Scrap This Bill
By Fred Thompson Posted in Immigration — Comments (110) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
With this bill, the American people are going to think they are being sold the same bill of goods as before on border security. We should scrap this bill and the whole debate until we can convince the American people that we have secured the borders or at least have made great headway.
« Federal Jobs Illegal Immigrants Can’t Do — Comments (12) | Immigration bill released to Senators, cloture vote set for Monday — Comments (150) »
Scrap This Bill 110 Comments (0 topical, 110 editorial, 0 hidden) Post a comment »
Amen, Senator Thompson.
Mitt Romney has taken the same position. Fred and Mitt supporters, its time to put our beliefs into action. Call your Senator and stiffen their spine a little. Hugh Hewitt has contact info for all the GOP Senators here:
http://hughhewitt.townhall.com/g/d5bd0694-1fef-4412-8493-167677bf3eb0
They that are with us are more than they that are against us.
Please tell Lamar! and Sen. Corker that they are on very, very thin ice if they vote for this abomination.
"The nine most terrifying words in the English language are, 'I'm from the government and I'm here to help.'" ~Ronald Reagan
We need to scrap a few more people in Washington along with this bill.
Real change requires real change. -Newt Gingrich
I've been writing this myself for months. (Of course, your words will carry much more weight!)
We've traded National Sovereignty for cheap roofing and yardwork.
all we need is the word!
We have been careful to give a fair review of all of the credible candidates, and although several of our people support specific candidates, we have not endorsed anyone. YET!
We await a leader!
It is beyond my understanding why people in government don't understand that it is their duty to regulate immigration, at least in the sense of being able to count how many people are entering.
Like Diana Irey (who opposed Jack Murtha in '06), I want a 'tall fence with a wide gate'. Right now, the whole fence is a gate.
The law and all policy should encourage honesty and integrity, not reward its absence as this bill would.
--
Gone 2500 years, still not PC.
Just tell us when, I'm locked and loaded.
In Vino Veritas
Please enter the race soon. The longer you wait, the higher the probability that the republican media "establishment" jumps on the Giuliani or Gingrich bandwagon. We need a leader who can unite the party...and we need him now. Timing is everything in politics...and this is YOUR time.
Capital Switchboard: 1-202-225-3121
Call your Senator and call Senator Kyl and Senator McConnell.
Be sure to contact Senator Kyl.
http://kyl.senate.gov/contact.cfm
He's the key. Lots of Senators will do what he does.
They that are with us are more than they that are against us.
Senator,
I have to respectfully disagree with you on this point.
The Republican majority frittered away any chance in the last Congress to do anything meaningful about this critical issue and frankly no one now is proposing an alternative set of legislation, including you. So now we are stuck with what we are being handed, or do we go into wait mode for a "better bill"? That's the choice confronting ordinary Americans, No bill or a bad bill, wait until the cows come home.
I hate to break it to you, but those of us in CA, Az, Texas and other border states need help on the issue of illegal immigration and we need it yesterday. Matter of fact, because of inaction on this issue by Federal authorities, who should be dealing with the issue, local and state government is stepping up across this country.
Before you knock this bill, which is not great, how about a counter proposal that actually stands a chance of passing both houses of Congress and being signed into law by the President.
to filibuster a bill...hmmmm. Maybe when there are only 25 or 30 Republican senators in 2009, the point about the ability to pass or block a law will be valid.
The President thinks this is a good bill and he is ready to sign it! Both parties want to grant amnesty to those already here. The only thing they can't agree on is what to call it other than what it truly is.
Other than temper tantrums, what does Tancredo, or any of the other hard line anti immegration forces offer as a counter?
Wait...hang on....we are thinking about it...no amnesty....
Sorry, I'll take a bad bill over no bill at this stage.
_______________________________
Fred...Fred...Fred..!
you are the one who has been throwing a tantrum for months now, God forbid that Tancredo or any other Republican wants the nation to follow its laws and not turn the nation over to a foreign invasion.
"Nothing works like freedom, Nothing succeeds like liberty"
Kyle
We already have a bill mandating the building of a wall and increase border security... but predicatably Congress and the President are dragging their heels in actually funding and building it.
We already have laws banning unauthorized entry into the country.
We already have laws banning employment of illegals.
We already have laws banning the forging of documents.
Let's demonstrate that we're able to follow through on the laws we already have BEFORE we grant privledges to those who've alread broke them- otherwise this will be a never ending cycle that's already been repeated far too many times.
Who's throwing tantrums? The only people who are out and angered are the illegals and their supporters. Almost on a daily basis now in LA. One day it's "it's the fed's job to enforce the law", the next it's "they shouldn't enforce the law because it breaks up families". Give me a break.
Look, Americans are upset and angered, righfully so, about the gov's inability/refusal to enforce our immigration laws and border. This is their responsibility and we have been paying them to do this. Instead they give our money to illegals.
Tancredo speaks how many feel about this issue. I give him the credit for having the cajones to do so.
He has offered solutions....enforce the law! Plain and simple.
Sorry you can't seem to grasp this concept, but it's quite clear to those of us who actually wish to keep America as a desireable place to live. You should visit SoCal sometime and see the crime and poverty stricken ghettos created by the illegals. Shameful. Absolutely shameful.
And yes, Amnesty is what is on the table and it doesn't work. Been there, done that. Millions of illegals later, and billions of dollars more indebted thanks to them.
Hail to the Chief, Tancredo gets my vote.
is better than a bad bill.
"I wish to have no connection with any ship that does not sail fast; for I intend to go in harm's way."
John Paul Jones (letter to M. Le Ray de Chaumont,16 Nov.1778)
....... but I'll give you an alternative to this sell out of America, enforce the current immigration laws. Better yet, adopt Mexico's Immigration laws and see how they like that!I'm going to hurl all over my keyboard simply thinking about this travesty on the American people.
Show me the proposed legislation that does what you suggest. Show me where someone has actually written a bill and submitted it for consideration. The BS listening tour last summer was a joke, and an enforcement only approach never would have passed in the old Congress nor in this one.
This is not a good bill or a good deal for the American people, but at least it is a step in the right direction, something a Republican controlled House, Senate and White house was unable to do in six years!
_______________________________
Fred...Fred...Fred..!
The last thing we need are more laws that will NOT be enforced. Are you that blind that you can't see we have good laws, but they are not enforced under Bush?
This is a BENEFITS bill, there is nothing in this bill that will be enforced in any way. It is surrender. If you can support this bill you might as well support surrendering in Iraq and Afghanistan too.
A prosecutor is suppose to pursue all possible violations of the law.
But he has a limited budget, by necessity.
So only the stuff that is pressing gets prosecuted. And pressing is defined as politically pressing. Power, dancing around the prosecutor, shapes what is pressing at the moment.
At local levels, things like morality play a reasonable role, but as you move higher, it starts to look like nothing but power. So its important to have muliple view points, pulling on the prosecutor, so the position does not become one of pure graft.
But what happens when both sides of the top want the same thing, but the people don't?
High power ends up just doing what it wants.
The solution is federalism, but we barely pay attention to that any more.
High power doesn't want to fix immigration. Neither side. Which is why the primary opposition has come from the house, which is closest to the people.
It doesn't matter what the law says, Steve. It's not going to get enforced. And BOTH SIDES want it off the table so its not an issue in the elections.
Our best bet is to NOT LET ANYTHING PASS. Delay. So those elite jerks have to state their policy next cycle, and the public opinion hardens - which it will - against open borders.
Delay so Fred can use the issue as a giant hammer. It resonates across party lines.
I can certainly understand why, but this piece of crap is a rerun of 1988. It has "border security", blah, blah, blah and "earned citizenship". You know as well as I that there will be no border security. No fence (this bill has 370 miles, the last one has 700+). They are going to hire 18000 new border agents. Sure they are. And I won't... whoops, family site, can't say that.
What we get is 12MM new US citizens who won't be able to speak English, whose fines will be waived for hardship reasons and whose families will be admitted without regard to the new "point system" because we can't be against families, can we? Which means we get 100MM new citizens.
Homeland Security said they're going to run background checks on these illegals. Riiiiiiiiggggghhhhhht.
Hey, if you like this piece of crap, I can get you a great deal on a bridge in London. Or Lake Havasu. Oh yeah, same bridge.
____
CongressCritter™: Never have so few felt like they were owed so much by so many for so little.
mbecker
So where's your bill? Where's your side's proposed way to deal with this that stands a chance of being passed into law?
You don't have one, you can't come up with one that would pass, just make noise and cry the sky will fall.
New Flash...the sky is already falling in parts of this country due to the flood of illegals coming into the country illegally. Are we supposed to just wait until what happens, what group gets in power and when to do something, anything.
This is not a prefect bill, but it is better than anything put up by the likes of Tom Tancredo, which is as far as I know is 0 ZERO pieces of proposed legislation.
_______________________________
Fred...Fred...Fred..!
We already have immigration laws on the books. The problem is that the president is NOT ENFORCING them. What good is ANY new bill is the people who are charged with enforcing them refuses to do so?
I believe Senator Thompson probably feels the same way. That's (one of the reasons) why we need Fred to be our President. He has the WILL and the SPINE to get things done.
RUN, FRED, RUN!
scott
So fine, you don't like the legislation, but we elect people to write laws and in this case these are the laws we are going to get.
I hear no alternatives, just a lot of "Don't like", which is beginning to sound like Democrats on the war in Iraq to me.
_______________________________
Fred...Fred...Fred..!
The answer is to ENFORCE the laws we have, and we have dozens of good laws.
Why do you think they will enforce more laws? Why not pass new immigration laws every week? It will have the same effect as the last 6 years, nothing under the republicans.
This is nothing more than a BENEFITS law. There will be no more enforcement at the border than the past or present. We will just have our country raped by millions of people from other countries for years to come.
This is the federal government surrendering to foreign countries. This is the rape of United States, with Republicans leading the act.
I also know we jail them when we find them.
Let's enforce the laws we've got. Sorry but this is worse than nothing.
____
CongressCritter™: Never have so few felt like they were owed so much by so many for so little.
is meaningless without enforcement.
I live in Arizona myself, and I'm far more concerned about the folks who will be coming across the border in the future than I am about those already here.
Build the fence, then we can talk about what to do with our current "visitors."
We've traded our National Sovereignty for cheap roofing and yardwork.
'Build the fence, then we can talk about what to do with our current "visitors."'
I agree; nothing is gained by passing a new law without dealing with the underlying problem first and foremost. Until we can secure the borders, something most every other country in the world does, we will never be able to get a handle on the tide of illegals coming here.
I have lived in border states for the past 26 years; first AZ now TX, and the numbers have gotten worse every year, with the crime rates going up with the rise in illegals. When I worked for the Phoenix Municipal Court, we joked that the illegals were job security, but now it doesn't seem so funny.
"A touch of grey kinda suits you anyway."
How about you expend a small fraction of your time and energy lobbying those people who are keeping the border open and perpetuating the problem, instead of taking shots at those trying to fix it? The only people trying to fix it, of course, are the so-called "restrictionists".
As if I need an answer. You were always a rather lame moby, and you have not improved with the passage of time.
Fred Thompson is a FORMER Senator running for President in a few weeks which means he can't walk in and change what is so obviously wrong. You might want to watch this;
Regurgitating The Apple: How Modern Liberals "Think"
http://www.heritage.org/Press/Events/ev030507a.cfm
Amnesty for Illegal Aliens is wrongheaded on ANY level and we will stop this bill and send it back to the lunatic left who should be funding our troops instead of recruiting voters for future elections.
Wave bye-bye Steve, this bill is history!
GOP USA Take Action: http://capwiz.com/gopusa/utr/2/?a=9747966&i=83617942&c
Numbers USA Take Action: http://www.numbersusa.com/actionbuffet
Minuteman Civil Defense Take Action: http://minutemanhq.com/hq/article.php?sid=302
"After two years in Washington, I often long for the realism and the sincerity of Hollywood." - FDT
You're a leader, Mr. Senator. Good to see men like you, and Duncan Hunter on the front of the issue.
If the candidates all denounce this abomination, our thick-headed Senators might get the point.
Fred and Mitt have already spoken. Who's next? Put pressure on the other candidates to follow their lead.
Brownback in particular could be vulnerable to pressure. Put it on him!
http://www.brownback.com/s/Contact/tabid/108/Default.aspx
Giuliani is waffling. Let him know this is not acceptable!
http://www.joinrudy2008.com//news/pr/222/
They that are with us are more than they that are against us.
I just sent Senator Brownback the following message:
Dear Senator Brownback,
I am a strong pro-lifer who has had reservations about your approach to national security and especially to immigration. Please give reassurance to me and other conservatives by opposing this so-called comprehensive compromise bill on immigration that is being introduced to the Senate. Please do not vote for cloture.
While it's good to hear Senator Thompson's view, what does it really mean? He's running for office and he wants the conservative vote. He can't stop this bill and that's what we need now.
I'd like to see Fred and Mitt do more than just issue statements. But even issuing statements alone helps.
But realistically its up to us to put the pressure on the Senators and, if that fails, the House. Realistically its probably the House but the Senate is worth trying.
They that are with us are more than they that are against us.
if we just sit around.
If you're one of those who have told Fred Thompson how right he is, but you haven't called or emailed your Senator, SHAME ON YOU.
Same for any Mitt supporters.
They that are with us are more than they that are against us.
Americans need a rational adult voice. Please speak for us and help protect this country. If this bill passes there might as well be no USA, for the country of our founders' principles will disappear. It would be the death of liberty and justice.
I will vote for you regardless of what party you run with, if any. We await your entry and will support you 100%.
unless you are running for President, Now is not the time for the squeamish, you are needed.
"Nothing works like freedom, Nothing succeeds like liberty"
Kyle
Secure the borders before you do anything else. Senator Thompso, you keep winning me over (and that bit with the cigar was great!). I can't wait for you to enter the race!
"The Democrats want to raise taxes. They only want to target the rich, they say. A word of advice to anyone in the middle class -- don't stand anywhere near that target."
-Fred Thompson
I am lucky in that I am represented by one of the few Senators in Washington that actually wants real immigration reform. Too bad Senator Jeff Sessions only gets to vote for Alabama.
Looks like the big winner of the Amnesty Bill will be the Libertarian Party.
I don't have a favorite canidate yet but I would like to see Thompson / Hunter or Thompson / Gingrich for President/ Vice-President in 2008.
Gotta go now and look up "Spanish Made Easy" Textbook. /GRIN!
Are you sure he's against this? Have you read the statements on his website the past couple of weeks? It seems to suggest that the current bill is better than last years. I hope he's seriously against it. Please tell me that you're positive Senator Sessions is! Do you know anything about Shelby's position? I'm in Birmingham, btw.
movement it just takes on the appeareence of opprtunism to me.Tancredo and duncan Hunter have always been in the movement.
Senator Thompson,
Please spend some time putting together a proposal to fund the fence, build the fence, call for an emergency, mandatory 2007 census (any illigal that doesn't participate is a felon), national cards for all foreigners, background checks, deport the felons and visa overstayers, and all the rest can go home and apply to re-enter legally, etc.
I think 75% of the country would support this.
Look for a post here soon on this very subject.
DM
Everyone is blasting this proposed amnesty bill and rightly so, it smells. But the real issue is that there is no need for ANY new legislation on immigration. The politicians have done what they do best, steer everyone away from the real crux of the problem by saying "we'll fix it with a new bill". Wrong! It is enforcement period, that is needed, not any new legislation that also will NOT be enforced by the Feds any more than the previous ones. How long America are you going to be so gullible?
The current Administration has no desire to enforce the border security laws.
That's why this is an election issue, and it's the most important issue before us. If we continue to allow foreigners to freely enter the country, and then we give them a "pathway" to becoming voters, America as we know it is done for, and so is the Republican Party.
Enforcement is mandatory. Americans, keep your eyes open and put up a Republican candidate for President who understands the importance of this issue, and who is already on record for enforcing strict border security. A conversion today or tomorrow is too late, because it will be for political expediency at best.
There are only five candidates on record on the right side of this issue: Fred Thompson, Mitt Romney, Tom Tancredo, Duncan Hunter, and (possibly) Mike Huckabee, and of these Fred is the strongest. It's time to tell the others to go home and wait for a Cabinet position.
BTW, if the leaders of the Republican Party hadn't kept their heads where the sun doesn't shine before the last election, they could have ridden this issue to a majority in both houses. If I'm wrong about this, we're all doomed anyway.
We've traded our National Sovereignty for cheap roofing and yardwork.
"Pat Buchanon stated that Bill Clinton was better on the borders than Bush has been"
have to do with anything? We already know that Bush is terrible on this issue, and the other two people are non-participants.
Bush is not running. Do you think people care what Pat Buchanan says? Many of them can't keep him and Pat Robertson straight, and most don't even know he's still alive. And do you think (Mrs.) Bill Clinton will be better on the borders than Thompson?
We've traded our National Sovereignty for cheap roofing and yardwork.
http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm
Just click on their names and then click on Email and cut and paste your rant.
I appreciate your comments here on Redstate, but I would rather see you holding a press conference right now telling the MSM and the rest of the world that this is a very bad bill. That, coupled with Mitt Romney's recent comments would go a long way toward killing this bill before it ever sees the Senate floor.
You will have at least one less candidate to worry about, though, as McCain is finished. Erick posted recented that he had the final straw with Mitt Romney. I propose to him that that final straw should have been saved for McCain.
The C.I.S. cannot handle its case load now, so how will it possibly deal with assimilating up to 12,000,000 illegals? The real losers here are those immigrants following the laws, getting in line, and suffering the hardships required to enter this country the way our esteemed legislative body decreed long ago. They will be shunted to the end of the line as we put all our emphasis on the illegals. Damn the amnesty program- where is the enforcement? Even the fence has been cut back about 50% and who really thinks what's left of it in the bill will ever get built?
As Ronald Reagan once stated, "A country without secure borders ceases to be a nation."
Your country needs your voice, right now. Please announce you're running, and annouce it soon.
I certainly appreciate the sentiment and am in the strongest agreement that the bill needs to be scrapped.
But frankly Senator Thompson, your last second post seems like rank political opportunism. This negotiation between Bush, Kyl and Kennedy has been going on for weeks. Where have you been during this period? Why did you not speak out while there was an opportunity to get this disaster stopped? Why wait until the mess is all but unstoppable before bringing your considerable stature and influence to bear?
While your answering those questions perhaps your would care to address your record on immigration while you were in office. During the Clinton years while you were in the Senate several 245i amnesties were passed. I have not yet bothered to look (but I will before you get my support) but perhaps you can tell us how you voted on those. What other positive steps did you take to secure out borders (obviously laying collective blame on the entire Federal government it was not enough). But what did YOU do? And why should we trust you to secure the borders in the future when Republicans have such a strong history of doing such a poor job on this issue?
My inclination if this amnesty passes will be to consider both the Democrats and Republicans as the parties of treason and refuse to vote for any of them and do everything possible to sabotage all of them. But maybe if you convince me you are for real rather than just another cheap opportunist I will reconsider.
Tom Tancredo in 2008
My inclination if this amnesty passes will be to consider both the Democrats and Republicans as the parties of treason and refuse to vote for any of them and do everything possible to sabotage all of them.
If you run as an enforcement first conservative who opposses amnesty, you will sweep the primaries. The conservative base cares more about this issue more than any other, I know I do.
Immigration effects so many areas of public policy, from national security, to crime, entitlements, education, health care and culture.
Don't let the media elites fool you into thinking the American people are clamoring for amnesty, they're not.
I can't vote in good conscience for any candidate in the Republican primary who supports this bill. Right now, I'm supporting Giuliani, but if he doesn't come out against it, I'll have to cut bait.
"Back in the thirties we were told we must collectivize the nation because the people were so poor. Now we are told we must collectivize the nation because the people are so rich. "
William F. Buckley, Jr.
Claim it as a defining issue for the future of the Republic and enter the arena swinging.. Bet you'd win...
====
"Enlightened statesmen will not always be at the helm." -- James Madison
If you preach red meat on immigration, you'll blow the Big Three out of the water. It won't even be a race. Take up this mantle and you can go wherever you want.
Please, take a STRICT stance on this!!
Oh...and RUN!
Romney Strongly Opposes
http://www.mittromney.com/News/Press-Releases/Governor_Mitt_Romney_On_Th...
But we all know this is just some big ploy to get in office and once he gets in office, he is going to partner with Democrats and let all scrap all immigrant laws.
____
CongressCritter™: Never have so few felt like they were owed so much by so many for so little.
I can wait till June for announcement... but the anticipation is killing me. Please, Mr. Thompson- give me a reason to tidy up the front lawn so I can put the biggest "Fred Thompson for President!" sign I can find out front!
When the Republican National Convention comes here to the Twin Cities in '08, I'm counting on you being front and center, because you're the only candidate I'll fight the traffic to go see!
that the vast majority of Americans very much want strong border security. Seems also that the majority of our politicians do not want that. Sounds to me like they are therefore not representing us. What happened the last time we were taxed but not represented?
I think we all ought to send letters to our fearless ELECTED leaders and include a tea bag in it, letting them know we are tired of there misrepresentation of us. It seems they are going to steam roll this immigration bill through. We have to take our country back before we are all broke and have nothing left.
Please Mr. Thompson, get in the ring. You will have the support of your party and lots from across the isle too.
wags388
I left the office earlier than usual because our mayor was demonstrating against the police Dept that reports to him. The streets were closed, by the Gestapo, I guess. I am totally confused about the bill, which maybe there or maybe not. Don't be surprised though, that we will have to welcome 12mm new Americans because of this phantom bill. Senator Reid lost the Iraqi war for us. The White House and Congress appear to want to surrender our national sovereignity. I know that OSB and Taliban are our enemies, save me from our elected politicians! They talk of legalising the illegals. Forget about the fine. Send them back and they are legal. That is amnesty, official pardon, and we will not prosecute. This is MORE than amnesty. This is rewarding and pandering. There are existing laws that affect immigrants; medical and criminal checks, economic viabilty and sponsorship so that one does not become public dependent, waiting in line. These Washington elite want to create a new class of immigrants. I would like to suggest that anyone and everyone in Congress who support this legislation be singly and severally responsible for all criminal and social welfare burdens that these proposed Z visa immigrants cause to the country. That is not unfair. American citizens who sponsor bear financial responsibilty. And, what if your Z visa caused homicide and there was no prior check to granting the Z visa....
Are there no Americans in positions of leadership left, not corrupted by the politics of pandering? Applying and implementing national laws in a firm and humane way is a requirement of our elected officials. Americans should not be sold out on the cheap.
This vile bipartisan betrayal of America makes it crystal clear that we need a real conservative candidate. Amnesty without security is anarchy.
Great catchphrase. All it needs is the exclamation point. (For the Thomas Paine version only, of course!)
We've traded our National Sovereignty for cheap roofing and yardwork.
Senator Thompson,
As both a fan of Law and Order and of your service to the nation, I hoped that you would run for the presidency and your posting tonight gives that hope even more urgency.
Mr Thompson,
Do not go "native". remain populist. Stick to your guns. The stray sheep will follow. Please fix this mess.
And promise us, that you will, even after 4 years in office, blog with us little people at least once a week. And heed the people.
DM
Fred Thompson won the election, and once in office gave his press conferences to bloggers rather than to Helen Thomas and the rest of those blowhards ?
The horror...the horror....
here for months. No Republican is going to get any votes in DC, NY, or LA; why do we do anything there other than show up and vote. If Republicans would start actually going out to where their votes are to make their announcements and their important speeches, they'd have a much more favorable local and regional media. Make the DC/NY celebrity reporters start to think of a Holiday Inn Express as a luxury hotel, and get the Hell out of the Imperial City.
In Vino Veritas
Your house in the winter, my house in the summer.
____
CongressCritter™: Never have so few felt like they were owed so much by so many for so little.
Senator Thompson is exactly right. From what we know about this legislation, it is an unmitigated disaster for the future of this nation and was primarily drafted by Ted Kennedy and La Raza. The time is now for principled and strong conservative leadership. The time is now for you to enter this race Senator Thompson. I am ready to join your campaign, but daylight is waning. Mitt Romney looks better and better the longer you delay.
Frank Katz
will not prosecute Jefferson and his freezer full of cash does anyone think they will go after an illegal immigrant.
A clear and unqualified statement by Fed Thompson on "Enforcement First" will blow all the other candidates out of the water. This has become the defining issue of our time while the Feinsteins, Boxers, Kennedys and the rest of the mandarins live in their gated communties.
Here's how you solve this problem easily, justly, and within only a few years with little cost:
Simply enforce the laws we have now, and add employer sanctions with teeth. Do that, and you will have elminated the very reason illegals come here in the first place - jobs.
Without being able to get work, illegals will have no other option but to SELF-DEPORT. They will simply have to go home on their own, because they'll have no way to make a living here.
It's that easy. No big new bill is needed. No rewarding law-breaking and screwing all those in line to get here legally is needed. No signing up of illegals to $2.5 TRILLION in Social Security and other services, AFTER their tax shares are accounted, is needed. And finally, no fence or mass deportations would be needed.
Why don't we just try this easy, just and common-sense approach for a few years? Real enforcement of our actual laws, and THEN see what the problem really is before we scrap the whole system and reward law breakers with an amnesty bill?
I bet that after just 2 - 3 years of this simple policy we'd be looking at 1 - 2 million illegals instead of 12 - 20.
Why not just give it a try?
And lastly, in every poll where the question is asked, the American people say they want ENFORCEMENT FIRST by about 70% - consistently. Even a majority of Latinos in this country say they want enforcement first.
The solution is so simple, it is the right thing to do, and it is overwhelmingly and vigorously supported by the American people...
So why not just give it a try Washington?
Why should we believe any new laws are going to save the day when they haven't even tried to enforce the old ones yet? Why, after 1986, do they expect us to fall for the same old line again - "We'll give you amnesty AND enforcement", but we only got the amnesty... and another 12 - 20 million illegals here now as a result of the first amnesty inviting them in?
Why on earth should we believe these people for one second? Considering what happened last time, shouldn't they be men enough to make this deal with us:
"We'll prove to you that we have sealed the border this time. Then we'll talk about the rest of it. We wont' try to fool you again."
Who on earth will buy this bill of goods YET AGAIN? Only to be told in another twenty years that we have to do it all again with the 30 million illegals partying with the 55 million this current amnesty brought in legally?
...
Ted Kennedy on Immigration [Mark Krikorian]
1965: "The bill will not flood our cities with immigrants. It will not upset the ethnic mix of our society. It will not relax the standards of admission. It will not cause American workers to lose their jobs."
1986: "This amnesty will give citizenship to only 1.1 to 1.3 million illegal aliens. We will secure the borders henceforth. We will never again bring forward another amnesty bill like this."
2007: "Now it is time for action. 2007 is the year we must fix our broken system."
...
Senator, you wrote, "With this bill, the American people are going to THINK they are being sold the same bill of goods as before on border security. We should scrap this bill and the whole debate until we can CONVINCE the American people that we have secured the borders or at least have made great headway."
Senator, while I welcome any call to stop this bill, all you seem to be saying is that the public needs to be convinced to accept amnesty after certain border security measures are in place. This position seems consistent with your voting record and your remarks at the Lincoln Club (“I don't believe most Americans are as concerned about the 12 million that are here“), as well. If this is your position, that the illegals that are here should be allowed to stay, please say so plainly so some of your supporters will know whether to abandon you. If it is not your position, if you are opposed to allowing illegal aliens to benefit from their lawlessness, please say that clearly so I can consider becoming one of your supporters.
Thanks.
Then we can talk about rounding up any loose horses. Until the border and our employment verification procedures are fixed and working, it's too early to worry about what we're going to do with the existing people who are here illegally. Anything we do with those folks isn't going to solve the problem.
---
Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself. - Milton Friedman
Couldn't agree with you more, Senator. If anyone needs any more evidence of the need to secure the border and control the illegals already here, look to the Fort Dix 6 - mostly illegal aliens looking to create a home-brewed al Qaeda wanna-be cell.
Please announce that you're running soon, Senator - Rudy McRomney is becoming the Frankencandidate (not to be confused with that "comedian" in Minnesota)...and it's nowhere near Halloween yet.
"Doveriai, no proveriai" (Trust, but verify) - Ronald Reagan, as spoken to Gorbachev on numerous occasions.
Look up the official definition under US Code 18, Chapter 115.
If this country doesn't secure our border before we start handing out hall passes, we might just as well get used to not having a country.
We don't need new laws. We need the laws we have enforced.
The tyrants (Democrats) have taken over Washington including the White House. BamaFan
We should be learning a good lesson on slippery slopes. Givem an inch and they'll take a mile.
Real change requires real change. -Newt Gingrich
For those who rail on and on about "amnesty" ... how exactly would you go about deporting 12 million people from this country? Because, logically, if you oppose anything that allows them to stay in return for certain costs, you are arguing they all have to be deported. That's fine in theory, but - in a practical sense - how would you do that?
Ideology without pragmatism is like living in a dream world ...
We could...
1. Repeal posse commetadas (sp), use the reserves just home from Iraq to round up all persons who look illegal. Put them in detention camps and make them prove their legal status in a reasonable amount of time, three days should suffice. Then ship them to some country of origin, wherever.
2. We could enforce our current laws, actually secure the border, shut off public services (schools, welfare, etc), ratchet up the pressure on employers and guess what, they will leave.
Pick one.
____
CongressCritter™: Never have so few felt like they were owed so much by so many for so little.
#2, obviously ... I'm all for enforcement, but it's unrealistic to think that most will just leave on their own even with the necessary crackdowns on employers, etc. There will always be a black market for jobs for illegals, there will always be a black market for fraudulent documents. I'm hopeful that much tougher border security and employee verification is forthcoming, and I think that will greatly stem the flow of future illegals. But I don't think it will do much to affect the number that are already here. The conditions they came here from are even worse than what their lives would be like if they had to turn to a black market to get a job. They're not leaving.
On another, secondary note, not that this is reason alone to support anything, but I'm far more worried about the GOP's long-term prospects if we DON'T do something like this than if we do. Like it or not, the Latino block in this country is growing rapidly. The vast majority of them are here legally, but we cannot allow it to appear that the GOP is the party of mass deportation. If so, we most likely concede Latinos permanently to the Dems just as FDR and JFK permanently pulled blacks into the Democratic Party. And given the rapid rise of the Latino demographic, that would mean permanent minority party status for roughly the next century or so.
Anything that makes life less attractive here will lead to some illegals going home. Anything that makes life more attractive here (amnesty, for instance) will lead to some more illegals crossing. Actual verification and enforcement of employment eligibility and a cutoff from social service would have a massive affect on the attractiveness of life here. Many would choose to take whatever money they have saved up and go home rather than try to stick it out here.
---
Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself. - Milton Friedman
...it appears to be more like anything that makes life less attractive here than from where they came will lead to some illegals going home.
The Fuzzy Puppy of the VRWC.
You're missing the point. Quite a few of us are willing to discuss some kind of "guest worker" program and what should be done about the illegals already here... AFTER and ONLY after they demonstrate a serious and sustained effort to secure the border and enforce immigration laws already on the books.
If faced with the prospect of not finding work, being detained and deported, with the result of being ineligible for re-entry after being caught, and the inability to go back to their home country, we may very well see the illegal popultion drop. At worst, it won't increase. Then announce a "guest worker" program in which illegals can go back home and apply or face having to compete with legal low-wage immigrant labor.
This compromise being discussed virtually guarantees that we'll have millions of illegals granted legal residency while millions more come across the border- including some who may wish us harm.
"You're missing the point. Quite a few of us are willing to discuss some kind of "guest worker" program and what should be done about the illegals already here... AFTER and ONLY after they demonstrate a serious and sustained effort to secure the border and enforce immigration laws already on the books."
I thought the visas, etc. for illegals only kicked after 18,000 border agents, hundreds more miles of fence and barriers, tougher enforcement of employee verification, etc., which would take at least 18 months according to Chertoff and probably longer.
"Democratic leaders were leery of three pivotal concessions to the conservatives. The first would make illegal immigrants' access to long-term visas and the new guest-worker program contingent upon the implementation of the border crackdown. Before those immigrant-rights measures could go into effect, the government must deploy 18,000 new Border Patrol agents and four unmanned aerial vehicles; build 200 miles of vehicle barriers, 370 miles of fencing, and 70 ground-based radar and camera towers; provide funds for the detention of 27,500 illegal immigrants a day; and complete new identification tools to help employers screen out illegal job applicants.
"Skeptics say those would take years, but Chertoff stressed yesterday that they could be done in 18 months."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/05/17/AR200705...
That's half the fence already passed. The 370 miles comes out of the same fence they are already (slowly and reluctantly) building because it was ordered by Congress. As for the 18,000 border patrol agents, who cares? If they aren't given the tools or permission to do their job, that is just a meaningless government jobs program. "New identification tools to help employers screen out illegal job applicants" means jack and that's what we will get from it.
---
Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself. - Milton Friedman
It's not inaccurate. You just have not read it carefully enough. It is the MSM, after all.
The Senate deal would grant temporary legal status to virtually all illegal immigrants in the country, while allowing them to apply for residence visas and eventual citizenship.
Their legal status is not dependent in any way on fences or employer verification systems. They are granted legal status instantly, with no prerequistes. IF they decide that want residence visas and citizenship, THEN there are some small requirements asked of them.
Contrary to what this says, the legal status is not "temporary". There is no mechanism to revoke or remove it at any time.
and I took "contingent" to mean "contingent," i.e. the visas simply will not be available until all the enforcement improvements happen.
The word "contingent" does not apply to the granting of legal status. That happens at once, with no triggers. Look again at the words I quoted you above. Do you see "contingent" there anywhere? No contingent!!!!
The only things that are "contingent" are the granting of the path to citizenship. And these are not really contingent on anything except Bush signing off that he is happy, which I suppose he will do sometime this year.
You know, the Democrats have flat out said what they are doing here.
To get a citizenship bill through Congress, President Bush and the Democrats probably need to convert a large bloc of anti-immigration Republican members, perhaps 40 in the House and 20 in the Senate. “Somehow,” said a Democrat lawmaker who is trying to build Republican support, “we have to convince them that voting for comprehensive reform does not amount to ‘enfranchising their defeat,’ ” a reference to the likelihood that two of every three new Latino voters would cast Democratic ballots. “Our problem,” he admitted, “is that we are hoping that the legislation will build the Democratic electorate.” ("Border Politics,” National Journal, Feb. 10, 2007)
“As the number of legal Hispanics increases, the number of Democratic votes increases as well. … Taking immigration off the table as a red-meat issue for conservative Republicans would be very helpful in a presidential year.” (Democratic “insiders", National Journal Insiders Poll, April 14, 2007)
Top Democratic leaders and activists see Hispanic migration as a long-term opportunity for the party. The arrival of additional immigrant workers is “bad for blue-collars,” Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass., chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, told National Journal late last year. But immigrants can help elect Democratic majorities, and “if [a Democratic Congress] were to significantly strengthen unions, then you would offset the negative effect on the income of workers,” he said. ("Immigration Economics,” National Journal, May 12, 2007)
But I think its clear that nothing will dissuade the open borders Republicans from their chosen end.
Its just too bad that they will take the rest of us down with them.
the whole political system not mention the at least half of law enforcement.
Better be despised for too anxious apprehensions, than ruined by too confident security. --Edmund Burke
Blog: TMYN
While things look very grim for the GOP this year, I will vote for your nomination if you run.