Illegal immigration may decide California recall

Illegal immigration has resurfaced as one of the top issues in California and will figure prominently in the recall election. In fact, the bill signed by Gov. Gray Davis to give driver licenses to illegal aliens has ripped the scab off the debate over Proposition 187, a 1994 measure that was passed by 59 percent of voters in the state, which Davis refused to defend in the courts.

Proposition 187 was a most reasonable measure. It simply would keep those who come here illegally from using our public schools, receiving social services or non-emergency health care. After all, if we can identify illegal aliens, we can send them back to their country of origin where their children can go to school while they go through the application process to come here legally.

The United States has a generous immigration policy. We accept over a million legal immigrants a year. However, because we also have one of the most generous welfare policies, there must be limits to our generosity.

Those who won't defend Proposition 187, say that illegal immigration is the problem of the federal government and if the feds don't cut illegals off at the border, the states then have the responsibility of taking care of all these folks. This is nonsense!

Breaking and entering is a crime. It is against the law at the border and it is against the law in every state in the union. What if we apply this misguided thinking on illegal immigration across the board?

Breaking and entering remains a crime in your state. However, once someone breaks into your home, you are responsible for taking care of that person for the rest of his or her natural life.

Think about that for a moment. You and your family go out for the evening. When you return, you find that another entire family has broken into your home and has polished off the leftovers in the refrigerator. The dad is now wearing your robe and slippers and has settled in front of the family television. The mom is busy helping herself to your wife's best clothes and the kids are playing video games on your computer.

You call the cops ... who remind you that the law has changed. They read you your rights – or in this case, their rights. "You, Joe and Jane average American, now must see that this family is well fed. You must make sure these folks are added to your health-care policy because, when these family members become ill, you now are responsible for seeing that their health-care bills are paid.

"One more thing," the voice on the other end of the phone is sympathetic, but emphatic, "You must see that their kids are in school tomorrow morning because their education is also your responsibility."

This is not all that far-fetched. While California taxpayers and the taxpayers in other border states have shouldered the lions' share of the cost of illegal immigration, the federal government distributes your tax dollars to these states for everything from public education to housing and health care.

Yes, breaking and entering your home still is a crime but you now are forced to pay some of these costs just the same. That is one of the reasons many liberal Democrats say the Bush tax cut was ill-advised because these costs are expected to rise.

Presently, those who break into our country have everything to gain and absolutely nothing to lose.

Unfortunately, many Republicans also subscribe to the status quo. Arnold Schwarzenegger, the leading Republican in the race to unseat Governor Davis, recently declared, "Proposition 187 has been resolved by the courts." Schwarzenegger says, "It's time to move on." His idea of moving on is to have the president and the U.S. Congress "increase federal reimbursements for these costs," in other words, your share.

State Sen. Tom McClintock has come out of nowhere to within striking distance of Schwarzenegger and the party establishment can't seem to understand why this is happening.

Perhaps, just perhaps, it is because McClintock has pledged to defend Proposition 187 if he is elected governor.

In this re-call election, all bets are off. Most taxpayers in California don't really care about party labels. They want the state's fiscal problems fixed and they never will be fixed until those who break into this country are cut off and sent home.

This recall election isn't about Democrats vs. Republicans. It's about a man who will defend the law, Tom McClintock, and his opponents who defend lawlessness.

I missed this show, but this is here to share:

JOE SCARBOROUGH, HOST: Tonight on SCARBOROUGH COUNTRY: A new congressional bill tries to ban from America all citizens from terrorist nations. Is this paranoia at its worst or national security at its best?

You’re about to enter SCARBOROUGH COUNTRY. No passport required, no San Francisco liberals allowed.
Hey, welcome to our show. I’m Joe Scarborough.

We’re going to say more about that later on the show. But, first, I want to talk about Representative Gresham Barrett. And he’s hunting around for co-sponsors on his new bill, the Stop Terrorism Entry Program, that would actually prohibit a person from a state who sponsors terrorism from entering the United States. And it would also require current visitors and students from those countries to leave the United States within 60 days.
And the congressman joins us tonight. He’s a Republican from South Carolina.
Congressman, thank you so much for being with us.
I want to begin by asking you, why do you think it’s so important for this bill to become law?
REP. GRESHAM BARRETT ®, SOUTH CAROLINA: Well, I will tell you something, Joe, the president of the United States-and I agree with him 100 percent-said that we are at war with terrorism.
And that’s exactly what we’re doing. Listen, I fought and defended my country in the United States Army. I raised my hand to protect and defend this country and the Constitution, just like I did when I put this black suit on as a United States congressman. One of the toughest things I ever did was give a flag to a friend of mine’s wife that had been killed in a helicopter crash. And I am not going to look any husband or wife in this country in the face and tell them that I didn’t do everything I could possibly do to stop terrorism from coming-terrorists from coming into this country.
I think it’s important for our national security.
SCARBOROUGH: Well, Congressman, let’s look at the State Department’s current list of state sponsors of terrorism that you would take aim at. We have Iran. We have Iraq. We’ve got Libya, Cuba, North Korea, and the Sudan.
Now, these are some of the most oppressive governments in the world. Why should we close the door to freedom from people who live in these countries, who I would think would need shelter in America’s shore more than any other citizens of any other countries across the world?
BARRETT: Well, Joe there are some exceptions.
No. 1, for political or religious reasons, if you want to seek asylum in the United States, you can do that. The other reason, if you want to have an emergency medical reason, you can come into the country. But listen, there was an article in the paper today. And I don’t remember which paper it was, but it said that our government officials, our law enforcement officials, are compiling a list of 100,000 possible terrorists in this country.
And I know-I don’t know for a fact, but I feel in my bones that, out of those 100,000, there are some people from these seven countries. And if they’re in this country and they’re supposedly terrorists, let’s get them out. We are at war. And I’m going to do everything I can to protect my homeland.
SCARBOROUGH: Well, what about the 15 of 19 terrorists on 9/11 who were from Saudi Arabia and Pakistan? And you take Pakistan, which is the epicenter of terrorism around the world, isn’t it true that your bill won’t apply to these two countries? And doesn’t that defeat the entire purpose of what you’re trying to do, which is to keep terrorists, potential terrorists and terrorist sponsors from these dangerous states out of America? Why don’t you add Saudi Arabia to that list? Why don’t you add Pakistan to that list?
BARRETT: It’s just like you said earlier, Joe. This is a step. We call it STEP legislation, Stop Terrorist Entry Program.
And this is a small piece of the puzzle. We’re working on a comprehensive immigration bill right now, as well as a lot of other congressmen. And I’m not saying this is a panacea. This isn’t something that’s going to solve our problems overnight. But, again, it is a start and a step in the right direction. And we do have to address that, because we have terrorists coming in to our country through friendly countries. So we’re going to have to address that sooner or later.
But, again, this is the first step, I think, and a step in the right direction.
SCARBOROUGH: Well, let’s talk about another step we should be taking. There’s the Syria Accountability Act. And it calls on Syria to stop sponsoring terrorism and to end its weapons of mass destruction programs or face sanctions, like a ban on U.S. exports to Syria and investment in Syria, a downgrade of diplomatic relations. And it would restrict the travel of Syrian diplomats in the United States.
But unfortunately, this is another bill, like yours, that hasn’t passed yet. But isn’t this a type of like commonsense legislation we need to start off, where we focus on governments like Syria, where we stop playing it both ways, like we’re doing with Saudi Arabia, like we’re doing with Pakistan, like we’re doing with these other countries, again, that don’t fit neatly on the state sponsor of terror list that the State Department puts out every year? What do we do about a country like Syria?
BARRETT: Well, you’re exactly right, Joe.
And I think you hit on one of the major problems. We have got to be proactive. Listen, how long does it take for us to wake up? Doggonit, we had an embassy bombed. We had a United States ship bombed. We had bombings here on our own soil and lost wonderful lives, American lives and countless other lives, citizens and folks that weren’t even American.
Listen, it’s time we started being proactive. The president said it the other day. A dear friend of mine, Representative Carter from Texas, is shopping around a bill right now that, if you get convicted of terrorism, that you can face the death penalty. It’s time we started being proactive. It’s time we realized that we are at war and do everything we can to keep our country safe and strong.
SCARBOROUGH: Congressman, one final question. Does your bill have any chance of passing? How many co-sponsors do you have right now?
BARRETT: Well, we dropped it last week. We’re in the process of shopping it around right now. And I’ll tell you what. We’re going to work hard on this thing because it’s the right thing to do to keep our country headed in the right direction, to keep our folks safe.
SCARBOROUGH: All right, Congressman Barrett from South Carolina, thank you so much for your service to our country now and, of course, your service to our country when you were in uniform.

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.