Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The Way Forward
National Review ^ | 8/8/12 | Charles Krauthammer

Posted on 11/08/2012 6:57:45 PM PST by randita

Edited on 11/08/2012 7:45:02 PM PST by Admin Moderator. [history]

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-26 last
To: randita
For the party in general, however, the problem is hardly structural. It requires but a single policy change: Border fence plus amnesty. Yes, amnesty. Use the word. Shock and awe — full legal normalization (just short of citizenship) in return for full border enforcement. I’ve always been of the “enforcement first” school, with the subsequent promise of legalization. I still think it’s the better policy.

Krauthammer is a fool. He knows nothing about the immigration issue and the impact of an amnesty.

Any legislation that legalizes the status of those who broke our laws by entering our country illegally and allows them to stay and work here is amnesty. We must not only prevent the Democrats and some moderate Republicans from hijacking the meaning of the word amnesty, but the public must be made aware about the true impact of an amnesty.

The Heritage Foundation concluded that the cost of amnesty would be $2.6 trillion just for increased entitlement program costs. And the number of additional LEGAL immigrants who would join those who were the recipients of amnesty through chain migration, i.e., family reunification, would approach 70 million over a 20-year period, assuming there are only 12 million illegal aliens. We cannot assimilate such numbers. An amnesty would destroy the United States of America with the stroke of a pen.

Conferring rights and privileges upon illegal aliens has a corrosive effect on the Rule of Law, the very foundation of our Republic. It is also a slap in the face to legal immigrants who have followed the rules and obeyed the laws. There are 4 million intending immigrants waiting their turn overseas to enter the U.S. legally. They have completed all the paperwork--background checks, physicals, etc. Some have been waiting overseas for years. We admit 1.2 million legal immigrants annually more than the rest of the world combined. What kind of message does this send to people who want to enter the US legally or illegally? Many will come to take part in the next amnesty.

Reagan signed a "one time" amnesty in 1986. The proponnets said it would be the only amnesty ever. The government estimated that 1 million would apply, the true number turned out to be 2.7 million. The process was rife with fraud. And once the word got out, we were flooded with new illegals who entered to take advantage of it even though you had to be resident in the country for five years. The estimated illegal population ranges from 12 to 30 million. We really have no idea how many are here. The administration of an amnesty would be fraught with problems and could present national security risks. One of the participants of the 1993 WTC was given amnesty under the 1986 Simpson-Mazzoli act. The 1986 amnesty was supposed to solve the illegal problem. Now we have 12 to 30 million illegals.

And to top all of this off, we are providing the Dems with more voters even though Krauthammer the Fool believes that we can legalize their status and not give them a path to citizenship. There is no way the courts will approve of second class citizenship. And all of these new legal residents will be able to collect welfare benefits including Obamacare. This is insane. If the Reps go along with this, we should form a third party. It is treasonous.

21 posted on 11/08/2012 7:55:47 PM PST by kabar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Unam Sanctam

Another amnesty will not win Latino votes. Reagan couldn't win the majority of the Latino vote. Any credit for an amnesty will go to Obama and the Dems.

Latinos or Hispanics are natural constituents for the Dems. They have a 50% out of wedlock birthrate and the highest school dropout rate. Immigrants in general are big users of welfare. 57% of immigrant headed households with children are on at least one major welfare program.

87% of the 1.2 million legal immigrants that enter this country annualy are minorities as defined by the USG. Anyone who thinks that immigrants and minorities will vote predominantly for Reps is smoking something. They vote Dem two to one.

Our efforts would be better spent securing the border and cracking down on visa overstays who make up 40% of all the illegal aliens in the country. We also need to crack down on the employment of illegals with an estimated 8 million of them holding jobs in this country. We need to reduce significantly the number of legal immigrants to around 300,000 a year and move to a merit based system. 25% of the adult legal immigrants entering this country annually lack even a high school degree. We are importing hundreds of thousand of high school dropouts every year.

The U.S. adds one international migrant (net) every 36 seconds. Immigrants account for one in 8 U.S. residents, the highest level in more than 90 years. In 1970 it was one in 21; in 1980 it was one in 16; and in 1990 it was one in 13. In a decade, it will be one in 7, the highest it has been in our history. And by 2050, one in 5 residents of the U.S. will be foreign-born.

Currently, 1.6 million legal and illegal immigrants settle in the country each year; 350,000 immigrants leave each year, resulting in a net immigration of 1.25 million. Since 1970, the U.S. population has increased from 203 million to 310 million, i.e., over 100 million. In the next 40 years, the population will increase by an additional 130 million to 440 million. Three-quarters of the increase in our population since 1970 and the projected increase will be the result of immigration.

The nation’s immigrant population (legal and illegal) reached 40 million in 2010, the highest number in our history. The U.S. immigrant population has doubled since 1990, nearly tripled since 1980, and quadrupled since 1970, when it stood at 9.7 million. Of the 40 million immigrants in the country in 2010, 13.9 million arrived in 2000 or later making it the highest decade of immigration in American history, even though there was a net loss of jobs during the decade. Growth in the immigrant population has primarily been driven by high levels of legal immigration. Roughly three-fourths of immigrants in the country are here legally. With nearly 12 million immigrants, Mexico was by far the top immigrant-sending country, accounting for 29 percent of all immigrants and 29 percent of growth in the immigrant population from 2000 to 2010. The median age of immigrants in 2010 was 41.4 compared to 35.9 for natives.


22 posted on 11/08/2012 8:15:58 PM PST by kabar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Unam Sanctam

“but I think if the Republicans are to have any future, they have to try to win a bigger chunk of Latinos.”

Right. The hell with everybody else.


23 posted on 11/08/2012 8:16:43 PM PST by ScottfromNJ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: ScottfromNJ; kabar

Whatever, I don’t care anymore.


24 posted on 11/08/2012 9:29:55 PM PST by Unam Sanctam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: randita
" ... full legal normalization (just short of citizenship) in return for full border enforcement."

Ah, yes, 1986 ... I remember it well ... "normalization" and "border enforcement" worked so well then, we should try it again!

25 posted on 11/09/2012 5:00:59 AM PST by spodefly (This is my tag line. There are many like it, but this one is mine.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: webstersII

It used to be the economy, stupid. We actually still thought it was.

When you have close of half of the citizenry shielded from economic downturns by the mandatory entitlement benefits and years of unemployment benefits, then a growing economy has no urgency.

Job creation is not the rallying cry it once was either. With people receiving enough government benefits to buy the necessities of life plus quite a few frills, then what’s the impetus in getting a job where you may actually end up with less take home pay than you’re getting in government benefits?

We mistakenly assumed that people truly do want a growing economy and jobs. But clearly a majority do not care either way.


26 posted on 11/09/2012 6:23:51 AM PST by randita
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-26 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
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

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