Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Plan has 'fatal flaw,' congressman says
Rocky Mountain News ^ | 01/08/04 | Ann Imse and M.E. Sprengelmeyer

Posted on 01/08/2004 5:01:57 AM PST by T-Bird45

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-71 next last
To: paper avalanche
Your number 6 totally ignores the main problem: the welfare state. The amount of "social services" consumed by illegals is staggering. They've totally overrun our hospitals, schools, etc. They are net consumers of taxes by a huge margin.

Many come here "yearning to eat free". We're tired of it.
21 posted on 01/08/2004 6:14:48 AM PST by jimt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: BureaucratusMaximus
Tancredo's website is here
http://www.house.gov/tancredo/

The Congressional Immigration Reform Caucus page is here
http://www.house.gov/tancredo/Immigration/

The list of Members is here
http://www.house.gov/tancredo/Immigration/members.html

22 posted on 01/08/2004 6:16:26 AM PST by DumpsterDiver
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: All
>Kicking out 10 million people is, let's face it, not realistic.

>Hmmmmm. Why not? There are other answers beyond this one, but perhaps this one, uncomfortable though it is, may be the best answer.

Because doing so would also force out perhaps hundreds of thousands of American citizens. Many of the illegals are here with families of one sort of another. They have had children. A child born on US soil is a US citizen. If you boot the mother, you condemn a US citizen to life in 3rd world Mexico with 3rd world Mexican medicine and care.

If you just boot the father, who supports the family?

Yeah, it's a problem. Bush's proposal probably isn't perfect, but it is not clear why the bomb throwers don't want to adjust it rather than elect a Democrat.

23 posted on 01/08/2004 6:17:12 AM PST by Owen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: paper avalanche
Kicking out 10 million people is, let's face it, not realistic

Wanna bet? All you gotta do is impose severe penalities - huge fines, executive jail time - on people who hire them and there will be no place for them to work. Without jobs, they will go home on their own.

24 posted on 01/08/2004 6:19:25 AM PST by Orbiting_Rosie's_Head
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: jimt
Many come here "yearning to eat free". We're tired of it.

The fruits of the Welfare State look mighty tasty to the invaders.

25 posted on 01/08/2004 6:20:46 AM PST by Lady Eileen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: paper avalanche
Your number 18, ditto my comments on number 6.

I have no problem with immigration, or "people of color". I do have a problem with anybody expecting me to support their family.

I also have a problem with people who come here to commit crimes. We have enough of our own already.
26 posted on 01/08/2004 6:23:36 AM PST by jimt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Owen
Yeah, it's a problem. Bush's proposal probably isn't perfect, but it is not clear why the bomb throwers don't want to adjust it rather than elect a Democrat.

You are living in fantasy land! What makes you think Mexicans will vote for Republicans in the future? Although Jorge is giving it the old college try when it comes to Hispandering, Dean is promising the illegals full citizenship. Whatever the means, if these people come here in a "guest worker" program, the anchor babies they pop out will vote Dem, you can be sure of it. And Dems will give them full citizenship as soon as they retake power. Dems will hold out all the affimative action goody payoffs, and more White and and Asian kids will be turned away from opportunity. It will be a voting block the likes of which you have never seen, resulting in an exponential socialism that will make Dubya's "free pills for Granny" look like fascism.

27 posted on 01/08/2004 6:29:10 AM PST by Orbiting_Rosie's_Head
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: jimt
Your number 6 totally ignores the main problem: the welfare state. The amount of "social services" consumed by illegals is staggering. They've totally overrun our hospitals, schools, etc. They are net consumers of taxes by a huge margin.

Yes, they are huge net consumers of taxes, as I wrote... just go back and read what I wrote about the California budget deficit. There are lots of ways to address that, like for example only providing emergency government services to work-permit holders (e.g. hospital ER yes, welfare or free education no), and of course making them all legal in some way and therefore fully taxed. I actually think Bush is coming out with this proposal now is at least in part at Arnold's urging, because Arnold needs this to fix the state budget.

Many come here "yearning to eat free". We're tired of it.

Actually, that is not the primary reason. Sure, they'll take handouts if we give them handouts, but in my experience the reason they come here is because it is a much better place to live. Mexico, let's face it, doesn't *have* laws and is just generally a pestillential hellhole. Most of the immigrants I know are extremely hard-working and industrious. A $6/hour job in the US (*without* welfare) is basically heaven to them, because they have *hope*.

28 posted on 01/08/2004 6:29:54 AM PST by paper avalanche
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: jimt
Your number 6 totally ignores the main problem: the welfare state.

That is the source of the problem that NO ONE will address, if we are to solve the problem, we must remove the incentives.

29 posted on 01/08/2004 6:32:11 AM PST by c-b 1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Orbiting_Rosie's_Head
>You are living in fantasy land! What makes you think Mexicans will vote for Republicans in the future? I think you misunderstood. The point is electing a Democrat this year. Not the future. The future can't be seen. I remember talk of demographics 15 yrs ago saying the GOP would be done within 5 because of increasing Hispanic and Black numbers, but we control both Congress and the WH today.

My point was booting US citizens, i.e., the babies. How are you going to do that? Some of those babies are 20 now. No one says it's not a difficult problem. The point is why would electing Dean be the solution?

30 posted on 01/08/2004 6:34:30 AM PST by Owen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: paper avalanche
1) these guys don't get citizenship just handed to them for breaking the law and yet 2) they can be above-board.

Your point 2 actually suggests that this might actually be better for national security. If these people sign up, then we know who and where they are -- which is a whole lot better than what we've got right now.

The other side of the coin is, this puts an even higher priority on enforcement against those who do not sign up. And it also puts the monkey squarely on the backs of prospective employers -- I can see there being criminal penalties for those who knowingly hire (and perhaps fail to report) undocumented aliens.

31 posted on 01/08/2004 6:36:33 AM PST by r9etb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: angkor
But I'm still waiting to see the enforcement mechanisms, the fixup of the horrorshow called INS, the penalties and timelines for noncompliance, etc.

Bottom line is this: the INS is not capabable of something on this scale, nor is any other federal government entity. The responsibility for making this, or any deportation scheme, is to place the responsibility on those who hire people.

Let's face it: the illegal immigrant problem is no different from the drug problem. The supply will continue so long as there is a market for it. As long as Americans are willing to hire illegal immigrants, there will be people willing to cross the border to be hired by them.

There's only one way to really put a stop to it: make it illegal to knowingly hire an illegal alien.

32 posted on 01/08/2004 6:43:32 AM PST by r9etb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: paper avalanche
Good post. We're obviously not going to push 10,000,000 into the northern Mexican desert to die. The ball was already dropped by having them here in the first place. If the ball is already dropped and we're not going to push them into the desert, then there needs to be a solution.
33 posted on 01/08/2004 6:44:07 AM PST by #3Fan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: r9etb
As long as Americans are willing to hire illegal immigrants, there will be people willing to cross the border to be hired by them.

There was a time - back in the 60's and 70's - when there were frequent INS/BP raids on businesses that hired illegals. You'd read about them in the newpaper or sometime see coverage on TV news if it was big enough.

34 posted on 01/08/2004 6:52:02 AM PST by angkor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: paper avalanche
If we can't or are unwilling to en force our current immigration laws, why would we accept the idea that we can or will enforce even more complicated laws? Where does the idea come from that once in this country these people will follow the rules considering that they weren't following them in the first place. And what ever happened to the "Temporary Work Pass" already being issued to these people? Too bad George, like Lincoln said, "You can fool all of the people some of the time, some of the people all of the time but you can't fool all of the people all of the time." Any you ain't fooling me at all!
35 posted on 01/08/2004 7:05:04 AM PST by CIBGUY (CIBGUY)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: paper avalanche
Those mexican immigrants we're talking about tend to be as American as you or me once they've been here for a while.

The legal ones, perhaps.

What you describe is the theoretical system for immigration we had before the illegals became the problem. Mexico and Latin America have always had numerical preferences and I have absolutely no problem with that. As a matter of fact, I am one of those.
Your (optimistic) blanket assesment of the illegal mindset, however, is contradicted in my real life experience. Right here. Right now. Where I am living.

36 posted on 01/08/2004 7:10:12 AM PST by Publius6961 (40% of Californians are as dumb as a sack of rocks.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: paper avalanche
Sure, they'll take handouts if we give them handouts, but in my experience the reason they come here is because it is a much better place to live.

Bush's proposal does exactly nothing to address the huge social services drain. Bush's proposal does exactly nothing to address the "anchor baby" issue.

These aren't just minor flaws, they're the crux of the problem. Very few people would object to folks simply coming here to work. I have major and severe objections to increasing the number of parasites living off my taxes.

37 posted on 01/08/2004 7:10:35 AM PST by jimt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Orbiting_Rosie's_Head
You are living in fantasy land! What makes you think Mexicans will vote for Republicans in the future?

Umm... Rosie, have you actually looked at how immigrants who have been here for a while or their children vote? Have you talked to any? My take is they are mostly moderate to mildly conservative. That is what got Arnold elected, he got a lot of the hispanic vote which surprised almost everybody. Well guess what, I don't have the numbers but I bet you the ones that voted for him were mostly immigrants that had been here for over 10 years or their children that grew up here. Also, consider Bush in Texas... I rest my case. They are not your enemies unless you really really want them to be.

38 posted on 01/08/2004 7:11:08 AM PST by paper avalanche
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: T-Bird45
Yup! I know where the UT Rep is--right on board with Bush and pushing the proposal. In very fact all of our Pubbie reps are also on board and that makes me angry!
39 posted on 01/08/2004 7:13:49 AM PST by Paulus Invictus (4)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: angkor
Who will you vote for, Dean? That would be worse. Worse yet would be a third party candidate and Dean would still win. It's a problem, isn't it?
40 posted on 01/08/2004 7:15:45 AM PST by Paulus Invictus (4)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-71 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson