Posted on 05/24/2006 7:00:13 AM PDT by blitzgig
IN the debate over immigration, "amnesty" has become something of a dirty word. Some opponents of the immigration bill being debated in the Senate assert that it would grant amnesty to millions of illegal immigrants. Supporters claim it would do no such thing. Instead, they say, it lays out a road map by which illegal aliens can earn citizenship.
Perhaps I can shed some light. Two decades ago, while serving as attorney general under President Ronald Reagan, I was in the thick of things as Congress debated the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986. The situation today bears uncanny similarities to what we went through then.
In the mid-80's, many members of Congress — pushed by the Democratic majority in the House and the Select Commission on Immigration and Refugee Policy — advocated amnesty for long-settled illegal immigrants. President Reagan considered it reasonable to adjust the status of what was then a relatively small population, and I supported his decision.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
And this is the real problem underlying this debate.
Anyone got a user name and password for the link?
Hm. In who's administration did Ed Meese serve as Attorney General?
Username stupidideas
Password asdfghjkl
Username johnjohn94
Password google
Username asdfsag
Password 123456
Excellent, thanks.
The more I read about this horrific legislation coming out of the senate the more I think it's time for another tea party.
Reagan's of course. Great article Meese tells it like it is and calls anyone who says this isn't amnesty a liar. He also points out how the illegals don't "go to the back of the line", because this amnesty scam doesn't make it a requirement to apply from country of origin. President Bush consistently repeats this lie. As Meese points out legal applicants wait in line from their home country. I hope McCain doesn't attack Meese like he did Lou Dobbs, Rush Limbaugh and Micheal Savage, for "telling the truths our president refuses to tell".
Getting there. At least as far as the two current major political parties.
Great article Meese tells it like it is and calls anyone who says this isn't amnesty a liar.
I hop McCain does attack him, it will further show what a leftist piece of garbage he really is.
To do that, we need to kill the incentive for the migrants to come here.
Exactly, throw them both into the bay and start a political revolution.
Our only saving grace at this point is the house. We need to add seats there and start running the RINO's out of the senate one by one.
They don't have to be shipped back, just fine the employers hiring them and they will go back voluntarily. They have no right to break our laws and be rewarded with citizenship for doing so, no right whatsoever. The congress critters considering this and the president are not representing the citizens of this country at all.
Our only saving grace at this point is the house. We need to add seats there and start running the RINO's out of the senate one by one.
Leni
With Fox's recent visit to Utah, his anticipated visit to his "troups" in Washington state we might expect a more bold and brash attitude from the multitude of illegal invaders in those states. Of course, we are beginning to get a glimpse of the long planned "Regional Government" just emerging. Could VF be the unmasked Regional Commander with the blessing of Washington D.C.? Just wondered......
Didn't work the, won't work now. By the Senate, cynically, pretends otherwise.
...and increase incentives for them to return home.
"And there proved to be a failure of political will in enforcing new laws against employers."
Yes, they can double, triple or whatever penalty the government decides vs. employers, but that is comparable to current firearms laws which remain generally unenforced.
Exactly this is a quote from Meese
"The fair and sound policy is to give those who are here illegally the opportunity to correct their status by returning to their country of origin and getting in line with everyone else. This, along with serious enforcement and control of the illegal inflow at the border — a combination of incentives and disincentives — will significantly reduce over time our population of illegal immigrants."
When you read this coming from a republican attorney general, who not only served under Reagan but fought this same battle 20 years ago, why would this administration choose to ignore this advice? The only reason I can come up with is they know this scam won't work and they don't want it to. They want Mexican slave labor.
If they want cheap labor, they are in for a shock. The labor unions are busily signing up illegals and are doing everything in their power to get them the vote. Reminds me of what I read about the Irish imigration. Tammy Hall would sign up immigrants as they came off the boats, carry them to the polls. The big machines were always powered by immigrant votes.
There's only one problem with the RINO talking points on "it's not amnesty": all but one of the alleged "penalties" (English language, no crimes, keep a job, pay taxes) are exactly and precisely the normal requirements for U.S. residency and/or naturalization. They are not special penalties applied to illegal aliens as "punishment" for their crime.
The only other "penalty" that purportedly makes the amnesty, "not an amnesty", is the proposed "stiff fine".
IMO, if that fine is $2,000 or less, it just about equals the cost of ANY immigrant getting from their home country to the U.S.A. , in terms of the costs for filing applications, getting to INS appointments, having legal assistance, getting police records, and having required medical exams. Illegal alliens won't pay any of those costs since they are here already, so the $2,000 "fine" = $2,000 resident visa costs. In other words, it's very nearly a wash.
SO, yes, it is an amnesty.
And I'm really getting disgusted with Republican officials such as Tony Snow, GWB, Arlen Specter and the rest presenting bogus and transparent talking points to Republican constituents.
It's intellectually dishonest and very insulting.
In January 2004 GWB proposed that illegals get a three-year work visa, once renewable.
The you go home, to stay there, or to apply for U.S. residency, or whatever.
Point is (and GWB did make this point), at the end of your "work visa" you go home. If you want residency, you get in line behind law-abading applicants, who in many cases have been waiting 5 or 10 years or even longer.
But somewhere in trip from January 2004 until today, GWB has suddenly found the case for a "a path to citizenship."
Hey Ed you mean like you helped Ronald Reagan to pass in 1986? THAT was a real Amnesty Ed.
Charles Krauthammer said it the best last week on Brit Hume's round table. After Brit bullied Mort Kondracke and Laura Liason into saying this wasn't amnesty, he turned to Charles and asked him. Charles' reply was classic. He said the penalty for illegally entering the US is deportation and if you don't deport the illegals you are granting amnesty. Why this administration continues to hang on to the lie that it's anything else is beyond me. Conservatives see right through the lie and like you find it insulting that our "leaders" think we'll respond like democrats do and go along with the lie. Tony Snows response showed he's already lost his sense of honesty.
He admits it in the article. Unlike this administration they openly called it amnesty. He's not running from that. He's saying it's already been tried and the result was 3 million turned into 30 million. He's only asking this administration to be honest with the American people. They can't even be honest about the word, let alone the fact that their will not be any teeth when it comes to enforcement.
This is a very important article for you to read. It was written by Ronald Reagan's AG. I consider Reagan our greatest president.
That equals amnesty. Permanent barring from becoming a US citizen ought be part of the price paid for those who've broken the law to get here. THEN we can talk of a guest worker program to which those illegal aliens may subscribe.
"The situation today bears uncanny similarities to what we went through then."
Which means D.C. will again, DO NOTHING...
I'm not referring to his support for amnesty. I'm referring to his reluctance to even use the word when I question his honesty. It's like they think as long as they don't use the word amnesty we'll support the sell out of the nation. The polls, including the FR immigration poll should tell them we ain't buying what they're selling.
Correct the original penalty for illegally entering the US is deportation. If you do not deport them you are granting them amnesty. Changing the rules to paying for citizenship and proving you've broken the country's laws the longest doesn't change the original penalty. What it does is show us how republicans leaders treat their faithful like democrats when it comes to selling them BS and asking them to look the other way. We're not democrats and I resent being treated like one. What happened to the party that called Bill Clinton on PC speech every chance we got? Are we the same party that now accepts "undocumented workers", "guest worker programs" and "paths to citizenship". If we are, we are no better than democrats.
Its the currently apathetic Americans that'll be in for a shock - cause under the senate plan there'll always be an unlimited supply of freshly arrived illegals to replace the ones who get 'uppity' and assume their place on the lowest rung of the Great Society.
Not enough of Americans have connected the dots between the '86 amnesty and the current demographic shift throughout the country.
And that amnesty was offered to a mere 2.9 million.
The legislation being contemplated now will make what has happened since 86 look like the trailer to a three hour film epic.
Don't depend on that. There will always be demagogues who fasten on discontent. Wouldn't surprise me if a Chavez type pol shows himself in districts that run 90% Mexican. So far La Raza has not made a dent, but that could change.
We've seen this film before yet some refuse to believe it will only get worse. Just think back 20 years ago, did we have as many bilingual signs, ATMs, telephone services? They won't assimilate like the Koreans. When was the last time you saw a choice for Korean at an ATM? Also when it comes time to enforce the new set of laws the bleeding hearts will just dust off the same arguments they are using now. We can't send back, (by then), 80 million Mexicans. We can't separate them from their anchor babies. These are not straw man argument. It's happening now and unless we learn the lesson of '86 and stop this now I don't think we ever will.
Well, duh. I mean, what's the point in making such a comment? It's like saying the sun rises in the east and gets more intense in the summer.
You don't see consumer goods companies debating these issues - they just make sunscreen products.
Likewise, the only point of interest are the business/political opportunities in which to become engaged. Everything else is just observing from the grandstands.
He's still supporting an amnesty. But now he wants to introduce some dishonest talking points and weasel words into the issue to make "amnesty", "not-an-amnesty."
Asserting that "learning English, keep your nose clean, have a job, and pay taxes" are "penalties" for illegal aliens is ridiculous, since that's precisely what one must due to retain permanent residency and certainly for naturalized citizenship. So they are not "penalties" at all.
The $2,000 fine is completely offset by the illegal alien's exemption from normal immigration costs such as visa applications, medical tests, police background checks, etc. Since they are already here, they won't need those.
I suspect that "11 year" waiting period will have enough loopholes to become completely null within the next three years.
The point is I didn't expect a republican president in the middle of a war to hold our border security hostage until he gets his amnesty plan. I thought a republican house/senate/president wouldn't put business/political opportunities ahead of border security. Does that answer your question?
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.