There’s no telling when an immigration bill will come to the House floor, what it will say, or who will support it.
Only one thing’s for sure: Steve King will vote no.
And he’s not alone.
The Iowa Republican has organized a small but growing number of conservatives who are committed to voting against any House immigration bill — no matter what it says — because they fear the Senate will inevitably find a way to add “amnesty” to the equation.
King won’t say how many members he’s got on board, except that it reached “fairly deeply” into the GOP caucus. Lobbyists say it’s somewhere between 20 and 70 members. Even at the low end of that range, it’s enough to prevent any Republican-led immigration bill from passing.
King’s “immigration whip team” began in January, when he learned that a group of House Republicans and Democrats were secretly negotiating an immigration bill that he was certain included a path to citizenship.
“I talked to Lou Barletta and said, ‘We’d better prepare ourselves,’ ” he said.
The House’s “Gang of Eight” has since splintered, with little chance of its carefully negotiated proposal making an impact in the broader immigration debate. But the House Judiciary Committee has readied four conservative immigration bills that make up the “piece-by-piece” solution to immigration, and the House Homeland Security Committee has completed work on a border-security bill.
“I say to the sponsors, ‘Paint for me a scenario by which any of these five pieces of legislation could become law without sacrificing the rule of law.’ They’re answer to me is, ‘You’re to help with that. You’re to solve that,’ ” he said.
King solves it by saying no to everything.
Although King says he’s supportive of the reform efforts in principle, he adds that they can only lead to a conference-committee compromise that he’d find unacceptable. “We’ll lose in every scenario I can think of,” he said. “There’s nothing to be gained.”
The core of King’s “whip team” is relatively small, with Barletta and Mo Brooks, R-Ala., among them.
Ira Mehlman, a spokesman for the Federation for American Immigration Reform, says there are a “significant number of members who are really concerned that anything that they come out with would be hijacked as a vehicle to push amnesty.”
There has been no indication that the House will vote on any immigration legislation this fall beyond the statements of House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan, R”‘Wis., who said in July that the House would vote on immigration in October. That October window of opportunity was always narrow, however, and now it is likely that lawmakers will be preoccupied with a debt-ceiling showdown next month instead.
From King’s perspective, that’s great. “Each day that has passed without floor action has been good for the rule of law and good for the rule of sovereignty,” he said.
The Senate bill that passed in June included a 13-year path to citizenship for unauthorized immigrants that met certain criteria. It has been widely rejected by the House, with Speaker John Boehner instead seeking a “piece-by-piece” approach to the issue.
But Boehner has also been quiet about what he wants to do on immigration, spending most of his time assuring members of his caucus that they won’t bow to the Senate position. King, by contrast, is one of the most outspoken members on immigration, who has more than once caught flak for using colorful language to make his point that illegal immigrants harm the country and contribute to crime. House Republicans publicly distanced themselves from him after he commented in July that many children of illegal immigrants are forced to work in the drug trade and have “calves the size of cantaloupes.”
Yet even if his GOP colleagues are less inclined to talk about immigration, they tend to sympathize with King’s views opposing any form of legalization. They also fear that business groups that favor a path to citizenship will pressure House leaders so much that they will agree to act on the issue.
It’s theoretically possible for Boehner to get an immigration bill through the House without King and his compatriots.
The Homeland Security Committee’s border-security bill could bring some Democratic votes, particularly because they are discussing inserting it into a broader comprehensive immigration bill that would also include a path to citizenship. But GOP leaders cannot count on Democrats’ assistance with just that bill because they also won’t support any immigration legislation that doesn’t include a path to citizenship.
King, for his part, is proud of his ability to give voice to concerns among his less outspoken colleagues. “Long been my role,” he said. “If something cries out for attention and people are ignoring it, I will step up and do my best to turn it into an issue.”
What We're Following See More »
Much has been made of David Brooks’s recent New York Times column, in which confesses to missing already the civility and humanity of Barack Obama, compared to who might take his place. In NewYorker.com, Jeffrey Frank reminds us how critical such attributes are to foreign policy. “It’s hard to imagine Kennedy so casually referring to the leader of Russia as a gangster or a thug. For that matter, it’s hard to imagine any president comparing the Russian leader to Hitler [as] Hillary Clinton did at a private fund-raiser. … Kennedy, who always worried that miscalculation could lead to war, paid close attention to the language of diplomacy.”
“We haven’t seen a true leftist since FDR, so many millions are coming out of the woodwork to vote for Bernie Sanders; he is the Occupy movement now come to life in the political arena.” So says Bill Maher in his Hollywood Reporter cover story (more a stream-of-consciousness riff than an essay, actually). Conservative states may never vote for a socialist in the general election, but “this stuff has never been on the table, and these voters have never been activated.” Maher saves most of his bile for Donald Trump and Sarah Palin, writing that by nominating Palin as vice president “John McCain is the one who opened the Book of the Dead and let the monsters out.” And Trump is picking up where Palin left off.