Skip to comments.Discretion, Not Amnesty (Newt didn't propose citizenship - did not propose Amnesty)
Posted on 11/23/2011 10:32:54 AM PST by TBBT
All he said was, Lets be humane in enforcing the law. That was my reaction last night when Newt Gingrich argued that the federal government should refrain from deporting illegal immigrants who had been in the U.S. for many years if the effect would be the break up of a family.
I did not take him to be proposing a new law conferring amnesty. To do what the former Speaker proposed would require no change in U.S. law. All youd need is the sensible application of prosecutorial discretion.
A successful immigration enforcement policy, easily implemented under current law, would secure the borders; use the capability we have to track aliens who enter on visas to ensure that they dont overstay; and target our finite law enforcement resources at (a) illegal immigrants who violate federal or state criminal laws (i.e., other than the laws against illegal entry), and (b) employers who knowingly hire illegal aliens and therefore provide the incentive that induces them to come. (An even better policy would deny illegal immigrants various social welfare benefits, but some of that would involve changes in the law so I put it to the side for present purposes.)
Such a policy would materially reduce the number of illegal immigrants in the U.S. if they cant work, many will leave and many wont come in the first place. Such a policy would also call on government lawyers to exercise discretion (as they do in all aspects of law-enforcement) to decide which cases are worth prosecuting. Obviously, if an alien has been here illegally for a number of years but has been essentially law-abiding (again, ignoring the fact that it is illegal for him to reside and work in the U.S.), and if his ...
(Excerpt) Read more at nationalreview.com ...
Would it be humane to deport someone who'd been here 24 years and six months? Apparently in Newt's world it is.
Please explain how EVERY federal law we have in this country can NOW be modified to include the option of “discretion”....I’m not so much worried about them potentially voting. I’m frickin’ pissed that they ARE voting dammit! You know it and I know it. I don’t want them here, period!
Newt has lost me as a potential voter. I’ll stay home. You go vote for me like a Democrat does....
It’s much simpler. Newt said he supports The Krieble Foundation’s proposals. I’d suggest folks go read up.....
Bachman clearly did not listen to what Gingrich said when she responded, and the rest tried to pile onto Bachmans misinterpretation in order to try to injure Newt. However, what he laid out was a policy statement on how to address the problem, which is actionable.
Mrs Rainman and I were talking about this, and the difference between what Newt said and what Perry said. First, Newt addressed Controling the Border, then the talked about getting rid of a huge chunk of illegals, but having some who would be allowed to stay .. as legal residents, not citizens. That is the same as permanent green card ... cant vote, but have to pay taxes. If they want the perks of citizenship, they would have to go thru the process ... so no amnesty.
Compare that with Perry, who is giving the benefits of citizenship (in-state tuition assistance) without addressing the fact that they are illegal. I have heard a lot on FR bitzen about Newt giving amnesty, but he did no such thing. I think the problem Newt has is he used the wrong adjective last night. He said Humane, and he should have used Actionable. No plan on illegals means squat if it is not actionable. He started this direction when talking about what went wrong under Reagan.
The operative question for those who hate Newt, is what exactly is your candidates plan. As Luntz said last night, nobody has advocated trying to send them ALL home ... but several of them have not really laid out what thier plans are either. They are hiding in the shadows, because NONE of them is going to be able to propose a realistic plan that will satiate those of you who want red meat on this issue.
I think Newts plan has several good componets ... 1) it is actionable ... not just pablum for those looking for sound bites. The first step is secure the border! What is wrong with that?
The second step is create a guest worker program. This addresses a lot of the agri-need for illegals. They can come for the season, work, then they go home. It keeps us from having apples that cost $10 each.
The third step is now what to do about those who are here. No place in his plan are they getting citizenship ... they may get permission to stay, but that is not citizenship. Most will be forced to leave immediatly.
The real question is, what is actually wrong with this plan, and who is proposing a better idea? On other threads they have even pointed to the fact that Sarah and Cain have both said basically the same thing.
Too many were listening to MB and MR - and they both KNOW he wasn’t talking amnesty. They were being political and not honest. Shame on them. They both do not have doable plan and Ron Paul was right - no way will ALL illegals ever be deported.
If it allows these people to stay here, it’s just another BS equivocation to keep from doing a job that should be done right - find them, remove them.
Nice try, but if you allow millions of illegals to stay, that’s amnesty.
Once they become legal they are eligible to apply for citizenship just like any other legal resident.
Why stay home? If Newt’s the nominee and you’re not going to vote for him - go to polls and vote for 0bama. It’s the same thing.
I fell for this sh!t with McCain and voted for him - I won’t again. This country will die because of these illegals and I will not be a part of it. I hope you enjoy your new ‘changed’ country because you are now ‘humane’....
This is what's called administrative amnesty, i.e. what the President is doing right now.
Worlds means things.
Sorry (again), but I have no sympathy for people who break the law . . . kinda' like finding a fugitive from the law that was finally found living a "good and proper" life in BFEgypt for 20 years. Should we not arrest the lawbreaker and bring him to justice?
I say cut the crap and throw them out. And unless you were on another planet, Gingrich said he'd let them be treated differently because they were good little citizens. We have a border that is poorly protected. If this person crossed it, throw him and his relatives back. No sympathy! Gingrich lost my vote last night.
Good God, when will this end!
McCarthy’s plan is a rational, realistic plan. That’s why it will never be accepted by many here.
Says who? The DOJ?
25 Years ago RONALD REAGAN granted amnesty to all the illegals in the USA.
Of course there was supposed to be strict enforcement too. Did not happen.
Controlling the border is the first step. Fining the snot out of employers of illegals is the second step. Problem solved.
Exite Civilis Ingeniarium!
So they can come here, drop a baby, and suckle at the teet of Uncle Sucker for the rest of their lives.
Seems like a good plan.
Oh brother! We’re being played again by one of DCs consumate liars. Make sure to be vague enough so that its easy to do whatever you want in the future and still say you didnt lie. We need leaders not weasels.
Before we can figure out what to do with all the illegals here today, we MUST secure the Tex-Mex border FIRST --- CLOSE THE DOOR!
I agree. Excellent post, so well said. How refreshing! Thanks.
Yes! All persons who break the law must be prosecuted to it’s fullest extent! We have unlimited resourses of time and money to do so.
Sounds like Obama’s current policy. Let illegals stay here and collect those food stamps and other benefits, and push up the poverty statistics for democrats to use to raise our taxes. And produce more kids born for free in emergency rooms to grow up and rally against capitalism and for Obama types.
Thanks Newt, Compassionate conservatism is back.
Newt is right on.
Feel free to leave the United States anytime you wish.
I have less of a problem with WHAT Newt said than in HOW he said it. Like Perry’s “program of the week”, this came across out-of-the-blue and caught everyone by surprise.
That’s not how you build support for ideas, and it’s not how good chief executives operate. I see it as another example of Newt having to prove he’s the smartest kid in the classroom, but as one hoping to garner support for the highest office in the land, his approach was wrong.
You come here and make me....
They basically call for an easy documenting procedure that allows entire families to cross the border at will. And to let the “free market” decide how many workers they need.
They also call for a privatization of this documenting process. Just what we need when too much of our WOT army is private contractors.
Me thinks Newt is betting folks wont do their homework....
Rush just drove a stake in to this monster with, “how long before the ACLU and the democrats take it to court and get them all made US citizens”.
So, IMHO Neewt is toast, next.
I’d rather try at something that is possible - not pie in the sky. See post #6 - Rain Man explains it better than Newt.
Rush is full of sh!! today. He is so brilliant than what is his plan?
Really? How? In essence, everyone here has amnesty now. Our current laws are not being enforced so there is no deterrent.
Plans like Newts might begin the process of actually stemming the tide.
Confession: I despise Newt because he caved when the government shut down occurred effectively surrendering.
Then go get one of the other three elected nominee. I will vote for any of the GOP candidates in the general because all of them are better than 0bama.
During the years of being here ILLEGALLY there must have been times when document fraud occurred.
.. mean while there are hundreds (thousands?) of citizens in prison for document fraud. How about ignoring their crimes also? Or matching their punishment to what the ILLEGAL aliens will have to pay -- a couple hundred dollars.
And how, exactly is an illegal alien going to prove he's been here for 25 years?
Why didn't he apply for amnesty in 1986?
You're right in that workplace enforcement (and NO welfare) will drive the vast majority of them back to where they belong. The negligible amount that live here, somehow supporting themselves, not working and not taking from the U.S. tax payer, they're low priority for removal.
An excellent summation.
This is the point the pro-illegal Newt supporters don't want to address.
Entering the United States without authorization or not at an official entry point, is a crime with a penalty of six months in federal prison for the first offense and two years in prison for the felony, second offense.
Amnesty is defined as: the act of an authority (as a government) by which pardon is granted to a large group of individuals.
If the illegals do not have to answer for their crimes, they are, by definition, being granted amnesty.
Newt is in favor of amnesty, nothing less.
With it in place, they will infest our communities and entrench themselves completely - even more than now because, in the end, they are still now ILLEGAL. When they are legal, the ‘give-an-inch-take-a-mile’ syndrome will be operative and our courts will be inundated with legal-illegals seeing redress and constructive-citizenship. And, our liberal judges will gleefully comply. This is not good in any fashion.
Which is what Bachmann was pointing out.
“Amnesty,” like trust or love, need not be some all-or-nothing concept. In my opinion, if a policy allows someone who sneaked into the country illegally to remain better off than a similar would-be immigrant who did NOT break the law, then it’s a form of amnesty.
No plan will satisfy them short of giving the entire world citizenship.
Uh...Newt didn't mention any of that. Cain, Paul and Romney did. Newt focused on who should stay, not who should go, nor on employer sanctions, nor on AZ-style laws. Just amnesty. Game over.
Why the hell do you think 0bama and his commie henchman Holder are suing to prevent any enforcement of immigration laws? This is a planned invasion of the U.S. by hostile powers, damn it.
They voted with impunity here in Ohio in 2008. Mexicans who used phony SSNs and utility bills as “ID” the registered and voted on the same day.
it is still amnesty since it would allow for serial immigration.
This “rescue spin” is pointless.