Editorial: Ensign’s real motives

Wednesday, July 11, 2007 | 7:02 a.m.

S en. John Ensign, R-Nev., found a unique way to cover his political motives for voting to kill the hotly debated immigration overhaul bill.

In a conference call before a Senate vote last month that stopped the bill, Ensign told reporters that he would vote against the bill because he was unsure of the fate of an amendment he attached that would limit Social Security payments to immigrants.

As reported by Lisa Mascaro in Saturday's Las Vegas Sun, Ensign said the Senate's Democratic leadership told him his amendment would likely come up if the bill made it to the floor, but he said he did not trust those assurances.

His amendment was clearly designed to create a campaign issue by forcing Democrats to vote on Social Security benefits for immigrants. Republicans used a similar vote as the basis for attack ads against Democrats in 2006. Ensign is the chairman of the National Republican Senatorial Committee and charged with getting Republicans elected.

Ensign joined two other Republican leaders - Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky and Policy Committee Chairman Kay Bailey Hutchison of Texas - in voting against the bill. The vote came after the shutdown of the Capitol switchboard , overwhelmed by angry callers fanned by conservative talk shows.

As we have noted, the Senate bill had serious problems, such as its arduous path to citizenship, but the bill offered an opportunity to debate the issue and devise a comprehensive immigration policy. Senate Republicans, however, saw this only as an election issue and, fearing the fate of the 21 GOP seats on next year's ballot, they punted. Already hobbled by an unpopular president and the war in Iraq, Republican leadership did not want to lose any more support.

Given the profound effect that immigration is having on this country, Congress should be crafting realistic and humane policies instead of playing petty politics.