See previous: It ain't over till the fat lady goes back to Mexico

Below the fold (newest items at the top):

• Shamnesty lives; Meet the Amnesty/Sanctuary Republicans
• Is the amnesty bill’s “points system” a sham? 
• Coleman Amendment Defeated
• House Republicans take a stand
• Exporting the immigration issue
• Attention, Michael Chertoff: Get to the bottom of this screw-up
• Lott urges Bush to wield veto threat

*** *** *** Fold (but please don't spindle or mutilate) *** *** ***

Shamnesty lives; Meet the Amnesty/Sanctuary Republicans
Michelle Malkin

Shame, shame, shame:

Proponents today narrowly defeated an amendment that would have ended the bill's temporary worker program after five years. The measure was defeated 49 to 48, the narrow margin secured when Sen. Daniel Akaka (D-Hawaii) changed his vote at the last minute after an entreaty from Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass.), the bill's main Democratic sponsor. ...

In other votes today, senators resoundingly defeated an amendment that would have eliminated visas for workers currently in the country illegally, the key provision that incenses Republican opponents. It went down by a vote of 29 to 66.

"In my opinion and in the opinion of many Americans, this is amnesty pure and simple," said Sen. David Vitter (R-La.), the amendment's sponsor. He argued that the immigration bill repeats the errors in the 1986 immigration reform "when we did amnesty but not enough enforcement..."

...Senators also defeated a measure that would have permitted law enforcement officers to question individuals about their immigration status if they had probable cause to believe that they might be in the U.S. illegally.

Mark Krikorian lists those who voted against Vitter's amendment. Here are your Amnesty Now Republicans: ...

---

*************

Is the amnesty bill’s “points system” a sham? 
Allahpundit

Sure is, says Stanley Kurtz, who’s got the best piece today in NRO’s ongoing full-court press. Kate O’Beirne’s hearing that there are already “about 60″ votes in favor, and today’s editorial emphasizes that the bill grants amnesty as soon as it’s enacted, not when the border-enforcement “triggers” (which are merely spending targets anyway, not hard results-based targets) are satisfied. That’s sort of true and sort of not: per section 601(h), an alien isn’t given probationary status until he formally applies for a Z visa, which many of them won’t do if they can’t afford the $5K fine or don’t want to risk having to go back home to receive their visa. But NRO’s right that once the application is filed, they can’t be deported. Quoting section 601(h)(1)(C):

[An alien who files an application for Z nonimmigrant status] may not be detained for immigration purposes, determined inadmissible or deportable, or removed pending final adjudication of the alien’s application, unless the alien is determined to be ineligible for Z nonimmigrant status…

NRO asks what happens to illegals who are on probationary status if the government never reaches the enforcement triggers. Do they stay probies forever or go back to being illegal? Or would “compassion” require that we immediately legalize them to help bring them out of the shadows of probation? You know the answer.

But back to Kurtz. ...

See also (H/T: Allahpundit):

• George Will: A Bill That Earned Its Doubters
• NRO Editors: It’s Worse Than You Think
• Stanley Kurtz: Defeat in Victory; The family “reform” in the immigration bill is a joke.

Coleman Amendment Defeated
Ed Morrissey

The amendment offered by Minnesota Senator Norm Coleman to the immigration reform bill has gone down to defeat. As I noted yesterday, the bill would have removed the loophole that allows for "sanctuary cities" and require local law-enforcement agencies to cooperate on illegal immigration:

Senator Coleman's legislation will not require local law enforcement to use their own resources to enforce federal immigration laws. Moreover, it does not require local law enforcement to conduct immigration raids or act as federal agents. Senator Coleman's bill will simply give law enforcement officers the ability to inquiry about a person's immigration status during their routine investigations, and in turn report their findings to the appropriate Federal authorities though already-established channels, as they are currently required to do by law.

The Senate narrowly voted the amendment down, 49-48, even though it had some Democratic support. Republicans voting against this common-sense amendment were: ...

That makes 9 Republicans who either voted against enforcing existing immigration laws or didn't bother to show up to defend the law. Any two of them would have passed this amendment.

***

John Hinderaker has some choice comments here.

Let Our Nation's Leaders Know: NO AMNESTY

House Republicans take a stand
Michelle Malkin

Glad to know there are Republicans still out there who haven't been infected with the "Ted Kennedy is awesome" virus:

Key House Leaders will hold a press conference on this afternoon to highlight their opposition to the Senate’s amnesty proposal which would allow 12-20 million illegal immigrants to stay in the United States and be put on a path toward legalization and citizenship.

WHO: ...

WHERE: ...

WHEN: ...

---

Exporting the immigration issue
Don Surber

Daniel Finkelstein of the Times of London asked, “How long before the row about an amnesty for illegal immigrants currently taking place in the United States comes here?”

His short response: Not long.

But there are stark differences in approaches because there are fundamental differences in the two societies and their needs.

Wrote Finkelstein:

[...]

Here, those of us who dare suggest the deportation of the 12 million felons who are here illegally are called bigots by Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina. His exact words: ...

In England, no problem. Hodge is an Industry Minister with the Blair government. She said: “So a recently arrived family with four or five children living in a damp and overcrowded privately-rented flat with the children suffering from asthma will usually get priority over a family with less housing need who have lived in the area for three generations and are stuck at home with the grandparents.”

Both nations are trading their security for cheap labor.

The short-term answer is kick out the illegal aliens ...

Attention, Michael Chertoff: Get to the bottom of this screw-up
Michelle Malkin

This is Manuel Flores. He is an illegal alien fugitive from the law. He is accused of raping and sodomizing his girlfriend's nine-year-old daughter.

Nine-year-old daughter.

Manuel Flores is free, reportedly headed back to Mexico, because federal immigration officials screwed up, according to a local Denver report. I linked to this story earlier today, but it deserves greater exposure. And it deserves the attention of DHS Secretary Michael Chertoff, who has been too busy demonizing immigration enforcement proponents to make sure his behemoth bureaucracy is doing its damned job:

Law enforcement agencies say they followed policies and procedures, but an illegal alien, accused of sexually assaulting a nine year-old Denver girl, was still able to post a bond and flee the country.

The man, who called himself Manuel Flores, was arrested February 15 and accused of raping and sodomizing his girlfriend's daughter. According to police documents, he was not able to provide a Social Security number or driver's license. When he was booked into the Denver Jail, he told Officers he was born in Moralos, Mexico.

A Sheriff's Department spokesman says they alerted federal immigration officials that Flores might be an illegal alien, but ICE apparently did not put an immigration hold on him.

A private bounty hunter tracked Flores down. But no one's lifting a finger to bring him back here to face charges: ...

Lott urges Bush to wield veto threat
By Stephen Dinan, The Washington Times

The Senate's No. 2 Republican yesterday said he has told President Bush to be prepared to save their party from a bad immigration bill through his veto pen.

The comments from Minority Whip Trent Lott of Mississippi came minutes before the Senate voted to cut in half the guest-worker program in the massive immigration bill, the first blow that strained, but did not break, the bipartisan coalition trying to pass the measure.

Mr. Lott said Mr. Bush needs to get more involved in the debate by drawing lines in the sand that Democrats can't cross.

"He's got to be prepared to say to [House Speaker Nancy] Pelosi, 'If you come up with something that really makes a bad situation worse, I will veto it,' " Mr. Lott told reporters yesterday. "That is the ultimate weapon, and it has to be held in abeyance to keep the pressure on us to do this right."

The former Senate Republican leader said he told Mr. Bush this in a recent conversation, telling the president "it's important you emphasize that you want immigration reform, but not just any immigration reform."

But other Republicans laughed at that notion, saying there is no way Mr. Bush would veto a bill that reaches his desk.

"Whatever might be described as 'comprehensive immigration reform,' if it is put in front of the president, it will be the equivalent of hanging a pork chop in front of a hungry dog," said Rep. Steve King, Iowa Republican. ...