The Daily Caller

The Daily Caller

A New Opening for Amnesty?

Maybe the stakes in the Senate races are in the House: Is it really the Washington CW that

“Speaker Boehner will stay if Republicans take the Senate, which would raise hopes for sending more legislation to the President (for veto!), and would retire if the Senate stays in Democratic hands.” [Emphasis added]

That comes from Politico‘s  Mike Allen,  than whom you do not get much CW-er.  …  If true, it would seem to create an opening for proponents of “comprehensive” (Amnesty First) immigration reform to squeeze a bill through in a lame duck session, after the November results are known–if the Dems hold the Senate.  One reason Boehner, who clearly favors some form of amnesty, hasn’t defied his caucus and brought a bill to the floor is that he would then face a revolt that might cost him his speakership.**  If he’s retiring, he might as well go out a hero to the donors and lobbyists pushing for a bill. …

P.S.: Does this mean that those donors*** and all the GOP consultants who’ve convinced themselves that passing amnesty is the key to 2016 will be secretly rooting this fall for the Democrats to lose fewer than the six seats it would take to flip control? …P.P.S.:  In February, Senate Minority Leader McConnell said he wouldn’t support a lame-duck amnesty push said a lame-duck amnesty push is “not going to happen.” But he’ll be Minority Leader, not Majority Leader, if the GOPs don’t get their 6 seats. Even if they do, Harry Reid will be running the Senate for any lame duck session. … And I would be insufficiently paranoid if I failed to note that McConnell’s statement (to Laura Ingraham) didn’t include a pledge to lead a filibuster of  a lame duck amnesty attempt, or to otherwise block it. McConnell didn’t even say he wouldn’t support such an effort (just that it wouldn’t happen) . …

__________

**–It would probably also involve breaking or finessing Boehner’s seemingly explicit promise not to bring an immigration bill to the floor unless a majority of his caucus supported it (the so-called Hastert Rule). But even if a bill could be found that a majority of GOP Representatives could support (after Election Day) there might still be a revolt against Boehner by those who opposed it, which he might not want to risk if he’s not retiring.

*** Like the naively thuggish Silicon Valley types attempting to almost-explicitly bribe Republicans into moving an amnesty bill.