Were they speaking English when on the floor?

I hope they pass this. An English Only law in the United States levels the field for the majority of Americans.
--------------------------------------
House Anger Over English-Only Policies Boils Over
By David Rogers
The Wall Street Journal Blogs,
November 9, 2007
http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2007/11/09/house-anger-over-english-only-policies-boils-over/
Frustration among members of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus broke into the open this morning in a rare twist: Democrats supporting a motion to adjourn the chamber their party controls.

California Rep. Joe Baca, a leader in the House caucus, set off the fireworks in protest of the Democratic leadership’s handling of a vote Thursday night related to English-only practices in the workplace. The adjournment motion failed narrowly, 204-184, with some of the protesters backing down. But the incident reflects real anger in the caucus given what many perceive as the current anti-immigrant political climate in Congress.

The collapse of immigration overhaul legislation in the Senate this summer has all but doomed efforts to address the millions of undocumented workers in the U.S. The so-called “Dream Act” to help the children of illegal aliens establish themselves in the U.S. has stalled. At the same time, there has been a steady drumbeat of proposals to increase border security funding or require greater proof of legal residency to qualify for federally supported healthcare programs.
Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D., Calif.) has complained, especially of the impasse in the Senate blocking the Dream Act. But among some factions in her own party, there has been some sympathy for English-only policies that have angered Hispanic lawmakers.

At issue Thursday night was a Republican nonbinding motion supportive of language that would bar Equal Employment Opportunity Commission from taking civil action against any organization which requires its employees to speak English at work. The Senate has adopted similar language as part of a budget bill funding the EEOC, and by a 218-186 margin, with 36 Democrats joining Republicans, the House voted to instruct its negotiators to accept the Senate amendment.

Baca complained that the leadership hadn’t adequately anticipated the motion. Fourteen Democrats were absent and others, who voted with the Republicans against the EEOC, were unaware of the motion’s import. “We need better intelligence” he said.

“English-only is the only issue that unites all Hispanics,” said Rep. Jose Serrano (D., N.Y.).
-----------------------
Why is it only the Hispanics we hear from? Where are all of the other Illegals in this?

The majority of America Citizens support this and increased enforcement. It is Big Business and those who profit from the use of Illegal Labor who are supporting Illegal Immigration.

The rest of people supporting Illegal Immigration are too blind to see the truths behind the issue. If they really looked past the media spin from the left to the meat of the matter, they would want to beat those fighting for Amnesty.

Do not get me wrong, it is not just the Left which helped cause this problem. The Right is responsible too. However it is now most of the Right and some of the Left which is truly listening to their voters and taking action.

This isn't about race, unless you support Illegal Immigration. In that case all against it are racist even though my issue with all of this is the ILLEGAL issue, not skin color or anything else.

Do your research. Listen to what is actually said, what they write, and look for the truths. I admit there is some against all immigration due to racism, but I am not part of that, nor are the majority of people against illegal immigration.

It is a matter of answering this one question: Should we reward criminals for their crimes?

Actual Progress?

Did I actually see this? Did all the phone calls, radio shows, letters, faxes, and e-mails finally wake up our Congress? Look at this and see what you think.

Senators Agree to Extra $3 Billion for Border Security
Thursday , July 26,
2007
Associated Press

WASHINGTON — Senate Democrats and Republicans
agreed Thursday to devote an additional $3 billion to gaining control over the
U.S.-Mexico border.
The move puts Congress on a path to overriding President
Bush's promised veto of a $38 billion homeland security spending bill.
The
deal, approved by an 89-1 vote, resurrects a GOP plan to pass some of the most
popular parts of Bush's failed immigration bill. That includes money for
additional Border Patrol agents and fencing along the southern border.
Democrats liked the money. But they objected to Republican proposals such as
allowing law enforcement officers to question people about their immigration
status and cracking down on people who overstay their visas.
Efforts broke
down Wednesday to make progress on a compromise containing only the border
security money.
But Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., and Sen. John
Cornyn, R-Texas, resolved their differences overnight and announced agreement
Thursday morning. Cornyn won a promise to use some money to pursue immigrants
who had entered the United States legally but had overstayed their visas.
Reid had apparently thought that Cornyn wanted harsher language.
"I was
wrong and Senator Cornyn was right," Reid acknowledged.
The measure
initially was opposed by the White House, top Republicans said, and it clearly
puts the president in a box. Bush had promised a veto of the overall homeland
security bill for spending $2.3 billion more than he requested.
But the
White House signaled it would at least accept the added money for the border.
"To the extent Congress supports additional emergency funding, we want to
work with them to make sure it is spent on the highest border security
priorities," White House spokesman Scott Stanzel said.
Now, Bush's stalwarts
in Congress, including Sen. Judd Gregg, R-N.H., are poised to override the
president's veto on the entire bill.
Cornyn predicted the bill would "pass
by a veto-proof margin" and Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., told reporters the bill
might get 90 votes in the 100-member Senate.
The measure probably will be
the first spending bill for the budget year beginning Oct. 1 that will arrive on
Bush's desk. The president, however, demanded on Thursday that the
Democratic-controlled Congress focus on delivering the Pentagon's budget to him
before lawmakers take their August vacation.
The money approved Thursday
would go toward seizing "operational control" over the U.S.-Mexico border by
using additional Border Patrol agents, vehicle barriers, border fencing and
observation towers. In addition, there is Cornyn's effort against people who
overstay their visas.
Graham said the $3 billion would pay for "more boots
on the ground, more people patrolling our border making it harder for somebody
to come across illegally. We should have done this a long time ago."
Bush
and Republicans such as Graham and Sen. Jon Kyl of Arizona had argued during
last month's immigration debate that a comprehensive approach to overhauling
immigration policy was the only way to attract bipartisan support.
The bill
was condemned by conservative talk radio and congressional foes as offering
"amnesty." After it failed to pass, Graham and others changed their minds and
offered the border security plan.
Graham and Kyl said the public will not
accept the more contentious parts, especially the plan to give millions of
illegal immigrants a way to earn U.S. citizenship, until the border with Mexico
is made more secure.
"Border security is the gate that you must pass through
to get to overall comprehensive reform," said Graham. The senator is up for
re-election next year and faces political heat at home for backing Bush's
unpopular immigration plan.
Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pa., said he is
circulating a plan that would grant some legal status to illegal immigrants but
would stop short of giving them citizenship.
That approach "would take the
teeth out of the amnesty argument," Specter said. "I think we can act this year.
I think this bill is very close to doable."

I think after hearing the uproar of the American Citizens across the United States, our Congress must have figured out that what we want is Border Security, not Amnesty for criminal immigrants.

I truly hope that this passes. After that I hope it is actually spent where it is needed, not used to build pools for people supposed to be building fences and walls.

Now they need to get something other than get out of jail free cards put in place to deal with criminal immigration. Do I support mass deporting of all illegals? No, but I do believe that we need to go after the truly Criminal first. After that, if we have a way that the others if they can pass background checks (meaning No Criminal History, not this idea of 8 arrests is OK because they have not been arrested 10 times currently) and that they are actually part of our society. However, if they have used fake Social Security Cards, Green Cards, or other Identity Theft, they should have to leave.

I see as I try to find exceptions to allow some illegals to stay and get a visa, I can only support those who have broken no laws, and in that is my problem because if they came in illegally, I cannot support any of them.

It is good that it sounds like the majority of Americans were listened to. Now all we can hope for is that this passes into law, and becomes enforced laws!