 |
| KIRK: How hard a sell to get an "aye" vote? |
For
it seems he was among the 15 members of the U.S. Senate who took a procedural
vote being interpreted as opposition to immigration reform. For under the Senate
rules, the bill under consideration has to have at least 60 percent support to
even come up for debate, then consideration and a vote.
IT’S
A MONTH-LONG process, and the overwhelming majority of senators who cast “aye”
votes are not bound in any way to actually support the concept. It just lets
the process move forward.
But
for those who didn’t want an “aye” on their records for anything related to
immigration, it was more about making a statement of appeasement to the conservative
ideologues who resent that the issue is even being considered.
Then,
there’s Kirk, who has made a point of making statements saying he’d be willing
to support an immigration reform proposal if more of an emphasis is placed on
keeping people out of the United States, rather than trying to figure out if
the bureaucratic mess of a policy we now have is keeping out people who
legitimately ought to be allowed in.
Of
course, what constitutes the “greater enforcement” that Kirk mentions is a
vague concept. In fact, it could be interpreted so broadly that nothing
qualifies – which would mean he’s a “no” vote on the issue, no matter what
happens.
IT
SEEMS THE activists and political observers were thinking that Kirk is a “moderate”
who would not want to be aligned with the hard-core ideologues whose opposition
is more about wanting their own ethnic hang-ups enforced by federal law.
But
I can’t say that Kirk’s actions surprise me in any way! I would have been
shocked if he had somehow Got Religion and discovered that he should not let
himself be intimidated politically by the ideologues.
Yes,
Kirk is of the North Shore suburbs. He’s not of the rural background that
prevails amongst many of the political people who lead these conservative
movements.
 |
| Work cut out for them. Photograph provided by OFA-Illinois |
And
on some issues, he is the type of person just urban enough that he can be
persuaded to break away from the ideologues. I’m sure there are enough of those
individuals who are disgusted that Kirk made public comments urging the
Illinois General Assembly to go forward in making marriage a legitimate option
for gay couples.
LET’S
NOT FORGET that Kirk also has always been in disagreement with the Republican
Party platform when it comes to abortion. He’s not the first person the
ideologues turn to for support.
But
on this issue, Kirk is keeping the party line. I guess he figures he can make
up for offending the GOP base on marriage by maintaining the closed view on
immigration policy.
Let’s
not forget that when Kirk ran for the Senate seat in 2010 (after having
represented the North Shore in Congress for a decade previously), he was the
butt of campaign ads that criticized him for his support of measures meant to
increase U.S. support of family planning programs directed at foreign nations.
The
reasoning was that it might somehow reduce the number of foreigners, which in
the future would reduce the number of people wanting to try to get into this
country. Even though anyone with sense would see there’s no real connection
between family planning and immigration.
KIRK
HAS MADE his choice. And even if, by chance, he does wind up voting “aye” on
immigration reform when it allegedly comes up for action some time before
Independence Day, there will be those among us who remember his previous “no”
votes.
In
fact, having votes on both sides of the issue would probably hurt him more
politically than anything else.
So
for those activists who are now stomping around, picketing and urging petition signatures to try to sway the senator, go ahead! It’s your freedom of
expression to let Kirk know you think he’s wrong.
Just
don’t get too shocked when you figure out that Kirk has picked a side on this
issue – and getting him to swing back to sense is not going to be an easy
cause.
-30-
No comments:
Post a Comment