What if George W. Bush really believed in enforcing the borders? Allah Pundit presents the Bush immigration speech remix. Put down your coffee before listening.

Heather Mac Donald has a must-read (everything she writes is must-read) post over at The Immigration Blog: Why East Coast Elites Should Shut Up About Immigration. Ditto that.

John Hawkins polls right-of-center bloggers on immigration: thumbs down for the Senate bill.

Meanwhile, hearings begin today in San Diego over border enforcement failures:

Congressional hearings are usually held to explore an issue and search for solutions. House Republicans have been frank that their hearings, slated for this month and next, will be used as a negotiating tool with two goals: to highlight what they see as flaws in the Senate-passed immigration bill and build public support for their enforcement-only measure.

“Pointing out what I would describe as the inadequacies in the Reid-Kennedy bill will help strengthen our hand as we move toward a compromise with the Senate,” said House majority leader John Boehner, Republican of Ohio , who used the names of two Democrats, Senators Harry Reid of Nevada and Edward M. Kennedy of Massachusetts, to refer to and deride the bipartisan bill.

Democrats dismissed the House hearings as political theater aimed at rallying core GOP voters with biased witness lists and loaded topic headings. Even so, the minority party is just as enthusiastic to start them.

In San Diego and the three or four other hearings to follow, Democrats plan to ask why Republicans are spending the summer talking about immigration, instead of working on it.

And Democrats say that the hearings are the perfect opportunity to point out that if the border is porous, if agents are underfunded, and if workplace immigration law is rarely enforced, much of that has happened under six years of Republican rule.

Democrats in Congress — and President Bush — largely support the Senate bill, which includes enforcement measures along with a guest-worker program and a way for most of the country’s illegal immigrants to attain citizenship.

The House bill, closely identified with congressional Republicans, focuses on enforcement, including a 700-mile wall along the southern border and provisions that would make illegal presence in the United States a felony.

Until the hearings are complete, negotiations to reconcile the two bills will not begin, though House and Senate leaders are expected to confer throughout the summer. As they do, the House will hold hearings in California, Texas, and Arizona to examine border vulnerabilities; the use of English as the official US language; enforcement of current immigration law; and the impact of illegal immigration on local, state, and federal governments.

There are murmurs that Bush is “willing to deal” with the House GOP:

On the eve of nationwide hearings that could determine the fate of his immigration bill, President Bush is signaling a new willingness to negotiate with House Republicans in an effort to revise the stalled legislation before Election Day.

Republicans both inside and outside the White House say Bush, who has long insisted on comprehensive reform, is now open to a so-called “enforcement-first” approach that would put new border security programs in place before creating a guest worker program or path to citizenship for people living in the United States illegally.

The shift is significant because Bush has repeatedly said he favors legislation like the Senate’s immigration bill, which establishes border security, guest worker and citizenship programs all at once. The enforcement-first approach puts Bush one step closer to the House, where Republicans are demanding an enforcement-only measure.

I’m not buying it.

***

La Shawn Barber looks at Mike Pence’s “amnesty-lite” plan.

comments (0)   trackbacks (6)