It’s better late than never. Two hours before wrapping up the immigration debate, Mitch McConnell finally gave a few-minute floor speech speaking out against the amnesty bill which he supports. Here are some gems:
FOR ME, AT LEAST, THAT THE FINAL BILL DIDN'T TURN OUT TO BE SOMETHING I CAN
SUPPORT. THE REASON IS FAIRLY SIMPLE. AS I SEE IT, THIS BILL
DOESN'T MEET THE THRESHOLD TEST FOR SUCCESS THAT I OUTLINED AT
THE START OF THIS DEBATE. IT JUST DOESN'T SAY TO ME, AT LEAST,
THAT WE'VE LEARNED THE LESSONS OF 1986 AND THAT WE WON'T FIND
OURSELVES RIGHT BACK IN THE SAME SITUATION WE FOUND OURSELVES
IN AFTER THAT REFORM. IF YOU CAN'T BE REASONABLY CERTAIN THAT
THE BORDER IS SECURE AS A CONDITION OF LEGALIZATION, THERE IS
JUST NO WAY TO BE SURE THAT MILLIONS MORE WON'T FOLLOW THE
ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS WHO ARE ALREADY HERE. AS OTHERS HAVE RIGHTLY
POINTED OUT, YOU CAN ALL -- YOU ALSO CAN'T BE SURE THAT FUTURE
CONGRESSES WON'T JUST REVERSE WHATEVER ASSURANCES WE MAKE TODAY
THAT BORDER SECURITY WILL OCCUR IN THE FUTURE. IN OTHER WORDS,
IN THE ABSENCE OF A VERY FIRM RESULTS-BASED BORDER SECURITY
TRIGGER, THERE IS JUST NO WAY I CAN LOOK AT MY CONSTITUENTS,
LOOK THEM IN THE EYE AND TELL THEM THAT TODAY'S ASSURANCES
WON'T BECOME TOMORROW'S DISAPPOINTMENTS, AND SINCE THE BILL
BEFORE US DOESN'T INCLUDE SUCH A TRIGGER, I WON'T BE ABLE TO
That’s right. We have pointed out that with legalization first, we will never bind future congresses to enforcement, while encouraging a new wave of illegal immigration. The problem is that he said he would support the final bill if it contained the Cornyn amendment. While the Cornyn amendment was better than the current iteration, it granted complete amnesty first with just stronger promises of security 10 years later. Hence, it was also legalization first. And that is exactly what McConnell supports.
Then, he had to qualify his opposition with this:
IT DOESN'T GIVE ME ANY PLEASURE TO SAY THIS OR TO
VOTE AGAINST THIS BILL. THESE ARE BIG PROBLEMS, AND THEY NEED
SOLVING, AND I AM DEEPLY GRATEFUL TO ALL THE MEMBERS OF MY
CONFERENCE AND THEIR STAFFS WHO HAVE DEVOTED SO MUCH OF THEIR
TIME AND WORKED SO HARD OVER A PERIOD OF MANY MONTHS TO SOLVE
THESE PROBLEMS. I'M GRATEFUL TO ALL OF THEM,
Wow – imagine him saying this about the crafters of Obamacare. I guess he is grateful for all the lying, deceptions, and attacks on conservatives.
Then he praises the entire legal side of the bill:
I THINK IT HAS TO BE SAID THAT
THERE ARE REAL IMPROVEMENTS IN THE BILL. CURRENT IMMIGRATION
POLICY WHICH PRIORITIZES FAMILY-BASED IMMIGRATION HASN'T
CHANGED IN DECADES. THIS BILL WOULD TAKE AN IMPORTANT STEP
TOWARD THE KIND OF SKILL-BASED -- SKILLS-BASED IMMIGRATION A
GROWING ECONOMY REQUIRES. THROUGH NEW AND REFORMED VISA
PROGRAMS, FOR INSTANCE, THIS BILL WOULD PROVIDE MANY OF OUR
MOST DYNAMIC BUSINESSES WITH THE OPPORTUNITY TO LEGALLY HIRE
THE WORKERS THEY NEED TO REMAIN COMPETITIVE AND TO EXPAND.
Ummm..No. Only about 7.8% of future flow over the next 10 years will be merit-based – about 2.5 million of 30 million. Most of the rest is actually family-based. Moreover, this bill extends the right to bring in family members that is now enjoyed by American citizens to all green card holders. Given that this bill creates tens of millions of more green cards, we will incur mass chain migration that is not merit based. And now that Anthony Kennedy issued his anti-natural law manifesto disguised as a legal ruling, we will have even more “family-based” chain migration. Under this bill, almost 20% of the country will be foreign born by 2033.
SO THIS BILL MAY PASS THE SENATE TODAY, BUT NOT WITH MY VOTE,
And that is exactly what he wants with this and many other bad pieces of legislation. And as he said earlier this week, he is looking forward to this going to conference.