|
January 30, 2009
Don't Let Harry Reid Rent Space In Your Head!
By Joe
Guzzardi
If there were one thing I could wish for my
immigration reform patriot friends, it would be that you
react with less alarmism at each and every utterance made by
Congressional traitors.
While we have to remain forever vigilant,
we simply can’t get into a lather over the
latest offending remark coming out of Washington, D.C.
I would, for example, recommend that you
follow my example when it comes to anything that
Senate
Majority Leader Harry Reid has to say about immigration (or
anything else):
Ignore it!
Since 2004, when Reid was unanimously
elected the Democrat’s Senate leader, every single prediction
he’s made about amnesty has been dead wrong. Why annoy yourself
by listening to him?
Here’s Reid’s most recent (and
canned) amnesty comment, available in Spanish only:
"I expect to
achieve it (amnesty) before September, and I feel extremely
confident [emphasis added] that we can pass it. We are 59
Democrats and we need 60 votes, then we are going to need a
little help and we are going to need them (the Republicans)."
[Ponen
fecha para reforma migratoria, El Informador,
January 28, 2009]
According to the story (dateline
Miami
and transmitted by
Univision)
Reid said that he "has spoken with the former Republican
presidential candidate
John
McCain, who has
expressed to him his support to obtain the necessary Republican
votes for the reform."
But Reid’s statement doesn’t hold up to
even the most superficial analysis.
-
First, what would anyone expect Reid to say to a Miami-based
Univision reporter? Naturally, he’s going to express
confidence that, in September, amnesty will pass. And when
September has come and gone, Reid will say that he’ll have
the votes in March 2010.
-
Second, Reid has proven repeatedly that he can’t count
votes. If he could, none of the proposed 2006 and 2007
amnesties would ever have come to the floor. All were
soundly defeated—a total embarrassment to the Democrats.
-
Third—and again assuming Reid could count—he would realize
that not all 59 Democrats would join him. Here are that
eight that will not:
Max Baucus (MT);
Jon Tester (MT);
Clare McCaskill, (MO);
Mark Pryor, (AR);
Byron Dorgan (ND);
John Rockefeller (WV);
Kirsten Gillibrand (NY).
-
And here’s another group of five that Reid shouldn’t depend on:
Evan Bayh (IN),
Robert Byrd (WV),
Debbie Stabenow (MI),
Kent Conrad (ND) and
James Webb (VA). I’ll help out the mathematically
challenged Reid: 59 minus 12 equal 47.
-
Fourth, McCain, who has
no leverage within the Republican Party, is the wrong
envoy.
Imagine this scenario: Reid gives McCain
the assignment of lining up Republican votes for amnesty. The
dutiful McCain approaches his fellow Republican Senators
including Oklahoma’s
Tom Coburn and James Inhofe. They’re excellent on
immigration, so they tell McCain to drop dead.
Then McCain decides to give it a go with
more pliable Republicans.
Bob Bennett (UT) and
Judd Gregg (NH) are two who have mixed voting records on
immigration reduction.
But Bennett and Gregg have problems—in
2010, they’re up for re-election.
In
Utah,
immigration remains a hot button issue. The state is locked in a
debate about SB 81 that would by requiring
E-Verify reserve American jobs for citizens and legal
residents, reduce public expenditures on benefits for ineligible
immigrants, reduce
illegal-alien crime, and provide assistance to citizens who
have had their identities stolen. Most residents support it.[SB81
Requires E-Verify Checking for Workers, by Deborah
Bulkeley, Deseret Morning News, February 19, 2009]
And most assuredly, fresh in Bennett’s mind
is
the fate of long time immigration enthusiast
Chris Cannon—once
a Congressman but now a sorry chapter in Utah’s political
history as one of the rare incumbents to
suffer a defeat in a primary election.
Gregg also has
issues too that a "yea" amnesty vote wouldn’t help.
According to the AFL-CIO, [PDF]
New Hampshire is losing good jobs and gaining low-wage jobs.
Average wages for jobs in industries that are growing in New
Hampshire are 25.4 percent lower—$11,225 a year less—than those
in the industries that are shedding jobs.
Why, Gregg would wonder, should he vote for
legislation that would drive income down further and gather the
ire of his constituents?
Bennett and Gregg likely decline McCain’s
offer for the best possible political reason: they gain nothing
by supporting amnesty.
As my drama unfolds, a desperate McCain
then reaches out to someone he’s sure he can count on, somebody
who is as bad on immigration as McCain himself:
Arlen
Specter.
But, to his amazement, McCain discovers
that even Specter can’t be considered a shoo-in for his amnesty
cause.
Like Bennett and Gregg, Specter is also up
for 2010 re-election. But unlike his two colleagues, Specter
faces
a dogfight.
Although he’s an incumbent,
Specter
is a sickly 80-year-old, he’s been around forever and he’s
tainted with the Bush administration’s indelible
neocon stain.
Both disaffected
Pennsylvania Republicans and Democrats will go after
Specter, who barely survived in 2004, with a vengeance.
[Specter
Wins Fifth Term After Tough Year,
Associated Press,
November 3, 2004]
Pennsylvania’s
level
of immigration, especially in the western part of the state,
is minimal. But jobs and wages are important. And it’s
impossible to effectively separate immigration from its impact
on employment.
If Specter expects a sixth term, he’ll need
every single
core Republican vote. And assuming Specter uses the
"what’s-in-it-for-me" guideline and applies it to amnesty,
even he may decline McCain’s unattractive offer. Possibly on the
day of the vote, Specter will be absent—out "campaigning."
In short, Republican cross-over votes will
be hard to come by.
And all of the Republicans that McCain
might woo could be forgiven if they ask him one simple question:
"John, can you explain to me what twenty years of
carrying
water for open
borders lobbyists did for your career?"
When Reid talks about the bipartisan
relationship McCain and he have forged to pass amnesty, it’s to
laugh out loud.
Neither one of them can get anything right.
Only an institution like the U.S. Senate would suffer both of
those fools so effortlessly.
In case I haven’t made my point strongly
enough about Reid’s ineptitude, think back a mere month ago.
In late December, Reid swore up and down
that Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich’s appointment of Roland
Burris to replace President Barack Obama in the Senate
"will
not stand."
At exactly the same time, Reid endorsed
Caroline
Kennedy calling her
"a
wonderful choice"
to assume Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s New York seat.
Fast forward to one month later. Burris is
in the Senate and Kennedy, having withdrawn just before the door
was unceremoniously slammed in her face, is somewhere on Park
Avenue
sipping white wine.
Every time Reid opens his mouth, something
comically wrong comes out.
In a perfect world, there would be a limit
to the numbers of egregious public errors and misstatements a
politician could make before he’s automatically ousted.
I’m not sure exactly how many Senators that
rule of thumb would send to the unemployment line.
But Reid would be one of them.
Joe Guzzardi
[email
him] is a California native
who recently fled the state because of over-immigration,
over-population and a rapidly deteriorating quality of life. He
has moved to Pittsburgh, PA where the air is clean and the
growth rate stable. A
long-time instructor in English at the Lodi Adult School,
Guzzardi has been writing a weekly column since 1988. It
currently appears in the
Lodi News-Sentinel. |