Immigration bill backers confident
WASHINGTON — The eight senators who authored the new bipartisan immigration reform bill said on Thursday that they are confident their efforts will not collapse in the way a bipartisan gun control bill did this week.
Immigration reform has much wider support among both Democrats and Republicans, said Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y. Schumer is one of the “Gang of Eight” senators who released their bill this week.
The other senators — who met 24 times over three months to craft their sweeping 800-plus-page bill — are Republican Sens. John McCain and Jeff Flake of Arizona, Lindsey Graham of South Carolina and Marco Rubio of Florida and Democratic Sens. Mark Bennet of Colorado, Dick Durbin of Illinois and Bob Menendez of New Jersey.
“I think the majority of people in both caucuses really want to get this done,” Schumer said. “I think this is ours to lose.”
McCain said the most compelling reason for the senators' confidence is the unprecedented coalition of diverse interest groups that have come together around the legislation.
Among them: labor unions and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, farmers and farm workers, Roman Catholics and evangelical Protestants, and immigrant rights advocates and conservatives such as Grover Norquist, president of Americans for Tax Reform. A bipartisan coalition of more than 30 state attorneys general also is calling on congressional leaders to pass reform.
“I never thought I'd be standing next to Richard Trumka,” said McCain, chuckling as he turned to acknowledge the AFL-CIO president. “This is why we'll succeed.”
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.
- Mountaineer workers fear smoking ban will harm ‘livelihood’
- HGH use on the rise in teens, survey finds
- To fight crime, Chicago tries wiping away arrests
- Cyber domain is next battleground, authors of 9/11 report warn
- U.S. intel believes civilian plane might have been mistaken for Ukraine military aircraft
- 100 years later, World War I resonates at Kansas City museum
- Man convicted of enslaving woman gets 30 years
- For more than 8 decades, N.Y. farmer has kept eye to the sky
- Explosion levels home in Central Texas; 3 hurt
- Montana judge censured over rape case comments
- VA nominee to demand ‘urgent action,’ he tells panel