Senate OKs Border Fence, Mulls Citizenship

AP ^ | 20 minutes ago | DAVID ESPO,

[trubluolyguy]

So who is lying here?

[Defiant]

Republicans are like the Dems of the 60s, torn between their civil rights wing and their dixiecrat wing. Dems were in charge of Congress, and fought the battle within their party. It ended up leading to a GOP majority. We are split between a conservative, pro-American wing and a "dem-lite" wing.

These fools like Hagel, McCain and Bush are leading the GOP down that same path, back to permanent minority status.

[Paulus Invictus]

The fence needs to be 1200 miles long, not 400 miles! Don't these senatorial morons know anything at all about the border?

[WOSG]

"I would be furious if I believed President Bush said that"

Bush said this, sugar coated with Clintonisms, on Monday night. Why are people acting surprised?

The whole point about legalization is that we are unwilling to actually enforce immigration law to the point of deporting illgal immigrants who are here illegally but otherwise not breaking laws. Based on that failure of will and desire to not look 'mean-spirited', we let lawbreakers get in line for citizenship.

If you dont deport then you can leave asis or you then must legalize. That's the thinking.

[WOSG]

"English"

Do you support English-only ballots?
Do you support ending the 'dual citizenship' of
If not, then what meaning is this requirement'?
Can we end bilingual education?
It's nice to make take an English course, but practically meaningless in an
environment of multiculturalism
Where the majority of students in LA school system
are kids of illegal immigrants parents, speaking spanish
at home.

It also begs a simple question: Why not English only for all naturalized citizens? It should be a requirement for citizenship, right?

[WOSG]

"The hoops that will be created by Senate amendments to provide path to citizenship for the 11 million illegals are going to be severe."

They are practically meaningless now, and they even turned back a Vitter amendment to cut it down. Your optimism is not justified by events thus far.

"Damn near none of these illegals will qualify. "

So far, even the Hagel-Martinez 'compromise' got everybody in the amnesty. And with document fraud, even illegal aliens yet to cross will 'qualify'! (Its what happened in 1986).

Also, the fencing is not relevent, really, without serious attempts at interior immigration law enforcement.
What's relevent is the will to enforce immigration laws via deportation.

If the Senate passes the CLEAR Act, and puts teeth into employer verification, I might bite. ... but I'm skeptical, still.

[Tammy8]

I listened to every word of President Bush's speech, and read the transcript, he did not say that.

There is much to debate about this issue without putting words into anyone's mouth.

[Owen]

>>
That amendment passed, too? It seems Sessions and company are chipping away at this bill little by little...but will it end up being enough to be effective?
>>

It doesn't have to be. It's moving in the right direction to walk into conference. The House Senate conference will move it even more in the right direction.

The President has strong feelings about people who walk across the border to find work. His feelings are less strong about short cutting the already strict requirements for naturalized citizenship. The Senate is sending out a bill with a GW total of only 200K. I don't think the Democrats realize how small that is.

The conference will reduce this further and add the condition of a 2/3 supermajority in both houses required to raise that number. That's the crusher. The Democrats think they can jack that number later. By putting a supermajority condition on it they are maneuvered into a corner.

Then by adding English required, 10 years wait, pay fine, pay an estimate of back taxes, make a self financed trip to the border to "get in line" (the line will move fast) and you have enough hoops to jump through that anyone who does would probably make a fine American.

The House Senate conference will also add miles to that fence.

This is moving in the right direction. I don't think it was anticipated that the Senate would report out a bill that the House / Senate conference could actually adjust even further rightward to something explicitly abhorrent to the Democrats and actually something that gives us a fence plus severe punishment of those who broke the law and a GW program so small that it is almost invisible.

[LS]

Thanks for posting that. I couldn't believe Rove would have said that---and I sure didn't think Bush THOUGHT that.

[LS]

Cheney said yesterday on Rush that we didn't need a fence along the whole border, and that "experts" had told him that it made sense in many places and made no sense in others. I can see that, coming from AZ. There's parts of AZ where you pretty much cannot cross (i.e., the Yuma desert). It would be VERY easy to spot someone there using a variety of techniques (I don't recommend thermal, however :)

[Republican Wildcat]

Interesting take. I hope you are right.

[Bikers4Bush]

There's no doubt in my mind that big business has finally awoken to the fact that they are at the end of the plank from both a moral and legal standpoint on this issue and that they stand to lose much more than hiring illegals has saved them over the years.

Despite some who claim this is just another conspiracy theory if you look at it from an administration standpoint the possibly consequences are such that there will be something in this legislation that forgives illegal hiring by corporations.

Without an amensty for the corporations as well they will still be liable for damages basd on past illegal acts.

In other words the RICO statutes won't stop applying just because a guest worker program is created.

It's time to read the fine print.

[Bikers4Bush]

Allow me to ask you a simple and honest question.

With respect to the illegal alien issue whom do you trust more, the administration or the house of representatives?

[Preachin']

"its a start but it needs to be 1,900 miles."

Is that the length of the US-Mexican border?

[SevenMinusOne]

Actually, he's looking to placate the vast majority of voters while providing amnesty and calling it "guest worker." Unfortunately, some, including you, are falling for this sham.

That is complete rubbish (unless we all get amnesty every time we go to court and pay a fine) - I get a ticket for jay-walking or disturbing the peace....I go to court pay a fine.....case closed. Did I recieve amnesty? (of course not).

GWB is not giving amnesty. That is what Ronald Reagan did. One minute 3 million were illegal the next minute they were legal with absolutely no requirements nor punishment.

GWB is not offering this in the least. There are background check requirements, there are assimilation requirements, there will be fines owed, etc, etc.

If you still don't like this type of plan. So be it. However, having to be intellectually dishonest and insist it is amnesty is BS. (unless we all get amnesty every time we go to court and simply pay a fine without doing jail time).

[SevenMinusOne]

However, on immigration I cannot. There have been 8 amnesties since 1980, and things keep getting worse. Family members of citizens attempting to immigrate here LEGALLY need 8 to 25 years to get here, and if 12 million illegals are given a path to citizenship, then future family members can forget ever coming. As it is have to wait at the back of the line...overseas, not here. Furthermore, these people are not allowed to visit their relatives here, and that due to American law, not Russian. Somewhere, somehow truth, justice and the American way went down the drain when America considers legal immigration, AND THAT IS EVIL.

GarySpfc - I hear your sentiment...but we have to be willing to be intellectually honest here - Especially regarding amnesty - The notion that GWB is offering "amnesty" is simply a false premise.

Unless we all get amnesty every time we go to court and pay a fine - If I get a ticket for jay-walking or disturbing the peace....I go to court pay a fine.....case closed. Did I recieve amnesty? (of course not).

GWB is not giving amnesty. That is what Ronald Reagan did. One minute 3 million were illegal the next minute they were legal with absolutely no requirements nor punishment.

GWB is not offering this in the least. There are background check requirements, there are assimilation requirements, there will be fines owed, etc, etc.

If you still don't like this type of plan. So be it. However, having to be intellectually dishonest and insist it is amnesty is BS. (unless we all get amnesty every time we go to court and simply pay a fine without doing jail time).

Best regards,

[GarySpFc]

GarySpfc - I hear your sentiment...but we have to be willing to be intellectually honest here - Especially regarding amnesty - The notion that GWB is offering "amnesty" is simply a false premise.

I agree, but who is being intellectually honest? George W. Bush has one definition of amnesty, and most law professors have another. The definition of amnesty as given by Kris Kobach, law professor, and former head of the Immigration section in the Department of Justice is, "Moving an individual from a guilty to an innocent position, without them paying the required penalty." Note, Professor Kobach's credentials. These illegal aliens are not being deported, which is the penalty for entering the US illegally.

Here are some of the most common felonies committed by illegal aliens, and all of these are offenses, which call for deportation..

8 usc 1325 entering the US unlawfully (misdemeanor first time, felony second time)
8 usc 1326 entering the US after being deported
18 usc 1546 using false documents to obtain work authorization
18 usc 1028 using false identification document
42 usc 408 misuse of a social security number
18 usc 1344 setting up a bank account with false information

[GarySpFc]

"The hoops that will be created by Senate amendments to provide path to citizenship for the 11 million illegals are going to be severe."

My wife took her citizenship test last year and passed. The test for reading and writing English is a joke. "Jack and Jill ran up the hill." Can you read that? Write, "I like dogs." You passed.

[SevenMinusOne]

I agree, but who is being intellectually honest? George W. Bush has one definition of amnesty, and most law professors have another.

Well 9 times out of 10 I'd go with the exact opposite of what most college professors are saying about anything! (but that's another story).

Furthermore there are always maximum penalties and or penalties on the books that judges see fit to give a lesser degree of punishment (and that still isn't amnesty).

When one gets a speeding ticket and has to pay a hefty fine but is put on probation for 6 months without accruing *points*...is that amnesty?

Furthermore the notion that we are going to round up 11 million people and remove / deport them is simply silly. It ain't going happen (and you and I both know it). Hell we could hardly remove one little Cuban boy back to his Father in Cuba without this country erupting on itself.

Outside of the very serious logistics alone of trying to do such -

[GarySpFc]

BTW, with 4 million in line to immigrate to the US legally the INS workers have 4 minutes to examine each file. Now add 12 to 20 million to that total, and tell me how long they are going to have to examine each file?