Harry Reid Pulls Omnibus, But Announces Votes On DADT & DREAM Act

WASHINGTON -- Faced with the prospects of having to literally read the full 1924 pages of an omnibus spending bill, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) chose on Thursday night to pull the measure in favor of a continuing resolution to keep government funding.

Republicans, presented with the news, could barely hide their glee. "Did we just win?" asked newly elected Sen. Mark Kirk (R-Ill.), a rhetorical question that seemed to engender sharp rebukes from Democrats.

Kirk was directing his remarks to Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), who had chastised the spending bill as a pork-filled "monstrosity" before relating his sadness at no longer being able to make examples out of the earmarks in the measure.

That, of course, was a rather one-sided if not unfair description of the bill. And what McCain left out of his remarks was the fact that Republican Senators had inserted their own earmarks into the legislation. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), who said his preference was for a one-page "clean" substitute, had more than $100 million dollars worth in spending earmarks in the measure. The Minority Leader had also encouraged Democrats to pursue an omnibus rather than a continuing resolution before the November election.

"Though some of my Republican colleagues in recent days have publicly distanced themselves from the idea that members have a role to play in the appropriations process, nearly all of them did nothing privately to withdraw their priorities from this bill," said Reid.

With defeat on the omnibus, however, came some promise for Democrats. In pulling the spending bill from consideration, Reid announced that he was filing cloture on two of the party's other major priorities: the DREAM Act, which would grant pathways to citizenship for children of illegal immigrants, and the stand-alone repeal of Don't Ask Don't Tell, the military law that restricts openly gay members from serving.

Votes on those measures, a leadership aide told The Huffington Post, would now come on Saturday morning. DREAM will go first, followed by DADT. The former has, it is believed, less of a shot at passage than the latter,

Once the Senate casts those Saturday votes, members will return to debating the START nuclear non-proliferation treaty.

Comments

[susjust]

11:49 PM on 12/17/2010

the Omnibus bill contains $450 BILLION for the F-35 fighter which neither Gates nor Obama want because of the cost and the fact it's unnecessary! MCCain knows this! Such a b.s.'er.

Time to reduce the Pentagon/defense budget by whatever means necessary to make up for the tax cuts!!!

[politicalguy94]

08:10 PM on 12/17/2010

As the end of the year approaches, Democrats CANNOT fail to pass the DADT repeal. Tell Sen. Reid that if the DADT repeal vote fails, they should not abandon the repeal, but must keep forcing votes on it until it passes. Tell him to extend Senate sessions into the winter recess if he has to until DADT repeal passes! And most importantly, tell him that if he and the Democrats fail to pass the DADT repeal, they would be handing the GOP a victory; quote Sen. Kirk’s comment as evidence of that.
Also, contact the senators that voted against repealing DADT on the last vote and pressure them until they vote for it! It’s time that America ends the pointless rule that is DADT!

[carnitine]

07:44 PM on 12/17/2010

I think they should pass WAPDT..Won't Ask Please Dont Tell

[ScottnLaguna]

07:06 PM on 12/17/2010

Demo theatre. Here's the name of the play..."We really do care about you illegals and gays in military. We also hate all those mean nuclear weapons." All three will fail. Sorry. Looking forward to seeing all the teeth knashing and crying by Sunday. They could have passed all this last year and didn't even try. Why?

[Leslie Goldman]

05:47 PM on 12/17/2010

My heart goes out to all the children and adults that have been harmed by contaminated food. We need to all work together now to Chew on Food Safety: A National Conversation is needed. All sides and every person who eats needs to be a part of a true dialogue on Science, Ethics, and Food.

http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=348831351129

Please join a year long Campaign to Educate Washington on Real Food Safety.

I have to believe in my heart that our elected representatives want to do the right thing for the American people. Working together we can harmonize our laws with the laws of nature and turn away from attempts to harmonize with international Food Rules. It is time we fully speak openly about what was between the lines in these food safety bills, the Codex Alimentarius Commission. It is time to know we will save the future of our nation through accepting we are all being called back to shift our economic orientation, to balance Nature's Original Technology with the blessings that come to us from a free and open internet that allows all of us to be heard.

I want to thank all from the Tea Party, all from the Sustainability movement, the local food advocates, all the diverse factions of American life who came together to save the future of our food. We truly have reason to thank God this holiday season
Plant Your Dream Blog

http://pr4progress.org/plantyourdream/?page_id=715

[Silverfixation]

05:05 PM on 12/17/2010

The dream act, if passed, would definitely help me. I do consider myself more republican than a democrat. I can definitely understand the position on those who are against it. Unfortunately because of my situation I would likely want this bill to past because of my circumstances. As most of you who might be reading this will think this will would only cost a great deal of money to the American tax payers. I implore you think & ask yourself what these dreamers would do if they aren't given the path to citizenship? Do you think they would all of a sudden get up & expected to leave the country? Some of these people are are definitely very talented, much more than what I can say about myself. I feel the amount of money use to resolve this issue is a drop in the bucket compared to the benefits these young dreamers can give back to America(n). I hope some of you who are against this bill, think above and beyond the rhetoric that has plague this bill. Consider what the long term benefits some of these dreamers can do for this country. Fortunately for me, I am an independent contractor & work for myself. Obtain a college degree having never taken any and I repeat any welfare, NO student loans, NO financial aid or any handouts from anyone or the government. So not everyone will be taken any money from the government & I pay my taxes!

[BlackBottom]

05:52 PM on 12/17/2010

You're a republican? You're ridiculous. How can u possibly be in agreement with those who despise you? If u vote for and support the GOP then shame on u.

[Goff256]

10:10 PM on 12/17/2010

And insulting him makes the left seem oh-so-comforting.

[Zeus9000]

10:19 PM on 12/17/2010

Is this how the left woo their voters?

[Paul Panola]

02:10 PM on 12/17/2010

THE 10-YEAR WORK PERMITS (What you are not being told by corrupt politicians and MSM)

1. Application: The DREAM amnesty begins with illegal aliens filling out applications. They merely have to claim — not provide evidence — that they meet criteria of having been brought to the U.S. before age 16 and being under the age of 30 at time of enactment and being present in the U.S. at least 5 years before enactment of the amnesty, among other criteria.

2. Work Permits Given: Upon filing the application, the illegal aliens are given a 10-year work permit to compete directly with the 22 million Americans who want a full-time job but can’t find one.

Estimates suggest that up to 2 million illegal aliens could legitimately qualify for the opening application, and perhaps a couple million more might be or look young enough to fraudulently apply.

Those millions would immediately be able to legally compete for any U.S. job…

[Chris3131]

04:37 PM on 12/17/2010

Well, luckily we have WAY too many job openings in this country. Oh, wait...

[moose and squirrel]

02:08 PM on 12/17/2010

mark kirk: 'did we just win?"

what a doosch.  failing to meet a basic congressional responsibility is a win?

[LynnW49]

01:15 PM on 12/17/2010

If DADT has a better chance, seems like they should get that done first, but at least both DREAM and DADT repeal will come to the floor on Saturday. That looked very sketchy for a while with the White House ("fierce advocates", ahem) pushing DADT repeal down the list in favor of the START Treaty (which many agreee *would* pass next year, whereas the others would not). Lieberman, otherwise a scoundrel, was working hard to get DADT into the schedule so he must have succeeded. Tomorrow will be an interesting and pivotal day. Even with passage, I wonder how long it will take the Pentagon to actually certify and implement repeal. At a press conference at the end of November, Gates did not answer questions about the timeline for actual implementation of repeal. The deal that the President cut with the Pentagon (who's in charge?) means that "certification" is required and that certification requires "That the Department of Defense has prepared the necessary policies and regulations." Some military leaders speculated about 2012 as the date for implementation!

"Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. Norton Schwartz suggested 2012 might be a good target timeframe for full implementation of repeal."

----
How the House voted: http://www.365gay.com/news/house-roll-call-lifting-ban-on-gays-in-military/

[BlackBottom]

06:00 PM on 12/17/2010

I recall many (including me at times) wanting Lieberman tarred and feathered during the HCR debate. I also recall the utter hysteria of the POTUS not unilaterally repealing DADT. Is this not better? Will we all not be happy when it's repealed? That maybe asking too much. :-) But I think I get the President's calm, PATIENT, long range view of getting things done. With HCR it's the law of the land, sure many of us are still unhappy, but now the debate is about making it better, not TRYING TO PASS IT!

I'm really beginning to admire the President's patience, but I still would like to see him throw a right cross every now and then. :-)

[jestanle]

01:05 PM on 12/17/2010

Expensive- $1.4 billion to foot the initial DREAM Act bill, estimates that “the bill would increase projected deficits by more than $5 billion" in at least one of the four consecutiv­e 10-year periods starting in 2021.”

http://the­hill.com/h­omenews/ho­use/132299­-democrats­-set-up-ho­use-and-se­nate-votes­-on-dream-­act

Dangerous- THOSE ELIGIBLE FOR AMNESTY INCLUDE REPEAT CRIMINAL OFFENDERS. The bill also hasn't had either hearings nor Committee process. The bill includes a 3-misdemea­nor rule, similar to the 1986 amnesty rule. As a result, criminal aliens who have less than 3 misdemeano­r conviction­s will remain eligible for legal, permanent status through the DREAM Act.

Racist- Aliens granted amnesty by the DREAM Act will have the legal right to petition for entry of their family members, including their adult brothers and sisters and the parents who illegally brought or sent them to the United States, once they become naturalize­d U.S. citizens. In less than a decade, this act could easily triple the number of green cards that will be immediatel­y distribute­d as a result of the DREAM Act, rewarding millions who unlawfully entered the US all because of their skin color!

Unfair- preferenti­al treatment to people here illegally while legal immigrants wait years for hearing and procedures also THE DREAM ACT DOES NOT REQUIRE THAT AN ILLEGAL ALIEN FINISH ANY TYPE OF DEGREE (VOCATIONA­L, TWO-YEAR, OR BACHELOR’S DEGREE) thus being unfair to the immigrants who actually complete these conditions or service

[bdaved]

07:43 PM on 12/17/2010

Whatever solution is sought to the problem of undocumented immigrants is going to cost something. Deportation would be a very expensive solution. As to the DREAM Act being dangerous, you should carefully read Sec. (4) (a) (1) (C) in its entirety, and the associated references to U.S. Code, instead of reading only part (iv) (II) of part (C):
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=s111-3992
As to the DREAM Act being racist, I can't really make much sense of what you say, but you should look at these:
http://travel.state.gov/visa/immigrants/types/types_1306.html
http://travel.state.gov/visa/bulletin/bulletin_5212.html
http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/WaitingListItem.pdf
According to Sec. 6, DREAM Act participants wouldn't become legal permanent residents for at least ten years. Legal permanent residents can't petition for visas for fourth-preference relatives like siblings. They are only eligible for family second-preference visas, of which only 114,200 are available each year. As of Nov. 1, 2010, there were 913,611 persons on the waiting list for those, and the wait can be very long.
As for unfairness, are you sure you want to go down that path? What's fair in considering a person who is linguistically and culturally indistinguishable from an American citizen of the same age, and who knows no other home but America, the same as someone who crossed the border this morning?

[TaiJi2]

01:04 PM on 12/17/2010

Tomorrow, we will know. That's something to look forward to. I don't really dare hope that the votes go the way I would like them to; I can't remember the last time I wasn't disappointed by the outcome. Oh yeah, that's right - Jerry Brown won. Seems like so long ago!

[bannorhill]

01:03 PM on 12/17/2010

Harry....when are you going to get to the budget that was due 2 1/2 months ago?

[Jeffin90019]

12:48 PM on 12/17/2010

DREAM is the wet dream of Democrats -- a way to reward criminals with the invaluable gift of American citizenship for their anchor babies.

[Jason N]

12:52 PM on 12/17/2010

"a way to reward criminals with the invaluable gift of American citizenshi­p for their anchor babies."

Anchor babies are already citizens genius, they don't need this bill. A 6 year old isn't a citizen, but didn't really have a choice to stay on his own when his parents decided to come here illegally. The parents of that child would get nothing out of this deal.

[lotus321]

05:31 PM on 12/17/2010

Actually, the parents would eventually be able to be sponsord once their children become citizens.  Also the people covered by this bill are nor anchor babies because they were not born here.   The problem I have is that this bill has no penalty for providing bad information and do we really think the government will follow up to see if they completed school or emt the other qualifications...this government could get a bottle of water to Katrina victims.no way they get this right

[Maezeppa]

12:59 PM on 12/17/2010

You are disgusting.  And I bet your forebears were similarly "criminal" - unless you're an American Indian.

[Texanbybirth]

12:48 PM on 12/17/2010

These pieces of legislation should be considered "The Whine Act". It's all Harry seems to be able to do, whine, whine, and whine some more.

[Jason N]

12:51 PM on 12/17/2010

I'm sorry, who's been crying on national TV lately? Not Democrats.

[Chris3131]

04:38 PM on 12/17/2010

That's your comeback? Wow.

[Maezeppa]

12:59 PM on 12/17/2010

Except he's gotten more legislation through than the do-nothing  Republicans ever did. 

[esalter]

01:04 PM on 12/17/2010

If DADT repeal passes there will be many people to thank but oddly no president.

[apiazza]

12:45 PM on 12/17/2010

Republicans win...America loses.

[Chris3131]

04:39 PM on 12/17/2010

Yeah, look how amazing things have been during Democrat control. Oh, wait...

[BlackBottom]

06:08 PM on 12/17/2010

You forgot about the new math: 60 votes and the senate is broken.