarantees amnesty" for illegal immigrants.

The bill's supporters say DeMint and other critics will oppose the measure no matter how many amendments are accepted. Nonetheless, they agreed Friday that some type of peace accord with the conservatives is essential if the measure is to return to life.

"If we're able to come up with a list of amendments that could take two or even three days to complete, 10 years from now or 100 years from now who will care that it was an extra three days if we can achieve the result that we're talking about?" said Republican Sen. Kyl of Arizona.

Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, D-Mass., told reporters he was hopeful because the Senate "is a chemical place. There's a flow to activity here. The tide comes in and goes out. And once in a while, the stars get lined up correctly, and we move ahead."

Some House Democrats and Republicans declared the Bush-backed legislation dead, saying the only viable alternative would focus more heavily on tightening borders without granting lawful status to those who entered the country illegally.

"The Senate immigration bill was a deeply, deeply flawed proposal, and I'm glad it has finally landed in the political graveyard," said freshman Rep. Nancy Boyda, D-Kan. "America needs enforcement, not amnesty."

"This bill is dead," said Rep. Brian Bilbray, R-Calif. He called for new legislation "that does not grant amnesty" but focuses instead on border security and workplace enforcement.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/huff-wires/20070608/congress-immigration/

Amnorix
06-08-2007, 07:24 PM
EFFECTIVELY(!!) **THIS** bill is dead.

Think cloture in terms of a clot to stop the bleeding via filibuster. Failure to pass the cloture vote means that the Senate as a whole is effectively filibustering the legislation, and that the Senate leadership can't stop it.

As a result, this bill, in its current configuration, is being shelved by the Democratic leadership so they can move on to other issues.

Immigration legislation can, of course, be revisited by the WH and Senate negotiating committes, but clearly the bill in its current form was unpalatable to too many Senators.

And, in case anyone asks, the House leadership basically said they wouldn't even take up the measure unless the Senate could pass a bill first. Clearly, the Democratic leadership in the House figured that they could muscle together the votes to get something close passed so that it could then be worked out in committee, and wasn't going to waste time when they knew the thing was a wounded duck flying into the Senate at the start.

Cochise
06-09-2007, 03:58 PM
I actually heard some people talking this week in a restaurant about the bill, and it was the first time I have heard anyone say they supported it. (Granted, I was in Miami)

The rationalization was, well, they have to pay a fine and back taxes and go home while they wait in line for citizenship. I wanted to jump up and say that not one farking one of them is going to do that! Once they are legal to work here, no focking body is going to follow this process to citizenship. Who cares about that? They just want to work, and they would be more or less legal to work from the day Bush's pen touched the paper.

None of them are going to pay a $5,000 fine and back taxes and go back home to wait their turn to get in. It's a ridiculous canard.

go bowe
06-09-2007, 06:55 PM
I actually heard some people talking this week in a restaurant about the bill, and it was the first time I have heard anyone say they supported it. (Granted, I was in Miami)

The rationalization was, well, they have to pay a fine and back taxes and go home while they wait in line for citizenship. I wanted to jump up and say that not one farking one of them is going to do that! Once they are legal to work here, no focking body is going to follow this process to citizenship. Who cares about that? They just want to work, and they would be more or less legal to work from the day Bush's pen touched the paper.

None of them are going to pay a $5,000 fine and back taxes and go back home to wait their turn to get in. It's a ridiculous canard.who cares about citizenship?

a great many illegals want very much to become citizens...

then they can bring over the rest of their immediate family legally and relatively quickly...

(just like my brother in law, that's how my wife got into the country)...

as far as the amnesty proposal goes, i'm generally not in favor of amnesty, particularly in its current form (as written in the proposed bill that got stalled in the senate)...

but sooner or later the realities on the ground will force us to to come up with some more reasonable concept of limited amnesty...

the problen is that trying to do anything to 12 million or more illegals already here isn't feasible as a practical matter...

if there was anything feasible, you would expect that it would have been tried by now...

Ultra Peanut
06-09-2007, 07:08 PM
http://i13.tinypic.com/4v6yjbl.jpg

caffeinated_virus
06-11-2007, 11:07 AM
Who where the 45 yays...

Can anybody get that list?

Here you go:

Vote results (http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=110&session=1&vote=00206)

caffeinated_virus
06-11-2007, 11:09 AM
The sad thing is except for the amnesty...all that oter shit is already on the books.

Which begs the question, why do we need a new immigration bill?

Why not just secure the borders and enforce the laws?

caffeinated_virus
06-11-2007, 11:12 AM
EFFECTIVELY(!!) **THIS** bill is dead.

Think cloture in terms of a clot to stop the bleeding via filibuster. Failure to pass the cloture vote means that the Senate as a whole is effectively filibustering the legislation, and that the Senate leadership can't stop it.

As a result, this bill, in its current configuration, is being shelved by the Democratic leadership so they can move on to other issues.

Immigration legislation can, of course, be revisited by the WH and Senate negotiating committes, but clearly the bill in its current form was unpalatable to too many Senators.

And, in case anyone asks, the House leadership basically said they wouldn't even take up the measure unless the Senate could pass a bill first. Clearly, the Democratic leadership in the House figured that they could muscle together the votes to get something close passed so that it could then be worked out in committee, and wasn't going to waste time when they knew the thing was a wounded duck flying into the Senate at the start.

Exactly.

Also, Brian Bilbray of the House, already said there were/are numerous individuals in the House, that were eagerly waiting to kill this bill if it got to the House. I cannot recall the specifics, but there was something in the bill that would allow them to do a 'blue slip' or something. Pulling that measure would stop the bill dead in its tracks.

Jorge Bush will try to lobby Senators, but the word in DC is, there is less than 20% chance of it being revived.

caffeinated_virus
06-11-2007, 11:17 AM
For those who are further interested on this issue, check out:

http://www.numbersusa.com

http://www.alipac.us

Cochise
06-11-2007, 01:53 PM
who cares about citizenship?

a great many illegals want very much to become citizens...

then they can bring over the rest of their immediate family legally and relatively quickly...


Why would they, under the new rules, need to be citizens to do so? Their families could just cross the boder like they did and apply for the free-for-all Z visas.

Chief Faithful
06-11-2007, 02:01 PM
but sooner or later the realities on the ground will force us to to come up with some more reasonable concept of limited amnesty...

the problen is that trying to do anything to 12 million or more illegals already here isn't feasible as a practical matter...

if there was anything feasible, you would expect that it would have been tried by now...

The only thing that hasn't been tried is securing the boarders and making employers liable financially to hiring illegals. If the government did these two things I expect most of the problem would go away.

Businesses are already springing up that check for false documentation. The government does not need to get into this business just let the market work.

Chief Faithful
06-11-2007, 02:05 PM
For those who are further interested on this issue, check out:

http://www.numbersusa.com

http://www.alipac.us

I like the ALIPAC solution to the problem:

"The four things we must do are: (1). Secure our Borders. (2.) Crack down on employers that intentionally hire illegal labor. (3.) Remove all benefits such as licenses, in-state tuition, and welfare for illegal aliens. (4.) Empower local police to enforce immigration law."

caffeinated_virus
06-11-2007, 04:00 PM
I like the ALIPAC solution to the problem:

"The four things we must do are: (1). Secure our Borders. (2.) Crack down on employers that intentionally hire illegal labor. (3.) Remove all benefits such as licenses, in-state tuition, and welfare for illegal aliens. (4.) Empower local police to enforce immigration law."

Seems straightforward and should be EASY to do right?

The problem would correct itself.

Taco John
06-11-2007, 07:01 PM
Bush on "Dead" immigration bill: "I'll see you at the Bill signing..."


...He pledged to resurrect his derailed immigration bill in the Senate — "I'll see you at the bill signing,"


http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070611/ap_on_re_eu/bush;_ylt=AqBf8spQTXPwgVwuqq9zkE2s0NUE

Taco John
06-11-2007, 07:04 PM
I'm suprised Bush is willing to taunt his base like this. Surely he knows that it's the people who voted for him that primarily shut this thing down.

Fishpicker
06-11-2007, 08:36 PM
I think Bush is doing this because the bill will allow for illegal immigrants to enlist in armed services as a means to obtain citizenship. I think that particular allowance is fair & justified. I just cant agree with the rest of it. We really need some fresh bodies if we are to go after Iran.

Cochise
06-12-2007, 12:33 PM
This is not something that was done in by the Republican base. Everyone is opposed to it.

I heard an anecdote on the radio last week where Lamar Alexander was doing a town hall meeting and someone asked into the microphone for everyone in the room who supported the bill to raise their hand, and not one person raised their hand.

But everyone is against this. I'm too lazy to look up polls right now, but the public I think I heard was opposed to it upwards of 70%. You have to be gay marriage or jimmy carter or, well, Bush to be that unpopular.

Bush was on board here but let's be fair, this was Bush, McCain, Harry Reid, and Ted Kennedy's bill. I'm sure a lot of people would like to think it was just Bush's problem though.

BucEyedPea
06-19-2007, 06:59 PM
It's baaaaaaack!
Okay folks...like I said "they will be back."


They WILL be back. They need to be put on a short leash...including Bush.
I got an email telling me the calls did make an impact. Good work for those who did.

According to Congressional Quarterly (a Capitol Hill news source), debate for S. 1348 will likely be re-opened by a procedural vote on June 22. Over the past two weeks negotiations have been held behind closed doors.

It still calls for the “acceleration” of the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America, a steppingstone to the North American Union. This is a joint Kennedy-Bush policy.

I first heard it was coming back through the efforts of Reid at the end of last week through email. Then I saw Hannity late last night. I like him on this issue. Hannity said our reps are trying to force it through the back door too. He said, and I happen to agree, that all the calls from the grassroots pissed our reps off. Isn't that nice! Steve Eliot of grassfire.org (never heard of it but will check it out) mentioned how PO'd our congress was that the people spoke.


Snakes. Gotta call again.

caffeinated_virus
06-20-2007, 01:41 PM
I first heard it was coming back through the efforts of Reid at the end of last week through email. Then I saw Hannity late last night. I like him on this issue. Hannity said our reps are trying to force it through the back door too. He said, and I happen to agree, that all the calls from the grassroots pissed our reps off. Isn't that nice! Steve Eliot of grassfire.org (never heard of it but will check it out) mentioned how PO'd our congress was that the people spoke.


Snakes. Gotta call again.

Ya, it is back and the grassroots organizations are out in full force, calling in opposition to this bill.

The sad thing is, it is the same bill, with no new ammendments with Bush, Kennedy and a few others trying to get more votes for yes on cloture vote this Friday.

Selling out the country is what they are doing. As more Americans are being made aware of this bill and what is in it, more and more Americans are joining in opposition to this bill. Americans are angry and pissed off with this bill.

We pissed off our reps? These so called representatives of the people are ignorant (not all of them, but a lot of them) and now they are surprised that the people are angry?

Poll numbers show that support for this Senate bill is around 20%.
Over 55% oppose it.

They should adopt the House Secure Act bill just brought up in the House. It focuses on enforcement first and foremost before anything is done. At least most of the people in the House understand and get it.

Steve Elliot:

http://www.grassfire.org

Roy Beck

http://www.numbersusa.com

William Gheen

http://www.alipac.us

Some of the bigger names working together, against this bill.

Cochise
06-20-2007, 01:53 PM
Yeah, it's funny how the Republican members of Congress who were for this bill reacted to the uproar from all parts of the general public.

Liberals, we're used to them spouting about how talk radio is ruining America and that those kinds of voices basically need to be silenced. But to hear people like Bush and Lott turn on the base when we didn't decide to go along with this, that shows you what people in Washington really think of you. They don't care about representing your beliefs, they want to do whatever they want, no matter what the public's opinion of it.

I hope that we can get some of these people replaced in the next election cycle. I would love to see Trent Lott lose his seat (well, fat chance) to a challenger who campaigns on this immigration fiasco.

The GOP in Congress needs to be reminded that we didn't send them to Congress to be errand-boys for Ted Kennedy and Harry Reid.

Easy 6
06-20-2007, 02:07 PM
Its heartening to see that "We The People" still have atleast SOME kind of voice in the major issues.

If Bush thinks he'll "see us at the bill signing", i think he's in for a big surprise...this will go the way of SS reform & the Dubai ports deal.

caffeinated_virus
06-20-2007, 05:20 PM
Yeah, it's funny how the Republican members of Congress who were for this bill reacted to the uproar from all parts of the general public.

Liberals, we're used to them spouting about how talk radio is ruining America and that those kinds of voices basically need to be silenced. But to hear people like Bush and Lott turn on the base when we didn't decide to go along with this, that shows you what people in Washington really think of you. They don't care about representing your beliefs, they want to do whatever they want, no matter what the public's opinion of it.

I hope that we can get some of these people replaced in the next election cycle. I would love to see Trent Lott lose his seat (well, fat chance) to a challenger who campaigns on this immigration fiasco.

The GOP in Congress needs to be reminded that we didn't send them to Congress to be errand-boys for Ted Kennedy and Harry Reid.

Well said.
I would love to see a lot of people voted out of the Senate. Here is a short running list:

Lott - Mississippi
Graham -SC
Feinstein - CA
Kennedy - MA (should set term limits in the senate just because of this jack a$$...guy is a tool and could care less about Americans)

I have about a dozen more.
They are completely ignorant if they don't think their view and support of this scamnesty bill will have repercussions in the coming elections. Americans are pissed off and we will vote LOTS of Senators out of office because of this issue.

caffeinated_virus
06-20-2007, 05:22 PM
Its heartening to see that "We The People" still have atleast SOME kind of voice in the major issues.

If Bush thinks he'll "see us at the bill signing", i think he's in for a big surprise...this will go the way of SS reform & the Dubai ports deal.

Ya, almost like our modern day version of American Revolution. Rising up against tyranny and the likes.

Great thing is, more and more Americans are becoming aware of this bill each day and they don't like it.

http://www.numbersusa.com had almost 20,000 people sign up in a 3 day span. They are growing daily, as are the other grassroots organizations.

If you are interested, check out the above links in a earlier post. ALIPAC has a message forum with daily updates and campaigns. It is interesting to see the feedback we are getting from Senators when we call their office. They are quite "surprised" by the number of calls and hostility towards this bill. DUH!