McConnell Proposes Immigration Vote to Resolve Impasse

Erica Werner, Yahoo! News, February 23, 2015

Days from a Homeland Security Department shutdown, Senate Republicans sought a way out Monday by splitting President Barack Obama’s contested immigration measures from the agency’s funding bill.

It was not clear whether the gambit by Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell would succeed ahead of Friday’s midnight deadline to fund the department or see it shut down. It was far from certain whether it would win any Democratic support, and House conservatives remain firmly opposed to any funding bill for the Homeland Security Department that does not also overturn Obama’s executive actions on immigration.

But with Senate Democrats united against a House-passed bill that funds the agency while blocking the president on immigration, McConnell said it was time for another approach.

“It’s another way to get the Senate unstuck from a Democrat filibuster and move the debate forward,” McConnell said on the Senate floor after a vote to advance the House-passed bill failed 47-46, short of the 60 votes needed. Three previous attempts earlier in the month had yielded similar results.

“This is our colleagues’ chance to do exactly what they led their constituents to believe they’d do: defend the rule of law, without more excuses,” McConnell said in a jab at the handful of Senate Democrats who have voiced opposition to Obama’s executive actions offering work permits and deportation deferrals for millions in the country illegally.

A spokesman for House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, welcomed McConnell’s move, though without predicting its chances of success in the House.

“This vote will highlight the irresponsible hypocrisy of any Senate Democrat who claims to oppose President Obama’s executive overreach on immigration, but refuses to vote to stop it,” said Boehner spokesman Michael Steel.

McConnell left unclear whether a vote overturning Obama’s immigration moves would be followed by a stand-alone vote to fund the Homeland Security Department–an omission not lost on Senate Democrats.

“This proposal doesn’t bring us any closer to actually funding DHS, and Republicans still have no real plan to achieve that goal,” said Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y. {snip}


McConnell’s move seemed aimed at dividing Senate Democrats who have been united against the $39.7 billion House-passed legislation that funds the Homeland Security Department through the Sept. 30 end of the budget year, while also rolling back Obama’s executive actions granting work permits to millions of immigrants in this country illegally.

Aides said McConnell’s bill would target only the executive actions Obama announced in November, not an earlier directive from 2012 that provided protections to hundreds of thousands of immigrants brought illegally to the country as youths.

That could make it more difficult for the handful of moderate Democrats who opposed Obama’s executive actions when he announced them in November to vote against the legislation.

{snip} In wake of a federal court’s ruling last week stating that Obama had exceeded his authority and putting his immigration policies on hold, several Senate Republicans said the courts were the best place to fight that battle.

“Leave it to the courts. I think we have an excellent case before the Supreme Court,” Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., said Monday night.



Share This

We welcome comments that add information or perspective, and we encourage polite debate. If you log in with a social media account, your comment should appear immediately. If you prefer to remain anonymous, you may comment as a guest, using a name and an e-mail address of convenience. Your comment will be moderated.
  • Mitch McConnell’s favorite song:

    • LHathaway

      I don’t know What the heck John Denver did, but he sure appealed to me.

    • dd121

      They had the last election thrown in their laps and are now going to squander it. It almost guarantees they’ll lose in ’16

      • Hammerheart

        The dinosaurs that run the GOP won’t recover from this. The illusion of a two party system will be forever dispelled and I hope a lot of people will wake up after this.

        I find it hard to believe a whole baseball team of ‘conservatives’ can’t find a way to stop the mad fool Hussein’s ill orchestrated grabs for power.

        • dd121

          As soon as Obama gets another 30 million browns in here we’ll have a permanent one party system. Those cigar smoking republicans who run the party don’t know and don’t care.

          • They know.

          • dd121

            It seems curious they’re not trying to do something about it.

        • A Freespeechzone

          It will be TOO LATE!

          The GOP will NEVER hold National power for decades–the new ‘citizens’ will vote for the party that is giving them $30K+ in Earned Income Credits going back 4 years…

          NOBODY will do a damned thing to stop Obama.

      • Realist

        It’s not easy maintaining the title ‘Stupid Party’

  • Dave4088

    “Leave it to the courts. I think we have an excellent case before the Supreme Court,” Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., said Monday night.

    Typical gutless RINO response, but there’s no guarantee the high court will rule against Hussein Mugabe, so it’s time they stand firm since less than 15% of DHS employees will be affected by a shut down. Besides, the SCOTUS is not averse to rulings that favor and coddle illegal aliens.

    • E_Pluribus_Pluribus

      You’re right. Supreme Court decisions depend on the personal policy preferences of the majority of justices. They do what they want.

  • Alex Dihes

    My Talmud
    Occam’s razor for the politics

    Do not look for any president’s malicious intent where a banal stupidity is
    the best explanation.

  • WR_the_realist

    “Leave it to the courts. I think we have an excellent case before the
    Supreme Court,” Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., said Monday night.

    Thus speaks the war mongering constitution shredding senator from hell who agrees with Obama’s amnesty.

    • Even if SCOTUS finds against Obama, Obama has a history of blowing off Federal court decisions. After all, even if the courts find Obama in contempt, who’s going to arrest him? The FBI that Obama controls?

      I think Obama could very easily get what he wants even if he signed the bill defunding his precious amnesty.

      Of course this is not a big mystery. All the obnoxious Senate RINOs preaching surrender are bought and paid for by the cheap labor lobby.

    • Realist

      John McCain is North Vietnam’s gift that keeps on giving!

  • dd121

    Boy, the Republicans are sure getting ready for a bloody fight. /sarc

  • Sid Ishus

    Republicans are like the French, always looking for someone to surrender to.

    • IstvanIN

      Mean (to the French) but true.

    • LackawannaErie

      Amren is no place for neocon attacks on fellow Europeans.

      • Sid Ishus

        Agreed, but the saying is well known. Wouldn’t have worked without tying it together.

    • newscomments70

      The French are changing for the better. The National Front movement is surging ahead. We have nothing like that in the US. Other European countries lag behind as well. The French helped the Continental army win the Revolutionary war. In the 20th century, the Germans were the aggressors and the French surrendered. This is the 21st century. The French are standing up for themselves, and the Germans are mostly liberal wussies (some exceptions of course). We need to live in the present.

  • libertarian1234

    “Leave it to the courts. I think we have an excellent case before the Supreme Court,” Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., said Monday night.”

    Yes, and the ongoing process will allow them all to get everything they need to make them no longer illegal, genius. As Judge Hana said, none of it could be backed out. It would be too late even if SCOTUS ruled in favor of the GOP.

    If McConnell wasn’t such a sissy, he would change Senate rules as the Democrats did and disallow a filibuster on this issue.

    The GOP Senate are nothing but a bunch of wimps who don’t have the guts for a good fight. They should be constantly in front of the cameras denouncing Dem obstructionism and declaring them to be in favor of dictatorial rule by edicts.

    I guess they think they’re too high and mighty to stoop to fighting in the dirt just as the left does.

    Obama and Reid are already celebrating the back down by the GOP.

    • MBlanc46

      “The GOP Senate are nothing but a bunch of wimps who don’t have the guts for a good fight.”

      Maybe it’s not a good fight that they want. Maybe it’s millions of low-wage workers for their corporate sponsors.

      • Robert Smith

        They can have that in Mexico right? NAFTA is in place. Why go through all of this struggle when those low wage workers are sitting right under Texas? I’m sure Mexico would be much easier to deal with in regards to keeping compensation low. It’s about destroying and weakening the US.

        • GeneticsareDestiny

          Not all industries can outsource their jobs. There’s a lot of industries that want to pay lower wages but cannot send their jobs out of the country. Fast food employees, maids, gardeners, construction workers, and retail employees are some examples.

          The people who employee these workers want lower wages just as badly as the employers who can outsource, but it isn’t possible for them, so the only option is to bring the low-wage workers here.

        • MBlanc46

          It’s pretty clear that they want both. As the poster below points out, a lot of work can’t be exported. But even with much that could, the employer doesn’t want to set up shop in Mexico, he wants to set up shop closer to home. So far as destroying and weakening the US is concerned, I doubt that many employers of Third World labor give that any thought at all.

      • Realist


  • Epiminondas

    Even Ann Coulter finally realized that Republicans are mostly cowards, sociopaths, and paid shills.

    • JohnEngelman

      The business community, which pays for Republican campaigns, wants more immigrants, so employers can lower wages for American citizens.

      • LHathaway

        No. What they want are quotas. Of the kind Ronald Reagan imposed on imported cars. I find it hard to believe American corporations are happy with an 18% and dropping share of US auto sales. Trying to portray corporate leaders as less patriotic than others is a joke. Just another sad joke. The punch line: cultural marxist’s have achieved total victory.

        • JohnEngelman

          The idea situation for the business community is to admit more immigrants, but to deny them the right to vote. That is probably the compromise the Republicans will work out with the Democrats. That way they can lower wages without getting more Democrat voters.

          • Sid Ishus

            The Democrats would probably buy that, then come back in a few years to grant them suffrage.

        • LackawannaErie

          Are you insane? Corporate leaders are the least patriotic people out there. If you think that defending corporate scum has something to do with opposing cultural marxism, you are sorely mistaken.

          BTW, do you know any senior executives at large, multinational corporations? 100% of these folks are hard core anti-white globalists and have fully internalized cultural marxist values.

          • JohnEngelman


            I agree with much of what you posted. Nevertheless, I think American Corporate leaders get their values from Ayn Rand, rather than Karl Marx.

          • LHathaway

            Really, then why are the ultra rich more likely to vote conservative?

          • striket3

            The ultra rich hedge their bets. They support both. Maybe they vote conservative but the outcome matters little to them.

          • LHathaway

            and yet they vote white, anyway. It’s more difficult to fool the rich. God bless them.

          • Nonhumans

            For the overwhelming majority of them, race/skin color is not of any concern or consideration. Their loyalties lie with the greenbacks. That is until their children have to experience all of the vibrant diversity.

        • Sid Ishus

          CEOs are very loyal… to their wallet.

          • JohnEngelman

            And to their stockholders. They care little about the employees they fire to increase stock value. They care little about the customers who are served by a workforce that suffers from stress and low morale. What matters to CEO’s is the next quarterly profit statement.

  • That and the national party didn’t have a unified articulate agenda. Even though individual candidates did, the party did not. Which means all they ran on implicitly is “we’re against Obama.” Therefore, their election mandate was to stop Obama.

  • LHathaway

    I thought it was the gay issue that won the midterms in 2014? Same as it did for republicans during the midterms when they crushed the dems in 1994 after Clinton began the whole gay thing? The very same Bill Clinton who fired Fired surgeon general joselyn elders going on about it – as I remember it, for saying saying (men) should just jack-off? The Clinton’s just can’t be trusted.

    It looks like we are going to be stuck with gays in our faces, anyway. It would be less insane in a homogeneous society rather than the ‘diversity’ we have. Perhaps it is the most humane solution.

  • IstvanIN

    McConnell has three daughters and yet wants to destroy their country. Unbelievable how many of our people want to sacrifice their own children.

    • Xerxes22

      McConnell wants to sacrifice your children, not his. McConnell’s three daughters will be well protected. Their daddy has connections.

      • IstvanIN

        Protected for how long?

    • Americaandthewestshouldbewhite

      I think his daughters are half Chinese. So they will be back in China when America falls down.

      • IstvanIN

        His kids are by his first wife, they’re White.

        • Americaandthewestshouldbewhite

          ok. Thank God!

  • evilsandmich

    I’ll be (VERY) slightly optimistic on this. The Senate Dems wanted the House to surrender first and pass the dirty Obama bill first so that they’d have some CYA, to which Boehner (yes, Boehner) said “not happening”. McConnell got the Dems to open the vote to their own dirty bill, but there are two issues for them, at least one of which is going to come to pass. First, the dirty bill can be amended on the floor by some GOP senator (Cruz has kept his card close to the vest in this regard) to remove the amnesty support. Secondly, the bill will go to conference and more than likely come out looking just like the House bill with the Senate Dems now unable to filibuster it.

    This will mean that the clean (no executive amnesty bill) will land on Obama’s desk and he’ll have to decide if his tools in the press are talented enough to cover a treacherous veto on his part. This also means that there’s no gain for McConnell to force a vote on the clean bill since he’ll win either way.

    Again, this is a bit optimistic, so we’ll see. (If this does come to pass, my guess would be that the Dems knew that they were about to overplay their hand and the best they could hope for is a selling point to hispanic radicals about how hard they tried).