Thursday, August 03, 2006

Senate Triple Salto

Early last week I noticed this story and archived it but never got around to posting anything on it. Money graf:

On May 25, 2006, the U.S. Senate passed by a 63-36 vote the "Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act of 2006," which included provisions to build a 750 mile fence along our border with Mexico.

Less than two months later, on July 13, 2006, with much less fanfare, the Senate voted 71-29 not to appropriate money to build that fence.

Simply put, when it comes to immigration, the U.S. Senate is fully engaged in the big lie. Sure, the U.S. Senate is for securing our borders, as long as nobody actually does anything to build a fence that might keep illegal immigrants out.

This piece was co-authored by Jim Gilchrist, the founder of the Minuteman Project, a man you would expect to notice legislative double-crosses like this.

Well, apparently Gilchrist wasn't the only citizen to make said notice, and the secret getting out led to a "veeeeeeely intelesting" somersault:

The Senate did an abrupt about-face yesterday, voting overwhelmingly to begin paying for 370 miles of fencing and 500 miles of vehicle barriers on the U.S.-Mexico border, just three weeks after voting against the same spending.

The amendment's sponsor said senators were so embarrassed by that July 13 vote that most felt they had to reverse course and vote for it this time - especially after so many were on record in May voting to build the fence in the first place. The amendment, which provides nearly $2 billion for the project, passed 94-3, with 66 senators switching from "no" to "yes" votes since last month.

They thought we wouldn't notice. In a time of bona fide media competition and instant news dissemination via the blogosphere, talk radio, and other true mainstream media outlets, the open borders crowd really thought they could sneak this bait & switch past us.

I'm still baffled as to why so many pols - strike that, why so many Republicans - are so determined to go against the clearly expressed will of two-thirds of the American public on an issue of paramount importance to homeland security, fiscal policy, and the preservation of American culture. But evidently that determination is inversely proportional to the degree of public scrutiny under which it is carried out.

Just one more illustration of how bleeped up the GOP majority is, and why that majority status would be in mortal peril if they had an opposition that was an even remotely serious and credible alternative.

[h/t: Hugh Hewitt]