Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Why the Railroad Effort on the Amnesty Bill?
Jawa Report ^ | June 16, 2007 | Ragnar Danneskjold

Posted on 06/16/2007 8:02:53 AM PDT by 3AngelaD

We can all understand the push by big business to keep their steady flow of illegal laborers coming in, strengthening their bargaining position against blue-collar working class Americans. Then again, they already have that today in droves. Why the sudden balls-to-the-wall push to get it all "kosher" right now? Mickey Kaus forwards a theory:

Chertoff and Kyl both seem to have answered that question recently, Kyl in his Wall Street Journal interview and Chertoff on Fox News yesterday: because businesses are starting to worry about efforts to enforce immigration laws at the local level. One state in the vanguard of that effort is Kyl's (and McCain's) home state of Arizona, where the legislature has passed numerous laws (usually vetoed) on the issue, and where the public voted for Prop 200 back in 2004.

To me that says something far more ominous than that Congress is being disingenuous or naïve on the matter. Far from simple being empty promises, this amnesty bill is actually a blatant attempt to head off any attempts at enforcement at all.

I think this is probably right. I think big business realizes that voters are going to extract some very explicit and unequivocal promises from their candidates next year. I think they realize at this point that a number of their champions on this bill are not coming back to Washington after the next election.

Big agriculture and big construction realize that they'll be faced with a new Commander-in-Chief, Democrat or Republican, who will likely have made a list of unequivocal promises to the voters during the campaign. Given the opportunity to build up public goodwill with a series of big, high-profile immigration busts in her first six months of office, does anyone think that President Hillary would pass it up? If she's anywhere near as calculating as her reputation suggests, there's not a chance she'll pass up that opportunity.

A Republican President would feel less need for high-profile token efforts, but may bring in a Justice Department that actually cares about national security. (How crazy would that be?) If you're an employer who's been skirting the law for years with a wink and a nod, this change in the winds has to be keeping you up at night--with good reason. Some CEOs looking at public opinion polls and knowing their employment rolls haven't been even close to right with God, have to be dealing with some serious heartburn at the thought of angry villagers at the corporate gates demanding massive fines and/or a few years in federal pound-me-in-the-ass prison.

If the employers can just get across the line on this, they've significantly reduced their exposure. This Amnesty Bill represents a sort of "get out of jail free" card for these executives. Whether it'll actually work out that way is another matter. They see the writing on the wall, and they're pulling out the stops to protect their own hides, even if they have to wreck their own country to do it. Of course, jamming this piece of sh*** down our throats only adds to the long list of reasons we're already pissed as hell at the employers and their elected cronies.

This may be your time, fellas. You may have the upper hand now. The men in power are your boys, and you may get them to vote how you like, even against the clear will of the people who sent them there. Enjoy it while it lasts, but don't forget it for a second: our time is coming. You have the cash, but we have the numbers. A whole lot of us have damn long memories. We're gonna remember every bit of this sordid ordeal. And payback, as they say, is a bitch.

TOPICS: Government
KEYWORDS: aliens; amnesty; cheaplabor; illegals; immigrantlist; immigration; noamnestyforillegals; pitchforkpat
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-200201-209 next last
To: RightWhale

>>The security thing is a distraction: if laws mean nothing what is left?<<

“The security thing” as seen by pro-amnesty people is that if most of them are legalized, the feds will know where they are. I don’t agree that this will be an overall plus to security.

As I see it, “the security thing” is that amnesty

1) Will legalize some terrorists who are currently illegal, and

2) encourages further massive illegal immigration, which is an ideal way to conceal terrorists entering the US.

I agree that “If laws mean nothing, nothing is left.”

51 posted on 06/16/2007 9:20:11 AM PDT by ding_dong_daddy_from_dumas (Illegals: representation without taxation--Citizens: taxation without representation)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: ding_dong_daddy_from_dumas

Over the past winter the Troopers came down this little road half a dozen times and eventually arrested 3-4, all terrorists but none either Mexican or Arab. We have enough homegrown already due to general disregard of laws and the values the country started with that some foreign terrorists wouldn’t amount relatively to spit in a bucket of swampwater. Just my opinion.

52 posted on 06/16/2007 9:25:51 AM PDT by RightWhale (Repeal the Treaty)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: 3AngelaD

Many politicians have come and gone but the majority have remained the same for years — like Kennedy, McCain, Lott, etc., etc. Illegal immigration has been going on for decades without any serious attempt by the federal government to stem the tide. So — the logical inference is that they, for some reason, desire illegal immigration. We know that senators have a way of leaving office very wealthy. How? Why? Because they suck up to big business. Big business, by the way, is the real beneficiary of illegal immigration. They pay wages that Americans don’t want to work for. It is much more profitable to have a permanent slave class. So we understand the reason for turning a blind eye for so long at illegals streaming across the border. Now those same politicians who allowed illegal immigration in the first place are telling us that we can’t deport the 20 million law-breakers who are here. Why? It’s not because it is physically impossible or heartless. It’s the money!

53 posted on 06/16/2007 9:26:07 AM PDT by Designed
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 3AngelaD
Make a call to their office and use these loopholes as talking points about why the Bill should not be passed.

20 Loopholes in the Senate Immigration Bill

Loophole 1 – Legal Status Before Enforcement:

Amnesty benefits do not wait for the “enforcement trigger.” After filing an application and waiting 24 hours, illegal aliens will receive full “probationary benefits,” complete with the ability to legally live and work in the U.S., travel outside of the U.S. and return, and their own social security card. Astonishingly, if the trigger is never met and amnesty applications are therefore never “approved,” the probationary benefits granted to the illegal alien population never expire, and the new social security cards issued to the illegal alien population are not revoked. [See pp. 1, 290-291, & 315].

Loophole 2 – U.S. VISIT Exit Not In Trigger:

The “enforcement trigger,” required to be met before the new temporary worker program begins, does not require that the exit portion of U.S. VISIT system – the biometric border check-in/check-out system first required by Congress in 1996 that is already well past its already postponed 2005 implementation due date – to be in place before new worker or amnesty programs begin. Without the U.S. VISIT exit portion, the U.S. has no method to ensure that workers (or their visiting families) do not overstay their visas. Our current illegal population contains 4 to 5.5 million visa overstays, therefore, we know that the U.S. VISIT exit component is key to a successful new temporary worker program. [See pp. 1-2].

Loophole 3 – Trigger Requires No More Agents, Beds, or Fencing Than Current Law:

The “enforcement trigger” does not require the Department of Homeland Security to have detention space sufficient to end “catch and release” at the border and in the interior. Even after the adoption of amendment 1172, the trigger merely requires the addition of 4,000 detention beds, bringing DHS to a 31,500 bed capacity. This is far short of the 43,000 beds required under current law to be in place by the end of 2007, or the additional 20,000 beds required later in the bill. Additionally, the bill establishes a “catch, pay, and release” program. This policy will benefit illegal aliens from countries other than Mexico that are caught at the border, then can post a $5,000 bond, be released and never show up for deportation hearings. Annual failure to appear rates for 2005 and 2006, caused in part by lack of detention space, doubled the 2004 rate (106,000 – 110,000 compared with 54,000). Claims that the bill “expands fencing” are inaccurate. The bill only requires 370 miles of fencing to be completed, while current law already mandates that more than 700 miles be constructed [See pp. 1-2, & 10-11, and EOIR’s FY2006 Statistical Yearbook, p. H2, and The Secure Fence Act of 2004].

Loophole 4 — Three Additional Years Worth of Illegal Aliens Granted Status, Treated Preferentially To Legal Filers:

Aliens who broke into the country illegally a mere 5 months ago, are treated better than foreign nationals who legally applied to come to the U.S. more than two years ago. Aliens who can prove they were illegally in the U.S. on January 1, 2007, are immediately eligible to apply from inside the U.S. for amnesty benefits, while foreign nationals that filed applications to come to the U.S. after May 1, 2005 must start the application process over again from their home countries. Last year’s bill required illegal aliens to have been here before January 7, 2004 to qualify for permanent legal status. [See pp. 263, 282, & 306].

Loophole 5 – Completion of Background Checks Not Required For Probationary Legal Status:

Legal status must be granted to illegal aliens 24 hours after they file an application, even if the aliens have not yet “passed all appropriate background checks.” (Last year’s bill gave DHS 90 days to check an alien’s background before any status was granted). No legal status should be given to any illegal alien until all appropriate background checks are complete. [See pp. 290].

Loophole 6 – Some Child Molesters Are Still Eligible:

Some aggravated felons – those who have sexually abused a minor – are eligible for amnesty. A child molester who committed the crime before the bill is enacted is not barred from getting amnesty if their conviction document omitted the age of the victim. The bill corrects this loophole for future child molesters, but does not close the loophole for current or past convictions. [See p. 47: 30-33, & p. 48: 1-2]

Loophole 7 – Terrorism Connections Allowed, Good Moral Character Not Required:

Illegal aliens with terrorism connections are not barred from getting amnesty. An illegal alien seeking most immigration benefits must show “good moral character.” Last year’s bill specifically barred aliens with terrorism connections from having “good moral character” and being eligible for amnesty. This year’s bill does neither. Additionally, bill drafters ignored the Administration’s request that changes be made to the asylum, cancellation of removal, and withholding of removal statutes in order to prevent aliens with terrorist connections from receiving relief. [Compare §204 in S. 2611 from the 109th Congress with missing §204 on p. 48 of S.A. 1150, & see missing subsection (5) on p. 287 of S.A. 1150].

Loophole 8 – Gang Members Are Eligible:

Instead of ensuring that members of violent gangs such as MS 13 are deported after coming out of the shadows to apply for amnesty, the bill will allow violent gang members to get amnesty as long as they “renounce” their gang membership on their application. [See p. 289: 34-36].

Loophole 9 – Absconders Are Eligible:

Aliens who have already had their day in court – those subject to final orders of removal, voluntary departure orders, or reinstatement of their final orders of removal – are eligible for amnesty under the bill. The same is true for aliens who have made a false claim to citizenship or engaged in document fraud. More than 636,000 alien fugitives could be covered by this loophole. [See p. 285:19-22 which waives the following inadmissibility grounds: failure to attend a removal proceeding; final orders of removal for alien smuggling; aliens unlawfully present after previous immigration violations or deportation orders; and aliens previously removed. This appears to conflict with language on p. 283:40-41. When a direct conflict appears in a statute, the statue is interpreted by the courts to the benefit of the alien.].

Loophole 10 – Learning English Not Required For A Decade:

Illegal aliens are not required to demonstrate any proficiency in English for more than a decade after they are granted amnesty. Learning English is not required for an illegal alien to receive probationary benefits, the first 4-year Z visa, or the second 4-year Z visa. The first Z visa renewal (the second 4-year Z visa) requires only that the alien demonstrate an “attempt” to learn English by being “on a waiting list for English classes.” Passing a basic English test is required only for a second Z visa renewal (the third 4-year Z visa), and even then the alien only has to pass the test “prior to the expiration of the second extension of Z status” (12 years down the road). [See pp. 295-296].

Loophole 11 – Earned Income Tax Credit Will Cost Taxpayers Billions In Just 10 Years:

Current illegal aliens and new guest workers will be eligible for the Earned Income Tax Credit, a refundable tax credit designed to encourage American citizens and legal permanent residents to work. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that this loophole will cost the U.S. taxpayer up to $20 billion dollars in just the first 10 years after the bill’s enactment. To be consistent with the intent of the 1996 welfare reforms – which limited new immigrants from receiving public benefits until they had been legal permanent residents for five years – the bill should withhold EITC eligibility from amnestied aliens until they become legal permanent residents. Closing this loophole will save the taxpayers billions of dollars. [See p. 293 after S.A. 1190 was adopted, p. 307, p. 315, §606. All that is required for EITC eligibility is a social security number and resident alien status. Nothing in the bill’s tax provisions limit EITC eligibility. The issuance of social security numbers to aliens as soon as they apply for amnesty will ensure they are able to qualify for the EITC.]

Loophole 12 – Affidavits From Friends Accepted As Evidence:

Records from day-labor centers, labor unions, and “sworn declarations” from any non-relative (acquaintances, friends, coworkers, etc) are to be accepted as evidence that the illegal alien has satisfied the bill’s amnesty requirements. This low burden of proof will invite fraud and more illegal immigration – even aliens who are not yet in the U.S. will likely meet this burden of proof. DHS will not have the resources to examine whether the claims contained in the “sworn declarations” of the alien’s friends (that the alien was here prior to January 1, 2007 and is currently employed) are actually valid. [See p. 293: 13-16].

Loophole 13 – Taxpayer Funded Legal Counsel and Arbitration:

Free legal counsel and the fees and expenses of arbitrators will be provided to aliens that have been working illegally in agriculture. The U.S. taxpayer will fund the attorneys that help these individuals fill out their amnesty applications. Additionally, if these individuals have a dispute with their employer over whether they were fired for “just cause,” DHS will “pay the fee and expenses of the arbitrator.” [See p. 339:37-41, & p. 332: 37-38.]

Loophole 14 – In-State Tuition and Student Loans:

In-state tuition and other higher education benefits, such as Stafford Loans, will be made available to current illegal aliens that are granted initial “probationary” status, even if the same in-state tuition rates are not offered to all U.S. citizens. This would normally violate current law (8 U.S.C. §1623) which mandates that educational institutions give citizens the same postsecondary education benefits they offer to illegal aliens. [See p. 321: 8-31].

Loophole 15 – Inadequacy of the Merit System:

The “merit system,” designed to shift the U.S. green card distribution system to attract higher skilled workers that benefit the national interest, is only a shell of what it should have been. Though the merit system begins immediately, it will not increase the percentage of high skilled immigrants coming to the United States until 2016, 8 years after enactment. Of the 247,000 green cards dedicated to the merit based system each year for the first 5 years, 100,000 green cards will be reserved for low-skilled guest workers (10,000) and for clearing the current employment based green card backlog (90,000). From 2013 to 2015, the number of merit based green cards drops to 140,000, and of that number, 100,000 green cards are still reserved each year for low-skilled guest workers (10,000) and for clearing the current employment based green card backlog (90,000). Even after 2015, when the merit system really begins (in 2016) by having 380,000 green cards annually, 10,00 green cards will be reserved specifically for low skilled workers, and points will be given for many characteristics that are not considered “high-skilled.” For example, 16 points will be given for aliens in “high demand occupations” which includes janitors, maids, food preparation workers, and groundskeepers. [See p.260: 25 – p. 261: 20, p. 262, & The Department of Labor’s list of “occupations with the largest job growth” available at].

Loophole 16 – Visas For Individuals That Plan To Overstay:

The new “parent” visa contained in the bill which allows parents of citizens, and the spouses and children of new temporary workers, to visit a worker in the United States is not only a misnomer, but also an invitation for high rates of visa overstays. This new visa specifically allows the spouse and children of new temporary workers who intend to abandon their residence in a foreign country, to qualify to come to the U.S. to “visit.” The visa requires only a $1,000 bond, which will be forfeited when, not if, family members of new temporary workers decide to overstay their 30 day visit. Workers should travel to their home countries to visit their families, not the other way around. [See p. 277:1 – 33, and p. 276: 38-43].

Loophole 17 – Chain Migration Tippled Before Being Eliminated:

Though the bill will eventually eliminate chain migration (relatives other than spouses and children of citizens and legal permanent residents), it will not have full effect until 2016. Until then, chain migration into the U.S. will actually triple, from approximately 138,000 chain migrants a year (equal to 14% of the 1 million green cards the U.S. currently distributes on an annual basis) to approximately 440,000 chain migrants a year (equal to 45% of the 1 million green cards the U.S. currently distributes on an annual basis). [See pp. 260:13, p. 270: 29 – pp. 271: 17]

Loophole 18 – Back Taxes Not Required:

Last year’s bill required illegal aliens to prove they had paid three of their last five years of taxes to get amnesty. This year, payment of back taxes is not required for amnesty. The bill requires taxes to be paid at the time of application for a green card, but at that time, only proof of payment of Federal taxes (not state and local) is required for the years the alien worked on a Z visa, not the years the alien has already worked illegally in the United States. Though Senator McCain’s S.A. 1190, adopted by voice vote, claimed to “require undocumented immigrants receiving legal status to pay owed back taxes,” the amendment actually only required proof of payment of taxes for “any year during the period of employment required by subparagraph (D)(i).” Since the bill does not contain a subparagraph (D)(i), nor require any past years of employment as a prerequisite for amnesty, the amendment essentially only requires proof of payment of taxes for future work in the U.S., not payment of “back taxes.” [See p. 307, and p. 293 as altered by S.A. 1190, amendment p. 2: 19-20.]

Loophole 19 – Social Security Credits Allowed For Some Illegal Work Histories:

Aliens who came to the U.S. on legal visas, but overstayed their visas and have been working in the U.S. for years, as well as illegal aliens who apply for Z visa status but do not qualify, will be able to collect social security credits for the years they worked illegally. Under the bill, if an alien was ever issued a social security account number – all work-authorized aliens who originally came on legal visas receive these – the alien will receive Social Security credits for any “quarters of coverage” the alien worked after receiving their social security account number. Because the bill requires social security account numbers to be issued “promptly” to illegal aliens as soon as they are granted “any probationary benefits based upon application [for Z status]” (these benefits are granted 24 hours after the application is filed), an illegal alien who is denied Z visa status but continues to work illegally in the U.S. will accumulate Social Security credits. [See pp. 316:8 – 16, and pp. 315: 32-39]

Loophole 20 – Criminal Fines Not Proportional To Conduct:

The criminal fines an illegal alien is required to pay to receive amnesty are less than the bill’s criminal fines for paperwork violations committed by U.S. citizens, and can be paid by installment. Under the bill, an illegal alien must pay a $1,000 criminal fine to apply for a Z visa, and a $4,000 fine to apply for a green card. Eighty percent of those fines can be paid on an installment plan. Under the bill’s confidentiality provisions, someone who improperly handles or uses information on an alien’s amnesty application can be fined $10,000. Administration officials suggest that the bill’s “criminal fines are proportionate to the criminal conduct.” Why, then, is the fine for illegally entering, using false documents to work, and live one-tenth the fine for a paperwork violation committed by a government official? [See p. 287: 34, p. 317: 9, p. 315:6-8, & remarks made by Secretary Gutierrez on Your World with Neil Cavuto, 4:00 May 31, 2007]

Senator Sessions Releases List of 20 Loopholes in the Senate Immigration

—GWB and DHS got $1.2 billion for a border fence,
—GWB authorized 6,000 National Guardsmen to the border in rolling deployments of 3 weeks

—In his 2006 budget, GWB’s budget showed that 216 BP officers would be hired, not the 2,000

U.S. Border Patrol Director David Aguilar said two weeks ago, “The United States will have “operational control” of its border with Mexico by 2013.”

54 posted on 06/16/2007 9:29:26 AM PDT by B4Ranch (DRIP = "Don't Return Incumbent Politicians," – two terms, and they're out.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cicero

Here’s what I don’t understand: if all these cheap laborers are legalized, don’t they become subject to minimum wage laws? How does this help businesses? Of are businesses going to fire all the now-legal folks and hire the next wave of cheap illegals instead? If the latter, what are the now-legal folks going to do?

55 posted on 06/16/2007 9:50:06 AM PDT by ellery (I don't remember a constitutional amendment that gives you the right not to be identified-R.Giuliani)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: 3AngelaD
We can all understand the push by big business to keep their steady flow of illegal laborers coming in

Actually, I can't understand it. What was wrong for "big business" with the status quo. (assuming arguendo that "big business" is hiring these folks) If illegals are paid less than legals for similar work, and the bill eliminates the illegality, it would seem to me that the number of underpaid workers will decline drastically.


56 posted on 06/16/2007 9:50:21 AM PDT by ml/nj
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Paladin2

“The Washington DC establishment wants this all done and behind us before the ‘08 election really revs up.”

Yes. Wait until they try to push this on the public. Not only will there be a whole lot of naysayers who will be dumbfounded but, the outcry will make the illegal immigration debate look like a birthday party.


57 posted on 06/16/2007 9:55:46 AM PDT by wolfcreek (AMNESTY: See what BROWN can do for you..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: B4Ranch
Thanks for this information, B4.

I have edited it to fit in the Senator's website communication area, and told each of them that NO AMERICAN SENATOR with a conscience or love for this country can vote to bring this horrendous bill to become law.

We all need to flood their e-mail boxes and their phones, screaming protests that we won't have this shoved down our throats by elitists. These people are crazy!!

58 posted on 06/16/2007 10:03:50 AM PDT by janetgreen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: DoctorJim; 3AngelaD
You are both right. Doctor Jim I hate that American Citizens who own small businesses are out of the competition because Hispanic perhaps illegal aliens can employ people they don’t have to pay benefits to or workers don’t pay taxes and 3 Angela D, I agree with you that small businesses can take an inordinate amount of money off their personal taxes (we have relatives in the Alpaca business and they pay relatively NO taxes) but for three entrepeneurs, one in North Carolina and one in South Carolina, one in the landscape business, one in the road construction business and one in the roofing business, these entrepreneurs are all quality people who expect quality from their work people. In all three businesses, if the workers sluff off on the job or are dishonest in any way, and there are ways of knowing this, and that worker in these 3 businesses I have personal knowledge, are fired. And they know not to complain because they knew the rules to begin with. These three entrepeneurs have always had Caucasian , Black/African American, and Hispanic-legal and illegal. And guess who wins out on the reliable and honest worker category? Even without the language, Hispanics are more trustworthy. So it’s back to the work ethic and our lack of quality education that expects this of our own citizenry. Our educational system has sabotaged our own citizenry of the ability to work up the ladder because of low expectations in quality work and honesty.

So, if our educational system, and I am a former teacher who fought all the nonsense that has gone on exponentially for 40 years or more, has so dumbed down the American worker they only know expectation rather than hard, honest work, we are all losers. Businesses hire who they can trust. It turns out they have less trust in the American worker than they do the foreign worker, in my estimation; so they justify their anti-American hiring because it benefits their business at a higher level.


59 posted on 06/16/2007 10:05:31 AM PDT by Cordio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Cordio

“They do hire illegals, they earn a good salary. live in modern double wides with nice interiors, drive newer cars, and have their children well dressed and polite.”

Ask them if they pay taxes, buy their own insurance and have valid ID?

60 posted on 06/16/2007 10:07:33 AM PDT by wolfcreek (AMNESTY: See what BROWN can do for you..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: ellery
Here in California small business’s have been using illegals for so long many are in reasonably high paying blue collar positions and would be difficult, if not impossible, to replace. If these jefe’s could magically obtain legal status the owners lives would definitely be less stressful. Then the next wave will keep the wages low for the unskilled positions.
61 posted on 06/16/2007 10:13:07 AM PDT by moreisee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: DoctorJim

“if it doesn’t pass when they resurrect it, it may be too late for them, and their friends, to walk away scott free after trying to destroy the face of our nation.”

And they’ll probably get a visit from Fat Tony or Antonio at payback time. There’s a lot of *big money* riding on this decision.

62 posted on 06/16/2007 10:13:09 AM PDT by wolfcreek (AMNESTY: See what BROWN can do for you..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: LadyNavyVet
Beneath that level, there is an unholy convergence of interests driving this. Business and agriculture want an endless, cheap, easily exploitable source of labor.

True, but there's another side to this. Business, agriculture, and even economic reality needs an influx of new CONSUMERS in this country -- to prop up what has become an increasingly unsustainable socioeconomic order.

63 posted on 06/16/2007 10:15:07 AM PDT by Alberta's Child (I'm out on the outskirts of nowhere . . . with ghosts on my trail, chasing me there.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: janetgreen

Anything for you, my Dear.

Fill their mailboxes, answering machines, everything with facts about why we are not going to support them if they continue to destroy America.

64 posted on 06/16/2007 10:17:45 AM PDT by B4Ranch (DRIP = "Don't Return Incumbent Politicians," – two terms, and they're out.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: mo
The failure to provide adequate border security really does call into question the premise of the war in Iraq, at least in my mind.

Welcome to the crowd, Mo. I've been saying this since the months before the invasion of Iraq, and one of the best signs of progess in my mind is that I can at least say this "out loud" at a place like FreeRepublic and find more than just a few people agreeing with me.

This stupid "war on terror" is -- and always has been -- a complete farce. This country isn't defending itself at all . . . it's building an empire.

65 posted on 06/16/2007 10:17:55 AM PDT by Alberta's Child (I'm out on the outskirts of nowhere . . . with ghosts on my trail, chasing me there.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: sam_paine
Which, of course, means that Prez-2008 will have the oppty to crack down on illegal-supporting big-businesses even more

He/she may have the opportunity but not the will. Sure Hillary might make some token busts, but real enforcement will not be implemented. The Dems are not going to alienate their constituency.

If you're an illegal hiring big-biz owner, then you DO NOT want an amnesty bill. Amnesty gives your existing cheap labor rights to min wage etc. And Amnesty doesn't indemnify you from the Hillary Federal Govt coming down on you in 2009, it makes it worse.

It is not big biz but small to medium biz that doesn't want amnesty. Still, without any real enforcement, it really is meaningless. If you believe that Hillary is really going to enforce this bill, you're nuts. The Dems are the ones fighting the building of a fence. They will listening to interest groups like La Raza. With 45 million Hispanics now and a birthrate twice as high as that of the rest of the American population, the rapid Hispanic population boom in the coming decades is just starting. And so is their political clout. They will use our own political system to hang us.

If you're an illegal hiring big-biz owner, you want to keep illegals illegal and cheap, and you want to keep your protectors in congressional seats continuously. A law cannot protect you because it can be overturned at any given time.

A law is meaningless if it is not enforced. We don't have the bureaucracy capable of enforcing these laws. The resources just aren't there nor is the political will.

66 posted on 06/16/2007 10:26:22 AM PDT by kabar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: B4Ranch
I just received information from a friend that the 854 mile fence, passed and signed by Bush, IS NOT GOING TO HAPPEN!

The House decided to withhold funding for the fence.

I just called my "rep" Jane Harman and demanded that she explain to her constituents why she voted no to the funding. (of course she won't bother answering that question).

67 posted on 06/16/2007 10:29:12 AM PDT by janetgreen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: sam_paine
Except that no "bill" can do any such thing. The status quo that's passed today can be quietly amended and reversed as an amendment to some other bill next session.

Wrong on one very important point. If this bill passes, the 12 to 20 million illegals with be given legal status. Once that is done, it is game, set, and match. No matter what future Congresses may do, and I believe they will try to remove whatever "concessions" the Dems made to get this bill, e,g., changing chain migration, you can't unring a bell. These 12 to 20 million will be legal residents of the US now and forever more and will be able to bring in their spouses, children, and parents. They will also be entitled to paid legal representation and SS numbers. Once that is done, nothing else really matters in terms of how this will destroy this country as we know it.

68 posted on 06/16/2007 10:36:26 AM PDT by kabar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: wolfcreek
I don’t know about taxes, but I imagine not. The company pays for on the job injuries in all three cases I know about, but not for the family, as far as I know, but maybe there is another loophole. Two of these entrepreneurs I know would probably pay for doctors/hospitalization for their workers’ families because there is a personnel relationship. And I know, you are saying that these business owners are willing to pay for their hospitaliztion/doctors visits because they are paying them less and they are not paying taxes and they are all illegal. So what we’ve got is Americans knowingly hiring illegals because they can get them for less and pay out for their doctors needs when it is necessary. So the owner and the illegals are not paying taxes on this. Then we have the Americans, and they have been hired into these businesses I’ve watched for 8 years, who have not fulfilled their obligations to their job at the level of the owners expectations; so they are fired or let go. And you say back to me maybe, “but they were fired only because they could hire someone else for less.” And I say, they that Americans would never lose those jobs-at least in the three small businesses I know, unless they were unreliable for a number of reasons.

So we have big business and small business lobbying groups wanting amnesty and voting against the Constitution because it benefits them to have cheaper and usually more reliable workers for their business. And we have the Washington critters voting for where the money is for the next election. And we have the leftest educational system so well intact that it sabotages our future work force. Cordio

69 posted on 06/16/2007 10:41:14 AM PDT by Cordio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: 3AngelaD

Explain to me again why I should continue to support the Republicans.

70 posted on 06/16/2007 11:06:44 AM PDT by claudiustg (I didn't leave the Republican Party. I was purged.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sam_paine
If you're an illegal hiring big-biz owner, then you DO NOT want an amnesty bill. Amnesty gives your existing cheap labor rights to min wage etc.

Oh, I believe you'd want this particular amnesty bill, considering the provision least mentioned by its supporters: the so-called "temporary Z visa." From the moment the bill is signed, there will be no deportations, since all illegals will be assumed to be eligible. DHS has six months to set up a system for registering these people (with that exhaustive 24-hour background check). I doubt they will meet that deadline, and even if they do, the registration period can be extended or renewed (a given, considering the sheer numbers, the historic inefficiency of any government bureaucracy and the fact that extensions have been granted in every previous immigration bill), and that presumption of eligibility will continue.

There's no specific deportation rules or deadline set down for non-registrants; and no way of even estimating what percentage of illegals have registered at any given point, considering the 12 million figure is very likely a gross underestimation. So you wind up with an amorphous mess of a population of non-registered illegals mixed with Z-visa holders, and an indefinite period of business as usual, compounded by the fact that employers are actually forbidden, according to this bill, to use the government status-checking system as a prerequisite of employment. They must hire first, then check, wait for results from the same slow bureaucracy, then allow an appeal by the employee, yada, yada, yada.

Regarding the rush to amnesty, this has been Bush's holy grail from the moment of his inauguration. 9/11 threw a huge monkey-wrench into his plans, or he would have pushed something through in his first term (he tried, then dropped it). As it stands now, it's his last chance, with the only constraint being getting it "out of the way" before the primaries; because, of course, we dumb, xenophobic Americans have short memories and all will be forgotten soon.

I also don't believe the congress critters believe their future is doomed; rather I think they've convinced themselves that 2006 proved conservatism is dying, and that centrism, as exemplified by both Clinton and GW Bush, is the bright new promised land to which these privileged few have been ordained to lead us all.

Hillary? She's more likely to push for en-masse naturalization of the new Democrat base of temporary (and indefinitely renewable) Z-visa holders than raid businesses.

71 posted on 06/16/2007 11:07:22 AM PDT by browardchad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: LadyNavyVet

I think at the highest political levels, i.e., the Bushes, Clintons, certain Senators, and the oligarchy of Mexico it is about creating MexAmeriCanada. Beneath that level, there is an unholy convergence of interests driving this.”
So it would appear -—— Throw in some concern about China’s rise and it all starts to come together.

72 posted on 06/16/2007 11:14:03 AM PDT by cowdog77 (" Are there any brave men left in Washington, or are they all cowards?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Cordio
It has not been my experience that Hispanics are the most reliable group of workers. The last three jobs I have had done on my property where preformed by Hispanic workers. The quality of work was substandard and when confronted there was immediate agitation and aggression. The only reason business hires illegal is because of cheap labor costs not because of reliability or a job well done.
73 posted on 06/16/2007 11:18:06 AM PDT by pterional
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: 3AngelaD; All
For email addy's to the STAFF of the Senators, here is a great link:

Post No. 22 Hat tip to caphillbabe.

They don't want us coming in the front door, let's try the back door like the illegals do.

74 posted on 06/16/2007 11:26:03 AM PDT by greyfoxx39 ("You know," he says, "I haven't spent a dime yet." FDT, June 9, 2007)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pterional
That may be indeed true overall. But we hired through a reputable firm, and the entrpreneur, who was owner of his own business was a native born American of German discent who spoke Spanish to his workers and obviously they had been trained by him. and he did all the talking and discussion with them. And he was not at our home for the entire job. To insure a 50 year warranty where all will be paid for by HomeDepot if there is any damage or problem-And we have 140 mile an hour winds up our mountain, you have to be confident of your workers and your product.

It would be hard to hire a Hispanic crew if one couldn't’t really communicate with them.


75 posted on 06/16/2007 11:28:00 AM PDT by Cordio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies]

To: truthkeeper

Your analysis re the North American Union and trans-Texas Highwy as to the urgent push to get the illegal Immigration bill through sounds just right!

76 posted on 06/16/2007 11:29:53 AM PDT by cardinal (Kill it. Enforce existing laws.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: 3AngelaD
Eye noteece jesterday that El Presidente say we need emeegrintos to do thee yobs that Americans AREN'T doing.

Theese is change from yobs that Americans WON'T

77 posted on 06/16/2007 11:36:01 AM PDT by stboz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: stboz

Si, es verdad. Ellos tubieron que cambiar su mensaje. Malditos. Todavía están mintiendo. Pinches malditos.

78 posted on 06/16/2007 11:40:34 AM PDT by 3AngelaD (They screwed up their own countries so bad they had to leave, and now they're here screwing up ours)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 77 | View Replies]

To: RightWhale
The link between massive illegal immigration and terror by Arabs is weak.

Weak? Was this suppose to be a joke? Did I misread your post?

We are at war, no?

We have millions entering this country during war. We have trucks entering daily with thousands of pounds of dope, and many others are crammed with human cargo.

Mexico is one of the most corrupt countries on earth. Officials can be bribed with mere tokens.

Since 911 airport security has been beefed up. It would be a little difficult to smuggle in weapons, bio material, bio weapons, and material for other weapons, dirty bombs etc in a commercial airliner. No?

How easy would it be for ship to sail to Mexico, filled with all kinds of nasty stuff, bad guys, weapons, bio stuff, or other weapons material, or whatever? Bribe a local official if need be. Put these guys and their nasty cargo on trucks and roll it across the border along with all the other trucks entering with loads of dope and human cargo. This could *easily be accomplished.

79 posted on 06/16/2007 11:42:32 AM PDT by dragnet2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: truthkeeper
You've got it, truthkeeper...

..May God have've got it.

80 posted on 06/16/2007 11:44:49 AM PDT by Guenevere (Duncan Hunter for President, 2008!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: browardchad

-—I also don’t believe the congress critters believe their future is doomed; rather I think they’ve convinced themselves that 2006 proved conservatism is dying, and that centrism, as exemplified by both Clinton and GW Bush, is the bright new promised land to which these privileged few have been ordained to lead us all.-—

Exactly! A future where the parties are tweedledum and tweedledee. Where there is little political division or rancor and even less political interest on the part of the public.

81 posted on 06/16/2007 11:45:32 AM PDT by claudiustg (I didn't leave the Republican Party. I was purged.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies]

To: mo

Also note that not controlling the border makes the WOD a joke also.

82 posted on 06/16/2007 11:46:43 AM PDT by Paladin2 (Islam is the religion of violins, NOT peas.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: Paladin2; All

From NRO The Corner...

Immigration Update [Kathryn Jean Lopez]

From a knowledgeable Senate source:

Here is what we expect to happen next week, though it is far from clear yet. In short, we expect it to come up this week, and if Senators (as we expect) object to unanimous consent agreements, it will take the better part of 6-8 days to get this done. They will not get it done this week (but Reid threatens to stay in next weekend).

1. We expect Reid, in conjunction with support from McConnell, Lott and Grand Bargainers Kyl, Martinez, Graham and McCain, to introduce a brand new piece of legislation - and use Rule 14 to put the bill immediately on the Senate calendar without going thru committee - which of course, the first bill did not do as well.

* It is possible that Reid will choose a different procedural path - but we expect the effect to be the same.

2. We expect that the new bill’s drafters (White House, Kennedy, Kyl, Graham, et. al.) will use close to the same language as the original substitute amendment (the first immigration bill) as amended by the 14 Democrat and 13 Republican amendments adopted the the first go round.

3. A new Rule 14 bill takes 1-2 days to ripen, and then we expect Reid to file cloture on the motion to proceed (a step he will need to take because numerous Senators are objecting to any unanimous consent agreements). The cloture motion takes time to ripen, so that adds a full day and change before the vote (60). Then, there is 30 hours of “post cloture debate” that a number of Senators will refuse to allow to be shortened.

4. When the 30 hours expire, Reid will have the vote on the motion to proceed to the bill (majority).

4. Once on the bill, Reid will again file cloture (to shut off debate - again, a number of Senators will continue to object to unanimous consent agreements) - this time on the bill itself.

5. The guessing begins at this point - but we expect Reid - with the help and support of certain Republican leadership and the Grand Bargainers - to do something that we believe has never been done in the history of the Senate... he will use an arcane Senate procedure that allows a single amendment to be divisible into many - in this case, into the 20-odd amendments the Grand Bargainers are trying to cobble together to keep 60 votes in support of the bill. Traditionally, that amendment has been used to protect minority rights - but in this case, it will be used to PREVENT the minority from getting additional amendments called up and from being able to fully debate the amendments in question. It is, to our knowledge, unprecedented.

6. Once the cloture motion ripens (again, another day and change), the cloture vote can occur (60 votes) and then, again, there is 30 hours of “post cloture debate” during which Reid will run, in order, through the panoply of amendments offered by way of the division.

7. Finally, there will be a vote on final passage.

If Reid does this, with the help of certain Republican leadership and the Grand Bargainers, they will shut off the ability of Senators with concerns of the bill to offer additional amendments and to debate the amendments in question.

In the end, this means that if they have 60 lined up to support it - there is little that can be done procedurally - so it has become far more important than ever for Senators to hear from their constituents.

83 posted on 06/16/2007 11:52:48 AM PDT by RobFromGa (FDT/TBD in 2008!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child

Consumers can be anywhere. There’s no need to import them and no particular advantage to having them inside the boundaries of the US. Businesses, especially large ones, can attract customers from all over the globe, which is how teenagers in Asia know all about fashion and music trends in the US, and why, Lord help us, we’re eating food and taking vitamins whose ingredients come from China. Recent large global consumption increases are being driven as much by the rise of middle classes in Asia satisfying pent-up consumer demand as by consumption in the US.

Outside of contruction, which is in a slump, there’s little economic incentive for businesses to import consumers, and a whole lot of incentive for businesses to import below-market-wage labor.

84 posted on 06/16/2007 12:02:20 PM PDT by LadyNavyVet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: devolve; ntnychik; PhilDragoo; dixiechick2000; bitt; Seadog Bytes; Lady Jag; B4Ranch; nicmarlo; ...

85 posted on 06/16/2007 12:03:12 PM PDT by potlatch (MIZARU_ooo_()_ooo_MIKAZARU_ooo_()_ooo_MAZARU_ooo_()_ooo_))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: potlatch; B4Ranch; Czar; Borax Queen
DEM BONES........ 20 Loopholes in the Senate Immigration Bill
86 posted on 06/16/2007 12:11:28 PM PDT by nicmarlo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 85 | View Replies]

To: DoctorJim

Maybe the most effective opposition to this is to stop saying NO and start saying - LATER (maybe) like our parents used to do when we were little. String enough laters together and you have a NO. Strategically, “Later” sounds so reasonable and can’t be characterized as fringe, kooky, stupid, racist. We just say that we want time to intelligently and calmly deliberate such an important matter as this and not, as they say, “rush to judgement”.

87 posted on 06/16/2007 12:14:22 PM PDT by Anima Mundi
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: nicmarlo

LOL, Several days ago I posted the link to the 20 loopholes and not one person responded!!

Better to post the whole written out text!!

88 posted on 06/16/2007 12:15:06 PM PDT by potlatch (MIZARU_ooo_()_ooo_MIKAZARU_ooo_()_ooo_MAZARU_ooo_()_ooo_))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 86 | View Replies]

To: RobFromGa


89 posted on 06/16/2007 12:16:03 PM PDT by Guenevere (Duncan Hunter for President, 2008!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies]

To: potlatch
Better to post the whole written out text!!

Always, always! People here read (well, most times they do). : )

90 posted on 06/16/2007 12:16:19 PM PDT by nicmarlo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 88 | View Replies]

To: Diogenesis

What’s with all the pictures of buildings burning and rubble and such? Did something happen?

91 posted on 06/16/2007 12:32:50 PM PDT by fella ( newspapers used habitually to poison the public opinion)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: 3AngelaD
I think Michelle Malkin might have pointed out a major reason for the "urgency" of the immigration bill. He is what she says about Trent Lott's denigrating of talk radio:

"Question: What kind of political instinct would identify the one spot on the media spectrum controlled by his constituents as a “problem” that needs to be dealt with? Answer: The same kind of political instinct that believes this bill is going to guarantee his party millions of Hispanic votes for decades to come."

92 posted on 06/16/2007 12:42:53 PM PDT by wideminded
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RightWhale

I agree with you. I like Mexican people. For the most part, the are hardworking, honest people desperate for work. BUT—paying illegals a lower wage puts 15 or 20 of them in a three bedroom house! Do we want to put a third world standard of living in our middle class neighborhoods?

I don’t blame them, they are just trying to make it. TAKE AWAY THE WORK, and they will stop coming. Both parties are in the pocket of big business on this one, just like big pharma on the drug bill. 95% of our legislation is written by lobbyists. Since when is it conservative to let big corporations own the government? Deregulation is one thing, but sheesh. This is getting out of hand.

93 posted on 06/16/2007 12:45:26 PM PDT by ktvaughn (I avoid cliches like the plague...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Cicero


94 posted on 06/16/2007 12:45:34 PM PDT by Guenevere (Duncan Hunter for President, 2008!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: GiovannaNicoletta

a must read post

95 posted on 06/16/2007 12:47:13 PM PDT by Guenevere (Duncan Hunter for President, 2008!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Cordio

The Hispanic workers I have run into, in similar situations to the ones you describe, mostly seem like extremely pleasant people to deal with. Of course, if one is in a country illegally, it probably doesn’t pay to draw additional attention to oneself by being a complete jerk.

96 posted on 06/16/2007 12:51:06 PM PDT by wideminded
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: truthkeeper
Truthie, the agenda may very well be the North America Union....

..but what else is going on behind our backs while we're being distracted by this.

I don't trust them....I don't trust them ....I don't trust them!

I think this is a wider shell game than we are imagining.

97 posted on 06/16/2007 12:52:47 PM PDT by Guenevere (Duncan Hunter for President, 2008!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: truthkeeper do we stop it?

98 posted on 06/16/2007 12:59:23 PM PDT by Guenevere (Duncan Hunter for President, 2008!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: norton; truthkeeper
I understand your fear...

..It is the worst horror movie I can imagine....

Your post is well are not alone.

99 posted on 06/16/2007 1:02:09 PM PDT by Guenevere (Duncan Hunter for President, 2008!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: truthkeeper
I remember that quote from More....

truthie, if this passes, are we entering a time of lawlessness?

100 posted on 06/16/2007 1:04:14 PM PDT by Guenevere (Duncan Hunter for President, 2008!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-200201-209 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
Topics · Post Article

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