Posted on 02/05/2014 3:18:01 PM PST by ColdOne
Bush Decries “Vigilantes,” For Reasonable Immigration Policy(W Calls Minutemen “Vigilantes”
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1370468/posts
Bush’s second term
Bush official slammed for stopping illegals sweeps
Bush's first term.
2006---Bush's second term, 500,000 illegals march on Dallas Texas, making demands, threats and waving foreign flags on U.S. soil.
By the time Bush's second term rolled around, it got much worse... In 2006 tens of millions of illegals and their supports were so emboldened by Bush's open borders, (during war time) they marched on dozens of U.S. cities during Bush's second term.
Politically-timed immigration raids:
As Rubenstein points out, this means that from 1997 to 2003, worksite arrests under the Bush administration fell by a factor of some 97 percent since 1997–and plunged by another 2/3rds by 2004.
Where have they been all this time?
As for getting tough on employers, Rubenstein also notes these stunning statistics: “[O]f the 3,064 workforce investigations closed [in 2004], fines were imposed in just 3 (three!) of them – one out of one thousand. . By contrast, fines were imposed in about 11 percent of closed investigations in 1997.”
Notices of intent to fine employers:
1997: 865
1999: 417
2000: 178
2001: 100
2003: 162
2004: 3
Based on my reporting and interviews with ICE agents, I can also tell you that this week’s dog-and-pony show will result in very few of the arrested illegal aliens actually being deported. Despite what the administration claims, “catch and release” is still the order of the day.
Just ask local and federal law enforcement officers in the Galveston, Texas, area, where in January of this year, following a collaborative effort between local police and area ICE agents, some 62 illegal aliens were caught at a day labor site…and released after local open-borders activists from LULAC kicked up a fuss and Washington ordered its local ICE agents to cave in. It happens every day.
More Bush-era catch-and-release background:here and hereand here. and here. Must-read from indefatigable deportation analyst Juan Mann here.
What this shows is that Arch-Democrap Bill Clinton had a better record of immigration enforcement, than conservative-hero, George W. Bush.
It was the policies Bush enacted during his first term than gave illegal aliens the balls to march during his second term.
Again, if you're curious about what policies I'm talking about you will visit my FR home page. (Hint: USA PATRIOT Act of 2001, Partnership for Prosperity Agreement (with Mexico), New Alliance Task Force, American Dream Down Payment Fund, US Social Security Totalization Agreement with Mexico)
Since you're still arguing that the damage was done during Bush's second term, it's clear you were sound asleep during his first term --no surprises, really. Most so-called conservatives believed they elected a kindred soul in 2000.
BTW, you never did confide for whom you voted in 2000 and 2004.
I also kind of figured you'd cruise right past the second part of what I wrote:
But, had the voters paid attention to the policies he implemented during his first term, I sincerely doubt they would have voted for him during his second.
Like I wrote, it's pretty clear you were sound asleep during Bush's first term.
He was half way through his second term when that occurred..lol
You seem to blame everything regarding immigration and Bush's polices on his first term. By the end of Bush's second term, things became so bad, even his supporters were bailing on him.
Blaming everything immigration on his 2nd term is simply not accurate and a rather meaningless argument.
Wrong again,I never claimed that. Bush was a disaster from day one in my opinion and like his ratings, he was nose diving by the end of his second term. This isn't even debatable... Your free to blame all this on his first term, but that is simply not accurate so it seems you're the one who needs to stop this spewing the inaccurate horsesh*t.
I’ll relinquish the thread back, since someone needed to be seriously educated at post #17.
Bush Vows to Get Immigration Bill Passed
(”I’ll see you at the bill signing”)
June 11, 2007 — Bush’s second term.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1848223/posts
Over and out~
My point exactly. Thank you.
Once again, your evasion and diversion was exposed when ya walked by #28...Pretending it did not exist.
After you were educated and taken to the woodshed in post #17, it’s very understandable.
See the tagline Mr. Tucker.
See ya!
The only one spewing inaccurate horsesh*t on this thread is you.
For the record, all the actions taken below occurred during Bush's first term. It was these policies that caused the flood of illegal aliens that we saw during his second term and this was by design.
On February 16, 2001, just 3 weeks after his inauguration, President George W. Bush met with Mexican President Vicente Fox to discuss the terms of the Partnership for Prosperity Agreement (with Mexico). (See: Partnership for Prosperity Agreement (with Mexico))
The P4P agreement was signed on September 6, 2001.
On October 26, 2001, Bush signed the USA PATRIOT Act of 2001 into law. Contained in section 326(b) was the provision that allowed US banks to accept the Mexican Matricula Consular card as valid ID for opening a bank account.
Congress sent a request for opinion to Bush's Treasury Dept. about 326(b). Bush's Treasury responded:
“The proposed rules set forth the requirement that financial institutions would have to establish a customer identification and verification program applicable to all new accounts that are opened, regardless of whether the customer is a U.S. citizen or a foreign national. While the proposed rules prescribe minimum standards for such programs, they leave sufficient flexibility to permit financial institutions to tailor their program to fit their business operations. The customer identification program would have to contain reasonable procedures for identifying any person, including a business, that opens an account, setting forth the type of identifying information that the financial institution will require. At a minimum, for U.S. persons the proposed rules would require financial institutions to obtain the following information: name, address, taxpayer identification number, and, for individuals, date of birth. While a taxpayer identification number is not required for non-U.S. persons, a financial institution must describe what type of information it will require of a non-U.S. person in place of a taxpayer identification number. The regulations state that financial institutions may accept one or more of the following: a U.S. taxpayer identification number; a passport number and country of issuance; an alien identification card number, or the number and country of issuance of any other government-issued document evidencing nationality or residence and bearing a photograph or similar safeguard.”
This also contained a footnote (17):
“Thus, the proposed regulations do not discourage bank acceptance of the ‘matricula consular’ identity card that is being issued by the Mexican government to immigrants.” (See: Treasury Department Issues USA PATRIOT Act Report to Congress)
Note that no Mexican banks accept their own government's Matricula Consular card as valid ID for opening a bank account because the bearer's identity is all but untraceable. In contrast, thanks to Bush's Treasury Dept., almost all US banks accept it.
On June 17, 2002, Bush held a press conference. In this press conference he said that by 2010 he wanted to see 5.5 million new 'minority' home owners.
He called on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to increase commitments to the 'minority' market by $440 billion. (See: President Calls for Expanding Opporunities to Home Ownership)
Here's how Bush described the minorities he wanted to 'help':
"Three-quarters of white America owns their homes. Less than 50 percent of African Americans are part of the homeownership in America. And less than 50 percent of the Hispanics who live here in this country own their home. And that has got to change for the good of the country. It just does."
In response to the mandate contained in the P4P agreement, the New Alliance Task Force was formed in May 2003. (See: New Alliance Task Force)
The NATF is a broad-based coalition of 62 members, including the FDIC, Mexican Consulate, 34 banks, community-based organizations, federal bank regulatory agencies, government agencies, and representatives from the secondary market and private mortgage insurance (PMI) companies.
Their goal was to open the Mexican illegal alien market to US banks and visa-versa using low-cost remittances as the bait. As Bush's 2002 speeches show he was talking about hundreds of billions of U.S. tax dollars going to directly benefit millions of Mexican illegal aliens.
The NATF was organized into four working groups that were tasked with the following goals:
In June 2004, the FDIC released a report detailing the goals and the progress to date, of the Partnership for Prosperity Agreement (with Mexico) "During the past several years, bilateral agreements and U.S. banking laws and regulations have facilitated remittance transfers for immigrants and helped bring the unbanked into the formal banking system. For example, in 2001 the United States and Mexico launched the U.S.-Mexico Partnership for Prosperity which fosters economic and labor opportunities in less developed parts of Mexico and expands access to capital in Mexico. The Partnership also addresses the high cost of sending money from the United States to Mexico and encourages banking institutions to market accounts that offer remittance features to Mexican workers. In addition, the G-8 countries are promoting programs to alleviate poverty in developing countries, including Latin America.17 These programs facilitate remittances through the formal banking system and, at the same time, attempt to reduce the cost of these transfers." "In June 2004, in an effort to encourage more banks to enter the remittance market and improve access to the U.S. banking system among recent Latin American immigrants, bank regulatory agencies clarified that financial institutions offering low cost international remittance services would receive credit under the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA).18 Regulated financial institutions are required under the CRA to serve the convenience and credit needs of their entire communities, including low- and moderate-income areas. Most remittance senders to Latin America are low- to moderate-income immigrant wage earners who operate outside the formal banking system." "In addition, a growing number of U.S. banks accept alternative forms of identification to help taxpaying immigrants open bank accounts and secure other banking services; these include the Individual Taxpayer Identification Number (ITIN) and foreign government issued identification, such as the Mexican Matricula Consular card. The USA PATRIOT Act allows financial institutions to accept both forms of identification, enabling insured financial institutions to serve unbanked immigrants who live and work in the United States. The ITIN, created by the U.S. Internal Revenue Service (IRS) for foreign-born individuals who are required to file federal tax returns, is a nine-digit number similar to the social security number (SSN) and is issued to individuals who are not eligible for the SSN. The Matricula Consular card is an identification card issued by the Mexican consulate to individuals of Mexican nationality who live in the United States. According to the Mexican government, an estimated 4 million Matricula cards have been issued in the United States." "As an example of the effectiveness of using this form of identification, Wells Fargo opened more than 400,000 new accounts for Mexican immigrants, using the Matricula Consular card between November 2001 and May 2004. In recent months, Wells Fargo has averaged 22,000 new accounts per month, many of which feature the bank's remittance product.20 For example, the bank offers InterCuenta Express, an account-to-account wire transfer service that charges $8 to transfer up to $3,000 per day directly into a beneficiary's bank account in Mexico. Transfers can be initiated at the bank's branch or ATM in the United States, and the receiving party can access monies via the bank's sizeable remittance distribution network of more than 4,000 banking offices and 10,700 ATMs in Mexico. According to the Mexican government, 178 banks in the United States accept the Matricula Consular card to open bank accounts; 86 of these institutions are in the Midwest."
Keep in mind this is just Wells Fargo and that sub-prime lending would not reach its peak until 2005-2007. This does not include all the other major banks, such as CitiGroup, Bank of America, Chase, Washington Mutual, or the hundreds of other smaller regional banks and lenders who were also taking part in this feeding frenzy.
The IRS says they've issued over 11 million ITINs since its inception. Mexico says they've issued over 5 million Matricula Consular cards.
But, none of this would be workable if ICE was deporting the banks' new customers. Once again, Bush swung into action, hobbling border and interior enforcement.
Worksite arrests of illegal aliens fell some 97 percent, from 2,859 in 1999 to 159 in 2004. Investigations targeting employers of illegal immigrants fell more than 70 percent, from 7,637 in 1997 to 2,194 in 2003. Arrests on job sites fell—precipitously, from 17,554 in 1997 to 445 in 2003. Fines levied for immigration-law violations fell from 778 in 1997 to 124 in 2003. Notices of intent to fine employers fell from 865 in 1997 to just 3 in 2004.
When the USA PATRIOT Act came up for renewal in 2004, some republicans wanted to remove the provision that allowed banks to accept Matricula Consular ID as the consular ID is unreliable.
Barney Frank (D-MA) and some of his Republican and Democrat friends swung into action to protect it:
|
Anti-matrícula proposal defeated; financial institutions can continue accepting consular ID's: In a vote of 222 to 177, the U.S. House of Representatives passed a bipartisan amendment, H.Amdt. 754, introduced by Reps. Michael Oxley (R-OH), Barney Frank (D-MA), Jim Kolbe (R-AZ), Ed Pastor (D-AZ), and Rubén Hinojosa (D-TX) to strike the so-called Culberson amendment that would have prohibited the Treasury Dept. from implementing regulations that allow financial institutions to accept matrícula consular identification cards as part of a valid customer identification program under the USA PATRIOT Act... In countering Culberson’s allegations that the FBI and the Justice Dept. were opposed to the bipartisan amendment to preserve the use of matrícula consular cards, Bachus presented a letter for the record written by Deputy Atty. Gen. James B. Comey and addressed to Speaker of the House Dennis Hastert. The letter, dated Sept. 14, 2004, stated: The Department of Justice fully supports the Administration’s current policy under the USA PATRIOT Act that requires banks and other financial institutions to establish reasonable procedures for the identification and verification of new account holders, which is set forth in regulations of the Department of the Treasury. Therefore the [Justice] Department supports the Oxley-Frank-Kolbe amendment to H.R. 5025 that preserves these regulations. . . . The Department of Justice, including the FBI, continue[s] to work closely with the Treasury Department on this and other issues related to halting all financing of terrorists. In the final roll call vote, 49 Republicans supported the Oxley-Frank-Kolbe-Pastor-Hinojosa amendment and 16 Democrats opposed it. This legislative victory was a joint effort by financial institutions, immigrants’ rights groups, consumer groups, and many others who worked in coalition to defeat, once again, efforts to limit the acceptance of consular ID cards by banks, credit unions, thrifts, and other financial entities. |
In Bush's June 17, 2002 speech, he also called for the creation of the American Dream Down Payment Fund.
"And so here are some of the ways to address the issue. First, the single greatest barrier to first time homeownership is a high downpayment. It is really hard for many, many, low income families to make the high downpayment. And so that's why I propose and urge Congress to fully fund the American Dream Downpayment Fund. This will use money, taxpayers' money to help a qualified, low income buyer make a downpayment. And that's important."
And, the 108th Congress (2003-2005) responded with the American Dream Downpayment Act: "Amends the Cranston-Gonzalez National Affordable Housing Act to: (1) authorize the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development to make grants to State and local participating jurisdictions for downpayment assistance and related home repair to low-income, first-time home buyers; and (2) limit family assistance to the greater of six percent of the purchase price or $10,000. Requires a participating jurisdiction to include intended grant uses in its fiscal year comprehensive housing affordability strategy under such Act." "Sets forth State and local jurisdiction allocation formulas. Permits fund reallocation." "Requires the Comptroller General to report respecting the impact of such grants on a State-by-State basis." "Terminates grant authority after December 31, 2007. Authorizes specified FY 2004 through 2007 appropriations." "Makes the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 inapplicable to such assistance."
The act was authorized to appropriate up to $200 million per year of US taxpayer funds between FY2004 through FY2007 to go to Bush's 'minorities'.
The sponsor and co-sponsors of this $800 million giveaway:
Sponsor: Sen. Wayne Allard [R-CO]
Co-sponsors:
Sen. Samuel Brownback [R-KS]
Sen. Conrad Burns [R-MT]
Sen. Ben Campbell [R-CO]
Sen. Michael Crapo [R-ID]
Sen. Michael Enzi [R-WY]
Sen. Charles Hagel [R-NE]
Sen. Lisa Murkowski [R-AK]
Sen. Richard Santorum [R-PA]
Sen. Jefferson Sessions [R-AL]
Your evasion of my post #24 has been exposed, as well.
See the tagline Mr. Tucker.
I've seen it and you're practicing what you preach.
For example, for whom did you cast your vote in 2000 and 2004?
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.