I hung out in the Senate yesterday as 67 members of the World's Greatest Deliberative Body agreed to debate an omnibus immigration bill amended to include border controls, like 20,000 more agents, proposed by Republicans. The going theory has been "a supermajority in the Senate will move minds in the House." I've always been skeptical and found new reasons for that skepticism as ... well, as members of the House talked about it.
John Dickerson trained his sights on the Senate, too, and came up with this theory of how all the concessions by Democrats—which their House counterparts see as moving the bill right—will be good for reformers.
A big Senate victory would also give supporters a way to minimize future debate about the controversial portions of the bill. The House is expected to pass a series of smaller immigration bills but no path to citizenship, which is the heart of the Senate effort. If a House Republican takes issue with a particular element of Senate reform, a supporter will claim the issue was already debated and resolved in the Senate.
It's a theory, anyway.
Correction, June 25, 2013: This post originally misspelled John Dickerson's last name.
TODAY IN SLATE
Slate Plus Early Read: The Self-Made Man
The story of America’s most pliable, pernicious, irrepressible myth.
Rehtaeh Parsons Was the Most Famous Victim in Canada. Now, Journalists Can’t Even Say Her Name.
Mitt Romney May Be Weighing a 2016 Run. That Would Be a Big Mistake.
Amazing Photos From Hong Kong’s Umbrella Revolution
Transparent Is the Fall’s Only Great New Show
Rehtaeh Parsons Was the Most Famous Victim in Canada
Now, journalists can't even say her name.
Lena Dunham, the Book
More shtick than honesty in Not That Kind of Girl.