Kill Bill

The Politico breaks the news:

The immigration overhaul bill collapsed on the Senate floor Thursday night, the victim of partisan bickering over procedure that reflected a broader national divide over how to deal with millions of illegal immigrants.

The failure to limit debate and move the bill toward final passage was a stunning defeat for President Bush, as well as Democratic and Republican senators, who have invested significant time and political capital into fixing the immigration system.

Whew! The powers-that-be are not happy today. They were unable to ram through the "grand bargain" on immigration. One can read the official MSM obituary in the NYT, or one can have much more fun reading the blow-by-blow account of Michelle Malkin (who also has a great graphic with the Kill Bill motif), or the incomparable Mickey Kaus.

Before pouring the champagne, the opposition needs to realize that the bill, though badly battered, is still not dead. The ideas and forces represented therein are like the villain from a bad horror movie that will not die even when a stake is driven through its heart (for some reason, the grand bargain reminds me of Samara from The Ring). The thirst for cheap labor continues unabated and that alone is enough to keep this issue alive.

Maybe now is a good time to look back and daydream: what could a more competent administration have proposed to get us out of our current mess?

1. Border security. There is no credible way to talk about what to do with the current crop of illegals until it is reasonably assured that we will not have to deal with the next crop.

2. Benign neglect with the current crop of illegals. There's no need to do that much right now. We can revisit the issue of their status in a few years after we have stabilized the size of the illegal population. By that time, most of the illegals who are still in the country will have such deep roots that there may be many ways of making creative uses of existing immigration statutes to regularize their status without the need for a generalized amnesty.

3. Linking immigration policy to economic needs. The idea of a guest worker program is bad for many reasons, but the idea that immigration policy can serve economic needs is not.

The Bush presidency, shall we say, has not distinguished itself through high levels of administrative competence. Combine this with Bush's obvious aversion to taking serious actions to limit the flow of illegals from Mexico throughout much of his term. It seems that all the hard decisions are being passed on to the next administration--and this is probably for the better.

Comments

[MlR]

Passing and enforcing laws against employers is key. You can stop it at the border, but a significant minority also gets in through other means. Attack the supply of jobs and free benefits.

[M.A. George]

This bill was a monster that tried to eat Cleveland--all at once. We need to break it down into manageable pieces and handle the problem incrementally. that way, we have a better chance of seeing what works--and want does not. Right now, this bill is like someone who gained 50 pounds over 10 years and tries to lose it all in 3 months. Won't work.

[Siggy]

1. Stop the flow first. Show us you can do something.

2. Then the problem becomes more manageable. Devise a route to citizenship.

3. Base future immigration on skills and potential contribution to our society.

[Adam]

"It seems that all the hard decisions are being passed on to the next administration--and this is probably for the better."

"Probably?" No, definitely! Our current bozo in chief shouldn't be allowed to touch immigration policy (or any other important policy) with a 10 foot pole!

[jimbino]

First, any immigration policy must be consistent with our notion of basic civil rights, summed up in the 5th and 14th: There can be no discrimination based on age, sex, race, nationality, marital status, family status, sexual orientation, and so on.

Basing immigration on merit, narrowly defined, is OK. I will do my best to oppose any immigration policy that favors couples or families over singles, 30 year-olds over 62 year-olds, and straights over gays.