I'll catch up shortly with the immigration saga as it winds through the Congress, but this National Public Radio story points out conflict between Georgia's two senators (Chambliss and Isakson) and the candidates for the open seat for district 10, which is just east of Atlanta.
The candidates, at least the Republicans, seem unanimously upset at the two (Republican) senators because of their support of efforts to clear the way for illegal aliens to become citizens. Does the conflict reflect the preferences of the calm, stable trustee versus those of the unstable delegate who must reflect the passions of the district in order to get elected? Perhaps this issue illustrates the idea that the Senate is the "saucer that cools the tea." Or are senators reflecting the interests of the business community (their true constituents) over those of the common people whose champions are in the House?
