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

Skip to comments.

Powell Tackles Illegal Immigrant Issue
Yahoo News ^ | 9 Nov 04 | GEORGE GEDDA, Associated Press Writer

Posted on 11/09/2004 10:29:21 AM PST by Ginifer

MEXICO CITY - Secretary of State Colin Powell (news - web sites) said Tuesday that President Bush (news - web sites) will place a high priority in his second term on granting legal status to millions of migrants who live illegally in the United States.

Powell spoke at the inaugural session of the U.S.-Mexican Bi-National Commission, which annually brings together top officials from both sides to discuss a range of cross-border issues. Powell was joined here by five other members of Bush's Cabinet.

"The president is committed to comprehensive immigration reform as a high priority in his second term, and he will work closely with our Congress to achieve this goal," Powell said, with delegations from both sides in attendance at a Foreign Ministry auditorium.

In separate remarks, Mexican Foreign Secretary Luis Ernesto Derbez made no specific reference to the migration issue but praised the "high level of confidence and understanding between the two countries."

Mexico is the primary source of the 10 million undocumented immigrants living in the United States. Persuading the United States to push ahead with migration reform is a major goal of President Vicente Fox (news - web sites)'s administration.

Last January, in an apparent bid for the votes of Hispanics and segments of the U.S. business community, Bush unveiled an ambitious immigration reform proposal whose key feature would provide temporary legal status to illegal migrants provided they are employed.

In the 10 months since Bush spelled out the proposal, it has failed to make any headway.

Powell told reporters Monday night while flying here that with the end of the election season in the United States and with substantial progress in shoring up security along the border, "there could be a more favorable environment" for immigration reform legislation.

He acknowledged, however, that it is not yet clear how the new Congress taking office in January will deal with the issue. Many in Congress oppose granting legal status to undocumented migrants because, they say, that would reward people who broke the law when they crossed the border.

Fox said the time is ripe for a migration accord. "We have done all the analysis, diagnostics and problem solving possible," Fox said in a radio interview Monday. "There's no reason to lose much time."

Earlier, Derbez praised the Bush administration's support for Mexico's efforts to promote consular identification cards that help Mexicans living abroad open bank accounts or apply for a driver's license in some parts of the United States.

Mexico believes immigration reform is sorely needed because of the precarious situation that many undocumented Mexicans in the United States face despite their significant contributions to the U.S. economy. Last week, Mexican Interior Secretary Santiago Creel called U.S. migration policy "absurd."

Bush and Fox first broached the subject of immigration reform less than a month after Bush took office in 2001. Fox said last week he believes that 2005 may finally be the year when significant progress may be possible.

"Neither of our countries will be in elections next year," Fox observed. But Creel warned against "raising expectations beyond what is politically viable and really possible."

Since the September 11 terrorist attacks, migration reform has taken a back seat to enhancing security along the border. U.S. officials say Mexican cooperation has been exemplary in addressing U.S. concerns about terrorists using the border as a transit point for attacks on U.S. soil.

On hemispheric relations, Powell acknowledged Monday night there has been a shift to the left in several South American countries but said he is "not deeply troubled by it at all. I want to work with whoever the people elect in those countries."

He said it wasn't shocking that people in the region are beginning to make different choices when they go to the polls if they haven't seen the kind of progress they were expecting.

As an example of the leftist trend, he cited the election two years ago of Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva, but he said Silva "has been acting quite responsibly with respect to economic and fiscal policy."

Powell reserved judgment on the implications of the election last week of a leftist coalition in Uruguay.


TOPICS: Culture/Society; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: aliens; immigrantlist
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 141-149 next last
Comment #61 Removed by Moderator

To: MineralMan

You've completely and totally ignored (or perhaps forgotten) the massive spending/deficeit increases we can now expect.


62 posted on 11/09/2004 11:30:15 AM PST by NJ_gent (Conservatism begins at home. Security begins at the border. Please, someone, secure our borders.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: All

What happened to the "I will not reward illegal behavior" schpeel in the Illegal Immigration election ads running a few days before the election?


63 posted on 11/09/2004 11:30:26 AM PST by moehoward
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: dennisw

"This will fail again."

No, this will pass "Big Time" this time. The only reason it failed last time was that it was on the table the week prior to 911. Bush didn't bring this issue up during the campaign because there was nothing positive to gain. Now as a lame duck what has he got to lose? This will be neatly wrapped up into a compassionate conservative package and delivered to the conservative House & Senate where it will pass!


64 posted on 11/09/2004 11:30:49 AM PST by blaquebyrd
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Area51

Lol... that's hilarious! :)


65 posted on 11/09/2004 11:31:26 AM PST by NJ_gent (Conservatism begins at home. Security begins at the border. Please, someone, secure our borders.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

Comment #66 Removed by Moderator

To: NJ_gent

"You've completely and totally ignored (or perhaps forgotten) the massive spending/deficeit increases we can now expect."

No, no, I haven't. But remember: Deficits are actually good for the USA? Now, who was it who said that? I can't really remember, but I believe it was someone within the administration.

As always, the Republican Party is not as conservative, overall, as some would like to think. Congress is a middle-of-the road entity, generally. Presidents generally trend toward the center, as well.

Gay marriage and abortion aside, there's precious little difference, really between the left and right sides of Congress.

Just watch what happens to SS reform. Every congressman and senator is dependent on all those baby boomers out there who are rapidly approaching retirement age.

I'm 59. Am I concerned about not having enough time to contribute to some sort of privatization program before retirement? You bet.

The SS reform package won't be anything of the sort, really. It will sound OK, but won't actually do much. You can't screw around with the baby boomer's SS checks. They just won't stand for it, and every congresscritter and senator knows it. And they all have to run for re-election. Our President does not.

Oh...there's lots to watch over the next couple of years. Lots. FR will be interesting, as always.


67 posted on 11/09/2004 11:39:48 AM PST by MineralMan (godless atheist)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: Ginifer

Both major parties have shrugged off citizen opinion, for decades.

A well funded 3rd party candidate, perhaps named Ruiz or Salazar or Gonzales, might take a run for the Presidency in 2008.

Platform: Stop illegal immigration.

It could force the major parties to take notice. (Perot deserves credit for the budget balancing during Clinton.)


68 posted on 11/09/2004 11:42:52 AM PST by truth_seeker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Happy2BMe

He only waited one week for God's sakes.


69 posted on 11/09/2004 11:44:38 AM PST by international american (RKBA RULES!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: MineralMan
"No, no, I haven't. But remember: Deficits are actually good for the USA?"

Oh, of course. Everyone knows that it's the best thing in the world for your expenditures to consistently outpace your income, especially over an extended period.

"Now, who was it who said that?"

A handfull of Freepers and some administration drones anxious to keep their jobs.

"As always, the Republican Party is not as conservative, overall, as some would like to think. Congress is a middle-of-the road entity, generally. Presidents generally trend toward the center, as well."

All three are tending toward the left these days. Look at the Republican party platform in 1996 and compare it to what's actually happening today. They are, once again, trying to out-left the left.

"Gay marriage and abortion aside, there's precious little difference, really between the left and right sides of Congress."

Even included, there's really not much difference. Arlen Specter got the President's support in PA, which is why the President lost PA this election. Now he's digging his heels in to work against the successful appointment of judges who are too far right for him (read: anything right of dead-center). The President's token support for a gay marriage amendment that everyone on Earth knew was dead in the water rings hollow in the ears of anyone who sees it for what it really is: an attempt to placate the base. I suspect gay marriage, on the Federal level, will dissolve away now that it's no longer a useful tool.

"Just watch what happens to SS reform."

Oh yes, I can only imagine what's going to become of it. Personally, I wouldn't have a problem with the program being eliminated (with promised benefits paid in full to those who've paid into the system), but we all know that unless and until an incredibly massive amount of money is sunk into Social Security, it will continue to depend on continued payments from those who work to sustain its functions for those no longer working.

"Oh...there's lots to watch over the next couple of years. Lots."

That's what worries me.
70 posted on 11/09/2004 11:53:13 AM PST by NJ_gent (Conservatism begins at home. Security begins at the border. Please, someone, secure our borders.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: MineralMan

Here's what SS privatization will be:

Social Security taxes will go up. You will be allowed to take the increased amount and put it in private investments. Gradually, the percentage will go up, while the guaranteed benefits go down. So, say you are 64 when this plan starts. You might put 1% of you income into private funds for 2 years before you retire (say $1600 total). You're regular SS benefits will just be reduced by maybe $50/month and you'll have $1600 in a private account.

As the older people with little or no private SS die off, the amount younger people are allowed to put in private accounts will increase.

So essentially, for older workers, it will just be a tax increase. 'Forced savings' might be a better word. But for someone who is 59 right now, I doubt you'll get much money in before age 65. You can do the same thing right now if you want to though. Just increase your savings by 1% of your salary and put it in stocks/bonds or CD's.


71 posted on 11/09/2004 11:58:49 AM PST by Old_time_conservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: NJ_gent

"I suspect gay marriage, on the Federal level, will dissolve away now that it's no longer a useful tool.
"

Well, there will be no Amendment, I'm pretty sure. I think we'll continue to see efforts in individual states, many of which will be thrown out by those states' respective Supreme Courts.

It's really a non-issue in the big picture. It's good for campaign rhetoric, but not for much else.

Abortion's a little bigger fish. Still, I doubt that's going to change significantly either, even with a Bush appointee on the SCOTUS.

Just watch the fireworks here when the President announces his appointee for the next vacant SCOTUS position. I predict there will be wailing and gnashing of teeth, and not among the centrists or liberals.


72 posted on 11/09/2004 12:01:37 PM PST by MineralMan (godless atheist)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: Aut Pax Aut Bellum

"This is an insult to others who have struggled and waited and spent much money to come here legally."

This is also an insult to the US Border Patrol who are putting their lives on the line defending what I fear this administration is about to legislate away. The security of our southern border.


73 posted on 11/09/2004 12:02:15 PM PST by blaquebyrd
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Old_time_conservative

"So essentially, for older workers, it will just be a tax increase. 'Forced savings' might be a better word. But for someone who is 59 right now, I doubt you'll get much money in before age 65. You can do the same thing right now if you want to though. Just increase your savings by 1% of your salary and put it in stocks/bonds or CD's. "

Oh, I'm not dependent on SS. It's part of my planning for retirement, of course, but it's not my whole retirement, by any means.

The reality of it is that I'll continue to work as long as I'm able, in any case. I'm not much for going on cruises or golfing or that sort of thing. I like to work. My dad's 80, and runs a citrus farm himself, doing most of the work himself. That's my plan. Failing that, which, of course, is possible, I have a tidy retirement fund put away.

My home is paid for. I have no consumer debt whatever. I'm not too concerned. However, I'm not typical of 59 year old men. Of that, I'm certain.


74 posted on 11/09/2004 12:04:57 PM PST by MineralMan (godless atheist)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies]

To: blaquebyrd

"This is also an insult to the US Border Patrol who are putting their lives on the line defending what I fear this administration is about to legislate away. The security of our southern border."

How can you legislate away what does not exist?


75 posted on 11/09/2004 12:05:48 PM PST by MineralMan (godless atheist)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies]

To: MineralMan

"How can you legislate away what does not exist?"

Unfortunately, sir you are correct


76 posted on 11/09/2004 12:08:23 PM PST by blaquebyrd
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]

To: Ginifer

Good way to expend all that political capital he is so proud of. Do this, and he'll lose support on all the good things we want to accomplish.


77 posted on 11/09/2004 12:10:46 PM PST by Defiant (Democrats: Don't go away mad, just go away.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: international american
He only waited one week for God's sakes.

A Royal Screwing takes work. Might as well start early...

78 posted on 11/09/2004 12:14:21 PM PST by Tolerance Sucks Rocks (Deport 'em all; let Fox sort 'em out!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: Ginifer

I can hear the pencils sharpening right now which will initiate numerous class action discrimination lawsuits on behalf of those legally trying to become citizens.

Without first satisfying those who've committed to lawfully abide by our immigration code, there should never be any concessions to illegal aliens.

Those asinine bureaucrats had best hope they cover themselves deep in immunity if such flapdoodle does happen to make its way through Congress.


79 posted on 11/09/2004 12:18:01 PM PST by azhenfud ("He who is always looking up seldom finds others' lost change...")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: politicalwit
Strange how the "party punch drinkers" said Bush would handle the immigration issue.

Most of us knew about the big lie.

80 posted on 11/09/2004 12:18:38 PM PST by Joe Hadenuf (I failed anger management class, they decided to give me a passing grade anyway)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 141-149 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