[paper avalanche]

Actually, it sounds like a pretty decent proposal. It is a good compromise because 1) these guys don't get citizenship just handed to them for breaking the law and yet 2) they can be above-board. Kicking out 10 million people is, let's face it, not realistic. Letting them stay as illegals is bad for a number of obvious reasons. That leaves either a citizenship grant/amnesty (been tried, it just encourages more lawbreaking) or limited work permits, i.e. the Bush proposal. There are a lot of details that need to be worked out: how many times can you renew a work permit? Can you ever apply for a green card on the basis of having had a permit continuously for some number of years? Will there be more family-based green cards? Do you have a decent grace period to look for another job if you lose your job here? Do minimum wages apply? Do you or your children get full government services or just limited services? ... etc.

Of course, without real enforcement, this is just a futile political gesture. What wasn't really emphasized in the speech is that after this system is in place, if you are *still* illegal, you're out faster than you can say boo. I do think the enforcement part will be there though.

If I was a Republican governor of California, and I could ask the president for one law, this would be *exactly* it. I suspect Arnold twisted the president's arm for this one. Once the federal law is passed, I expect Arnold will make state/local police have to enforce it (right now, it is SOP that state/local cops can't/don't enforce immigration laws). The difference between taxes paid and services recieved by illegal immigrants is responsible for an estimated $11 billion out of California's current $15 billion deficit, so this should really help.

Republicans really need to get their heads on straight and stop whining about us being overrun by immigrants. Surely even a strong conservative doesn't have anything against immigration per se, seeing how it is just an extension of the free market. The real objection is that when you have an huge influx of people with a different and possibly incompatible worldview, it can really disrupt a society. That is why the influx needs to be carefully balanced, and these people need to be able to integrate into our society, eventually assuming an equal status with full rights and responsibilities if they can prove they deserve it. This bill is a good step in the direction of making those people think of themselves as Americans first, and hispanic or whatever else second, which is incredibly important. Unintegrated immigrants hurt us, well-integrated immigrants in moderation are one of our great strengths.

(As an aside: here in So Cal I have seen a very few leftist MEChA hispanics, mostly college students, and a huge number of hard-working, entreuprenerial, essentially conservative hispanics. They do *not* want handouts, they just want half a chance to make a living. I think this will actually hurt the liberal welfare-state agenda in California and elsewhere.)

(It is interesting that Rep. Tom Tancredo has already introduced a bill exactly like what Bush's speech describes, as far as I can tell. Yet he's speaking out against Bush's speech now?)

[Penny]

<" Kicking out 10 million people is, let's face it, not realistic.">

This is only unrealistic if this kind of myth goes unchallenged! If we as a soverign nation have the will and commitment, then we have the way to give a six-month grace period, nationally advertised, for illegal ALIENS to pack up their bags, settle their affairs here, gather their children, and ship out. If they don't, they will be arrested and deported.

Where there is a will, there is a way, actually works for me in my "real" life.

Penny

[Catspaw]

From your link to Trancredo's press release:

“This bill will also end the exploitation of illegal workers in our underground economy. Legal guest workers will not have to fear deportation and will not be subject to intimidation and mistreatment,” Tancredo concluded.

[Publius6961]

Kicking out 10 million people is, let's face it, not realistic.

Hmmmmm. Why not?
I can see the next logical step: what is realistic? 5 million? 1 million?
What is to prevent another 10 million wave for developing over the next ten years and the same argument recycled?

When 10 million or 1 million illegal muslim "students" and their 10,000 new "mosques" are among us, what's to prevent the exact same argument for being used to ignore all the implications?
I heard Medved use this "argument" yesterday and I blanched. It is non sensical and a circular argument brought to respectability. I'm not buying it. The whole town is under 4 feet of water. Getting rid of it is not "realistic". Let's just raise the town 5 feet...

[Catspaw]

So how does what Representative Tancredo proposed in November, 2003 differ from what President Bush proposed in January, 2004?

[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.

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

[Orbiting_Rosie's_Head]

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.

[r9etb]

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.

[#3Fan]

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.

[MissAmericanPie]

Fining the pants off of their employers will self extract illegals from the nation. Refusing their kids into public schools and refusing them welfare will self extract illegals, telling them to go home will self extract many illegals.

Offering them a free train ride to the border is not a bad idea either. And certainly boots on the ground at our borders will go a long way in cutting the flood to a trickle. D.C. sits around and does nadda, zip, about inforcing the laws on the books.

If they can't enforce our immigration laws with the same zeal with which they inforce their unconstitutional gun laws then to heck with their guest worker program.

[expatpat]

I tend to agree with you. At the moment we are (a) burying our head in the sand, (b) condoning illegal action. I think what is proposed should only be the first step. Once the 'good illegals' have their temporary work-visas, we can chase all the others out of the country without hurting either those who need their labor or the 'good illegals' themselves.

[GigaDittos]

No MEChA just wants "their" country back. They out-populate everyone else in the southwestern states and they can vote their way to power. Simple and workable strategy. Illegals, who become legal for free under Bush's plan help that process along. Isn't it wonderful?

[Hoverbug]

If it walks like amnesty and quacks like amnesty, it's amnesty.

Amnesty by any other name would stink as sour. (Apologies to Bill S.)

Don't **** on my head and tell me it's raining.

(I'm working on more)

Hb