Posted on 11/23/2011 10:32:54 AM PST by TBBT
All he said was, “Let’s 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 you’d 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 don’t 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 can’t work, many will leave and many won’t 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 ...
Without citizenship you cannot vote.
_________________________________________________
In most states all you need is a Driver’s License to register to vote. Since when have non-citizens been prevented from getting a DL?
That's not true. The in-state tuition rates that the student pays are given to those who are applying for citizenship. There are other restrictions that apply as well.
Newt Ping!
Where did you get that conventionally understood definition? as far as i know amnesty is forgiveness of an act committed. In this case what would be forgiven is the illegal entry and the illegal ID’s used to illegally drive and all the other prior illegal acts. In no way does the word amnesty confer additional rights.
Nice try but Newt fails. I have to obey the laws of this nation but these people,because the crime is so massive in scope,get off? To hell with that.
That's a hell of a thing to say to a US citizen as you are being an apologist for Newt wanting to allow some here illegally to stay.
I guess the irony went right over your head.
I believe Newt’s position to to review each illegal’s situation. If they are established, pay taxes, no criminal record, church affiliated, have family, etc., then give them a green card which allows them to remain here legally. Deport everyone else. No citizenship is granted. Once they have a green card then they can get in line BEHIND all the other legal immigrants in a quest for citizenship. This makes very good sense to me because only the honest, tax paying people will remain and Lord knows we need as many of those as we can get. I agree with Newt 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.
Well there you have it..pretty clear in my book...and Newt’s very much open for suggestions as to what might be pitfalls in the plans..he wants to know what’s workable and what’s not and why.
I can’t believe I am reading such moronic liberal propaganda on Free Republic.
First, your food inflation argument falls in the face of many factors, such as the law of supply and demand.
I dare you to explain how we get $10 applies using an applicable economic model.
And if people want to pay for $10 apples that is really none of your business.
Do you moan and whine about the cost of caviar or French Champagne.
I see people at Farmer’s Markets paying premium prices made at American owned and operated organic farms.
Second, the United States didn’t have food inflation before the invasion of illegals.
Third, most countries in this world grow their own food without any illegals and without massive food inflation.
Again, I dare you to use real numbers and real math to defend your idiotic liberal propaganda.
-—”Cain opposes the Dream Act and amnesty, which Newt supports”-—
Newt opposes the DREAM Act, and makes exception for only one item in the bill. He opposes Amnesty in the same way Cain does.
See tagline.
If what you say is true, then we are already paying $10 per apple in hidden fees. How’s that? We’ve got to pay the extra bucks for all of the services the illegals use, the crimes they commit, etc. I’d rather pay the open cost of $10 than the hidden ones and have my country destroyed in the meanwhile.
My view is that if Fed.gov has the resources to go after babysitters for back taxes, they damned well have the resources to go after illegal aliens and those who employ them.
I don’t think you want to use the Deuteronomy to support your position on aliens
Newt Gingrich - “Some illegals deserve amnesty”
What do you call that??
I took “25 years” as a figure of speech, and not as a policy recommendation. He’s got enough wiggle room to drive an 18-wheeler through on the NAFTA highway.
70% of illegals are on some form of welfare. They normally live in urban areas.
They ain’t picking apples.
It's the toehold in the door....won't take long for them to granted full citizenship after the ACLU takes it to court.
This is a horrible plan..
Unfortunately there are a number of people here on Free Republic who are apparently intellectually dishonest and are not interested in having a discussion with facts. They are more interested in promoting there candidate and are willing to spread lies and half truths about another candidate then get into a serious discussion of the issue. With that kind of an attitude there is no use getting into any kind of serious discussion with them as they will just continue to spout BS. Reminds me of dimoKKKRATS.
Guest worker program when we have double digit unemployment all over the country?
I dare you right now to go find me one community in California, Texas, Arizona or New Mexico that has a large illegal community and full employment or a labor shortage.
The truth is that most communities with massive amounts of illegals have above average unemployment rates.
Go look at the numbers before you spew such nonsense.
Lastly, politicians lie and they lie about the illegal problem more than anything else.
Anytime there is a regularization of legals it will lead to citizenship for them, because the Democratic Party, the ACLU, La RAZA will scream taxation without representation until they are blue in the face and will use every civil rights law and the 14th Amendment to make sure they do become citizens.
Do you know how you solve the problem?
The solution is simple.
Enforce the law that the federal government refuses to enforce and the illegals will stop flouting it.
"...suddenly we are going to punish them for something they did 10 or 20 years ago..."
"Again, how is it that armed robbery, or even rape has a statute of limitations... but entering the country illegally does not?"
Their illegality did not end after their illegal entry - in fact half the illegals came here legally on temporary visas and never left. It continued every day they remained here illegally. Since any statue of limitation starts tolling after the completion of the crime, theirs should not begin until the LEAVE THE US.
Of course there will be opposition no matter what plans are put up there..be it Newt or any other candidate...that’s why nothing ever gets done and the problem of illegals simply grows all the more.
I agree with a guest workeers plan...as I see even in my own community those who refuse to work even janitorial jobs as beneath them.
Look...the excess is here..and the problems that go woth the communities they form here...so what are you going to do? The Aclu is already opposing those who are enforcing the laws....so then what?
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.