Odd alliance could be key to deal on immigration bill

Ianus · 06-30-2013, 03:19 PM

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/p...ation/2473133/

Quote:

WASHINGTON – Immigration issues have long given rise to odd political alliances in Congress, but the newfound camaraderie between a conservative white Southerner and a liberal Latino from the Midwest could help seal the deal on a sweeping immigration overhaul this year.

Republican Rep. Trey Gowdy of Spartanburg, S.C., and Democrat Luis Gutierrez of Chicago, Ill., are about as far apart in manner and ideology as they could be.

Gowdy is a slow-talking Southern Baptist whose politics mirror his strongly conservative district in an Old South state. Gutierrez is a spunky progressive of Puerto Rican descent serving his 11th term in Congress, a hero to immigrants and the working class. Gowdy, a sophomore, was a prosecutor in his previous life. Gutierrez was a community activist.

But their friendship may offer the U.S. House its best chance to find agreement on how to secure the border, overhaul procedures for legal immigration and deal with the 11 million people in the country illegally.

In separate interviews, Gowdy and Gutierrez gushed about their mutual respect and trust, despite their sharply contrasting political views.

"Luis is impossible not to like," Gowdy said Wednesday, hours before the two had dinner with a handful of others at an Italian restaurant near the Capitol. "There are people I agree with on everything politically that I don't go eat dinner with."

Gutierrez expressed similar sentiments.

"I think some things just happen because it's meant to be," he said. "The chemistry is there."

Gowdy and Gutierrez say they hit it off almost instantly just six months ago.

Gowdy was the new chairman of the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Immigration and Border Security, and Gutierrez had maneuvered his way onto the committee specifically to work on the immigration issue.

Immigrant rights groups assumed Gowdy was a hardliner who would block reform. But Gowdy told the Greenville (S.C.) News in January he empathized with people who had left their country to find a better life in the U.S. He ruled out deporting the nation's 11 million undocumented immigrants, saying such a roundup would "shock the conscience" of Americans.

Gutierrez, a leading advocate of offering illegal immigrants a path to citizenship, was pleasantly surprised and predicted he and Gowdy would work well together. The newspaper story was the subject of their first-ever conversation on Capitol Hill a few days later.

They had more in common than their biographies would indicate. Both men are quick-witted and colorful. They deliver speeches and interrogate witnesses at committee hearings with drama and passion on a variety of topics.

Gowdy and Gutierrez said they also share an interest in justice.

"What I think Trey has is a fundamental sense of fairness," Gutierrez said. "Bigotry and hate are an affront to his core values. Once you can set that aside, vis-a-vis immigration, you can devise a world of justice and fairness. It's clear he has a set of values."

Gowdy said he once wrote a note to Gutierrez that said, "If I ever needed an advocate, a passionate advocate, I would want somebody like you."

"If you listen to Luis, he sounds like a prosecutor, talking about respect for the rule of law and how to balance the compassion with the respect for the rule of law," Gowdy said.

Religious faith also plays a role. Gowdy called Gutierrez, a Catholic, on Good Friday this year to wish him well.

"We had a wonderful conversation that helped us build our relationship," Gutierrez said. "I don't want to take it all the way to divine intervention, but I've got to tell you, I'm really happy he's there because the Judiciary Committee has not been the friendliest place for immigrants from the Republican side of the aisle."

Gowdy called the Old Testament "a series of immigrations."

"And I'm trying to get to heaven," he said. "You do that by doing what you think is right after you consider everybody else's opinion. Luis and I could actually wind up voting differently, but I'll never challenge his motives and he will never challenge mine."

While they are not collaborating on any specific immigration deal, Gowdy and Gutierrez said they expect their relationship to pay dividends later this year, during final negotiations over whatever bill is on the floor.

"I look forward to the moment there is a Gowdy-Gutierrez proposal," Gutierrez said.

One immigration reform advocate said the Gutierrez-Gowdy matchup is refreshing.

"There's not a lot of muscle memory in the House of working together on a bipartisan basis," said Frank Sharry, founder and executive director of America's Voice. "But their relationship gives you some hope that maybe on this issue there is a way in which they can work together in good faith and they can assume the best about each other's motives rather than the worst."

Gutierrez is part of a bipartisan group of House members trying to write a comprehensive immigration reform plan that, like the plan passed by the Senate Thursday, would include a path to citizenship for people in the country illegally. Gowdy and House GOP leaders are instead writing individual bills, the first of which focus on enforcement.

Whether Republicans will move legislation to create a path to legal status for undocumented immigrants will be the first big test of the understanding between Gowdy and Gutierrez.

A few days ago, a heated partisan debate erupted in committee over a provision in Gowdy's enforcement bill that would add new criminal penalties for illegal immigrants already in the country. Gutierrez wanted an amendment to exempt those with strong ties to the U.S. and no criminal record.

Gowdy said he agreed some illegal immigrants "are deserving of special status and special treatment," but he pleaded with Gutierrez to drop his amendment, saying forthcoming GOP proposals would address his concerns.

"This is a step in what will be a longer journey and one that I will look forward to making that journey, frankly, with you," Gowdy said.

Gutierrez withdrew his amendment.

"I do trust you," he told Gowdy. "I have reason to do that."

I thought that statement alone was interesting considering the House GOP is part of the no 'amnesty' crowd.

swiftp · 04:09 PM

Yes, I have seen this in past House Judiciary committee hearings. For example, take a look at this one. Jump forward to 01:36:00.

For context, the invited speakers have been talking for a while now about the importance of border security and about the dangers posed by Mexican criminals, using keywords like smugglers, control, ICE agents, gangs, killings, safety, etc.

Then Gutierrez makes a passionate plea for his position on immigration reform. But check out what happens immediately after he finishes his speech with him and Gowdy...

dtrt09 · 06-30-2013, 04:10 PM

I don't like Frank Sharry - he's too in bed with the pols in DC. He was also actively involved in the congressional races in 1996 as well as the re-election of Bill Clinton in 1996, and he and others, including La Raza, was consulted on IIRAIRA and didn't make any noise because they were promised that their concerns would be addressed 'later'.

Aha. All of the Dems that voted for it are the ones one currenlty in Congress claiming to be our 'advocates'.

frbc13 · 06-30-2013, 04:50 PM

dtrt09 · 06-30-2013, 05:24 PM

Quote:

A few days ago, a heated partisan debate erupted in committee over a[b] provision in Gowdy's enforcement bill that would add new criminal penalties for illegal immigrants already in the country. Gutierrez wanted an amendment to exempt those with strong ties to the U.S. and no criminal record.[/B]

Gowdy said he agreed some illegal immigrants "are deserving of special status and special treatment," but he pleaded with Gutierrez to drop his amendment, saying forthcoming GOP proposals would address his concerns.

Quote:

Gutierrez withdrew his amendment

Hahahahahaha. The House is full of weak Democrats who roll as soon as a GOPer smiles their way. Wow. They are proposing to criminalize the non-criminal and they think this is okay???? Wow.

swiftp · 06-30-2013, 05:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dtrt09

Hahahahahaha. The House is full of weak Democrats who roll as soon as a GOPer smiles their way. Wow. They are proposing to criminalize the non-criminal and they think this is okay???? Wow.

To be fair, Gutierrez's amendment withdrawal is not final (he can later introduce it again if need be) and neither is passage of this enforcement bill in the Judiciary Committee (it still needs to go to for a floor vote). It is still very early in the House immigration reform process, so no need to become alarmed.

dtrt09 · 06-30-2013, 08:15 PM

I am alarmed because the window of opportunity is closing. Time does matter.

There still exists student loan rates, the budget, ongoing deportations, etc, etc. to be dealt with this year. They leave for six weeks' vacation starting in less than a month. Then in the fall, they take loads of holiday time off. The president said if it didn't reach his desk by June, he was introducing his own bill. Well, we knew that wasn't gonna happen. Then it was 'CIR will be signed by the president in time for the August recess'. Here we are now.

Congress is on vacation for the next 7 days. Boehner and the House Repubs will meet on July 10th. Shouldn't Gutierrez have the bill introduced by then? Otherwise, without bipartisan House legislation, what exactly is Boehner supposed to discuss with his caucus?

See, Dems are bs'ers, too.

satnam · 06-30-2013, 10:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dtrt09

See, Dems are bs'ers, too.

Aren't all politicians bullshitters? Some more than others.

dtrt09 · 06-30-2013, 11:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by satnam

Aren't all politicians bullshitters? Some more than others.

Some here believe the Dems and the Pres cannot do wrong.

RS22 · 07-01-2013, 11:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dtrt09

Some here believe the Dems and the Pres cannot do wrong.

And some think they are dictators who can do whatever they want.

There is no CIR unless you get Republican votes for it. Which means they can't just steamroll people, introducing their own legislation, demanding a vote on it, etc. They have to work with Republicans. That means putting up with a certain amount of nonsense, like delays and stupid symbolic votes, etc. You are nitpicking the details of how they are working with others from an armchair.

S	M	T	W	T	F	S
			1	2	3	4
5	6	7	8	9	10	11
12	13	14	15	16	17	18
19	20	21	22	23	24	25
26	27	28	29	30	31

They need you!

Forum links

Resources

Join our list

National calendar of events

July

Odd alliance could be key to deal on immigration bill