Jun 16 2007
New Immigration Poll – GOP Damaged
Well, it would seem the goodwill of America has been poisoned by the relentless PR campaign of the amnesty hypochondriacs. We seem to have found the magic scapegoat for all our woes: illegal immigrants. A new WSJ Poll Shows a big drop off in support of the immigration plan dealing with illegals currently here (see here and here). But at a major price to the GOP (as predicted):
Now I would like to get your reaction to several parts of a possible new immigration bill. Please tell me whether you strongly favor, somewhat favor, somewhat oppose, or strongly oppose each of the following parts of this bill.
All immigrants who apply to be U.S. citizens would be required to learn English
Strongly Favor: 73
Somewhat Favor: 16
Somewhat Oppose: 6
Strongly Oppose: 4
Not Sure: 1Fav/Opp: 89/10
Imposing new fines on businesses that hire illegal immigrants
Strongly Favor: 57
Somewhat Favor: 17
Somewhat Oppose: 11
Strongly Oppose: 12
Not Sure: 3Fav/Opp: 74/23
Increasing border security by building a fence along part of the U.S. border with Mexico and by hiring and training more border patrol agents
Strongly Favor: 44
Somewhat Favor: 21
Somewhat Oppose: 12
Strongly Oppose: 19
Not Sure: 4Fav/Opp: 65/31
Immigrants who want to come to the U.S. to work and who are not already here could apply for a two-year work visa that they could renew up to two times
Strongly Favor: 38
Somewhat Favor: 41
Somewhat Oppose: 6
Strongly Oppose: 12
Note sure: 3Fav/Opp: 79/18
Allowing illegal workers who arrived in the U.S. to apply for permanent U.S. residency if they return to their home country within eight years and pay additional fines
Strongly Favor: 13
Somewhat Favor: 22
Somewhat Oppose: 20
Strongly Oppose: 35
Note Sure: 10Fav/Opp: 35/55
Allowing illegal workers who arrived in the U.S. before January first of this year to receive an automatic work visa if they pay a fine of around five thousand dollars
Strongly Favor: 10
Somewhat Favor: 20
Somewhat Oppose: 18
Strongly Oppose: 46
Not sure: 6Fav/Opp: 30/64
Of course, the real question on dealing with illegal immigrants is a fine, back taxes and a background check for a violent criminal record. But despite the misleading question the news is not good. The GOP, striving for something harsh enough to entice illegal aliens NOT to come forward and register with the government, are hell bent on retaining the status quo and all its problems. The whole point of fines and back taxes was to require a reaonable (by all other laws on our books) payment of debt to society but enough of an enticement so that these people come forward and get jobs that include all the required taxes so that they too pay their fair share. The problem is rounding up people will cost a lot more than some small set who get benefits.
But today’s GOP is not run on logic, it is run on hate. And it is paying a price:
Putting aside for a moment the question of who each party’s nominee might be, what is your preference for the outcome of the 2008 presidential election––that a Democrat be elected president or that a Republican be elected president? (IF “DEMOCRAT” OR “REPUBLICAN,” ASK:) And do you strongly prefer a (Democrat/Republican), or is your preference not that strong?
Democrat
Strongly: 42
Not Strongly: 10
Republican
Strongly 23
Not Strongly 8Dem/Rep: 52/31
Strong Dem/Rep: 42/23
Almost 2-1 against the GOP. I would say that is a lot of damage when usually these numbers have a gap of only 5-10%, with the Reps down usually. The damage inflicted by the GOP on itself has been stunning. The Dems have inflicted damage on themselves too. People are ready to toss the Pols out and start fresh. The question on whether people support their own representative or want someone new is 40/48 in favor of someone new. That number is usually very high in support of incumbants (its always someone elses representative causing the trouble). But somehow the Dems are not as bad off as the Reps (though Congress is).
The fact is the damage to the GOP is done. And is it surprising? Again, all I have to do is sample the conservative blogs to show what kind of person represents the base:
And those that support this monstrosity will be looking for new jobs. The Senators that supported it will be next on the unemployment line.
Bush may go down in history as a traitor, but he won’t care, he’ll be living the high life in Paraguay.
3 posted on 06/16/2007 12:17:22 AM PDT by janetgreen
So this POS legislation proves beyond a shodow of a doubt that our government truly no longer serves by the consent of the governed.
According to the Founders, we now have the right to abolish said government.You bring the guillotines, I’ll bring the pikes!
6 posted on 06/16/2007 12:23:12 AM PDT by FierceDraka (I’m not against the government. The government is against ME.)
“El Presidente will be having steaks on the grill each evening while the rest of us will be left wondering what the hell happened???â€
We can wonder over that while we are spending hours in line waiting for our govt. cheese handout.
21 posted on 06/16/2007 2:01:55 AM PDT by Bogtrotter52 (Reading DU daily so you won’t hafta)
Peruse the insanity at will. Bush and Congress were duly elected and given the power to do what they think is right. People who disagree and then propose coup d’etat’s are not Americans. In fact I would not be surprised if the mob mentality gripping the right is not being stoked by people to help them in their credibility self-destruction. The funny thing is, the same Chicken Little cries resulted from the 1980’s bill and all the immigration that occurred has NOT destroyed this country. But the hate from the partisans has. They have lost all self control. And for those of us who have not lost our minds over documenting the undocumented workers here it is becoming uglier. And the sad thing is these haters who pretend that is the American way have lost all their perspective. It is now only ‘American’ to be like them.
The bill could pass, and it might be the right thing to do to get past this insanity. It is either pass it now and show the wingnuts the sky will not fall, or leave the entire mess in place for another 10-30 years. Because this issue is looking like a 3rd rail issue like Social Security reform. Thanks to the GOP we will could be stuck with the current mess for the foreseeable future. Either way, thanks to the GOP we are likely to be stuck with a Democrat President unless someone like Rudy Guiliani or Mitt Romney can hang on and win the primary. The problem is, the GOP may have distilled itself down to the point moderates do not participate at all.
Instead of learning the lesson of Pete Wilson in CA, and how long it took to get someone like Arnold Schwarzenneger to get the (R) back into a statewide office, we are probably seeing that mistake now being repeated on a national level. It was over illegal immigrants Wilson lost CA to the GOP for a decade. Sad, but true. We never learn our lessons of history. Bush better beat al-Qaeda in Iraq in the next year or the lesson of listening to partisans (left and right) will be a very, very painful one. People forget the comprehensive bill was designed to efficiently deal with immigration, minimizing law enforcement requirements and leave those for our war on terror. It was not meant to maximize punishment.
The bill was more enticement than punishment so we could optimize the resources between illegals and terrorists. We want the hay stack to come forward to make it easier to find the needles. The more who come forward the less effort required to deal with those we need to find who should be out of here. It is now way out of balance and the whole thing is going to leave us vulnerable. Not what the GOP wanted – but it is the price they were willing to pay to go after nannies and cooks and painters.
Update: A lot of readers keeping bringing up marginal details and asking me to address them as if they are important. They do not understand my position (though I have posted on it many times). The reason I am were I am is because of the priorities I have selected. I am not for maximizing the punishment of illegal aliens. What I am for is an efficient and rapid fix to our national security – thus I come down to a different set of conclusions.
The problem is the amnesty hypochondriacs think we have unlimited law enforcement resources or unlimited time to deal with the problem of illegal immigrants and who may be among them. In a world without al-Qaeda I would possibly agree.
But in a world with al-Qaeda my priorities are to rapidly separate the good from the bad and get the bad outta here before they go radical. Those who push this issue off until years later are allowing a dangerous criminal element to remain here and possibly be recruited by al-Qaeda. That is and has been my top concern.
The concept is one of triage, where you select what you can do to save what is salvageable. In my opinion we need to optimize our defense, not our punishment of illegals. We cannot focus on illegals at the expense of national security. So I am all for a path where we entice those who have not done anything seirously wrong and look to be law abiding to come forward and step aside. Once this is done we have made our national security problem orders of magnitude easier. Where to put our resources – nannies versus terrorists – it is a pretty basic question. With limited resources that is the choice. Worrying about silly things like touchbacks (more resources required we do not have) is just not worth the effort when you add up the problem and the resources we have to deal with the problem. Nannies or terrorists.
This has always been the basis of my equations – from day one. Maximize the transition of tolerable illegals to legal and monitored, while deporting the bad apples ASAP. Bad apples are potential terrorist recruits. When that is your driving strategy the bill makes total sense. When something else is your goal these priorities fall to the wayside.
Oh, and insulting and haranguing this subculture population so that the feel isolated and disrespected (like immigrants in Europe) only provides an excuse to finally give into terrorist overtures. Offering them to come into the open gives them one set of motivations. Offering them hate and punishment gives them another set of motivations. Cold, hard, unavoidable logic. Usually the best answer in a fight for your life. Leaving potential recruits for al-Qaeda on our streets is pretty dumb. Giving them excuse to sign up is suicidal.
There is no reason to wait on culling the 12 million illegals here into two camps: the relatively safe and the known problems (which are then deported). There is no rational excuse to delay this process of culling out those who cannot stay here any longer than possible. And what about insulting them, their families and their culture (e.g., 3rd world toilets) while you let them stay around longer? …… Needless to say I am woefully unimpressed with the GOP right now.
And I think it is this kind of logic that drives Bush and many conservative leaders. Unlike the armchair experts sitting at home behind a computer screen, our leaders see the daily security threats. So why would you go against your party and do something that spells political disaster? How hard is that one to figure out. You sacrifice what you must to protect the nation – including party. And no, they will not tell us if the telling opens up our national security secrets and defenses. I may be wrong – but at least I am erring on ‘the conservative side’.
terrye–
…They have never even begun to come up with a plan of their own. All they say is enforce the laws and build a wall…
what part of that plan didn’t you understand? i would add employer sanctions as well. if coming here illegally doesn’t do you any good, you’d stay home, wouldn’t you? americans should determine who comes here, not the mad rush through the border.
And there is something you guys might want to keep in mind while you have you go after people like me and AJ and yammer on about the bad people like McCain or Graham or Lott or whatever….
We are Independents, members of the largest self described group. Right now Independents out number Republicans or Democrats and since 2006 and the spectacle of the never ending temper tantrum from the right, more and more of those Independents are leaning Democrat. Now you can lie to yourselves and say if you just go after the Mexicans the people will love us, but that is not what is happening. Just the opposite. You can kill this the same way the Democrats killed social security reform, but sooner or later people will expect a solution.
I voted Republican, even when it meant voting for the doomed paleo John Hostettler because of the war on Terror. But it appears that the right has decided they would rather sacrifice the commander in chief and their own leadership in a time of war and rave like the nutroots than anything else. That is what they want to do.
In which case, my number one reason for voting Republican just went south.
smll;
What part don’t I understand?
Gawd, are people this DENSE????
A wall will not stop everyone, thinking it will is a fantasy and it ignores the fact that 50% of the illegals did not cross that border. Go ahead and build the fence, but it will not be enough.
And when it comes to just enforcing the laws…what does that mean? Do you think the border patrol people are just playing with themselves down there? Do you think that all the law enforcement people are plot of a conspiracy to not enforce the laws? All they need is a talking to and just like that they will start doing something they were not doing before?
12 million people, deported at 10,000 a month is a century. That is a fact.
There is no way to just enforce the laws under this system, the courts have watered them down, the process takes to long, the system obviously needs reform and with that reform we might be able to get a handle on this. These laws were not meant to deal with these numbers of people.
But to just say enforce the laws and build a wall and everything will be ok is stupid. s.t.u.p.i.d.
How are you going to enforce the laws, exactly? Which laws, how and when and with what resources?
Well you know what? I don’t like the security when I have to fly so I think the next time I go home I will just sprout wings and fly. Same difference.
I distinctly remember trying to debate the actual text of the bill with you, Terrye. You wouldn’t do that. Remember?
I posted countless posts where I cited the page number and QUOTED the bill. You were free to join in those discussions.
But you don’t seem inclined to talk about what is actually in the bill. If the debate does not include the text of the bill, what’s the point???
Seriously.
Terrye–
Stupid? Ah, more well-reasoned debate from you. Where did you learn your skills, Democratic Underground? Daily Kos?
From where exactly did you get this 10,000 a month figure? A fence wouldn’t “stop them all”? So what? It doesn’t need to. Again, if they can’t get a job here, why would they stay? Again, no need to deport. If you remove the incentives for them to crash our borders and set up house here, it seems to me you’d’ve won a large part of the battle. Also, why in the world should we get most of our “temporary labor” from Mexico, a country that has territorial designs on much of the United States? If we had control of who comes here, we could decide from whence they come, instead of just leaving the borders open, letting God who knows in. From where do you get your figure that less than half of them come across the Mexican border? You spout all this, but don’t back it up.
I am not going through this crap all over again.
Apache, you did not want to “debate” anything. I went over to Truth Laid Bare and read the bill, I also read analysis from both sides of the debate about the bill. I did not download the whole thing on pdf.
What you wanted to do Apache was cherry pick certain elements of the bill, before the amendments were even introduced and force me to defend them with my life or something while you cross examined me. I have already said there were parts of the bill I was not comfortable with, for instance I don’t care if any of these people become citizens.
I am not going to defend every part of the bill when I do not support the whole bill. But that does not mean I want to see the whole process killed by people who seem to think they always have to have their way about everything and who try to bully anyone and everyone who does not play their game. Besides, you said dealing with me was pointless. And I must say I think the feeling is mutual.
And like I said, turn some of that anal preoccupation back on your own side of the issue. Tell me something, did you read the emergency funding bill for Iraq that was passed with the socalled benchmarks? If not, how can you support funding the troops when you obviously have not read the bill and do not really know what is in it.
And considering the fact that I have been called a liar and traitor and God knows what else from the right side of this shindig smll, do not lecture me about my skills. I have never called the president a traitor or made remarks about McCain having sex with HoChiMinh. I have never sent Linda Chavez a threatening email or called Mexicans wetbacks and greasers. I have seen all that and more on right wing blogs, even though it sounds like the kind of venom we might expect to hear at Kos.
Here is something I saw on Big Lizards which I think covers the whole just enforce the laws meme:
Enforce how? By doing what specifically that we’re not doing? This is Phil Donahue logic… when he was interviewed by (I think) David Letterman, he said he was against the Afghanistan war. “Well,” asked Dave, “what would you do?”
“I would just go right in there and get Osama bin Laden.”
“How would you go in there?”
“I’d just go right in there and get him.”
“But how exactly? Do you mean with the Army?”
“No, I’m against war… I mean I would just go right in there and get him.”
“Get bin Laden?”
“Yup.”
“You’d just go right in there and get him.”
“Exactly!”
Sno, this is you. You’re basically saying we should just go right in there and get those 600,000 absconders and deport them. All right… where exactly are they? Perhaps a few are out in the open, but I suspect the great majority are moving around, staying underground.
So how do we find them? Which particular agency should drop everything else to focus full time on finding them? And how, exactly, are they to do it?
So we know there are a bunch of companies employing people who are using illicit SSNs. We should crack down on these illegals; but of course, we do — USCIS raids these companies all the time. We catch the illegals, we deport them… and they sneak back across the border.
Well, maybe we should crack down on the employers. But crack down how? What law do we use? The only law covering the offense requires (a) that you prove the employer knew or should reasonably have known the employee was illegal — which is very hard to prove if he showed them a fake Social Security card… how does the employer know it’s fake? And (b) even if you prove this, the penalties are laughably slight. It’s just an operating expense.
Well, why don’t we just fine them more? Snochasr, that requires changing the law. Which itself requires an act of Congress, and we’re right back where we started.
Our laws are inadequate. We need to change them… but that means, by definition, we need to pass a bill through Congress.
And here you are, vigorously opposing with all your might the only bill before the Congress that would make those penalties truly painful to the companies and create a tamper-resistant card that would allow employers to verify legal status.
And why are you fighting it? Because you can’t get everything you want while denying the majority party in Congress anything it wants.
So once more — I really grow weary of asking without getting an answer — what is your politically sophisticated and realistic alternative to this bill? An alternative that can actually make it past the Democratic leadership, onto the floor, can avoid a filibuster by the hard-core Democratic left in the Senate, and can get a majority?
Terrye–
…Well, why don’t we just fine them more? Snochasr, that requires changing the law. Which itself requires an act of Congress, and we’re right back where we started…
I think you’re misunderstanding me. If we need a law to crack down on employers, then fine. I don’t believe for a second that Congress could not do that. Again, it’s not an either-or proposition, where we either get the bill as it stands now, or we get nothing. I don’t buy that.
terrye, i told you before to seek counseling. no one of sane mind prints this ranting on a continual basis. you continue to lie, yes lie by telling half truths. when a behavior such as yours gets habitual get some help.
“Gawd, are people this DENSE????
A wall will not stop everyone, thinking it will is a fantasy and it ignores the fact that 50% of the illegals did not cross that border. Go ahead and build the fence, but it will not be enough.”
no one except for you has said as such thing. read mine and everyone else’s posts. even the president has admitted as much. if you can’t be honest with what people are expressing, and you can’t, you are to be ignored. the fence sole purpose as outlined 40 years ago is to stop the walk in traffic and the returning deportees. the estimates of illegal latin americans in the US is north of 7 million. all of those people walked across the border. the border patrol estimates between 500,000 and one million walk across the border every year now. they base their numbers on a 3 to 1 ratio of apprehended. they also go on to admit that every illegal will eventually get in.
without stopping this inflow all internal laws mean nothing as the last 40 years have shown. the system simply gets overwhemled by the numbers. the fed and states simply throw up their hands and do nothing. this is exactly what they will do if this bill passes with no border enforcement–right now there is no border enforcement only the same hollow promises. that’s why bush gave his last speech.
so please stop with your disingenuous tripe that you bore us with on a continual basis. you are embarrassing yourself.
Terrye–
…So once more — I really grow weary of asking without getting an answer — what is your politically sophisticated and realistic alternative to this bill? An alternative that can actually make it past the Democratic leadership, onto the floor, can avoid a filibuster by the hard-core Democratic left in the Senate, and can get a majority?…
If this is the best they can do, I prefer nothing.
Terrye, time and time again, you have been presented with actual text of the bill. And….time and time again you have ignored it and lapsed back into the pro-illegal rhetoric of “they don’t have a plan”.
We do have a plan.
Secure the border.
Allow the Border Patrol to be “immigration enforcement officers” [the first order of the day would be to dump Aguilar as the entire BP had a “no confidence” vote on Aguilar], not give them rules and regulations designed to prohibit them from doing their jobs.
Enforce Simpson-Mazzoli.
There are currently laws on the books that impose legal penalties on employers who ILLEGALLY hire illegals.
The Basic Pilot Plan is a joke. Allow the employers who are trying to be honest a way to verify a SS# BEFORE a person is hired, not after.
Take Barbara Jordan’s advise.
Eliminate all social welfare services for those who are illegal and allow government agencies to make those who are applying for social welfare to prove they are a legal citizen of the U.S. The only exception would be, as Jordan advised, REAL emergency medical care for life threatening problems, not hangovers, splinters, skinned knees and a common cold.
We are a mobile nation. If a person cannot make a living in Texas, they move to an area where they can make a living. If you are a carpenter, and there is a housing bust in Austin but a boom in Jackson Hole, Americans move to Jackson Hole. If there is a tech bust in Silicon Valley but a tech boom in Austin, computer techies move to Austin and out of Silicon Valley.
If you remove the reason illegals come and force employers to hire legal Americans, they will a) not come and b) go back home. It is just that simple.
It is not that there are jobs Americans won’t do. It is that there are jobs that Americans won’t do at wages where it is more profitable to live on welfare than to work. It is that there are employers who enjoy a never ending supply of slightly above slave labor to increase their profits while the American taxpayer picks up the tab that should be paid for by the employer. If these illegals were making a livable wage, why do they need free medical care paid for by the taxpayer?
So stop with the hype. We have presented a plan. Apache has supplied you with the actual text of the bill and you still don’t address it. And claiming that you don’t have to read the bill to understand what is in it, is a fool’s path.
“Doing nothing is not a solution”.
This was President Bush’s last appeal for the “Screw Honest Employers and Ignore Americans Bill”.
If doing nothing is not a solution, then why has Bush been using the “doing nothing” policy for the last six years? Punishing employers who hire illegals? Nope. Providing employers with a way to really verify a SS#? Nope. Stopping social welfare services for illegals? Nope. Building the fence we have been promised since 1986? Nope. Prosecuting those who steal an American’s SS#? Nope.
The “doing nothing” policy has been in effect since 1966 and not one President has tried to change it, including George W. Bush. But under Bush we did get santuary cities, federal funding for LaRaza and LULAC, and while we did not prosecute those criminals who ruined someone’s life by stealing their identity, we did manage to put Border Patrol agents in prison for shooting a drug runner in the ass and another for a “documentation” error on an adoption form. Not to mention a Texas sheriff’s deputy who is now sitting in prison for trying to stop an illegal driver who tried to run over him.
Now we are being told by Bush he is going to do emergency funding for border security. Why didn’t he do that six years ago?
We are being told by Bush that he is going to close the barn door. The only problem is that the horse has left the barn years ago and he hasn’t bothered to even look for it.
Now, under NAFTA, illegals are allowed to sent money back to Mexico and other foreign nations for no more cost than that of the wire transfer. One company reports that the average is $35 and they do 12,000 transfers PER DAY. Do the math. That is over $15 million a year by just ONE company that provides wire transfers out of the country. Just one. The estimates of money sent out of the U.S. by illegals just last year was $40 BILLION.
So where is all this money that the pro-illegal advocates claim that is dumped into our economy by illegals? I can tell you, it is on the way to [name your crappy nation].
Terrye
Cut out the generalities , name a specific point of the bill you would change and how you would do it. Quit with the I like ice cream meme.
Please address a specific feature of the bill you support and why or one you dislike and how you suggest a fix.
I never said you lied AJ and resent the insinutation. I merely said you used the data and interpreted it in light of your agenda….which you did
As far as the disputes of the land that run up to the border, simply pass a law or amendment asserting a however much wide easement exists on the border to get the fence done. Owner still owns the land, but the government has greater needs usage.
Cows gotta drink out of the river, fine put a cheap pump in the river and run it to a water trough on the land since the actual border is in the middle of the river.
AJ: Aside from the numerous insults directed at those who disagree with you, I read several paragraphs emphasizing the need for security. You note that our leaders see daily security threats. Now I won’t bother to attempt to fisk your entire post- but why in the hell are we talking about border security now almost 6 years after 9/11? WTF? Why the hell haven’t “our leaders” dealt with this by now? It should have been done years ago. That it hasn’t shows that “our leaders” don’t really care about it.If they did, this “comprehensive” approach would have popped up on 9/12. But it didn’t. So when you say we need to pass this bill RIGHT NOW so we will be safe-I don’t buy it.
Merlin, I would guess that the Texas ranchers who are complaining about a fence going up would be the ones who use illegals as ranch hands. But there are others who don’t and they want the trash and the destruction of their land, as well as the killing of their cattle, to stop. Think about this: one cow can be as much as $300+ to a rancher. Lose a cow a week, along with the destruction of precious grass in that area, and it doesn’t take long for a rancher to have a pretty big loss that no one is going to reimburse him for.
If Rick Perry can use “eminant domain” for his travesty called the TransTexas Corridor, he can damn sure use it to allow the feds to build a fence.
BTW, I am told that the TTC is really Bush’s idea when governor and Perry is just following through.
R05
It doesn’t involve just Texas. Read up on it. It goes from deep in Mexico all the way to Canada. A combined super highway and rail route mainly designed to allow pacific port shipments into Mexico to have a clear path for drop off shipment points for transmodal spiderwebing from there on.
Well then if nothing is what you want smll stop bitching.
And retire, I am not going to respond to you so don’t waste your time. Every since you made that idiot crack about my dead Grandmother I just don’t have much use or respect for you.
You guys notice how you are just wearing everyone else out? I can’t even remember the last time some posters like crosspatch even bothered trying to respond. After awhile it is all just so much noise. blah blah blah.
Next week Immigration (A) bill plan leaked…
Kathy Lopez at the corner got a tip on how the proponents of the (A) bill plan to move forward next week.
“From a knowledgeable Senate source:
Here is what we expect to happen next week, though it is far from clear yet. In short, we expect it t…
Ace nails it today
This information is out there. It’s public. We bloggers and blog commenters and talk show hosts and talk show callers aren’t exactly trying to keep it secret.
Quite the opposite: We are desperately attempting to get the attention of the Republican Party (and, also, the establishment Democrats willing to sell out sovereignty and blue-collar workers for some votes from “newcomers”). We are collectively pleading with you: Do not do this, or we will be forced to vote against you or sit out the next election, and yes, indeed, we are quite serious about this. This is the Rubicon, the last straw, the ultimate insult, the final nerve.
But they’re not listening. Useless humps like Trent Lott are so used to legislating in secret and without public scrutiny that they’ve come to believe that doing so is their actual right, and that democratic pressure from the public is some sort of usurpation of the Divine Right of Legislators.
I will say it again: Do. Not. Do. This. If You Value. Your Political Lives. Don’t consider it a threat; consider it an intervention.