Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

(Vanity) The Amnesty Act of 2007 (Discussion of Text from the Bill)
Thomas (Library of Congress) ^ | 5-20-2007 | grey_whiskers

Posted on 05/20/2007 12:37:52 PM PDT by grey_whiskers

I am reading the text of the new immigration bill.

Just as the Patriot Act was a grab bag for every illegal and unconstitutional fantasy on the part of law enforcement, this bill is a grab bag for the globalists, those who wish to destroy the American middle class, and those who want amnesty.

The site I am reading from is here.

Here are some of the horrible things in the bill.

It allows for the elimination of existing backlogs (apparently by fiat), section 501. From 501(b)(2)(A):

”(2) VISAS FOR SPOUSES AND CHILDREN- `(A) IN GENERAL- Except as provided in subparagraph (B), immigrant visas issued on or after October 1, 2004, to spouses and children of employment-based immigrants shall not be counted against the numerical limitation set forth in paragraph (1). ”

Here is another goody, about drunk drivers (Section 225):

SEC. 225. REMOVAL OF DRUNK DRIVERS.
(a) In General- Section 101(a)(43)(F) (8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(43)(F)) is amended by inserting `, including a third drunk driving conviction, regardless of the States in which the convictions occurred or whether the offenses are classified as misdemeanors or felonies under State law,' after `offense)'.
(b) Effective Date- The amendment made by subsection (a) shall--
(1) take effect on the date of the enactment of this Act; and
(2) apply to convictions entered on or after such date.

Get that? They are empowered to do something (anyone want to look up Section 101(a) (43) (F) (8 U.S.C. 1101(a) (43)(F) – after a
THIRD DRUNK DRIVING CONVICTION WHICH OCCURS AFTER THIS BILL!!!!!!

Ted Kennedy must have insisted on this personally ;-)

Let’s grab another tidbit:

SEC. 228. PROTECTING IMMIGRANTS FROM CONVICTED SEX OFFENDERS.
(a) Immigrants- Section 204(a)(1) (8 U.S.C. 1154(a)(1)), is amended--
(1) in subparagraph (A)(i), by striking `Any' and inserting `Except as provided in clause (vii), any';
(2) in subparagraph (A), by inserting after clause (vi) the following:
`(vii) Clause (i) shall not apply to a citizen of the United States who has been convicted of an offense described in subparagraph (A), (I), or (K) of section 101(a)(43), unless the Secretary of Homeland Security, in the Secretary's sole and unreviewable discretion, determines that the citizen poses no risk to the alien with respect to whom a petition described in clause (i) is filed.'; and
(3) in subparagraph (B)(i)--
(A) by striking `Any alien' and inserting the following: `(I) Except as provided in subclause (II), any alien'; and
(B) by adding at the end the following:
`(II) Subclause (I) shall not apply in the case of an alien admitted for permanent residence who has been convicted of an offense described in subparagraph (A), (I), or (K) of section 101(a)(43), unless the Secretary of Homeland Security, in the Secretary's sole and unreviewable discretion, determines that the alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence poses no risk to the alien with respect to whom a petition described in subclause (I) is filed.'.
(b) Nonimmigrants- Section 101(a)(15)(K) (8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(15)(K)), is amended by inserting `(other than a citizen described in section 204(a)(1)(A)(vii))' after `citizen of the United States' each place that phrase appears.

I don’t know what this means—but WTF aren’t they concerned with protecting citizens from illegal aliens who are sex offenders? There is no Megan’s Law in Mexico.

Oh, and Sanctuary Cities are A-OK:

SEC. 229. LAW ENFORCEMENT AUTHORITY OF STATES AND POLITICAL SUBDIVISIONS AND TRANSFER TO FEDERAL CUSTODY.
(a) In General- Title II (8 U.S.C. 1151 et. seq.) is amended by adding after section 240C the following new section:
`SEC. 240D. LAW ENFORCEMENT AUTHORITY OF STATES AND POLITICAL SUBDIVISIONS AND TRANSFER OF ALIENS TO FEDERAL CUSTODY.
`(a) Authority- Notwithstanding any other provision of law, law enforcement personnel of a State, or a political subdivision of a State, have the inherent authority of a sovereign entity to investigate, apprehend, arrest, detain, or transfer to Federal custody (including the transportation across State lines to detention centers) an alien for the purpose of assisting in the enforcement of the criminal provisions of the immigration laws of the United States in the normal course of carrying out the law enforcement duties of such personnel. This State authority has never been displaced or preempted by a Federal law. .
`(b) Construction- Nothing in this section shall be construed to require law enforcement personnel of a State or a political subdivision to assist in the enforcement of the immigration laws of the United States..

Oh, yes, at the end of this section is the funding:

”(b) Authorization of Appropriations for the Detention and Transportation to Federal Custody of Aliens Not Lawfully Present- There are authorized to be appropriated $850,000,000 for fiscal year 2008 and for each subsequent fiscal year for the detention and removal of aliens not lawfully present in the United States under the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101 et. seq.).”

This means less than 1 billion dollars a year for detention.

By contrast, section 643 mentions training in English for those who want to become citizens.

"SEC. 643. STRENGTHENING AMERICAN CITIZENSHIP.
(a) Short Title- This section may be cited as the `Strengthening American Citizenship Act of 2007'.
(b) Definition- In this section, the term `Oath of Allegiance' means the binding oath (or affirmation) of allegiance required to be naturalized as a citizen of the United States, as prescribed in section 337(e) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, as added by subsection (h)(1)(B).
(c) English Fluency-
(1) EDUCATION GRANTS-
(A) ESTABLISHMENT- The Chief of the Office of Citizenship of the Department (referred to in this paragraph as the `Chief') shall establish a grant program to provide grants in an amount not to exceed $500 to assist legal residents of the United States who declare an intent to apply for citizenship in the United States to meet the requirements under section 312 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1423).
(B) USE OF FUNDS- Grant funds awarded under this paragraph shall be paid directly to an accredited institution of higher education or other qualified educational institution (as determined by the Chief) for tuition, fees, books, and other educational resources required by a course on the English language in which the legal resident is enrolled."

OK, so I agree that English fluency is an important step to assimilation. That is good. (Even though to first appearances, it looks like we are trying to help illegals *become citizens* -- which is amnesty.) But $500 per person times (let us hope for the best, that they *all* want to assimilate) 12 million is $6 billion. So they will potentially pay $6 billion to train in English, but less than $1 billion for deportation. This is not "revenue neutral" as I believe the saying goes. How will you pay for this? And who will score and administer the tests of fluency?

And the preferences for the government for illegal immigrants over US citizens does not stop there. Look at the National Crime Information Center, illegals can get their names removed when put there in error:

SEC. 231. LISTING OF IMMIGRATION VIOLATORS IN THE NATIONAL CRIME INFORMATION CENTER DATABASE.
(a) Provision of Information to the National Crime Information Center-
(1) IN GENERAL- Except as provided in paragraph (3), not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall provide to the head of the National Crime Information Center of the Department of Justice the information that the Secretary has or maintains related to any alien--
(A) against whom a final order of removal has been issued;
(B) who enters into a voluntary departure agreement, or is granted voluntary departure by an immigration judge, whose period for departure has expired under subsection (a)(3) of section 240B of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1229c) (as amended by section 211(a)(1)(C)), subsection (b)(2) of such section 240B, or who has violated a condition of a voluntary departure agreement under such section 240B;
(C) whom a Federal immigration officer has confirmed to be unlawfully present in the United States; and
(D) whose visa has been revoked.
(2) REMOVAL OF INFORMATION- The head of the National Crime Information Center should promptly remove any information provided by the Secretary under paragraph (1) related to an alien who is granted lawful authority to enter or remain legally in the United States.
(3) PROCEDURE FOR REMOVAL OF ERRONEOUS INFORMATION- The Secretary, in consultation with the head of the National Crime Information Center of the Department of Justice, shall develop and implement a procedure by which an alien may petition the Secretary or head of the National Crime Information Center, as appropriate, to remove any erroneous information provided by the Secretary under paragraph (1) related to such alien. Under such procedures, failure by the alien to receive notice of a violation of the immigration laws shall not constitute cause for removing information provided by the Secretary under paragraph (1) related to such alien, unless such information is erroneous. Notwithstanding the 180-day time period set forth in paragraph (1), the Secretary shall not provide the information required under paragraph (1) until the procedures required by this paragraph are developed and implemented.
(b) Inclusion of Information in the National Crime Information Center Database- Section 534(a) of title 28, United States Code, is amended--
(1) in paragraph (3), by striking `and' at the end;
(2) by redesignating paragraph (4) as paragraph (5); and
(3) by inserting after paragraph (3) the following new paragraph: `(4) acquire, collect, classify, and preserve records of violations of the immigration laws of the United States; and'.

Got that? If an illegal gets on the bad list accidentally, they have the opportunity to petition for removal. Compare that to the TSA’s no-fly list, where you don’t even have the right to know how you got ONTO the list.

And the overt shafting of US citizens continues in employment, too.

Oh, and the much vaunted Employer Verification System? Read this from Section 305:

SEC. 305. ANTIDISCRIMINATION PROTECTIONS.

(a) Application of Prohibition of Discrimination to Verification System- Section 274B(a)(1) (8 U.S.C. 1324b(a)(1)) is amended by inserting `, the verification of the individual's work authorization through the Electronic Employment Verification System described in section 274A(d),' after `the individual for employment'.
(b) Classes of Aliens as Protected Individuals- Section 274B(a)(3)(B) (8 U.S.C. 1324b(a)(3)(B)) is amended to read as follows:
`(B) is an alien who is--
`(i) lawfully admitted for permanent residence;
`(ii) granted the status of an alien lawfully admitted for temporary residence under section 210(a) or 245(a)(1);
`(iii) admitted as a refugee under section 207;
`(iv) granted asylum under section 208;
`(v) granted the status of a nonimmigrant under section 101(a)(15)(H)(ii)(c);
`(vi) granted temporary protected status under section 244;
or `(vii) granted parole under section 212(d)(5).'.
(c) Requirements for Electronic Employment Verification- Section 274B(a) (8 U.S.C. 1324b(a)) is amended by adding at the end the following:
`(7) ANTIDISCRIMINATION REQUIREMENTS OF THE ELECTRONIC EMPLOYMENT VERIFICATION SYSTEM- It is an unfair immigration-related employment practice for a person or other entity, in the course of the electronic verification process described in section 274A(d)--
`(A) to terminate or undertake any adverse employment action due to a tentative nonconfirmation;
`(B) to use the verification system for screening of an applicant prior to an offer of employment;
`(C) except as described in section 274A(d)(3)(B), to use the verification system for a current employee after the first 3 days of employment, or for the reverification of an employee after the employee has satisfied the process described in section 274A(d); or `(D) to require an individual to make an inquiry under the self-verification procedures established in section 274A(d)(8)(E)(iii).'.
(d) Increase in Civil Money Penalties- Section 274B(g)(2) (8 U.S.C. 1324b(g)(2)) is amended--
(1) in subparagraph (B)(iv)--
(A) in subclause (I), by striking `$250 and not more than $2,000' and inserting `$1,000 and not more than $4,000';
(B) in subclause (II), by striking `$2,000 and not more than $5,000' and inserting `$4,000 and not more than $10,000';
(C) in subclause (III), by striking `$3,000 and not more than $10,000' and inserting `$6,000 and not more than $20,000'; and
(D) in subclause (IV), by striking `$100 and not more than $1,000' and inserting `$500 and not more than $5,000'.
(e) Increased Funding of Information Campaign- Section 274B(l)(3) (8 U.S.C. 1324b(l)(3)) is amended by inserting `and an additional $40,000,000 for each of the fiscal years 2008 through 2010' before the period at the end.
(f) Effective Date- The amendments made by this section shall take effect on the date that is 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act and shall apply to violations occurring on or after such date.

Get that? The next-to-last paragraph. Forty MILLION for the Information campaign about this. Jon Edwards probably spends that much on hairspray alone.

Oh, and section 7 says it out loud.

EMPLOYERS CANNOT USE THE VERIFICATION SYSTEM FOR SCREENING PRIOR TO AN OFFER OF EMPLOYEMENT.

EMPLOYERS CANNOT FIRE ANYONE ON THE BASIS OF A TENTATIVE NONCONFIRMATION.

EMPLOYERS CANNOT USE THE VERIFICATION SYSTEM (except as described in a completely different document) AFTER THREE DAYS EMPLOYMENT.

Kennedy and Bush are dallying the idea of destroying one of the few remaining American professions which cannot be offshored (and a finger in the pie to destroy the others). But Section (d)(1) on domestic nurses gives me some scant hope. Why can’t they do the same thing for IT staff?

SEC. 505. SHORTAGE OCCUPATIONS.
(a) Exception to Direct Numerical Limitations- Section 201(b)(1) (8 U.S.C. 1151(b)(1)) is amended by adding at the end the following new subparagraph:
`(F)(i) During the period beginning on the date of the enactment the Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act of 2007, and ending on September 30, 2017, an alien--
`(I) who is otherwise described in section 203(b); and
`(II) who is seeking admission to the United States to perform labor in shortage occupations designated by the Secretary of Labor for blanket certification under section 212(a)(5)(A) due to the lack of sufficient United States workers able, willing, qualified, and available for such occupations and for which the employment of aliens will not adversely affect the terms and conditions of similarly employed United States workers.
`(ii) During the period described in clause (i), the spouse or dependents of an alien described in clause (i), if accompanying or following to join such alien.'.
(b) Exception to Nondiscrimination Requirements- Section 202(a)(1)(A) (8 U.S.C. 1152(a)(1)(A)) is amended by striking `201(b)(2)(A)(i)' and inserting `201(b)'.
(c) Exception to Per Country Levels for Family-Sponsored and Employment-Based Immigrants- Section 202(a)(2) (8 U.S.C. 1152(a)(2)), as amended by section 502(1), is further amended by inserting `, except for aliens described in section 201(b),' after `any fiscal year'.
(d) Increasing the Domestic Supply of Nurses and Physical Therapists- Not later than January 1, 2007, the Secretary of Health and Human Services shall--
(1) submit to Congress a report on the source of newly licensed nurses and physical therapists in each State, which report shall--
(A) include the past 3 years for which data are available;
(B) provide separate data for each occupation and for each State;
(C) separately identify those receiving their initial license and those licensed by endorsement from another State;
(D) within those receiving their initial license in each year, identify the number who received their professional education in the United States and those who received such education outside the United States; and
(E) to the extent possible, identify, by State of residence and country of education, the number of nurses and physical therapists who were educated in any of the 5 countries (other than the United States) from which the most nurses and physical therapists arrived;
(F) identify the barriers to increasing the supply of nursing faculty, domestically trained nurses, and domestically trained physical therapists;
(G) recommend strategies to be followed by Federal and State governments that would be effective in removing such barriers, including strategies that address barriers to advancement to become registered nurses for other health care workers, such as home health aides and nurses assistants;
(H) recommend amendments to Federal legislation that would increase the supply of nursing faculty, domestically trained nurses, and domestically trained physical therapists;
(I) recommend Federal grants, loans, and other incentives that would provide increases in nurse educators, nurse training facilities, and other steps to increase the domestic education of new nurses and physical therapists;
(J) identify the effects of nurse emigration on the health care systems in their countries of origin; and

(K) recommend amendments to Federal law that would minimize the effects of health care shortages in the countries of origin from which immigrant nurses arrived;
(2) enter into a contract with the National Academy of Sciences Institute of Medicine to determine the level of Federal investment under titles VII and VIII of the Public Health Service Act necessary to eliminate the domestic nursing and physical therapist shortage not later than 7 years from the date on which the report is published; and (3) collaborate with other agencies, as appropriate, in working with ministers of health or other appropriate officials of the 5 countries from which the most nurses and physical therapists arrived, to-- (A) address health worker shortages caused by emigration; (B) ensure that there is sufficient human resource planning or other technical assistance needed to reduce further health worker shortages in such countries.

Did I mention IT workers? They’re covered too under section 508. Those with advanced degrees, who have been on green cards during three years, don’t count against the limits. Neither do their spouses or children!

And the limits are raised to 115,000 per year—for starters. And go up 20% a year after that.

SEC. 508. VISAS FOR INDIVIDUALS WITH ADVANCED DEGREES.
(a) Aliens With Certain Advanced Degrees Not Subject to Numerical Limitations on Employment Based Immigrants-
(1) IN GENERAL- Section 201(b)(1) (8 U.S.C. 1151(b)(1)), as amended by section 505, is amended by adding at the end the following:
`(G) Aliens who have earned an advanced degree in science, technology, engineering, or math and have been working in a related field in the United States under a nonimmigrant visa during the 3-year period preceding their application for an immigrant visa under section 203(b).
`(H) Aliens described in subparagraph (A) or (B) of section 203(b)(1)(A) or who have received a national interest waiver under section 203(b)(2)(B).
`(I) The spouse and minor children of an alien who is admitted as an employment-based immigrant under section 203(b).'.
(2) APPLICABILITY- The amendment made by paragraph (1) shall apply to any visa application--
(A) pending on the date of the enactment of this Act; or
(B) filed on or after such date of enactment.
(b) Labor Certification- Section 212(a)(5)(A)(ii) (8 U.S.C. 1182(a)(5)(A)(ii)) is amended--
(1) in subclause (I), by striking `or' at the end;
(2) in subclause (II), by striking the period at the end and inserting `; or';
and
(3) by adding at the end the following:
`(III) has an advanced degree in the sciences, technology, engineering, or mathematics from an accredited university in the United States and is employed in a field related to such degree.'.
(c) Temporary Workers- Section 214(g) (8 U.S.C. 1184(g)) is amended--
(1) in paragraph (1)--
(A) by striking `(beginning with fiscal year 1992)'; and
(B) in subparagraph (A)--
(i) in clause (vii), by striking `each succeeding fiscal year; or' and inserting `each of fiscal years 2004, 2005, 2006, and 2007;'; and
(ii) by adding after clause (vii) the following:
`(viii) 115,000 in the first fiscal year beginning after the date of the enactment of this clause; and
`(ix) the number calculated under paragraph (9) in each fiscal year after the year described in clause (viii); or';
(2) in paragraph (5)--
(A) in subparagraph (B), by striking `or' at the end;
(B) in subparagraph (C), by striking the period at the end and inserting `; or'; and
(C) by adding at the end the following:
`(D) has earned an advanced degree in science, technology, engineering, or math.';
(3) by redesignating paragraphs (9), (10), and (11) as paragraphs (10),
(11), and (12), respectively; and
(4) by inserting after paragraph (8) the following:
`(9) If the numerical limitation in paragraph (1)(A)--
`(A) is reached during a given fiscal year, the numerical limitation under paragraph (1)(A)(ix) for the subsequent fiscal year shall be equal to 120 percent of the numerical limitation of the given fiscal year; or
`(B) is not reached during a given fiscal year, the numerical limitation under paragraph (1)(A)(ix) for the subsequent fiscal year shall be equal to the numerical limitation of the given fiscal year.'.
(d) Applicability- The amendment made by subsection (c)(2) shall apply to any visa application--
(1) pending on the date of the enactment of this Act; or
(2) filed on or after such date of enactment.
(e) Worldwide Level of Immigrants With Advanced Degrees- Section 201 (8 U.S.C. 1151) is amended--
(1) in subsection (a)(3), by inserting `and immigrants with advanced degrees' after `diversity immigrants'; and
(2) by amending subsection (e) to read as follows:
`(e) Worldwide Level of Diversity Immigrants and Immigrants With Advanced Degrees-
`(1) DIVERSITY IMMIGRANTS- The worldwide level of diversity immigrants described in section 203(c)(1) is equal to 18,333 for each fiscal year.
`(2) IMMIGRANTS WITH ADVANCED DEGREES- The worldwide level of immigrants with advanced degrees described in section 203(c)(2) is equal to 36,667 for each fiscal year.'.
(f) Immigrants With Advanced Degrees- Section 203 (8 U.S.C. 1153(c)) is amended--
(1) in subsection (c)--
(A) in paragraph (1), by striking `paragraph (2), aliens subject to the worldwide level specified in section 201(e)' and inserting `paragraphs (2) and (3), aliens subject to the worldwide level specified in section 201(e)(1)';
(B) by redesignating paragraphs (2) and (3) as paragraphs (3) and
(4), respectively;
(C) by inserting after paragraph (1) the following:
`(2) ALIENS WHO HOLD AN ADVANCED DEGREE IN SCIENCE, MATHEMATICS, TECHNOLOGY, OR ENGINEERING-
`(A) IN GENERAL- Qualified immigrants who hold a master's or doctorate degree in the life sciences, the physical sciences, mathematics, technology, or engineering from an accredited university in the United States, or an equivalent foreign degree, shall be allotted visas each fiscal year in a number not to exceed the worldwide level specified in section 201(e)(2).
`(B) ECONOMIC CONSIDERATIONS- Beginning on the date which is 1 year after the date of the enactment of this paragraph, the Secretary of State, in consultation with the Secretary of Commerce and the Secretary of Labor, and after notice and public hearing, shall determine which of the degrees described in subparagraph (A) will provide immigrants with the knowledge and skills that are most needed to meet anticipated workforce needs and protect the economic security of the United States.';
(D) in paragraph (3), as redesignated, by striking `this subsection' each place it appears and inserting `paragraph (1)'; and
(E) by amending paragraph (4), as redesignated, to read as follows:
`(4) MAINTENANCE OF INFORMATION-
`(A) DIVERSITY IMMIGRANTS- The Secretary of State shall maintain information on the age, occupation, education level, and other relevant characteristics of immigrants issued visas under paragraph (1).
`(B) IMMIGRANTS WITH ADVANCED DEGREES- The Secretary of State shall maintain information on the age, degree (including field of study), occupation, work experience, and other relevant characteristics of immigrants issued visas under paragraph (2).'; and
(2) in subsection (e)--
(A) in paragraph (2), by striking `(c)' and inserting `(c)(1)';
(B) by redesignating paragraph (3) as paragraph (4); and
(C) by inserting after paragraph (2) the following:
`(3) Immigrant visas made available under subsection (c)(2) shall be issued as follows:
`(A) If the Secretary of State has not made a determination under subsection (c)(2)(B), immigrant visas shall be issued in a strictly random order established by the Secretary for the fiscal year involved.
`(B) If the Secretary of State has made a determination under subsection (c)(2)(B) and the number of eligible qualified immigrants who have a degree selected under such subsection and apply for an immigrant visa described in subsection (c)(2) is greater than the worldwide level specified in section 201(e)(2), the Secretary shall issue immigrant visas only to such immigrants and in a strictly random order established by the Secretary for the fiscal year involved.
`(C) If the Secretary of State has made a determination under subsection (c)(2)(B) and the number of eligible qualified immigrants who have degrees selected under such subsection and apply for an immigrant visa described in subsection (c)(2) is not greater than the worldwide level specified in section 201(e)(2), the Secretary shall--
`(i) issue immigrant visas to eligible qualified immigrants with degrees selected in subsection (c)(2)(B); and
`(ii) issue any immigrant visas remaining thereafter to other eligible qualified immigrants with degrees described in subsection (c)(2)(A) in a strictly random order established by the Secretary for the fiscal year involved.'.
(g) Effective Date- The amendments made by subsections (e) and (f) shall take effect on October 1, 2007.

Oh, finally, about all those illegal criminals, rapists,murderers, and the like? The Feds care about that. They have authorized less than 1 billion dollars a year for it, nationwide. Section 218:

SEC. 218. STATE CRIMINAL ALIEN ASSISTANCE PROGRAM.
(a) Reimbursement for Costs Associated With Processing Criminal Illegal Aliens- The Secretary shall reimburse States and units of local government for costs associated with processing undocumented criminal aliens through the criminal justice system, including--
(1) indigent defense;
(2) criminal prosecution;
(3) autopsies;
(4) translators and interpreters; and
(5) courts costs.
(b) Authorization of Appropriations-
(1) PROCESSING CRIMINAL ILLEGAL ALIENS- There are authorized to be appropriated $400,000,000 for each of the fiscal years 2008 through 2012 to carry out subsection (a).
(2) COMPENSATION UPON REQUEST- Section 241(i)(5) (8 U.S.C. 1231(i)) is amended to read as follows:
`(5) There are authorized to be appropriated to carry this subsection--
`(A) such sums as may be necessary for fiscal year 2008;
`(B) $750,000,000 for fiscal year 2009;
`(C) $850,000,000 for fiscal year 2010; and
`(D) $950,000,000 for each of the fiscal years 2011 and 2012.'.
(c) Technical Amendment- Section 501 of the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 (8 U.S.C. 1365) is amended by striking `Attorney General' each place it appears and inserting `Secretary of Homeland Security'.

Got that? That is for ALL costs, including defense, prosecution, autopsies, translators, interpreters, court costs.

I hereby dub this bill "The Globalist Wet Dream and Mexico Ass-Kissing Act of 2007."

This bill is treason.


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Foreign Affairs; Government
KEYWORDS: amnesty; illegalimmigration; immigrationbill; jobsamericanswontdo; kennedy; mccain; s1348; sellout; whiskersvanity
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-66 next last
This is Amnesty, folks, no ifs, ands, or buts.

Bush Swallows.

1 posted on 05/20/2007 12:37:59 PM PDT by grey_whiskers
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: grey_whiskers

Yes it is.

A far better “plan” would be to finish Duncan Hunter’s border fence, and enforce the damn laws we have now.


2 posted on 05/20/2007 12:39:55 PM PDT by pissant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: grey_whiskers

bump


3 posted on 05/20/2007 12:41:17 PM PDT by tomakaze (Cuius testiculos habes, habeas cardia et cerebellum.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pissant

Whatever happened with the law that “ no profit can be made from criminal activity”?

Corporations clearly profit from hiring illegals.


4 posted on 05/20/2007 12:42:47 PM PDT by LFOD777 (In 2006, Washington spent $2.7 Trillion and ran a $248 billion budget deficit.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: grey_whiskers

We already have a thread on this
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1836566/posts


5 posted on 05/20/2007 12:43:35 PM PDT by LFOD777 (In 2006, Washington spent $2.7 Trillion and ran a $248 billion budget deficit.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: grey_whiskers

“Get that? They are empowered to do something (anyone want to look up Section 101(a) (43) (F) (8 U.S.C. 1101(a) (43)(F) – after a
THIRD DRUNK DRIVING CONVICTION WHICH OCCURS AFTER THIS BILL!!!!!!

Ted Kennedy must have insisted on this personally ;-)

Americans die on the first DUI!


6 posted on 05/20/2007 12:44:08 PM PDT by stephenjohnbanker ( Hunter/Thompson/Thompson/Hunter in 08! "Read my lips....No new RINO's" !!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: grey_whiskers
From just about everything I've read and heard over the past few days, I think this bill is either DOA or will be severely altered as it moves through the process. I'm guessing even our clueless, thick-headed solons have gotten the point that nobody likes this one.
7 posted on 05/20/2007 12:44:33 PM PDT by JennysCool ("The urge to save humanity is almost always a false front for the urge to rule." -Mencken)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: grey_whiskers

Thanks for this. Bookmarking.


8 posted on 05/20/2007 12:45:22 PM PDT by sageb1 (This is the Final Crusade. There are only 2 sides. Pick one.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LFOD777

It remains unenforced just like the law that says you cannot be here illegally.


9 posted on 05/20/2007 12:45:23 PM PDT by pissant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: grey_whiskers

“I don’t know what this means—but WTF aren’t they concerned with protecting citizens from illegal aliens who are sex offenders?

Oh, and Sanctuary Cities are A-OK:”

Unbelievable!! They ARE the offenders!!


10 posted on 05/20/2007 12:46:00 PM PDT by stephenjohnbanker ( Hunter/Thompson/Thompson/Hunter in 08! "Read my lips....No new RINO's" !!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LFOD777; Admin Moderator
We already have a thread on this

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1836566/posts

Do you want me to ask the mods to delete my thread, and I can post all my findings to the other thread?

Cheers!

11 posted on 05/20/2007 12:46:03 PM PDT by grey_whiskers (The opinions are solely those of the author and are subject to change without notice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: grey_whiskers

“Oh, and section 7 says it out loud.

EMPLOYERS CANNOT USE THE VERIFICATION SYSTEM FOR SCREENING PRIOR TO AN OFFER OF EMPLOYEMENT.

EMPLOYERS CANNOT FIRE ANYONE ON THE BASIS OF A TENTATIVE NONCONFIRMATION.

EMPLOYERS CANNOT USE THE VERIFICATION SYSTEM (except as described in a completely different document) AFTER THREE DAYS EMPLOYMENT”

Useless!!


12 posted on 05/20/2007 12:48:44 PM PDT by stephenjohnbanker ( Hunter/Thompson/Thompson/Hunter in 08! "Read my lips....No new RINO's" !!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: grey_whiskers

keep it here, your observations need to stay up front rather than buried pages in in another thread.


13 posted on 05/20/2007 12:48:47 PM PDT by tomakaze (Cuius testiculos habes, habeas cardia et cerebellum.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: grey_whiskers
FYI, the link you provided now goes to an expired search page.

THIS LINK should take folks to the text of S.1348
(Click on "Printer Friendly Display").

14 posted on 05/20/2007 12:49:28 PM PDT by calcowgirl ("Liberalism is just Communism sold by the drink." P. J. O'Rourke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: grey_whiskers

“Got that? That is for ALL costs, including defense, prosecution, autopsies, translators, interpreters, court costs.

I hereby dub this bill “The Globalist Wet Dream and Mexico Ass-Kissing Act of 2007.”

This bill is treason.”

Nuff said!!


15 posted on 05/20/2007 12:50:06 PM PDT by stephenjohnbanker ( Hunter/Thompson/Thompson/Hunter in 08! "Read my lips....No new RINO's" !!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: calcowgirl
BAH!! It timed out on me several times during the cut and paste. Which link of mine is broken? The header information next to the date of my posting, or the one interior to the article?

Cheers!

16 posted on 05/20/2007 12:50:32 PM PDT by grey_whiskers (The opinions are solely those of the author and are subject to change without notice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: grey_whiskers

I am reminded that Senator Kennedy once wrote a children’s book (starring his Water Spaniel — no joke, he has a swimming dog named “Splash”!) called How a Bill Becomes a Law.

I would like to see if that book actually says, “After years of doing nothing, a select cabal meet and hastily throw together a Mulligan stew which no one can possibly understand, and then get it passed with lightning speed, so that no one has a chance to see what is really hidden in the text. That is the way Uncle Ted does it, kiddies. Now, just for old time’s sake, shall we all take a ride across a rickity bridge?”

Cute.

I think that this bill should be the end of the McCain candidacy.


17 posted on 05/20/2007 12:50:56 PM PDT by docbnj
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: grey_whiskers
Correction... the Thompson link is accurate at the top of the thread.
The one that expired is in your post ("The site I am reading from is here.")
18 posted on 05/20/2007 12:52:24 PM PDT by calcowgirl ("Liberalism is just Communism sold by the drink." P. J. O'Rourke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: docbnj
I think that this bill should be the end of the McCain candidacy.

The some good will have come out of it.

19 posted on 05/20/2007 12:53:55 PM PDT by clintonh8r (..taking down my picture of "President" Bush, Mrs. clintonh8r and me.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: grey_whiskers
The President is charged to take care that the laws be faithfully executed.

Our present laws in this matter are more than adequate.

No new laws are needed.

20 posted on 05/20/2007 12:57:03 PM PDT by Jim Noble (We don't need to know what Cho thought. We need to know what Librescu thought.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: grey_whiskers

Those that pass this should be held criminally responsible.


21 posted on 05/20/2007 12:57:31 PM PDT by freekitty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: grey_whiskers

Excellent work, sir.

I have passed this around the outside FR world already.

Great work.

“The Globalist Wet Dream and Mexico Ass-Kissing Act of 2007.”

So named. (sound of gavel coming down).


22 posted on 05/20/2007 12:57:38 PM PDT by HonestConservative (If Conservatism is dead, why are the candidates claiming to be one.Hunter/Thompson08)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: docbnj

Correction: Kennedy’s book was called “My Senator and Me.” All the liberal media thought that it was SO cute. Libraries across the country undoubtedly bought it, because all they do is order according to the recommendations of the reviews. There is a section of it on how a bill becomes a law. The dog intervenes at one point to break an imapsse by barking.

That would fit, for this bill is for the dogs.

Anyway, you can check it out here:
http://www.amazon.com/My-Senator-Me-Dogs-Washington/dp/0439650771/ref=pd_bbs_2/102-6616615-3272140?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1179690797&sr=8-2


23 posted on 05/20/2007 12:59:46 PM PDT by docbnj
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: clintonh8r

Absolutely. McCain is gone.

I believe he already knew it going into this and this is his “screw you” present to America for not recognizing his genius.

Even after he retires, he’ll be like Carter and stick around for the ego trips and throw wrenches into the conservative works.


24 posted on 05/20/2007 1:01:25 PM PDT by HonestConservative (If Conservatism is dead, why are the candidates claiming to be one.Hunter/Thompson08)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: HonestConservative
Umm, thanks.

Let's just keep this monstrosity from passing.

NO cheers, unfortunately.

25 posted on 05/20/2007 1:02:06 PM PDT by grey_whiskers (The opinions are solely those of the author and are subject to change without notice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: grey_whiskers
Thread from yesterday:

22 Problems With The Senate's Illegal Immigration Bill
  Posted by AuntB
On 05/19/2007 10:23:34 AM CDT · 8 replies · 142+ views


Rightwingnews ^ | May 18, 2007 | John Hawkins
1) The Senate Bill Would Make It Impossible To Deport Most Illegal Aliens For Years "What about illegal alien protection? The alien and their families who file applications for amnesty �shall not be detained, determined inadmissible, deported, or removed until their applications are finally adjudicated, unless they commit a future act that renders them ineligible with amnesty.� With tens of millions of applications, this amnesty, this provision essentially guarantees an illegal alien years of protection in the United States, even if they do not qualify for the amnesty." -- Jeff Sessions 2) Consultations Between United States And Mexican Authorities At...

26 posted on 05/20/2007 1:04:28 PM PDT by TomGuy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jim Noble

Replace those 1000 pages with 4 words, “Build the Fence,Now”.


27 posted on 05/20/2007 1:04:48 PM PDT by HonestConservative (If Conservatism is dead, why are the candidates claiming to be one.Hunter/Thompson08)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: LFOD777
Whatever happened with the law that “ no profit can be made from criminal activity”?

Glenn Beck has a special on illegal immigration on his Friday TV program. During the program, he made a comment that he thought the US government has already settled the lawsuit brought by the drug dealer who was shot by Border Patrol Agents Jose Alonso Compean and Ignacio Ramos. Beck mentioned that rumor is the lawsuit was settled for a few $million.

If true, talk about hitting the jackpot -- you get to continue trafficking drugs across the border, you get immunity from prosecution, and you get the US government to pay you a few $million for the Border Patrol inconveniencing you.
28 posted on 05/20/2007 1:07:40 PM PDT by TomGuy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: grey_whiskers; LFOD777

Thomas only gives temporary links, so you have to print everything and then hope it is not amended.

I hope this is killed. This is insane from the risk of terrorism, e.g. 911, Fort Dix Six, etc., to the cost of entitlements and the welfare state. Call or write your Senators and Representative.


29 posted on 05/20/2007 1:08:06 PM PDT by neverdem (May you be in heaven a half hour before the devil knows that you're dead.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pissant

Protect the borders you DC idiots.

30 posted on 05/20/2007 1:08:18 PM PDT by tflabo (Take authority that's ours)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: docbnj

SEC. 135. WESTERN HEMISPHERE TRAVEL INITIATIVE.

This section provides for replacing passports with substitute “passport cards.” It is just too much hassle to have to issue all those passports, so a card will be used for Canada, US, México, and the West Indies. It’s so much easier. It’s also easy to fake, but what the heck: anything is worth saving some real work by the State Department staffers. I guess that they figure that it is lucky that there is no terrorist threat out there.

This provision was probably favored by the travel industry. Probably also it was favored by the lazy and improvident, who cannot plan ahead and get a passport: I am sure that the group I just described is 99% Demonrats.


31 posted on 05/20/2007 1:09:54 PM PDT by docbnj
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: calcowgirl; All
>>THIS LINK should take folks to the text of S.1348 <<

No, no, no! That is a copy of the 2006 bill. Please everyone, stop posting links to this bogus placeholder. This is closer to the real draft, which is also an abomination, although I'm sure it is changing as we speak: text from NRO
32 posted on 05/20/2007 1:10:56 PM PDT by ding_dong_daddy_from_dumas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: grey_whiskers
One half the Ft. Dix six are here illegally with a combined 65 violation, under the nose of the police and nothing is done for years.

But this mess [above] will be enforced after 20M illegals are dclared legal.

33 posted on 05/20/2007 1:11:30 PM PDT by Swanks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: grey_whiskers; All

I would remind everyone that an estimated 1/3 to 1/2 of the illegals in the USA entered the country legally and have overstayed what their visa or entry documents allowed. That would be an estimated minimum of 4 million over-stayers based on a minimum estimate of 12 million illegals currently residing in country. Source: USA Today article of May 1, 2006; http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/editorials/2006-05-01-our-view_x.htm

Would anyone be willing to grant amnesty to all of these folks who have overstayed their welcome. You can be sure the current Senate legislation does not address this issue in any meaningful way.


34 posted on 05/20/2007 1:16:50 PM PDT by gpapa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ding_dong_daddy_from_dumas

Wrong. Please FOLLOW THE LINK I posted! It is dated May 2007.

Or, try this one... same thing in PDF Version.
http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=110_cong_bills&docid=f:s1348pcs.txt.pdf

It is also the legislation that is linked if you go look at what is scheduled for the Senate Floor tomorrow.
http://www.senate.gov/pagelayout/legislative/d_three_sections_with_teasers/calendars.htm

Instead, you give me a PDF file from NRO, with no citation, no source, no official anything.... and you are telling me my link is bogus?

Convince me.


35 posted on 05/20/2007 1:18:08 PM PDT by calcowgirl ("Liberalism is just Communism sold by the drink." P. J. O'Rourke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: tflabo

And deport every single illegal, pronto.


36 posted on 05/20/2007 1:31:40 PM PDT by pissant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: calcowgirl

What I should say is that your linked document is bogus. I think the amnesty crowd (Reid etc.) posted a copy of the 2006 bill in that library to make sure we don’t see anything like the real text, so that they can claim we are “uninformed.” And perhaps to waste our time.

Search for “Z Visa” and “Triggers” in both files. Do you really think the real text will not mention “Z Visa?”


37 posted on 05/20/2007 1:33:18 PM PDT by ding_dong_daddy_from_dumas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: anyone

Okay this is only the second time I was angry enough to post instead of just read. Just got back from Sam’s Club in Raleigh, NC. There was a stand set up in the front of the store with Mexican flags, Mexican music playing, and a big dancing duck.........passing out samples of some kind of Mexican candy. There were swarms of hispanics laughing, dancing, & sampling. Now I know what elders mean by the good ole days.


38 posted on 05/20/2007 1:33:32 PM PDT by Raleighwood
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: grey_whiskers

Grey Whiskers, thanks for this. I say this through gritted teeth, because the more I read about this debacle, the angrier I get. And oh yes, did you know that the RNC has issued a request that all good Republicans support this...thing?

But, just so you know, according to those same Republicans, this is not an amnesty bill. (They’re right: It’s actually much worse than that.)


39 posted on 05/20/2007 1:45:11 PM PDT by MizSterious (Anonymous sources often means "the voices in my head told me.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ding_dong_daddy_from_dumas
You may have something: the text of your file has section 218 identical to section 217 of what I posted from.

And Section 301 in the document I posted has the same title as the Section 302 in your document.

The contents of section 301 vs. 302 are quite similar though not identical.

And yes, Z-Visa is mentioned in your document, but not in the one I posted.

I may have to do a point-by-point on the document you posted.

Cheers!

40 posted on 05/20/2007 1:46:19 PM PDT by grey_whiskers (The opinions are solely those of the author and are subject to change without notice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: stephenjohnbanker

That section must be the reason Kennedy’s been grinning like a possum about this bill.


41 posted on 05/20/2007 1:46:57 PM PDT by MizSterious (Anonymous sources often means "the voices in my head told me.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Raleighwood

When us folks in So. Cal. have bi***** for yrs. about
this type of exhibition as our everday observance, we have said, it is coming to a neighborhood near you.
Keep away from the MX candy. There are often problems with lead content in their candy.


42 posted on 05/20/2007 1:50:14 PM PDT by SoCalPol (Duncan Hunter '08 Tough on WOT & Illegals)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Raleighwood

Even worse, that candy was probably full of LEAD. (There have been articles recently about lead being found in Mexican candy.)


43 posted on 05/20/2007 1:55:49 PM PDT by MizSterious (Anonymous sources often means "the voices in my head told me.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: grey_whiskers
Thanks. As I said, one of their mantras is that their opponents are "uninformed."
Saxby Chambliss, after he was bood by his state GOP members:
"After the speech, Chambliss said he took the crowd’s reaction as a lack of popular understanding of the shape of the current immigration system."

YOU ARE NOT WORTHY TO RECEIVE THE WISDOM OF THE GREAT SAX!
44 posted on 05/20/2007 2:00:34 PM PDT by ding_dong_daddy_from_dumas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: stephenjohnbanker
Americans die on the first DUI!

Kennedy Drank, People Sank.

45 posted on 05/20/2007 2:02:54 PM PDT by grey_whiskers (The opinions are solely those of the author and are subject to change without notice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: grey_whiskers; ding_dong_daddy_from_dumas
GW... It is looking like dddfd is correct, or at least a whole lot of folks like NRO and Heritage are singing the same song. Both links to documents take you to the May 18, 2007 11:58PM "Draft" of the "Secure Borders, Economic Opportunity and Immigration Reform Act of 2007" versus S.1348, the "Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act of 2007."

While this may be a new draft, one wonders how a 790 page document was widdled down to 326 pages but capable of adding all sorts of new stuff that was not in S.1348. It also makes you wonder how politicians that go to such lengths to hide things from the public can stay in office.

The NRO-hosted PDF file was apparently first posted yesterday by Kathryn Jean Lopez at The Corner:

Saturday, May 19, 2007

Text! [Kathryn Jean Lopez]

In case you are intensely bored this Saturday: here's the current immigration bill Senate staff are spending their weekend with.

05/19 09:18 AM

Also, from The Heritage Foundation:

May 19, 2007
The Senate's Comprehensive Immigration Reform Package
by The Heritage Foundation

FYI

Working behind closed doors for months, a handful of Democratic and Republican staffers, along with a few senators and principals from the Administration, have been drafting a “comprehensive immigration reform package.” Until Saturday morning, the legislation was unavailable to any other senators or staff, let alone the media, policy analysts, or the general public.

This legislation would be the most significant reform of immigration policy in 40 years, affecting not only our national security and homeland defense but the fiscal, economic, and social future of the United States for several generations.

For the sake of open deliberation and public education, The Heritage Foundation is making this legislation, in draft form, publicly available to encourage widespread debate and discussion.

The document made available here, although marked “DRAFT – FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY,” is being relied upon by senators and staff as the final language to be debated beginning on Monday, May 21, with the expectation of a vote on final passage—without congressional hearings, committee mark-up, fiscal analysis, expert testimony, or public comment—before the end of the week.

Download Draft Legislation: The Secure Borders, Economic Opportunity and Immigration Reform Act of 2007 (PDF, 1 MB)


46 posted on 05/20/2007 2:11:11 PM PDT by calcowgirl ("Liberalism is just Communism sold by the drink." P. J. O'Rourke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: ding_dong_daddy_from_dumas

Lindsey Graham was just as condescending - “people are mad”, “an emotional issue”. They both even sound like smug liberals now.


47 posted on 05/20/2007 2:11:40 PM PDT by Baladas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: grey_whiskers

“Kennedy Drank, People Sank”

Yep


48 posted on 05/20/2007 2:16:48 PM PDT by stephenjohnbanker ( Hunter/Thompson/Thompson/Hunter in 08! "Read my lips....No new RINO's" !!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: grey_whiskers

This is The Great Molestation of 2007. Asking us to “Sssh!” while they do unspeakable things and telling us we’ll actually grow to enjoy it. Disgustorment!


49 posted on 05/20/2007 2:18:26 PM PDT by arasina (So there.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: calcowgirl
GW... It is looking like dddfd is correct, or at least a whole lot of folks like NRO and Heritage are singing the same song.

I in good faith linked to the Library of Congress.

I included the link in my post.

And I included cut-and-pasted sections from the link which I used.

All allowing for complete traceability and accountability.

So, the question then, is obviously this.

By whose orders did an outmoded version get put onto, and left on, the Library of Congress site over the weekend, given that the cloture vote is on Monday?

Can you private FReepmail me with a good link to Heritage?

Cheers!

50 posted on 05/20/2007 2:18:59 PM PDT by grey_whiskers (The opinions are solely those of the author and are subject to change without notice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-66 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson