YES!!
QuoteHouse Republicans took action Thursday to crack down on illegal immigrants and the cities that shelter them.
One bill passed by the House would deny federal grants to sanctuary cities and another, Kate's Law, would increase the penalties for deported aliens who try to return to the United States.
Kate's Law, which would increase the penalties for deported aliens who try to return to the United States and caught, passed with a vote of 257 to 157, with one Republican voting no and 24 Democrats voting yes.
AND!!
The other bill, which would deny federal grants to sanctuary cities, passed with a vote of 228-195 with 3 Democrats voting yes and 7 Republicans voting no.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/06/29/house-passes-kate-s-law-as-part-illegal-immigrant-crackdown.html
Harder to get it trough the senate but looks like they may have a very good shot at it!! :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn:
Quote from: redbeard on June 29, 2017, 03:20:30 PM
YES!!
Harder to get it trough the senate but looks like they may have a very good shot at it!! :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn:
A bigger question for the senate is will McConnell even bring it to the floor for a vote? Make democrats commit. It could be a big election issue in 2018 with all the democrat seats up. McConnell may give them cover by not bringing it to the floor.
Quote from: supsalemgr on June 30, 2017, 04:41:30 AM
A bigger question for the senate is will McConnell even bring it to the floor for a vote? Make democrats commit. It could be a big election issue in 2018 with all the democrat seats up. McConnell may give them cover by not bringing it to the floor.
He needs to bring both to the floor. I would suspect Dim's up for re-election would support Kates law and vote ageist the Sanctuary city law. The voters in the red states will see right through this maneuver. on the good side is Kates law would pass and give General Kelly another tool for his tool box and there is a fair chance they could push both through.
Quote from: redbeard on June 30, 2017, 05:03:06 PM
He needs to bring both to the floor. I would suspect Dim's up for re-election would support Kates law and vote ageist the Sanctuary city law. The voters in the red states will see right through this maneuver. on the good side is Kates law would pass and give General Kelly another tool for his tool box and there is a fair chance they could push both through.
I agree with your assessment. How could any senator not support Kate's law? The sanctuary city bill is a purely state by state issue.
The House vote was: Reps: Y = 233, N = 1, Dems: Y: 24, N: 166.
http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2017/roll344.xml (http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2017/roll344.xml)
The sole Republican 'No' was Justin Amash representing the 3rd district of Michigan. He looks young ... probably doesn't know what Yea and Nea mean. Anyone have an idea why he would vote against?
Anyone have any idea of why the Dims mostly voted against ... what was their (distorted) logic?
The 24 Dem Y votes were:
Cartwright, Cooper, Courtney, Crist, Cuellar, DeFazio,
Demings, Esty, Gottheimer, Higgins, Keating, Kind,
Kuster, Langevin, Larson, Lipinski, Lynch, Murphy,
O'Halleran, Peterson, Ruppersberger, Sinema, Speirer, Swalwell
It might be worth the Pubs time to focus on this group since a few votes on some issues make such a difference. Negotiate bills with a group formed from these - don't invite Schumer or other stone cold lost leftist zombies.
The list could be strengthened by cross correlate with other occasional centrist Dim voters on other issues. Some Dems that might not be such lemmings and want to make a difference for our country. This is what the "new Dem" party will probably toward eventually.
Has this been attempted before. Seems likely that it has ... just wondered if anything productive seems (historically) possible.
Quote from: topside on July 01, 2017, 07:23:41 AM
The House vote was: Reps: Y = 233, N = 1, Dems: Y: 24, N: 166.
http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2017/roll344.xml (http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2017/roll344.xml)
The sole Republican 'No' was Justin Amash representing the 3rd district of Michigan. He looks young ... probably doesn't know what Yea and Nea mean. Anyone have an idea why he would vote against?
Anyone have any idea of why the Dims mostly voted against ... what was their (distorted) logic?
The 24 Dem Y votes were:
Cartwright, Cooper, Courtney, Crist, Cuellar, DeFazio,
Demings, Esty, Gottheimer, Higgins, Keating, Kind,
Kuster, Langevin, Larson, Lipinski, Lynch, Murphy,
O'Halleran, Peterson, Ruppersberger, Sinema, Speirer, Swalwell
It might be worth the Pubs time to focus on this group since a few votes on some issues make such a difference. Negotiate bills with a group formed from these - don't invite Schumer or other stone cold lost leftist zombies.
The list could be strengthened by cross correlate with other occasional centrist Dim voters on other issues. Some Dems that might not be such lemmings and want to make a difference for our country. This is what the "new Dem" party will probably toward eventually.
Has this been attempted before. Seems likely that it has ... just wondered if anything productive seems (historically) possible.
I have no idea what he's talking about, claiming the Bill is unconstitutional. Can anyone else figure out his reasoning?
Justin AmashVerified account
@justinamash
Follow
More
I voted no today on two bills that together violate the 1st, 4th, 5th, 10th, and 11th Amendments. I will always defend our Constitution.https://twitter.com/justinamash/status/880561113443713024?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw&ref_url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.breitbart.com%2Fbig-government%2F2017%2F06%2F30%2Frep-justin-amash-only-republican-to-vote-against-kates-law%2F
Doesn't look good for Amash' future. Do a search for:
Amash, CAIR and the Muslim Brotherhood.
Quote from: topside on July 01, 2017, 07:23:41 AM
The House vote was: Reps: Y = 233, N = 1, Dems: Y: 24, N: 166.
http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2017/roll344.xml (http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2017/roll344.xml)
The sole Republican 'No' was Justin Amash representing the 3rd district of Michigan. He looks young ... probably doesn't know what Yea and Nea mean. Anyone have an idea why he would vote against?
Anyone have any idea of why the Dims mostly voted against ... what was their (distorted) logic?
The 24 Dem Y votes were:
Cartwright, Cooper, Courtney, Crist, Cuellar, DeFazio,
Demings, Esty, Gottheimer, Higgins, Keating, Kind,
Kuster, Langevin, Larson, Lipinski, Lynch, Murphy,
O'Halleran, Peterson, Ruppersberger, Sinema, Speirer, Swalwell
It might be worth the Pubs time to focus on this group since a few votes on some issues make such a difference. Negotiate bills with a group formed from these - don't invite Schumer or other stone cold lost leftist zombies.
The list could be strengthened by cross correlate with other occasional centrist Dim voters on other issues. Some Dems that might not be such lemmings and want to make a difference for our country. This is what the "new Dem" party will probably toward eventually.
Has this been attempted before. Seems likely that it has ... just wondered if anything productive seems (historically) possible.
No need to waste our time on democrats let them figure it out or self destruct.
Quote from: topside on July 01, 2017, 07:23:41 AM
The House vote was: Reps: Y = 233, N = 1, Dems: Y: 24, N: 166.
http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2017/roll344.xml (http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2017/roll344.xml)
The sole Republican 'No' was Justin Amash representing the 3rd district of Michigan. He looks young ... probably doesn't know what Yea and Nea mean. Anyone have an idea why he would vote against?
Anyone have any idea of why the Dims mostly voted against ... what was their (distorted) logic?
The 24 Dem Y votes were:
Cartwright, Cooper, Courtney, Crist, Cuellar, DeFazio,
Demings, Esty, Gottheimer, Higgins, Keating, Kind,
Kuster, Langevin, Larson, Lipinski, Lynch, Murphy,
O'Halleran, Peterson, Ruppersberger, Sinema, Speirer, Swalwell
It might be worth the Pubs time to focus on this group since a few votes on some issues make such a difference. Negotiate bills with a group formed from these - don't invite Schumer or other stone cold lost leftist zombies.
The list could be strengthened by cross correlate with other occasional centrist Dim voters on other issues. Some Dems that might not be such lemmings and want to make a difference for our country. This is what the "new Dem" party will probably toward eventually.
Has this been attempted before. Seems likely that it has ... just wondered if anything productive seems (historically) possible.
No need to waste our time with democrats. Let them figure it out for themselves or self destruct. Running against any democrat who opposes Kate's law is winner everywhere except where true loons reside.
Quote from: topside on July 01, 2017, 07:23:41 AM
The House vote was: Reps: Y = 233, N = 1, Dems: Y: 24, N: 166.
http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2017/roll344.xml (http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2017/roll344.xml)
The sole Republican 'No' was Justin Amash representing the 3rd district of Michigan. He looks young ... probably doesn't know what Yea and Nea mean. Anyone have an idea why he would vote against?
Anyone have any idea of why the Dims mostly voted against ... what was their (distorted) logic?
The 24 Dem Y votes were:
Cartwright, Cooper, Courtney, Crist, Cuellar, DeFazio,
Demings, Esty, Gottheimer, Higgins, Keating, Kind,
Kuster, Langevin, Larson, Lipinski, Lynch, Murphy,
O'Halleran, Peterson, Ruppersberger, Sinema, Speirer, Swalwell
It might be worth the Pubs time to focus on this group since a few votes on some issues make such a difference. Negotiate bills with a group formed from these - don't invite Schumer or other stone cold lost leftist zombies.
The list could be strengthened by cross correlate with other occasional centrist Dim voters on other issues. Some Dems that might not be such lemmings and want to make a difference for our country. This is what the "new Dem" party will probably toward eventually.
Has this been attempted before. Seems likely that it has ... just wondered if anything productive seems (historically) possible.
Good question on Amash; I have no idea why he voted against it. His "twitter" response was that it violated the Constitution! I would love to know how so?
https://twitter.com/justinamash/status/880561113443713024