Sunday, May 20, 2007
|
|
Summary Of The Fine Print Read, And NZ's Easy To Use Text
|
|
Posted by:
Hugh Hewitt at
4:02 PM
|
|
UPDATE: Be sure to check out N.Z. Bear's online version of the draft immigration bill which allows for section-by-section comments.
His post explaining his effort is here.
I have spent a lot of my weekend reading the draft bill as was requested by both Jon Kyl and Tony Snow, and not just of me, but of all critics. Here are the relevant posts in order of their appearance:
Part 1
Part 2
Part 3
Part 4
Part 5
Part 6
Part 7
Part 8
There are so many problems with this bill that it should not be introduced in the Senate absent a period of open hearings on it and the solicitation of expert opinion from various analysts across the ideological spectrum. Even were it somehow to improbably make its way to the president's desk, if it does so before these problems are aired and confronted, the Congress would be inviting a monumental distrust of the institution. There is simply too much here to say "Trust us," and move on. The jam down of such a far reaching measure, drafted in secret and very difficult for laymen much less lawyers to read, is fundamentally inconsistent with how we govern ourselves.
For more crucial background, see Powerline's entry on the McCain-Cornyn shouting match.
And Thinking Right has a focus on one aspect of the law which deals with disabled illegal aliens.
|
|
|
For taking up your weekend to plow through this monstrosity. It needs to die quickly. We The People will not be fooled again. This is 1986 all over again. Amnesty, with no enforcement. Senator Kyl does deserve some credit for trying to get some good things in it. They are overwhelmed by the bad things Kennedy got in it. |
|
...the immigration issue has become as politically explosive as military base closings and Social Security Reform combined. There is a "jam-down," but it's the lawmakers "jamming down" each other so that something finally happens.
The issue is probably going to linger around now, unsolved until 2009 or 2010. Maybe that's better, but I don't think so. |
|
|
weekend to try and make sense of this "RUSH-JOB". There is no doubt that justfiable paranoia exists as a result of failed executive branches of Government to enforce past and current laws. Until the President ENFORCES the existing laws of congress, NEW laws are a mute point! The marching in the streets of America while waving Mexican flags, strongly indicate to most true U.S. Citizens, that there is no fear on the part of illegals to have the laws enforced. I would prefer time to make the next Presidential election, one that boxes in ALL CANDIDATES to a firm pledge to enforce the law, in order to secure credability for the Presidency! American citizens have made it clear that TRUELY securing our borders is a prerequesite to any form of immigration reform. No President should blatently ignore the existing laws of congress, and then ask for new ones! |
|
We should not undertake any immigration reform until after another Presidential election. This President has shown his loyalties are not to American citizens on this issue. Personally, I believe we need Comprehensive Immigration Enforcement, not reform. We have the laws, what we don't have is any enforcement. Without enforcement, laws are meaningless.
This new package will be no different than 1986. The borders could have and should have been secured September 12, 2001. But that would have disrupted the cheap labor express and the RNC could not disappoint its contributors. So the problem has doubled as enforcement went from inadequate under Clinton to nonexistent under Bush. Now they will try to jam another amnesty down our throats. The question remains, will we let them?
|
|
|
Once honesty is included in "Code of Ethics", US Congress, I start believing them. |
|
I don't believe I have ever been this angry about politics in my life. Not even Carters incompetence or Clinton's depredations brought me to this level of anger.
If only we could have Republican principals with Democratic political skills. The lefts warrior spirit with the rights principals. |
|
|
Being a recovering accountant in remission, that was an effort worth a Medal of Freedom, particularly since you wasted a weekend to do it. Thankfully, you arrived at the beginning of what will be the right conclusion: kill this bill right now. |
|
Best if this issue is part of the 2008 elections.
Of course, that is what the political class wants to avoid ...
|
|
It may be a mess and need a lot of reworking. It might not be the time to do it and just continue with the status quo (which is pretty bad) but it is not amnesty.
Under this plan an illegal has to go home to apply for the visa, pay $5000, learn and speak English, have employment and pass a back ground check to even qualify for citizenship (which takes eight years at the quickest pace).
This is not a matter of killing it, this bill is just the start of the debate because the liberal hate it and the conservatives hate it (for very different reasons). I suspect it may pass in the Senate (although that is in doubt) but it will not pass in the House. Pelosi will see to that. |
|
|
because I certainly wasn't going to waste any time reading such a pathetic fraud of a bill. i think the founders of this country would have been wise to include another stipulation in the Constitution: "no written law may exceed the length of this Constitution!" or maybe that all laws should expire every 25 years. gotta keep those politicians busy, you know |
|
My applogies to Robert Preston as Professor Hewitt...
Well, either you're closing your eyes
To a situation you do now wish to acknowledge
Or you are not aware of the caliber of disaster indicated
By the presence of McCain in your party.
Ya got trouble, my friend, right here,
I say, trouble right here in River City.
Why sure I'm a politics player,
Certainly mighty proud I say
I'm always mighty proud to say it.
I consider that the hours I spend
blogging away are golden.
Help you cultivate horse sense
And a cool head and a keen eye.
Never take and try to give
An iron-clad leave to yourself
to pick a real winner like Mitt Romney
But just as I say,
It takes judgement, brains, and maturity to score
In my high level politics game,
I say that any boob kin take
And shove a bill through the Senate.
And they call that sloth.
The first big step on the road
To the depths of deg-ra-Day--
I say, first, medicinal wine from a teaspoon,
Then beer from a bottle.
An' the next thing ya know,
Your son is drinking Mrs. McCain's beer
In a pinch-back suit.
And list'nin to some big out-a-town Democrat
Hearin' him tell about political-race gamblin'.
Not a wholesome race, no!
But a race where they set down right on the donkey!
Like to see some stuck-up jockey'boy
Sittin' on Ted Kennedy? Make your blood boil?
Well, I should say.
Friends, lemme tell you what I mean.
Ya got McCain, Graham,. . . forteen in the gang.
It's those senators that mark the diff'rence
Between a gentlemen and a bum,
With a capital "B,"
And that rhymes with "dumb" and that stands for McCain!
And all week long your River City
The GOP'll be frittern away,
I say the GOP'll be frittern!
Frittern away their noontime, suppertime, choretime too!
Trying to get some fool bill through the Senate,
Never mind gittin' Mitt Romney ahead in Iowa
Or Mitt winning in New Hampshire.
Never mind getting Mitt ahead in South Carolina
'Til your find you are caught with another Clinton in the White House
With Bill prowling around and that's trouble,
Oh, yes we got lots and lots a' trouble.
I'm thinkin' of those Republicans,
Not knowing who to vote for
Giuliani is to liberal, Fred's too lazy, Gingrich is ok but too darn fat,
But Mitt is Mormon, and you know how hard they work,
And McCain is just trouble.
Trouble with a capital "T",
And that sums up McCain!
|
|
|
the problem is that the left is based 100% on lies and propaganda. it's what they do. the right, on the other hand, is based on truth. but we make the mistake too often of thinking that truth speaks for itself. it doesn't, but once spoken for, the truth must be heard. we'll never be able to organize a machine that produces agents like "Joe" here, but we don't have to if we can just get a Great Communicator to the front stage. |
|
Very impressive.
But we still have to kill the Amnesty Bill. |
|
This IS an amnesty. Forget the illegals for a moment. All of the Americans who have been breaking the law by employing them get an amnesty. And they don't have to pay any fines or anything.
|
|
|
system with immigration lawyers, dragging through the courts for ever. That being the case, ALL cases that clearly show that deportation is without question should be acted on asap! This would take trial lawyers out of the mix, placing their "would be" clients out of the country by deportation. It would also send a signal to the true U.S. Citizen that "Real" enforcement is under way. It's too late, but had the President made considerable progress on border fencing initiatives, and had a strong deportation rate in the past 10 months, he might have a shot at voters trusting an ongoing process? But, HIS actions have shown that his committment is not to the U.S. Citizen, but the fulfilment of age old committments to Vincinte Fox! Had he not allowed Kennedy and McCain with the Gang of 14, to be the leaders of the GOP, he may have salvaged his credability. But, now he has none, with either Democrats or Conservatives, and is left floundering like a baffoon, while ALL look forward to his departure. |
|
I like the idea of no work unless you are in the government data base.
With a 1% error rate that would be 1.5 million out of work.
Not bad for a government program.
If their error rate is in the IRS range (30%) that would be 45 million out of work.
Think of all the job openings this could create. And not just picking fruit either.
I really really hope this passes. It could be a bonanza for immigration specialists and lawyers who are in the government data base. Plus document forgers. |
|
|
I can't believe you read the whole thing. I mean I do believe you read the whole thing, but wow what dreary reading it must have been. |
|
Sweet.
As far as letting past violators off the hook--even though I have been one of the most strident voices here for cracking down on employers (who have been selling us all down the river) I would be willing to let them off the hook provided that we engaged in strict and real enforcement from now on. But unless we have a workable deal, that issue is moot.
As for killing the bill I agree that it needs a ton of work and is not ready for a vote. If this is the best that can be done, we have to face the fact that the status quo (which all agree is terrible) may be the best we can get for the time being. In the interim, the GOP needs to focus on employer and border security. McCain and Bush gave it their best shot, but it just does not look like it will work right now.
We also have to face the fact that Mitt Romney does not have a plan. If you think Mitt really wants to send 12 illegals back to their home countries to wait to be processed--you have a sugar high from too much Hi-C. Mitt's vigorous stance of "no amnesty" is not real. He was for virtually the same plan about a year ago. What changed? A focus group told him to change his position to appeal to the conservative wing of the GOP. |
|
|
I thought you had better things to do this weekend. For what it's worth, I've been grinding the think tanks to pull together a post. Ugh. Minus McCain we could've been at the ballpark or fishing. |
|
I like the part about reducing family re-unification. Something Republicans can be proud of.
Promoting family values. Just American families mind you.
What needs more effort is punishing workers and the people who exploit them. Like employers.
Yep. sound economics requires we punish workers and employers.
===
So you were wondering how the USSR got the way it did with internal passports etc? If what we see here is any indication it was by popular demand.
|
|
|
Hugh, thanks for also working on Sunday. When you're done, how bout a little help with my summary judgment motion! |
|
|
|
I'm totally in favor of letting Democrats win elections and surrender to Islamic fascism because Republicans are insufficiently tough on immigration.
Since Republicans can't be trusted I'm for Hillary in '08. That'll show the bastiches real Republicans are not to be trifled with.
The Republican reation to this bill is a classic case of cutting off your face to spite your nose. I wonder if there is a provision for reconstructive surgery in the bill?
===============
No work without government permission. That will show the socialists who is boss!
|
|
Don't break the law - and don't set the example for your children that breaking laws is A.O.K.
It's not OK. |
|
Absolutely!
I propose the same for Cubans who have come here ilegally. Let them re-unify in Cuba.
No more amnesty for Cubans.
Let us clean up the whole mess. Not just the Mexican part. No exceptions!
The Justice Dept. was correct to send back the Gonzales boy. We need more of that. Kids rounded up at gun point and re-unified with their families.
It would be the just thing to do. |
|
|
You seem to have problem with the concept of legality. |
|
|
|
|
Can legal immigrants and citizens de-legalise themselves under amnesty bill? I have been paying taxes _every year_ and getting Z visa sure looks temptating. I would not have to pay any taxes, and I could commit other crimes freely (say, identity theft) and not to pay health insurance (use ER only). Sounds like a dream ticket to me. |
|
We have 300 million law breakers in America.
They should all be jailed or deported.
You start with breaking one law and it just escalates.
If speeding was punished by summary execution I'll bet the speeding laws would be obeyed.
There are 90 million Americans who have comitted a felony by using illegal drugs. We only have 2 million people in jail. There is something seriously wrong when so many felonies go unpunished.
Those 90 million have made a mockery of our laws. Why aren't they being punished? I'll tell you why. The government is not enforcing the laws on its own books. Those 90 million are setting a bad example for the children. A few hundred thousand executions would put the fear of the Maker into the rest of the miscreants. We might have to execute as many as a million. However, I can gurantee you the drug problem would be over.
The other 89 million could be put in camps. Slavery is legal for the imprisoned. Think of how rich we could become with all that slave labor. Plus they could undercut the prices Mexicans charge for labor driving them out of the country.
A win-win.
Just enforce the laws.
Plus we need to repeal the Bill of Rights so the bad guys can't get off on technicalities. Once we do that and make government the sole arbiter of who can work we will have a greatly improved country. Our worst problems will be solved and we will have a template for solving other great problems.
Another thing. If we put government in charge of heath care those Mexican leeches would be unable to sponge off the system. Not in the data base? Heath care denied.
We can stop this thing in its tracks with the right policies.
What about infectious diseases you say? I have an answer. If you are not in the data base you get a lethal injection and cremation. Them darn freeloaders will not dare get sick!
===========
Some people wonder how the USSSR got the way it was? I believe it was by popular acclimation.
The idea that business should hire who they want at prices they are willing to pay is an outmoded concept. Eh, comrades?
|
|
|
If the government never bothered to enforce the 1986 law, what makes you think they will enforce this law? They won't. There is no point analyzing the details of this bill because just from Hugh has presented, it is clearly too complicated and unenforceable. For more insight on how serious they are on enforcement, read Paul Mirengoff's post on the background of McCain's F.U. moment. They have no intention of enforcing the law. Kill this bill right now!!! It cannot be fixed as long as this government is in power. If I am wrong, prove it by funding last year's fence bill and start enforcing the fines and penalties incorporated in the 1986 law. THAT is the best law available. WE DON'T NEED A NEW LAW!!! Problems can be addressed individually instead wrapping them up into one bill and taking a petulant stand that it's our bill or none. Ok, none it is!! Now enforce the laws on the books and lets get ready for 2008. |
|
I have to say, now that you have done the analysis that the networks (even FOX!) will not do, its very good to have it to draw on.
THANKS HUGH!
Now help us turn up the volume to where the Senate can hear us, a'la W.F. Buckley. This is certainly a time where it calls for us as conservatives to...
Stand athwart history, yelling Stop! |
|
|
|
|
|
This is, of course, an amnesty bill.
Amnesty (from the Greek amnestia, oblivion) is an act of justice by which the supreme power in a state restores those who may have been guilty of any offense against it to the position of innocent persons. It includes more than pardon, in as much as it obliterates all legal remembrance of the offense.
As this does remove their status as lawbreakers, move them ahead of legal immigrants, and forgive them the crime of failure to pay income taxes (for which you or I would be prosecuted), and wipes all this away with a "probationary: visa that legitimizes their presence here and rewards them with access to legal aid, tuition assistance, welfare, food stamps, Medicare, Medicaid - and furthermore, allows them to bring in relatives without penalty...
Well thats pretty much an amnesty in anyone's book.
Whose sock puppet are you? Its betting pretty transparent and blatant that you are not truly interested in the issue, but only in attacking Romney.
|
|
Section 131 of Reid's bill (S.1348) has an exemption for Mexican detainees that allows them to NOT be detained. I don't see anything like that in the draft of this bill.
Have you heard anything on this? |
|
In criminal law, sovereign act of oblivion or forgetfulness (from Greek amnesia) for past acts, granted by a government to persons who have been guilty of crimes. It is often conditional upon their return to obedience and duty within a prescribed period. Amnesty is granted usually for political crimes against the state.
There you have it.
Its AMNESTY. |
|
Go troll elsewhere.
Adults are trying to have a discussion here. |
|
I am no Romney fan (at least when the choice is Giuliani, McCain or Thompson) but I would pick Mitt over Gingrich. I like Newt, but he is not electable. I am not a sock puppet. I am Joe. You can call me Mr. Joe.
The deal does not forgive back taxes (they have to pay them back) but beyond that what would you propose? Sending them all back to their home countries? Why did politicians who ran on that do so poorly last election cycle? There is no political will for that, an attempt to do that will only alienate Latinos from the GOP for decades (Bush would not have won in 2000 or 2004 without Latino support), and it is ultimately going to cause more harm that trying to assimilate this group. Eight years to citizenship with substantial fines, background checks, and employment/English speaking requirements is a form of amnesty (if you will) I can support.
I have to say if Powerline's version of events is correct, McCain did shoot himself in the foot. Losing his temper like that is counterproductive. It is too bad because the attempt at this bill on the conservative side was well done--it is just not the right time and the opportunity for something real has been lost. Coryn is one of the good guys. While I think the status quo is bad--change does not necessarily mean it is for the better. WFB said the basis of the conservative movement was saying "NO." I respect Pasadena Phil's position on this, I believe change is required, but I am in agreement that this bill (while it is far better than is being let on and is hardly a sell out) is not the change we want. Medved has made a pretty good argument in its defense. Heck, even Mitt Romney was for a lesser version of this before he was against it. Perhaps it is fixable, but my guess is it is not. |
|
|
|
Simon writes: Sunday, May, 20, 2007 7:11 PM
The idea that business should hire who they want at prices they are willing to pay is an outmoded concept. Eh, comrades?
---------------------------------
American citizens go to jail in southern California for not paying workmans compensation insurance. Illegal aliens do not. As a matter of fact, there are cities in California, including San Francisco, that will not prosecute an illegal alien for breaking any employment law but Americans are held completely to the standard with the threat of jail. As a matter of fact, you cannot teach in California if you do not join the mandatory union.
Workmans compensation insurance for roofers is 400% of labor in San Diego. There are no American roofers in San Diego anymore, admitted by the business owners, due to worksmans compensation rates.
Stop being juvenile and making simple arguments a high school child could dissolve. |
|
as they once again try to do somthing down our backs and tell us its raining.... I nwill repost your info with all credit do. I also await with giddy anticipation your upcoming conversation with Tony Snow.
Tony and you both master an in your face style with inteligence, gile, and lack of fear of the misstep coversation.
I am dying to hear the responses that he has been told to give to your direct questions, although if anyone can deliver the administrations lines better than Snow I haven't ever heard him! |
|
"As this does remove their status as lawbreakers, move them ahead of legal immigrants, and forgive them the crime of failure to pay income taxes (for which you or I would be prosecuted), and wipes all this away with a "probationary: visa that legitimizes their presence here and rewards them with access to legal aid, tuition assistance, welfare, food stamps, Medicare, Medicaid - and furthermore, allows them to bring in relatives without penalty..."
Does it really do all of that? Someone who goes through this program has to maintain a job for eight years, learn English, pay a $5,000 fine, pass a back ground check, pay all back taxes--so where is the big windfall? Yes they eventually get residency and presumably citizenship--but isn't that a good thing (assuming that someone meets the criteria of being a good citizen)? What is it that will satisfy you--shipping all illegals out of the country?
I agree this bill needs work and is probably not a good idea because significant changes are not possible--but advocating getting rid of all the illegals is not politically possible and is not a desirable outcome even if it were possible.
|
|
|
for us conservative posters...do you spend time posting propaganda on liberal websites? |
|
Could it be put better? Speaking of z-visas.
"That's why the visa starts with the letter that's furthest away from the one 'amnesty' begins with. 'Z' stands for zellout . . . no, hang on, zurrender or Zapatista, or some other word way up the other end of the alphabet from 'amnesty.'"
http://www.suntimes.com/news/steyn/393216,CST-EDT-steyn20.article |
|
Lets see the patient is in the emergency room with multiple wounds and what do we do? Ignore the cut artery that if left unattended will kill the patient, and instead, we go after the leg fracture and check for bruises.
If I did that my dad would have called me, and not very affectionately, numb nuts.
|
|
|
Now I am ready to let loose with a few f-bombs. Have the staff of the Bush Administration lost their collective minds? If they want this to even having the remotest chance of passing--how could they delete paying back the back taxes? That was one of the hallmarks of this entire deal. |
|
|
|
|
In one sense I can see the administration's point; it would be difficult to determine the proper tax liability because a lot of these folks are being paid "under the table". However, that doesn't excuse not requiring them to pay a fine for not paying their taxes. This would be a fine above and beyond the $5,000 for being here illegally. Let's say for the sake of argument that we fined them $500 for every year they worked here in the states illegally and did not pay taxes. I think that would be fair. |
|
You couldn't do that, either. Then they would all produce fake documents to show they only entered in December 2006...
One of the biggest shams in this bill is that an illegal immigrant only has to produce two documents to show they were here and when. They have to have been here by January 1, 2007 to be elligible supposedly. The two documents?
1. Any "non-secure" document. This could be a phone bill, a receipt, anything. Basically, anything that would be very easy to forge, or buy from a forger for a few dollars.
2. "Sworn testimony from any non-family member that you were here when you say you were".
Now these two things will obviously be very easy to fake. Forgers did a brisk business during the first amnesty, and will do even better now and have an easier time of it.
So what's to stop all the illegals coming forward to just produce documents they bought for $20 to "prove" that they were here in December 2006, so they don't have to pay anything? And with the huge numbers coming forward having to be processed by agencies we already know can't do the job anyway, this will never be adequately checked. It's just not possible.
Even worse, the White House says that this will not cause a "new flood of illegals looking for amnesty", because, they say, they had to be here by January 2007 to qualify. Yeah, right. In both past amnesties there were huge surges - look at what we have now, and as demonstrated above it will be incredibly easy to "prove" you were here on time, so they'll come in droves.
So this bill will do what has happened in the past, and only encourage much more of the same.
Finally, what's to say that an illegal alien will even come forward to get hooked up to this system at all? Why would they? Until we make it difficult to be an illegal, why wouldn't they just want to stay "in the shadows" and live freely without paying anything? They know as well as we do that just as in times before, no enforcement mechanism will ever actually happen. So this will not solve much at all.
We should learn from the lessons of the past amnesty disasters, not try to repeat them. In both cases, things just got exponentially worse. The same will happen this time.
Unless you do enforcement FIRST, everything else will just encourage more rampant illegal behavoir and get you nowhere.
And no, that doesn't mean "mass deportations". Merely find the hell out of anybody who employs illegal immigrants, of which we already have systems in place for them to easily check online.(right now they are voluntary, they should be mandatory)
Do that - elminate the illegals abilty to get a job in this country, and they'll simply go home on their own. They'll have no other choice.
It's that simple and that cheap and easy to fix this problem. So why not try that first before all this other huge laborious nonsense that we already know doesn't work and will only make things even worse?
|
|
it's amnesty by any definition - the so-called penalties are anything but that, and would be impossible to enforce.
We need comprehensive reform, but let's do it one step at a time - 1. Build the wall and man it with enough people to enforce it. 2 Deport any illegal caught here with drugs or committing a violent crime. That would reduce the number of prisoners in California prisons and jails dramatically. If they enter the country again they go to federal prison - when Uncle Sam starts seeing those bills they will have no choice but to realize the scope of the problem and deal with it. 3 Increase the number of temporary visas - but only from countries that allow extradition of all types of criminals - no more sanctuary for murderers. Visas will only be issued from your country of origin after a background check, and will only be issued with biometric id cards - if it can be forged, it will be on the streets in less than a week. 4. Children born in the US must be born to parents of legal status for them to become citizens - we cannot reward parents who break the law. The child is a citizen of the country of the illegal parent's origin, and not of the United States. This would require (I think) a Constitutional Ammendment but it would be worth it. |
|
Joe, It's not amnesty? Okay obviously you had to be joking. But perhaps you can answer one of the paradoxes about John McCain's positions that I have not yet heard from him or any of his supporters.
John McCain believes in the whole Global Warming nonsense right? He wants to commit the US to "solutions" that will probably cost us billions of dollars. He also believes in "solutions" to our illegal invasion problem that will add potentially 100 million new fast breeding residents to our great land in the next 20 years. Don't more people = more carbon output, more use of fossil fuels, more trash, more water usage, and finally more impact on our cherished environment. How do you reconcile this paradox? |
|
"He also believes in "solutions" to our illegal invasion problem that will add potentially 100 million new fast breeding residents to our great land in the next 20 years."
You sound a lot like that Senator Frank Gerry in Godfather II. Remember him? He despised dirty Italians but had no problem doing business with them. Why not call them wetbacks or spics while you are at it?
There is nothing wrong with legal immigration--the problem is illegal immigration that has been given quasi legal status by Democrats and Republicans exploiting the current situation. As for 100 million new residents in 20 years--I am not sure where you are getting your data. |
|
Ordinary Coloradan,
Totolitarianism often arrives with popular acclaim. At first.
Once you have to be in the government data base to get a job what is to stop them from deleting people that are disfavored?
You will get due process and in six months or three years once your claim is properly adjucated you can have your old job back. If your employer will have you. Or maybe you are applying for a job and can't figure out why no one will hire you. Not to worry. The Mexicans must be stopped. at all costs. Sacrifices must be made.
Think of it. You are putting the government in charge of who can work and who can't.
Republicans used to be sceptical of government. Am I the last Republican left?
Are you willing to give up your liberty because socialism (government handouts) costs too much?
Evidently.
There seems to be a lot of that going around. |
|
|
|
One hundred million new americans in 20 years?
Right on.
We do need more Americans since the current ones are not quite breeding enough to replace themselves.
I'd like to see more Americans breeding. However, if they will not do the job outsourcing it to the Mexicans is second best. |
|
|
is a total disgrace, and the participation therein of The White House and several GOP Senators has tarnished them forever, in my eyes. All of this has me investigating how to switch my GOP registration. |
|
The Soviets never had much of a problem with people living in their country who weren't supposed to be there.
How did they do it? Internal passports.
They frequently checked people's papers and if you were were you weren't authorized to be you had some splainin to do.
The East Germans knew how to keep people from crossing borders without authorization. When this latest system breaks down we should consider the East German methods. We are going to have to get tougher if we want to solve this problem.
|
|
Guys, I'm reading Hugh's article and still do not understand why everyone insists on resolving this problem through permanent status and future citizenship. Why so much fuss? Why can we do this the easy way, without hurting enybody's feelings. It's a five step process:
1. Administration will hae two years to complete border security requirements (fence, walls, electronic surveilance, etc.) and to produce a solid temporary visa for future temporary workers.
2. All business owners are informed (by IRS, for example) that they have (six months?) to release illegal immigrants. After that period business owner stil employing illegal aliens will pay a hefty fine per capita.
3. All freed workers return to their countries of origin. Any illegal immigrant who remains in the US after the deadline will be fined, deported and most importantly, prohibit future entrance into US.
4. In their resected countries foreign nationals will be able to apply for work visa to enter US officially as temporary documented workers.
5. The maximum stay in the US will be limited to three years; after that worker must return back to his/her country of entrance for at least a year. There's no limit to repeating this procedure as long as he/she is needed in the US and has no American law violations.
Basically, this is it: Clean the country, enforce security and the order of the law, then continue employing foreign nationals based on official work visa, in a friendly and humane environment.
Do you need 1,000 page document? I don't think so! |
|
Fivo,
Socialism sucks.
Now has come the time to pay the price.
A little too steep? Most unfortunate.
If it was private insurance there would be an incentive on the part of insurance companies to limit costs and collect payments.
I'm told that in Calif. scamming workman's comp is relatively easy.
Oh well.
Hey, I'm with you. Lets blame the Mexicans for the failure of American socialism. Which could work, really, if it wasn't for the durn Mexicans.
Republicans used to get it. Now they just want their nanny state bennies. Heck, I'm a former Democrat. I was even enamored of Communism once. And yet I get it better than most Republicans. Why is that?
Big government Republicans. Or as I prefer - Socialism Lite Republicans. |
|
Joe, your comments are proof positive as to the demise of the Republican party. Republicans now seem perfectly content to throw out charges of racism/nativism in order to squelch debate just like the liberals have done for years. Was it the "fast breeding" comment? How else do I make the point that this group of aliens have considerably higher birthrates and will swell our population considerably? Can I not point out this fact, or is it just another example of PC censorship? On top of that your analogy makes absolutely no sense -- how am I doing business with the "spics" as you call them. Do you know something about me that even I don't know?
The 100 million is from Robert Rector of the Heritage Foundation analyzing the failed McCain-Kennedy Scamnesty Bill from last year -- McCain authored it and was perfectly willing to dramatically grow the size of our population. As for this bill who knows just yet, but it is undeniable that it will greatly increase our population by at least tens of millions if not hundreds of millions.
Again, if you believe in the whole Global Warming nonsense then wouldn't it seem reasonable that one of the first measures our country should take is to enact policies that would slow our current 3rd world rate of population growth? Instead, McCain wants to do just the opposite and rachet it up enormously. Where is the sense in that? If man causes global warming as John McCain states then don't we need to first stop producing so many men.
Joe, you'd have to be completely blind not to see this paradox. The cherry on top is that McCain wants to subscribe to global warming "solutions" that will cost us billions of dollars while enacting an immigration policy that all but guaranantees we will greatly exceed any CO2 limits that the left wing loonies want to set as a benchmark. You just can't get around the "inconvient truth" that more people = more CO2 and more impacts on the earth. |
|
|
Cognitive dissonance tells me that no new legislation will be made palatable to either side, so no legislation will be passed and the status quo can be maintained. Brilliant!! ;) |
|
It looks like both parties are backing down to flooding our Country with tax payer subsided cheap labor for big business! How about Americans from both parties coming together and throwing out any official that sells-out people to the lobbyist money changers in Washington!Please keep up the calls and e-mails!
WT-Fewer than 20 senators are publicly committed to supporting the immigration deal that hits the Senate floor today while nearly 40 are already opposed or have serious concerns, underscoring how difficult it will be for President Bush and his allies to craft a coalition that can pass the bill.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid this weekend said he will insist that the bill’s guest-worker provision be slashed from 400,000 per year down to 100,000 per year.
“I don’t want a program that is a funnel for cheap labor,” Mr. Reid, Nevada Democrat, said, according to the Reno (Nev.) Gazette-Journal. Mr. Reid said the 400,000 number “will not remain in the bill.”
Republicans are hearing — in some instances, quite loudly — from their core voters how much those voters dislike the bill.
Sen. Lindsey Graham, South Carolina Republican, was booed at his state’s Republican convention this weekend for his support for the bill, while presidential hopeful former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, was cheered for saying he opposed it — even though Massachusetts Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, the top Democratic negotiator, says Mr. Romney used to back it.
Across the state line in Georgia, Sen. Saxby Chambliss, one of the secret negotiators, was also booed at that state’s Republican convention, according to the Atlanta Journal-Constitution.
READ MORE
http://controlcongress.com/uncategorized/people-speak-no-to-immigration-bill
|
|
|
I want to make a couple of points that I do not belive people are aware of. I am always hearing that it is the employers fault for hiring illegals. That they should be fined. I will agree that there are a few companies out there that do take advantage of the illegals. I am the payroll department for my company. I verify all SS#. I can not verify the SS# until after I hire a new employee. If the name and the number do not match, I can not fire that employee. I have to request that the new employee go to the Social Security Admin. and resolve the problem. My hands have been tied by our current laws. |
|
- whatever name you call it is just surrender to the Mexican government by our own Quisling "betters".
Changing the law to make the lawless lawful will just result in more lawlessness. Disagree? Look at what happened with the '86 amnesty that was supposed to fix the stream of illegal aliens coming across the southern border.
The stream became a tsunami because the 'fix' was really in - no fixing the problem, just taking the fix.
I care not if the invaders are Polish, English, Irish, Ghanians, Icelanders, Mexican or Martians. If they are sneaking in, they are breaking the law.
If we change the law to wink at the litany of crimes they are committing (unlawful entry, identity fraud, tax evasion, etc.), others would-be illegal aliens will reasonably conclude that we will continue to change laws to accomodate them too.
Better to enforce the law NOW! That means NO CITIZENSHIP EVER FOR ANYONE WHO IS ILLEGALLY IN THE USA. That also means stiff fines and jail time for any employers who hire illegal aliens.
Therefore, I don't give a flying fig about the details of this bill. If it legalizes the residency in the USA of lawbreakers, KILL IT! |
|
We the people of the USA have allowed government illegalities to go on for too long. It is in small part our fault because we did not tend to the legalities of maintaining our borders. Those who wished to take advantage of that weakness in our government, the illegals from all countries, have found their loopholes, holes in the fence of freedom, and wound up creating a whole set of other indiscretions, whether it was their intention to create or not. So, to the illegals:
We have born your children in our country with the finest care in the world. You abused our system, shut down our hospitals, cost us billions for your health care.
We have illegally provided you with income from under the table wages from domestic to corporate, you saved and sent your monies to your home country, and a small percent of you have paid taxes, the rest of you are afraid to lest you be found and deported.
We have illegally sold you homes in our country that you fill with other illegal aliens called drop houses where you extort money from your own people until paid by illegal residents in our cities across the USA.
We have allowed a not so healthy dose of illegal drugs into our country for decades, nearly 100% of it from Central and South America.
We allowed our borders to be so porous as to let all walks of life, including mass murderers, and thieves from your countries to invade, rob, and kill for you to exist on earth. You fill our jails, walk when laws cannot hold you any longer (catch and release, supposedly disposed of), and if you are convicted, and/or deported, serve a less than short sentence because our jails are overcrowded with illegals. And if deported, you come back to the place where it is far easier to rob, steal, and kill here than in your home country where you may catch a booty less than is already in your pocket.
We have educated your children, free of charge, for students who still reside in your country of origin, overcrowding our schools, taking our tax dollars when we cannot protest the expenditure of such abuse. We allow a few of your children to become educated in our colleges, and typically overstay your visa becoming illegal and wishing to stay in our great country.
I could list a hundred other abuses of our more than generous society of the bennies the world's 'rejects' receive for being an illegal alien. But I will stop here. Those who suggest illegals contribute more than they use in services are blind, racist and uneducated--Geraldo is the most offensive, and he and the illegals are infringing on our rights across the USA.
My questions are to my government who, while we watched the abuses unfold, allowed the abuses to continue--nearly unabated. Now that we have tolerated the abuses for decades, when does it stop? When are you going to ENFORCE THE LAWS to return the abusers to their home land and families? Is this problem all because of greed? Your greed? Or theirs? Or BOTH? And where does that leave 'we the people' of the USA? A continuous squeeze of the middle-class forced to pay for every abuse, ever shrinking because our federal government is NOT ENFORCING THE LAWS?
Should we the people blow the whistle on these fellow human beings, or take the law into our own hands? Since you can't seem to uphold the Constitution for the security of our nation? It would seem that it is the 'right thing to do', but also the humane thing to do, since the majority are here to abuse the system (using false/stolen IDs, forged documents for a price, and applying for and receiving drivers licenses, credit cards, bank loans, etc. with no intention of paying their accrued debts), and are separated from their loved ones (until leaving our country because of debt collection--none of the thousands ever collected).
More than likely, they are separated from their families to whom they are sending our money, while they might be better off receiving OUR money, it is their government that cannot contain the problem because they are not providing enough jobs for their citizens. Since their labor pool is ever shrinking, doesn't it make sense that they would want their people back which would stimulate their economy? Not in a third world dictatorship. But that is not our problem to solve--they say we are meddling.
What if our federal government started tomorrow to ENFORCE THE LAWS? Would there be families left behind here? Would we help the families go back to their homeland where the bread winner was deported? Would our economy suffer because of this gradual attrition of low skilled workers resulting in unpicked produce, unpicked weeds, unclean hotels and office buildings, unbuilt housing projects, etc.? I would suggest going after the illegal employers, but the laws put them in a pinch. And go after the illegal employees, lock up the border, arrest, detain, and deport as our laws require. It is not heartless to enforce the law, it is showing the greatest of mercies to the countries involved regarding the far too numerous abuses no one wants to do anything about----until now...ENFORCE THE LAWS, obey the US Constitution and do not subordinate the will of the people:
"We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."
How is this not clear in the minds of all public servants? Who set up this illegal agenda to subordinate the will of the people? Is it the religion of tolerance, appeasement, and eventual anarchy? Yes, it is time for reform. Our blessings of liberty have been vanquished, our common defense is gone, no justice, no domestic tranquility, all in the name of the all American bleeding heart leftist ideology--tyranny, tolerance and equality--just like Marx dreamt of creating.
"Money trumps peace..." as GWB said a little while back, today it money also trumps liberty, justice, freedom, and security. |
|
I would only add to the institutions that very honestly and wholeheartedly wish to improve the lot of the illegal immigrants- PLEASE refocus your efforts on improving conditions in the native countries of these illegals.
To The Holy Roman Catholic Church (of which I am a member), LaRaza,and other latino organizations; you must also follow the laws of this country. Every human being on the earth cannot be an American. It is sad and unfair but nonetheless true. And no one can illegally barge into my home and make demands-- It is the job of my government to stop them. |
|
|
|
Simon writes: Monday, May, 21, 2007 10:27 AM
Socialism Bites Again
Fivo,
Socialism sucks.
Now has come the time to pay the price.
A little too steep? Most unfortunate.
If it was private insurance there would be an incentive on the part of insurance companies to limit costs and collect payments.
I'm told that in Calif. scamming workman's comp is relatively easy.
Oh well.
Hey, I'm with you. Lets blame the Mexicans for the failure of American socialism. Which could work, really, if it wasn't for the durn Mexicans.
Republicans used to get it. Now they just want their nanny state bennies. Heck, I'm a former Democrat. I was even enamored of Communism once. And yet I get it better than most Republicans. Why is that?
Big government Republicans. Or as I prefer - Socialism Lite Republicans.
----------------------------
If you were with me, you'd advocate every single employer spending 10 years in jail per incident of employment. That alone would dry up the illegal markets quickly.
You're a real genius for advocating more lawbreaking to solve a situation. So I suppose that companies that obey the law and pay their fair share of taxes are just idiots for not doing what the illegals employers do? So private insurance firms are the reason for California's illegal employment practices? Genius!
I could really care less a person's political party. Crime breakers need to do jail time and at the top of the list is the biggest Presidential money supply in America, Tyson Farms. |
|
If he gets his amnesty, he will be remembered as the last Republican President. The GOP will go the way of the Whigs and whatever party arises to replace it will never dislodge the Democrat majority, thanks to his stupidity of importing voters for the Democrats. He may go down in history as the man who simultaneously destroyed his party and his country. Of course that would be in the underground English language history books. The official Spanish language history books will laud him as the man who delivered El Norte to La Raza. (the Race in English)
|
|
|
I don't think most illegal aliens want what is being offered and probably will continue to do what they do now--since we know from experience that there will be no real penalities. Do you think some roofer in San Diego is going to go to the bank one day, get $5000, pay back taxes, learn English and stand in line to go back to his home country just to become an American citizen. Most of them want the benefits they get now, but their allegiance in many, many cases is not to America. If I were one, I'd just continue to work, hide in the shadows, get whatever benefits I could and then retire at home. |
|
Pathetic, but amazing how many do not seem to see the "wood for the trees"! Mr. Hewitt, your charm seems to work like magic for every one, bravo, keep it up sir. But there a few wise, who are immune to your trickery, and they know very well what you are crafting by this fake "immigration concern" that you seem to have embraced all of a sudden! Let me read your mind:
1. There are 2 formidable foes to eradicate; Giuliani and McCain
2. Giuliani has lots of baggage, he is a cotton candy, all he needs is a small spark at the right time (just before the primary may be!) to bring him down in a day or two! So lets keep him puffed-up for a while...
3. McCain is the real pain in the a**, if not eradicated in time, he will turn the tables around, as he does every time to every one's surprise! Hence, at every available opportunity, lets see to that he is demonized and painted as root of all evil!
4. Now for the positive campaign, lets take our master chameleon Mr. Romney, paint him as THE indispensable alternative; not on his own merits, but on his challengers' misfortunes (who else, Giuliani and McCain). By the time all your listeners (victims, to be precise) try to connect the dots to elucidate your craftiness, here comes the final assault... the Hillary outbreak scare-tactics!! People, do you wanna an antidote for her, here is Romney, the magic chameleon! Bingo, a Mormon indeed becomes the Whitehouse resident! lol.
Good planning! As long as fools exist, it is always Christmas for the ringmasters! Enjoy, Mr. Hewitt.
|
|
We didn't Import these parasites and we don't
have to Deport them either.
We created conditions whereby they came here
on their own volition.
We must cut off all government services that
are being dolled out to these undeserving and
unappreciating leeches before they suck the life-
blood out of this country,
Stop pointing your fingers at employers while
patronizing their businesses.
Those "bargain" prices in restaurants,"bargain"
prices for fences,concrete work,roofs,lawn care,
landscaping,ect.,ect.,ect., are not really
bargains at all when you figure in the increased
social costs that we all must bear.
We better do something fast because this
ship is sinking . Pointing fingers won't help.
Look in the mirror and ask yourself,"Am I part
of the problem?" |
|
The primary reason I resent this legislation is that it seems to be a violation of my constitutional rights to extend citizenship rights to people guilty of multiple felonies.
If all they did was simply cross the border, that would only be a misdemeanor, and it would be appropriate to dispense a slap on the wrist.
However- the moment an illegal alien starts working, TWO felonies are being committed by TWO people, the illegal, and the one hiring them.
This bill not only wipes the slate for the illegal alien but his employer as well.
Any business which relies on illegals to function
shouldn't be functioning, period.
If it is a fact that our economy will tank if we do not allow ourselves to be ripped off, then the economy needs to tank, period.
As to the constitutional issue- the Constitution sets down immigration legislational jurisdiction to the congress.
1. Nowhere does it state that congress has the right to extend extra-constitutional rights to non- citizen felons.
a. Any citizen guilty of fraud, identity theft, tax evasion, falsification of social security information, etc., receives MUCH harsher penalties than an illegal alien would receive under this legislation. ( A fine, so what?)
b. Any LEGAL immigrant who was found guilty of the aforementioned would be subject to immediate deportation, while an illegal alien is not, under this legislation.
If one felony is enough for a CITIZEN to lose the right to vote forever, the idea that a multiple felon will get to vote EVER is repugnant and unjust.
The point is, this entire exercise in "Comprehensive" "Immigration" "Reform" is not comprehensive, reforms nothing, and has nothing to do with the issue at hand.
Illegal aliens are not immigrants, they are thieves and liars.
It infuriates me when meanings get twisted by politically correct terminology.
Illegal aliens are defrauding the public, and causing societal chaos merely by being here, and if the congress gets this crap passed, they are then complicite in this illegal activity.
Congress can pretend that they can simply legislate away their responsibility to this country and it's citizens, but for it to abdicate it's respect for the rule of law and continue to legislate is also a crime.
It saddens me to see conservatives deliberately allowing the further corruption of the constitution.
It was bad enough when the courts bent it in Roe vs. Wade, and you thump them for it today; now the congress is ready to throw it out for illegals- but that's OK.
I fully understand the scope of the problem.
Yeah, yeah, we won't be scooping up 12 million people and shipping them out, I get that.
But your attitude is as bad as the people who say we can't acheive victory in Iraq.
You BOTH say " It can't be done"
OK, we will never stop all terrorism, I get it.
OK, we will never evict every illegal alien, I get it.
So- we should get the hell out of Iraq tomorrow, right?
Because we can't get them all we shouldn't try to get AS MANY AS WE CAN?
Defeatism cuts both ways people, and for congressional republicans, the war is lost.
Not for me.
I've seen plenty of suggestions, some of them pretty darn good- for getting the illegals to leave on their own: stopping federal funding for states that allow "sanctuary cities" or other forms of non-compliance such as dispencing identification cards and drivers licences to illegals.
If some states want to take in criminals, fine.
Not on MY buck, the local citizenry can foot the bill.
But most important is the idea of ever allowing illegal aliens the right to vote.
That has two consequences up front.
1. It allows former illegals to eventually have a say in what happens to their followers.
2. It allows congress to reward itself with a big government-friendly voting base.
Never mind whether or not they vote republican or democrat ( I tend to think democrat) look at the governments of the countries their coming from.
Big socialist dictatorships, most of them.
It's all they know; what makes you believe they'll change generations of terrible judgement simply because we forgive them?
At any rate- no vote, ever.
That stipulation strips political motivation from the equation.
They have had a couple of decades to fix this problem, and the public has gotten fed up with the buck passing and hand wringing.
Enforce the law, and after we've TRULY deported everyone we can, then we can start talking about amnesty- from the right footing.
The end doesn't justify the means.
|
|
Any massive immigration reform/amnesty (not just this one) will kill the GOP - no matter how practically-grounded and realistic it may purport to be.
As noted by others here, enfranchising 12-20 million new voters from left-leaning socialist countries, who view politics as an entitlements and cronyism game, is political suicide for limited government conservatives.
The lure of bread and circuses will outweigh the most principled and noble efforts the Right might make. The Democrats have branded themselves as the party of entitlements, and Republicans can't compete with them in that arena even if they were so inclined.
Hat tip to the latest hopeful forecasts (Hispanics will support the right wing because they are entrepeneurial and socially conservative - did anyone who wrote this ever live in SoCal ?) Entre, yes socially con, yes, but still historically voting with the peeps.
Ask any SoCal resident how many fliers they've seen in election cycles that literally, not constructively, ask in very plain English (ironically enough) for Hispanic voters to vote for candidates simply because they a) are Hispanic and b) will support legislation that favors Hispanics over other races.
Bush's admin lost all credibility on this one when Cheney got loose with that making beds in Vegas or picking strawberries quote a few months back. Note to current admin - Reagan never would have said any job was "too low" for his kid to work - the work was the important thing. Thanks for hijacking our party, you elitest country club assholes.
|
|
|
Amen, especially that last line. |
|
|
|