Skip to comments.Spokesman for President Bush Posts on Free Republic About Immigration Bill
Posted on 06/14/2007 11:16:52 AM PDT by kristinn
A spokeman for the Bush administration sent an e-mail to Jim Robinson and myself confirming the authenticity of a post on Free Republic this afternoon regarding the immigration bill currently before the Senate as having been posted on behalf of the White House.
The spokesman, Nicholas Thompson, works for the White House Office of Strategic Initiatives. The Politico reported yesterday that Thompson and Kerrie Rushton, associate directors in the Office of Strategic Initiatives who work under Karl Rove, would be engaging the blogosphere on the immigration bill.
Thompson's post is on the thread titled Penalty Mitigation in the Immigration Reform Bill, a vanity posted by philman_36. Thompson posted at comment #53.
Thompson's e-mail to Free Republic included a brief introduction and the text of his posted comment:
I just wanted to let you know that I just posted a response to the post "Penalty Mitigation in the Immigration Reform Bill."
The White House appreciates the opportunity to respond on Free Republic.
I would like to point out that the Secretary is authorized to reduce or mitigate penalities against employers who in good faith are trying to comply with the law. Certainly, we understand that not all employers knowingly hire illegal immigrants; this will remain the case, especially before the bills new secure documentation requirements are fully phased in. We do not seek to wrongly penalize honest employers who unknowingly hire illegal immigrants, therefore we reserve the right to reduce or mitigate their penalties if the employer can show good faith compliance in following the law.
For those employers who do knowingly hire illegal immigrants, please know that we intend to penalize these employers strongly, and the Administration has already stepped up these penalties in the last couple of years. For example, a 2005 program, Operation Rollback, assessed $15,000,000 in civil fines to employers, an amount greater than the sum of administrative fines collected in the previous eight years and was the largest worksite enforcement penalty in US history. In the first quarter of FY07, criminal and civil forfeitures have totaled $26,700,000 for employers.
As a reminder of whats in the bill, fines for hiring an illegal worker are $5,000 maximum per illegal worker for the first offense, $10,000 maximum per illegal worker for the second, $25,000 maximum per illegal worker for the third , and $75,000 maximum per illegal worker for the fourth. In addition, the bill increases the maximum criminal penalty for a pattern or practice of unlawful hiring twenty-five-fold, from $3,000 to $75,000, and would impose a prison term of up to six months. This represents a significant increase in fines for employers who knowingly hire illegal immigrants.
White House Office of Strategic Initiatives
STOP ALL OF THE GOVERNMENT HANDOUTS. WELFARE, FOOD STAMPS, FREE MEDICAL, ETC. SHOULD NOT GO TO ILLEGALS!!!!!
If you make life unlivable, they will leave!!!!!
Hey There,,,I’ve never seen that pic,,,TANKS a Bunch...;0)
1) BUILD THE FENCE 2) DEPORT ALL ILLEGALS 3) FINE / PROSECUTE EMPLOYERS BREAKING THE LAW 4) INCREASE BORDER PATROL 5) CONTINUE LEGAL IMMIGRATION 6) ENFORCE EXISTING LAWS
They have to do it now because they see we will no longer put up with it and we will come up with our own laws on the local level.
They don’t want that. They don’t want enforcement.
My rage level is reaching new heights today.
You apparently did not read the whole thing, ICE wasn’t even formed until March of 2003. In reference to the worker, if that “spurt of work” as you call it, lasted over a year and was steadily increasing, yes, I would give them a raise for their effort.
But you aren't fooling anyone, you know all that and you've read Senator Session's take down of your bill. Here's what I want to know: Why are you fools supporting a bill that will make us a permanent minority party?
I come from California. I was a pollwatcher as a kid in the Carter - Ford race, was involved with a lot of assembly and state senate races. Typical volunteer. I watched illegal immigration change California from a swing state to a blue state, both due to stuffing illegals into Dem districts in reapportionment to increase Dem strength and because naturalized hispanics voted Democrat about 2 - 1. (We won't go into the illegal aliens who openly voted and bragged about it on TV, in the mid 90s, after the reporter demonstrated how easy voter fraud was the LA County Registrar tried to prosecute the reporter -- hilarity ensued.)
This margin was due both to overwhelming anti-American propaganda in the Spanish press and because they were poor and wanted taxpayers services. As one told me when I knocked on his door during a precinct walk in 1988 for a Riverside assembly candidate: "No Republicans, Democrats give you more stuff." Lots of middle class flight out of the state further drove our numbers down as folks got fed up and left the state (and, in fairness, suburban white women got very turned off by the GOP for reasons not relevant to this discussion which hurt us further.) And before you bring it up, anybody who tells you 187 is what turned the poor hispanics "against" us is crazy, they never were for us. The court overturning 187 did accelerate the middle class flight that began with the riots in 92.
I left California for Virginia, and I see here in Virginia the same situation developing. The democrats have ALWAYS been the party of the very poor and the very rich, and the GOP has ALWAYS represented the middle class. What, in God's name, makes you think if we import millions of poor people they will vote Republican????? It's a two fold political hit: If you think the Spanish language press or the MSM will give the GOP **ANY** credit for passing this "pander-sty" you are crazy -- AND why would these people vote against their financial interests?
This bill is wrong on policy and wrong politically. Please understand: if this bill passes I personally will never vote or volunteer again. It will be pointless, we will be a tiny minority and we won't matter. I have better things to do with my time then help a party bent on suicide.
1) Based on history we all believe you are lying.
2) YOU (the Executive and Legislative Branches) have been derelict in your elected duty to uphold the Constitution. You have turned a blind eye to what amounts to an invasion. The net results has been a non-assimilated sub-culture; Falling wages; reduced health care capabilities (we just read yesterday how some lady died in an Emergency Room crisis because the Emergency Room was overloaded and could not help her in time); failing schools; people coming into this country without necessary vaccinations; etc, and etc.
3) Crack down on illegal immigration for a few years -- really show us that you mean it, and are upholding our nation's sovereignty -- then let's talk. And by all means, if you want to increase the legal immigration limits now (processed through the legal, existing channels and with the existing criteria) - by all means do so. But do it legally - no 'cutting in line'.
Oklahoma just passed the toughest immigration laws of any state. We have two Senators leading the fight against this bill as well. Senator Inhofe has a bill in Judiciary with English Only and enforce the laws we have that is not seeing the light of day even though some grandstanders ask for other bills that would be better. They have one with ENFORCE they refuse to hear authored by Sen Inhofe!
....they're too good at finding a way to screw Americans first.
LOL... Let's see, there are 20 million illegals in the US and the big news today is the arrest of 165. ICE no doubt practically tripped over 10,000 illegals just driving to the plant for the arrests.
With "stepped up enforcement" like this, we might just as well run up the Mexican flag above the White House today.
So why, then, did it take three years for enforcement to improve?
And why did that coincide with Bush wanting shamnesty passed?
Give it up. You ain't fooling anyone parroting the Administration's line here. Their credibility is shot. Don't shoot down yours as well.
Aside from all the other valid and legal reasons for securing our borders and deporting those here illegally, I can’t understand the political aspect of amnesty either. Legalizing 12-20 million illegals, the VAST majority of which will feast on our social services and earned income tax credits, will complete the Democrats vision of socially engineering an unbeatable majority through the tax code and social programs. A Republican won’t be able to win a race for dog catcher if you add 12-20M - and I bet the real number is closer to 35-40M - voters to the Dem rolls. The US will become France faster Henry Waxman can start another witch hunt.
Ever heard of the INS? Geesh...how far will you guys go to be an apologist for this guy?
And if shamnesty is passed, guess what? That law is effectively gelded.
I think JRochelle is right - this is an effort by the DC power structure to head off grassroots, local and state efforts to deal with illegal immigration. If you make them all legal, those laws are worthless. Pretty sickening.
True. And you've got to like the fact the post didn't begin with "Hi, Bigots".
Nonetheless, I've no interest in discussing any "regularization of illegals" until after the federal government has conclusively demonstrated that they can -- and will -- secure the border and enforce employment laws. As well as monitor and control aliens with expired visas.
Give me three years of performance...and we can take a look at the next step.
** snork **
I am betting the White House is not going to like this thread....
What a bunch of BS.....the government has not protected the borders for years.....they have allowed illegal alien lawbreakers to have the run of the country.....they have provided these lawbreakers with education, healthcare etc. Anyone who thinks the government is now going to enforce the law should come see me as I’m selling a bridge in Brooklyn.
I'd like to know by what measure does ICE judge the effectiveness of their 'new approach', given that the numbers of illegal crossings and their subsequent employment are at unprecedented levels.
IMO the only thing they seek to deter is criticism of their lack of effectiveness.
How serious can we take them when they let innocent CITIZENS go to jail for doing their job and let gang members and drug smugglers pour over the border.
Go read the link I posted on 465.
Ace of Spades couldn’t put it more clearly.
I’m amused that the WH thinks they still have any credibility left on this issue. Who are they trying to fool?
Why did Pres. Bush force the Senate to remove the back taxes requirement for illegals when it was clear that even the Democrats were supporting this requirement?
Dixie, I agree with your post. My husband’s company employs over 100 people. It doesn’t take a whole lot of effort to verify a job applicant’s legal status and background.
If any employer hires illegal immigrants it is because he/she is either lazy or CHOOSES to hire illegals. (probably the latter, because it is less costly)
We have no Hispanics (legal or otherwise) working at our plant. Not because we don’t want them, but here in the Black Hills, there are so few of them. Perhaps the snow and cold has influenced that. If this shameful bill passes, that will, I fear, probably change.
Even though we live in a small pocket of America that is relatively free of the problems associated with illegal immigrants, I am certainly aware of the situation. We travel alot throughout the country and we have most of our family in Texas. Everytime we go there to visit, we feel we are in a different country. Two of my cousins in Texas recently took early retirement because they refused to teach in Spanish. We just returned last night from a 10-day trip to California and Nevada. I felt like we were coming back to America when we landed in South Dakota. Sad, isn’t it?
The message appears to be obtuse or abstruse or something along those lines. It needs bullet points, no more than seven, and each point should have no more than five phrases. The way it is seems obfuscatory, and deliberately so. This should be simple or it should be sent to the landfill. Perhaps the White House has the germ of a good idea or perhaps not, but we need the patience of a reader of Proust to begin to make sense of this.
I agree that the INS was a joke...it was poorly organized... but ICE has dramatically increased enforcement, that is a fact. I am not being an apologist or parroting their lines, I am presenting facts. I will give credit where credit is due, unlike most on here that keep screaming about how there is no enforcement, when it has not only increased substantially, but they are starting to arrest employers and seize their assets rather than fining them, which did no good at all.
Welcome to FR. Please pass this message on to President Bush: Mr. President, I believe that you are a decent, compassionate man. That is partly why I voted for you for President. I also voted for you because I believe that you truly love this country and would work for the benefit of all of it’s citizens. Mr. President, you have let your compassion get in the way of what you have elected to do. It’s fine that you want people of other nations to have the same opportunities that the citizens of the United States have, but your loyalty must be to U.S. citizens. It is not your right or duty to assist non-citizens at the expense of citizens. Once you are out of office you will be free to do as you please to further your agenda. But for the next 18 months you have a duty to act in the best interest of the citizens of this country. Thank you for serving our country and may God Bless you and your family.
I'm going to bet that your comment will be the absolutely most sensible comment to appear on this thread, so I feel pretty comfortable getting back to my housework.
Youre a businessman, in 1986 a business proposal is put to you, while far from perfect, it will fix a problem for you, so you agree and the deal is signed.
You immediately fulfill every one of your required items in the contract, but in the intervening twenty years your partner never fulfills his required actions in the contract, in fact, he makes only the most minimal and token efforts to appear to care about his contractual obligations.
Now, twenty years later, your partner again comes to you with the same plan, gussied up a bit, but on the whole, the same plan he proposed but failed to live up to back in 1986.
Are you going to gladly sign the new contract, or are you going to be very apprehensive and if not rejecting it outright, demand that he prove he will carry out his contractual obligations?
That is exactly where we are today and why we have been telling Bush for six years: Secure the borders first to prove his and Congress true intentions before we agree to any further phony immigration reforms.
Spokesman for President Bush Posts on Free Republic About Immigration Bill
Posted by kristinn
On News/Activism 06/14/2007 11:16:52 AM PDT · 539 replies · 10,276+ views
“Fred Thompson 2008 - Law and Order on the border”
The "I'll see you at the bill signing that Bush proclaims is not dead " is too stupid for words and is making the speculation of a hidden agenda VERY credible. In fact, I, as many here, would no longer believe any theory to the contrary.
So... if the President does not pull back now and comply with the will of the people AND his own party (because they still have to answer to the voters) then there can be no other logical conclusion than the President does have a hidden agenda, it is not in the interests of American Citizens and the demonstration of total distain for the will of the people in the form of government proclamations that are not "from the consent of the governed" will cause MAJOR upheaval in the very structure of our government.
The total distain by the current administration for the will of the people in the form of government proclamations are also pointing to the exact organizations and individuals that are controlling the President. And control it is because everyone, right down to the dummies at DU can see that no matter how many times the President tries to tell everyone this is not amnesty no one believes him because right there in the bill IS AMNESTY!. You even spell out that it is amnesty while trying to say it is not!
..from FOX news TODAY!
The base immigration bill seeks to tighten border security, put an estimated 12 million illegal immigrants on a path to permanent residency
What is the Presidents motivation to lie?
What kind of fools are you people?
Are you inventing a new level of low in backstabbing pond scum?
Do you, or anyone among you really think ANYONE believes you any longer? This administration has not a single shred of credibility left.
Yup. The name "Bush" has become another four-letter word. John and John Quincy they ain't.
Like totally. ;)
“You may fire when you are ready Gridley.”
Commodore George Dewey, 1 May 1898, at the Battle of Manila Bay during the Spanish-American War.
Thank you for increasing the penalties for employers who willfully hire illegal aliens without proper verification. Please provide evidence of how you are going to enforce those requirements and how long it will take to eliminate hiring of illegal aliens.
Please address whether you will propose increasing the fines and penalties outlined in U. S. Code, Title 8, as applied to those aliens who enter or have entered our Country illegally.
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.