Posted on 07/13/2006 5:12:54 AM PDT by conservativecorner
WASHINGTON – Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, has quietly introduced a bill to create a "North American Investment Fund" that would tap U.S. and Canadian taxpayers for the development of public works projects in Mexico.
Despite assurances this week from White House press secretary Tony Snow that President Bush opposes the idea of a European Union superstate for North America, the effort, by one of the president's loyal supporters in the Senate, is sure to spark new questions about negotiations between the leaders of Canada, the U.S. and Mexico on issues ranging from security to the economy.
"Currently, a significant development gap exists between Mexico and the United States and Canada," Cornyn said. "I believe it is in our best interests to find creative ways to bridge this development gap."
Cornyn introduced the bill just before the July 4 holiday – admitting in his introductory comments that Congress is not likely to adopt his plan quickly. In fact, Cornyn previously attempted to create the new international fund in legislation he introduced in 1994. It soon thereafter died in the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, where the latest version is headed.
(Excerpt) Read more at worldnetdaily.com ...
We're already funding Mexican "development".
Keep that up, Cornyn, and you'll be Texas's first one-term Senator. What an idiotic proposal when the electorate has had it with illegals taking over the state!
Since when does America go around "bridging the development gap". Isn't that a Soviet Zoning process?
Are these Texas pols getting Mexican drug money payoffs, or what?
Why are so many of them so sympathetic to the corrupt and criminalized Mexican political establishment?
Is Cornyn a big drinker? It sure seems like you'd either need to big a big drinker or mentally challenged to think this was a good idea.
We already spend WAY too much of our tax dollars supporting Mexico and Mexicans, we certainly don't need to spend any more.
That being said if his little pet project involved returning all illegal aliens to their homelands, closing the border and building a wall I could be persuaded to come around.
We'd probably even wind up saving money on the deal.
The Pork Barrel grows? Is Conyers trying to use US imperialism to reverse the Mexican election and empower the socialist PRD losers?
Currently Mexicans in the USA send billions directly to their families. The money goes to "the people" with no bureaucratic overhead.
So what is the benefit in feeding the Mexican government bureaucracy to replace the private sector? Even the individuals in the Mexican bureaucracy would have better lives if they had the choice of private incomes vs public incomes.
For example, in the prosperous Northern States where the conservative PAN party has dominated, the path to prosperity for individual Mexicans has been in the private sector, not the public sector.
Conyers is trying to drag the prosperous parts of Mexico down to the lowest common denominator of the PRD dominated southern Mexican state disaster cases.
This is a transcript of Lou Dobbs with Senator Santorum. Dobbs spanked the Senate with this conversation:
Senator Santorum joins us tonight from Capitol Hill. Senator, thanks for being here.
SEN. RICK SANTORUM (R), PENNSYLVANIA: Thank you, Lou.
DOBBS: Why are you weighing in at this particular moment with the introduction of your legislation as the Senate is seeking conference with the House?
SANTORUM: Well, and we've been working on this issue now for almost 18 months in the United States Senate. We've been going through countless iterations trying to get compromised bills up before the Senate. They finally did bring a bill up, which I could not support. And what I've done from that point is to try to figure out what can we pass, what can pass the Senate and what can pass the House?
And I thought of the compromise being since the House wants a border security first bill, let's take the provisions that just passed the United States Senate in the Senate bill that deal just with the border security issue.
And let's take the Senate passed bill, send to it the House, have the House pass that bill, and then send it back to us. And you know, there we have a situation where we can take the first step. Now, there may be -- additional steps are going to have to be taken. We're going to have to look at what we're going to do with employer verification in improving that and probably some sort of temporary worker program, but we can agree that the Senate...
DOBBS: Wait a minute, senator.
SANTORUM: ... border security provisions should go first.
DOBBS: Some sort of temporary worker program? You know, as we look at Senator Frist and his eagerness for border security that resulted in what is basically an amnesty, a sellout in its entirety in the Senate legislation.
SANTORUM: Right.
DOBBS: Which he and Senator Kennedy and Senator McCain and others hailed as some sort of profound historical achievement by the Senate, we're looking at Dennis Hastert, the speaker of the House, James Sensenbrenner leading the judiciary committee standing up and saying, "We're going to secure the borders and that's the law they passed."
SANTORUM: That's right.
DOBBS: Every poll shows Americans want our border secured and they frankly don't trust you guys to get much done because this president has played games, obfuscating the difference between immigration and illegal immigration, talking border security and can't even get 6,000 national guardsmen to the border with Mexico as he promised.
I mean, why should we take anything that happens in Senate, including your advances seriously?
SANTORUM: Well, because it is an attempt to try to bridge that gap between what you describe, which was the Senate bill that I did not support and could not support, even though I would argue my opponent who I'm running against in the political run of my life, does support the Senate bill, I don't.
But I do -- I have problems with some of what the House has done. But the House is right, that we need to do border security first. And so my suggestion is let's take the provisions that were in the Senate bill dealing with border security and pass that.
DOBBS: Senator Santorum, let me just ask you straight up, what is it in the U.S. Senate that is not understood? What is in the White House that's not understood? How complicated it is to simply say that almost five years since September 11th, this nation, a superpower, has the wherewithal, the political will and understands -- its senators understand the need to secure our borders and our ports?
SANTORUM: Well I think you see it candidly just played out in the coalition that has supported this, quote, comprehensive reform. And that's a coalition of the "Wall Street Journal" and some of the open markets conservatives, the business community, who wants a flow of labor into this country.
DOBBS: Did you see cheap labor to exploit?
SANTORUM: There's no question that the vast majority of the labor that's coming in, illegal immigration, overwhelming majority is cheap labor, are low-wage workers.
And you combine that with the open borders crowd to the left, the Ted Kennedy's folks who see this as a political opportunity to build a future political base of support for the Democratic Party. That combination has resulted in the bill that we have in the United States Senate today.
And what I'm suggesting is let's stop that and let's put something forward that deals with national security and the economic security of our country.
DOBBS: Let me ask it just straight up this way. Would you be willing to support what the House has already passed without any other addendums?
SANTORUM: Well, I have a couple of problems with the House passed bill. Actually, one of them is very interesting. This whole provision saying that crossing the border would be a felony. I have a problem with that, not because I think...
DOBBS: ... But James Sensenbrenner, the chairman of the House judiciary committee, has already said that's out.
SANTORUM: That's out. So I guess my point is, with some of the changes that people have talked about, I could support it. But not as originally passed because I think there's some problems in original passed House bill.
DOBBS: Senator Rick Santorum, we thank you for being here.
SANTORUM: Thank you. DOBBS: Up next here, three of the nation's most provocative and intelligent political analysts and commentators join me. And the Middle East tonight on the verge of all-out war. Sectarian violence in Iraq and Israel on the move in southern Lebanon. One of the country's top Middle East analysts, Fouad Ajami, joins us.
This is Cornyn, not Conyers.
Did Cornyn stop taking his meds?
No he like a lot of senators do not listen to the people. To busy counting bribes, err sorry campain contributions. To give a care about the voters. I can not believe the arrogance of Washington.
Is mexico going to pick up the tab for all the illegals they sent over here for the care and feeding of? American taxpayers are tired of footing the bill for welfare and entitlements the illegals and their families are NOT entitled to!
Fox suggested this six weeks ago as a way of luring Mexicans back home. We should 'invest in rebuilding Mexico's infrastructure'. About the same time, he urged Mexicans heading north to keep going to the Canadian border and then told Canada they needed cheap labor. Oh, those wonderful remittances! Keep 'em coming!
He wants Canadian taxpayers to fund Mexican development? That's mighty liberal of him.
This may not be the right place to post this and Lord knows, I'm not the greatest thinker in world, but I was was mulling over the problem the other day as I was driving through the "less economically advantaged" part of town. I was impressed by the number of businesses that provided the service of wiring money to Mexico. That's the way money earned in the US is sent back to Mexico. I started wondering why aren't we taxing that transfer of funds on at least some level. I realize that legitimate funds are being transfered, but it seems that most of the money sent home by illegals would be less than 5 or 6K per transaction and any transaction less than that is surely worth a 10, 15 or 20% tax. At least we'd be getting SOMETHING to fund border security. Anyway, it's just a thought.
This sounds just like what Je$$e Jack@$$ proposed with accessing everybody's pension funds to rebuild the inner cities.
Our very own House of Lords.
I hope the Founding Fathers are spinning.
I've got a GREAT idea to help Mexico develop. We fund a huge construction program along the border, all the way from Brownsville Tx to San Diego California. We offer some of the contracts to Mexican companies, and then we BUILD THE FREAKIN WALL TO CLOSE THE BORDER.
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.