On the recordJune 24, 2013
We only had nine amendments. Is that a robust and open process? Do they think the majority has allowed regular order? From my point of view, the answer is a clear and resounding no. We are at a point where the process has been halted. It is unclear if any more amendments will be debated and voted on. The only amendment that is in order is the one that was concocted behind closed doors and is loaded full of provisions that are shockingly close to what can be called earmarks. We are back where we started--with a gang of Members promising that their legislative text is the best thing to happen to immigration reform, that their solution is the end of future illegal immigration. Does anyone really think this will solve the problem once and for all? From my point of view, based upon my experience in 1986 and since, the answer is a clear and resounding no. There are fundamental flaws in this amendment we call the Schumer- Corker-Hoeven amendment--legalization first. I am going to take the opportunity to walk through some changes. The authors claim the amendment is a border ``surge'' that leaves no more doubt about whether the border will be secure. Yet the border changes only account for about half of the total amendment. There are changes to every title. There are changes to exchange visitor programs, the future guest worker program, and visas for the performing arts.…





