Mark Sanford: Senate Version of Immigration Bill Will Ultimately Pass

Speaking to the Hilton Head Island Packet on Monday night, Rep. Mark Sanford said he believes that ultimately the Senate version of the immigration bill will pass. The bill, includes a path to citizenship, and did not appear likely to pass the House after gaining approval in the Senate.

Sanford explained that the final House bill will end up looking a lot like the Senate bill thanks to a number of micro-bills that will be palatable as individual components to the House. 

Many conservatives have reservations about the Senate bill because of its path to citizenship and have criticized it for not "securing the border" even though the security force would be doubled from its present number.
 
Sanford expanded on his thoughts on Facebook:

"Several friends have called in reference to today’s article in the Island Packet, wherein I was asked yesterday for my take on what will transpire with regard to the immigration issue in the House. The central question in the debate going forward in the House is that I believe any of the four targeted bills the body is now contemplating would be acceptable to most folks I talk to in the district. That would not appear as a central question, or problem - but in reality it is, because when any, or all of them, move forward to conference mathematically it would look likely that the Senate view would prevail. 

I believe my political observation of what may well occur to be accurate, but don’t want that to be confused with my stand on the issue. My view is based on conversations with literally thousands of people across the district over the five months of the campaign for Congress, and in them I got a loud and clear consensus that people did not believe in amnesty. Accordingly, as expressed from the time of the campaign forward I do not believe that Congress should move forward on any aspect of immigration reform until we secure America’s borders. Amnesty, as contemplated in the Senate bill, was in essence tried back in 1986 with the promise that enforcement and a secure border would come later, but it never came. Given that we have an example like this of what works and what does not, I think it’s important we learn from that decision and take 'paths' of any kind off the discussion table until we get our borders secure. 

One of my colleagues, Representative Tom Cotton, expressed a similar view regarding the dangers of a conference committee handling this issue last Wednesday in the Wall Street Journal; I’d ask that you take the time to read it and would love to get your perspective. It can be found below.

Thanks for taking the time to read this and I look forward to your thoughts."

Wall Street Journal op-ed.