The bottom line is that Senators and political parties feel they need more money to run a state-wide campaign, than US House members who run in smaller districts. So Senators and parties cater more to big business, because big business has big money to help fund their campaigns. Big business, labor unions and big religious players like leaders in the Catholic church are all for illegal immigration, amnesty and anything else that will boost their numbers. For big business it’s all about getting cheap labor. For labor unions it’s all about growing the size of their union base. For big religious players in the Catholic church, it’s all about allowing as many supporters of the Catholic church in as possible.
Redstate.com has all the pertinent details. Those details come from this Investor’s Business Daily article, that requires a subscription to read. (They do offer a free trial.) I did find another copy of the article on the Americans for Legal Immigration message board. That thread also has a CNN transcript with other details.
This is why the House had a bill in HR 4437, that mirrored the views of Americans overall. But we saw the effort to honestly end illegal immigration shot down in the US Senate, because GOP leaders and Republican Senators cut a back-room deal. The side that wanted to stand up against illegal immigration in the Senate was told to stand down by those who favor illegal immigration and amnesty programs.
At their winter meeting in Washington, D.C., RNC members approved a pro-Bush plan resolution by Texas committeeman Bill Crocker. That forced the withdrawal of a resolution against the plan proposed by Arizona committeeman Randy Pullen.
GOP leaders, including Vice President Dick Cheney, RNC Chairman Ken Mehlman and Kansas Sen. Sam Brownback, lobbied hard for the Crocker resolution and against the efforts of immigration critics.
The Crocker resolution is the McCain-Kennedy bill.
LOU DOBBS TONIGHT – Aired January 20, 2006 – 18:00 ET
Now don’t go thinking the Democrats would act any differently. While Republicans are stereotyped as cutting deals like this, Democrats do the exact same thing! This is why you must vote based on what a candidate is about and not their party affiliation.
Hat tip reader rightonpeachtree.
Me and rightonpeachtree have been discussing how to address big business’ influence over Senators. We both like the idea of term limits, but how would you ever get that approved? Nice idea, hard to get it done, but we’ve got to push for it.
I have also thought of another means of ensuring US Senators work in the best interests of the state they represent, instead of some big money interest group. I think Alan Keyes may have had a point when he mentioned that our means of selecting a Senator may not be best. Maybe we should consider going back to the way the founders intended that be done?
From: US Constitution Article 1, Section 3
Once upon a time in America, each state’s legislature voted for US Senators. So there was no statewide vote by the people. Which meant senatorial candidates did not need to run big money campaigns across an entire state. State legislatures had to answer to the people if they picked a bad Senator.
In 1913, the 17th Amendment changed that.
From: Ammendment XVII
But before the 17th Amendment, there were similar issues.
FindLaw.com Annotations: U.S. Constitution: Seventeenth Amendment (emphasis added)
So even if the 17 Amendment went away, big business would still know how to influence the Senate. Not to mention taking an even stronger hand in state legislatures. So term limits seem like the best available option.
Also before the 17 Amendment, there were other terrible issues.
Very shortly after ratification it was established that if a person possessed the qualifications requisite for voting for a Senator, his right to vote for such an officer was not derived merely from the constitution and laws of the State in which they are chosen but had its foundation in the Constitution of the United States. Consistent with this view, federal courts declared that when local party authorities, acting pursuant to regulations prescribed by a party’s state executive committee, refused to permit an African American, on account of his race, to vote in a primary to select candidates for the office of U.S. Senator, they deprived him of a right secured to him by the Constitution and laws, in violation of this Amendment.
But in the absence of the 17th Amendment, I feel that the same argument could have been made using Article. I, Section 2 of the Constitution. Which contains in part the following:
The House of Representatives shall be composed of Members chosen every second Year by the People of the several States, and the Electors in each State shall have the Qualifications requisite for Electors of the most numerous Branch of the State Legislature.
OK, so the short version is that parties and Senators are bought and paid for. Let’s press for term limits and pray for the best. In the mean time, vote the bums out that support illegal immigration and amnesty. Vote for candidates that really do express your views regardless of party and regardless of fear tactics used, to try and keep voting for people based on party affiliation.
Independent Conservative - Copyright 2008 - Copyright Notice
[powered by WordPress.]
60 queries. 0.389 seconds