Posted on 04/07/2006 6:01:06 AM PDT by kellynla
The senators who worked late Wednesday night devising a "compromise" on immigration legislation should have gone to bed early, serving the country better by getting some sleep. The "compromise" they came up with bears a striking resemblance to the one which passed the Senate Judiciary Committee a few weeks ago. Amnesty? Check. Guest-worker program? Check. So where exactly is the compromise?
It all depends, to revise a famously fatuous remark, on what the definition of amnesty is. Instead of the committee's blanket amnesty of all 11 million illegal immigrants, senators appear to have agreed to the definition offered Wednesday night by Sens. Mel Martinez and Chuck Hagel. Illegal immigrants who have been in the country more than five years, estimated to be about 7 million, would get a pass toward citizenship. Those living in the country less than five years but more than two would be required to return home -- perhaps just to a "port of entry," whatever that means -- and re-enter as temporary workers with a path toward citizenship. The rest, those living here less than two years, would go home to get in line for a guest-worker program like everyone else naive enough to obey the law of the United States.
Still to be explained is how a three-tiered amnesty solves any of the problems of a blanket amnesty. In fact, it adds a few more. In both scenarios, the workability of amnesty rests on the assumption that illegal immigrants would willingly pay a fine and back taxes for citizenship. But there are no incentives for them to do so, unless Congress imposes a criminal threat on their continued illegality and on the employers who hire them. Neither threat is in the Senate bill.
(Excerpt) Read more at washtimes.com ...
Considering the options put forth thus far, I'd really as soon not play.
(SHHH! We can start selling electric bills!)
"Amnesty" is the wrong word. "Documentation" is what is needed.
More of the same is a "compromise"?
It's like they separated illegals into three trimesters. Harry Blackmun's estate should get a royalty check for this nonsense.
Shamnesty bump
Forget amnesty and all the rest. The whole approach is bass-ackwards.
It's time to seriously consider a national ID for LEGAL residents. Identify everyone who's here LEGALLY. It's a known universe compared to trying to deal with those illegals hiding in the shadows. Here's how it would work...please read the whole thing b/4 shooting at me:
1) Merge all national databases on passports, visas, green cards, etc. While that's being done, close the border, build a wall and/or increase border patrol and INS personnel significantly.
2) Those in the new database would be notified to apply for the new (high-tech, biometric) card. For ease of reference, the new card would carry the same (or similarly identifiable) number as the old valid passport, green card, etc. It would also have social security number---the old "it's not for I.D." is a joke.
2-a) U.S. citizens without a passport would have to apply for the new card using procedures similar to the current passport application. Newly approved immigrants would be given the new card. All the old documents would expire in, let's say, 2 years.
3) Require employers, public assistance providers, etc. to record the new cards in their files...and check them against the gov't database. Any employee who doesn't comply must be fired. Any agency or employer that doesn't comply gets fined and jailed. (I'm thinking this could be merged with payroll tax reporting formats already in the employers' files.) Local jurisdictions refusing to enforce the law would lose federal funding. I would also consider a law making it illegal to pay wages in cash.
There. Now you've got a database of those who DO belong here. (This is simplified, obviously). All others would have to return home and stand in line like everyone else. If they're caught here without a card, they get jail and deportation without a hearing. Those caught at the border trying to sneak in would be jailed and held as a threat to national security. After a thorough checkout, they get sent back. Their biometrics would be recorded in the database with a tag saying they are forever INELLIGIBLE for future access to the States.
The key here is to stop focusing on the illegals and put the focus on a much more easily identifiable population: the legal residents of the United States of America.
_____________________
Ok, fire away!
GWB insults our intelligence asking for a guest worker program that isn't amnesty. And why the sudden urgency? Why is he urging passage this week? And Mr. No-Veto has this annoying habit of signing WHATEVER they pass. Very annoying.
I'm with you 100% buddy.
I'm quite sure that you are about to flamed by the libertarian crowd.
Personally, I WANT my government to know who I am. They already do, but the idea is a good one if it can be used to identify non legals at a glance.
"I worked lots of years in the produce business and I know that there is no shortage of legal workers"
I concur, I worked for SIX FRIGGIN YEARS while I was in school unloading produce trucks and boxcars and anyone who tells you there aren't people out there who will take those jobs is either the dumbest or the most naive person on the friggin' planet...and yes that includes George W. Bush!
It would identify them BY DEFAULT. That's the beauty of it.
"So this is what the left wants. Free tuition for illegals. If that doesn't wake up the third party lovers on FR, nothing will."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Peach, it's not just the left who want this, it's part of the CFR plan to integrate the US with Mexico and Canada, spelled out specifically -- both sides are going along with this!
http://www.eagleforum.org/column/2005/july05/05-07-13.html
"Here's another handout included in the plan. **U.S. taxpayers are supposed to create a major fund to finance 60,000 Mexican students to study in U.S. colleges.**"
(Here's the FR thread on the same article:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1444055/posts )
Years ago I worked in southern CA on a crew that did jobs Mexicans wouldn't do, e.g. stripping canvas filters from a gravel cleaning machine, `roof-loading' CA tile, and worse jobs.
When the president and Congress say that our "guests" are doing jobs Americans won't do--like the Democrats saying "*America* wants (this or that)" when they mean that *they* want this or that--what they are really saying is that there are jobs that they, their family or friends would not do.
Those of us who know what it's like to work for a living need a third party.
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.