Cornyn tells GOP amnesty doesn't work

Associated Press ^ | June 3, 2006 | KELLEY SHANNON

[Dubya]

SAN ANTONIO — An illegal immigrant amnesty program failed 20 years ago and a new one would be a mistake today, U.S. Sen. John Cornyn told Texas Republicans today.

Both Cornyn and Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison said they oppose a Senate bill approved with bipartisan support last week that provides a chance at citizenship for guest workers and an estimated 12 million illegal immigrants.

"My only regret is I had but one vote against that bad bill," Cornyn told Republican state convention delegates.

The Senate measure, in addition to providing a chance at citizenship, increases border security and provides guest worker programs to bring in new foreign workers. The House immigration bill, which set off huge street protests across the country, is generally limited to border enforcement and cracking down on employers who hire illegal workers.

Securing the Mexico border and cracking down on illegal immigration were the dominant themes of party leaders and many elected officials at the two-day GOP convention. The party's platform states "No amnesty! No how. No way."

Newly elected party vice chairman Dr. Robin Armstrong said the party encourages legal immigration.

"We're also a nation of laws, so we have to make sure that we enforce our laws," he said.

Amnesty for illegal immigrants only encourages more disrespect for the law, said Cornyn, the former attorney general for Texas.

Cornyn noted that he has been named to the House-Senate conference committee appointed to work out differences between the two chambers' immigration legislation.

"As a famous American said before, I have only begun to fight," he said.

Hutchison drew applause when she reminded convention delegates that the United states is "a proud nation of immigrants who are proud to be Americans."

"I am for legal immigration. I am against illegal immigration," she said.

Both senators also praised President Bush for the way he has fought the war on terrorism. Hutchison and Cornyn said securing the nation's borders is essential in fighting terrorism.

Hutchison, who faces an election challenge in November from Democrat Barbara Ann Radnofsky, didn't mention her opponent and instead emphasized her incumbency.

Radnofsky will get her chance to speak to her party faithful at the Texas Democrats' convention next week in Fort Worth.

Hutchison warned that Republicans across the country face election challenges this year and said the party must be united, not dwell on small differences among its members.

"The only way we will lose is if we are divided," she said. "It is what unites us that counts."

———

On the Net:

Republican Party of Texas at www.texasgop.org

Texas Democratic Party at www.txdemocrats.org

[coconutt2000]

From what I understand, the failure 20 years ago wasn't in the amnesty program, but in the lack of border enforcement.

I support the President's ideas and solution, but if Congress threatens to give us amnesty without border enforcement, I'm going to have to agree with those who oppose amnesty regardless of whether or not border enforcement is part of the package.

Amnesty without border enforcement is only going to make the problem worse. Border enforcement with amnesty has a chance of working better than border enforcement and then trying to round up 10-20 million illegal immigrants and send them home.

[CrawDaddyCA]

Hutchison warned that Republicans across the country face election challenges this year and said the party must be united, not dwell on small differences among its members.

Securing the borders and addressing the serious problem on 12 million ILLEGAL CRIMINALS isn't a 'small difference'.

[brytlea]

No one is really suggesting we just run out and round up 10 to 20 million people the day after tomorrow. First we secure the border. As we do that we enforce the laws pertaining to hiring illegals, (perhaps with increased penalties). We do away with any taxpayer freebies to people illegally in the country, including all but emergency medical care. We tax transfers of money out of the country. Additionally, we announce that any legal worker program we will consider will require that people apply from the country in which they legally live. Then, as we find people here illegally, we deport them. There will not be a need for a massive round up.
And, if you don't believe that, what makes you think that we will be able to enforce any bill that gives anything other than outright total amnesty?
susie

[rolling_stone]

Border enforcement with amnesty has a chance of working better than border enforcement and then trying to round up 10-20 million illegal immigrants and send them home.

What does granting amnesty have to do with helping border enforcement? Amnesty will be a magnet for more illegals and encourage them to break our laws not discourage them. Rounding up 10-20 million illegals is s straw argument, take away their benefits and they will leave on their own...legalize them and more will come..make them leave and less will come...

[ncountylee]

Hey AP...democrat and RINO is not bipartisan support.

[Shermy]

""The House immigration bill, which set off huge street protests across the country, is generally limited to border enforcement and cracking down on employers who hire illegal workers."

Let's put credit where due. Those protests occurred months after the bill. They were funded and stratagerized by Bush, Mexico, and the US Chamber of Commerce. They were political theater timed to make a "show of force" for the Senate.

But Reid got a scare, didn't push the bill through quick, and they got a drawn out process exposing the Senate bill.

[c-b 1]

From what I understand, the failure 20 years ago wasn't in the amnesty program, but in the lack of border enforcement.

The failure from 20 years ago, was both the amnesty (incentive) and the lack of enforcement. Just after the amnesty was implemented, those coming across were saying they had to get here in time for the next amnesty. Border Patrol agents I talk to now, say when they catch illegals the illegals tell them they are here for the amnesty.

Unless it is made very plain, that there is no amnesty, they will continue to try to get here, which will make Border Enforcement much more difficult.

[CrawDaddyCA]

then trying to round up 10-20 million illegal immigrants and send them home.

If 10-20 million American citizens decided not to pay their taxes, you can guarantee the government would devise a plan to prosecute them.

[FlingWingFlyer]

I don't understand all the whining that we should not deport illegals as we find them. People act as though the illegals "risked their lives" to come here and therefore, should be allowed to stay. The place where I live is infested with illegal aliens. Anytime there is a family graduation, a birthday or a wedding going on in Mexico, they take a few days off work and take off for Mexico. There are a lot of myths floating around out there about illegal immigrants. These people do not "live in the shadows." Once they establish themselves here, they travel freely back and forth across the border. All we need to do is secure the border.

[Soul Seeker]

And folks wonder why relations with Sensenbrenner/the House Republicans vs the administration are strained.

I haven't noticed any rebuttal from the W.H. about the allegation they championed the felony amendment, perhaps I missed it? If not, still silence which is as good as confirmation they were behind the amendment used to demonize the House bill. An amendment I personally had no problem with, but certainly an unexplored angle in this little show they staged.

W.H. insists on it. House passes it, then tries to take it out. Prevented by Democrats. Rallies citing that amendment, by folks that probably never read the legislation meaning the protest signs came from higher ups. W.H. refuses to come to the House's defense, supports the Senate..if I'm a House Republican I watch my back with this admin as a result.

[Froggie]

Brytlea: Your comments of common-sense tactics to deal with illegal border-crossers is just too darn rational for any of the current crop of political "leaders"... I would add that any agency, business, school, hospital etc that receives ANY federal money be required to report any illegal persons obtaining or attempting to obtain any services .... a system to allow/require those entities to
verify legal residency must be in place...for instance any person admitted to a hospital or ER which received federal funds - and that is all of them... would have to enter their data such as SSN into a database computer which would then confirm legal status or generate an immediate report to INS and local police.

[coconutt2000]

Simply put, I don't think enforcing the laws on the books is going to be possible considering the scale imposed by the large number of illegals currently in the country. Given that many people, and the amount of money involved in the underground and criminal economy - the most likely result of strict enforcement won't be a mass exodus, but a mass increase in criminal activity.

Most thinking on this subject has been single step. No thought has been given to how the illegal aliens will react, beyond the assumption that once they can't find jobs here, or access social services that they'll end up going home.

I disagree with that assumption. While a lot of illegals will take their families and go home, most probably won't. The reason is simply that a lot of their homes are piss pots and hell holes.

I'd predict that most illegals will stay in this country and try to hack it. There will always be jobs for people willing to work for less, if only in cash - and the only way you're going to catch people participating in such cash transactions will be to start violating the privacy of the financial records of every American. On top of that, you'd need a much larger law enforcement apparatus to track down leads, arrest, and prosecute those Americans.

There will be a massive growth in the cash-only, cheap labor sector for a lot of different jobs. Mechanisms and tools to facilitate this illegal employment sector will grow. The millions of illegal aliens in the country will feed this black market in labor.

In the end, we may succeed if we take this route, but the price will be far higher than just trying to absorb the illegals who are in our country.

The key to the problem is in border enforcement, and an expansion of our visa program to satisfy the economic demand for labor in our country. But I doubt I can convince you. Most people who have taken your position are emotionally invested in a path that will likely be much more difficult and more expensive than they think.

[brytlea]

Excellent addition. It's not a lack of common sense ways to be done with this problem. It is a lack of will by those who are supposed to be representing our best interests. It would seem that more and more Americans are waking up to this fact. It may be an interesting Novemeber. Of course, I'm mindful of the old curse, "May you live in interesting times."
susie

[brytlea]

I just flat think you are wrong.
susie

[coconutt2000]

And I think you're wrong.

But at this rate, we won't ever find out which one of us is right because nothing is going to be done by the Congress we have, and if the Democrats win this year and in 2008, we can guarantee that something will be done, but it won't be either of our preferred solutions.

Which leaves us with nothing but our opinions about how wrong we think the other is.

[Jim_Curtis]

I support the President's ideas and solution, but if Congress threatens to give us amnesty without border enforcement,

They need to return and live in Mexico. It would be nice if we could deport all Democrats but at least we can deport these illegal ones.

[ImpBill]

""My only regret is I had but one vote against that bad bill," Cornyn told Republican state convention delegates."

At least the Senators from Texas get it. But of course tis a political season as well.

[GretchenM]

bttt for the wisdom of Senator Cornyn.

[garbageseeker]

The Senator neglected to mention one thing.The reason why the Simpson-Mazzoli bill failed is because the government refused to rigorously enforce laws which prevented employers who hire illegal immigrants.For 20 years employers were presented with fake documents(drivers licenses,social security numbers or stolen numbers) to the time of hire. The same employers did not bother to call the the INS whether the documents presented by the prospective employee were real. The government did not punish enough employers who broke the Federal Immigration and Nationality Act.The sad thing is that they continue to do this today


http://www.mnforsustain.org/immigration_hiring_law_excerpts_from_us_code.htm

The law is crystal clear on this issue.