comprehensive immigration reform
Comprehensive Immigration Reform: Page 11
See the summary for this topic on the main Comprehensive Immigration Reform page.
The Democrats have various plans for different races: "A New Direction for __African-American____ Families", "A New Direction for ____Asian-Pacific Islander-American__ Families", "A New Direction for ___European-American__ Families", er, scratch the last one.
Their latest race-based plan is called "Compromiso Democrata con el Pueblo Latino: A New Direction for Latino Families".
FreedomWorks Foundation sponsored a luncheon for Capitol Hill staffers to discuss immigration reform that will balance both security and economic concerns. In particular, the forum will examine options for strengthening our borders while establishing procedures that provide law-abiding workers a legitimate path to the American workplace.It was her brilliant idea - perhaps as a way to get cheap labor for her horse ranch - that led to the Pence massive amnesty scheme, you know, the one that would allow unlimited immigrants.
FreedomWorks chairman and former House Majority Leader Dick Armey was joined by Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-TX), Congressman Mike Pence (R-IN, 6), and Helen Krieble, President of the Vernon K. Krieble Foundation.
Pausing briefly to wipe the "cheap" vegetables off his chin, Dick offers the usual false choice as well as a scare tactic:
"The Pence and Hutchison plans are on the right track. These serious legislative proposals first secure the border and address the need to supply necessary labor to critical sectors of the economy. Forcibly removing 15 million people is impractical and unrealistic, actions like this would be more characteristic of police state and not a free society."His group supposedly has 800,000 members, but he is/was also one of the leaders of "Americans for Border and Economic Security", a group created by George Bush to push his guest worker scheme.
UPDATE: There are some comments Armey made after the lunch in "Armey blasts Republicans over opposition to guest-worker plan" by Dave Montgomery of McClatchy Newspapers. He refers to those Republicans - whether just leaders or constituents - who oppose Bush's "guest" worker program as "jerks". Of course, Montgomery concentrates on the name-calling and doesn't ask Armey whether or not he's simply a paid cheap labor shill.
Latino Elected Officials March the Halls of Congress to Press for Comprehensive Immigration Reform/National Association of Latino Elected and Appointed Officials press release/[[September 13, 2006]]/ link
The Clinton-linked Center for American Progress has issued a desperate cry for help: "Don't Abandon Comprehensive Immigration Reform".
Initially, you might be confused. Did the GOP write this? Or, did they write it for use by the GOP?
A court hearing is scheduled this coming week for arguments in what could be one of the biggest decisions ever in the United States' battle over the integrity of its borders.Their July press release on the ruling that allowed them to
...The legal action seeks "to force the Los Angeles Police Department to drop its politically-correct 'sanctuary' policy [Special Order 40] and resume enforcing our nation's laws against illegal immigration," Judicial Watch said...
The authors of the failed 1986 illegal alien amnesty, former Rep. Romano L. Mazzoli (D-KY) and former Senator Alan K. Simpson (R-WY), offer "Enacting Immigration Reform, Again". Their article is little more than a bad and pathetic joke:
Since illegal immigration continues nearly unabated today, legitimate questions can be raised about the effectiveness of [1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act - IRCA, or the Simpson-Mazzoli bill]. Although we do have pride of authorship, we also believe that the shortcomings of the act are not due to design failure but rather to the failure of both Democratic and Republican administrations since 1986 to execute the law properly.
Why haven't they done that?
One answer is that there are never enough federal budget resources. Another is that administrations of both stripes are loathe to disrupt economic activities - i.e. labor supply in factories, farms and businesses.
There are, of course, other possibilities that they don't mention. For instance, political corruption: lots of companies make lots of money off "economic activities" generated by illegal aliens, and those companies then donate to politicians who simply do what those companies want. And, there are more sinister possibilities, such as replacing Americans with more pliable immigrants to the move to create the North American Union.
Then, perhaps because they vainly think they would be vindicated or perhaps for other reasons, they say:
We believe that our three-legged-stool approach is still relevant and workable if carried out vigorously.... We earnestly hope that before this Congress adjourns, the House and Senate will compromise, wring out the raw partisanship, and find a way to send President Bush - who has staked so much on enactment of solid immigration reform - a measure structured along the lines of our original bill. There is still time.
There's always that "if", isn't there? Unfortunately, nowhere in their piece do they even discuss whether the new amnesty would be enforced any more than their amnesty was. They provide no assurances that it would be enforced; they provide no proposals to make sure it would be enforced.
What would actually happen is that those same corrupt forces that prevent enforcement now would prevent it later. Passing "reform" isn't going to make corrupt corporations, corrupt foreign governments, and racial power groups go away. In fact, "reform" would be a capitulation to their demands and would make them even stronger than they are now.
I don't know why these two are promoting "reform", but if they wanted to make partial amends for what they were involved in before they would spell out all the possible reasons why their "reforms" weren't enforced and offer real solutions.
1. The title will be read by most as a challenge to those opposed to illegal immigration.
Immigration protests that drew hundreds of thousands of flag-waving demonstrators to the nation's streets last spring promised a potent political legacy a surge of new Hispanic voters.
"Today We March, Tomorrow We Vote," they proclaimed.
But an Associated Press review of voter registration figures from Chicago, Denver, Houston, Atlanta and other major urban areas that had large rallies found no sign of a new voter boom that could sway elections.
Salvadoran President Tony Saca visited Miami Friday to warn his citizens not to let their temporary residency status run out as they wait for Congress to pass a comprehensive immigration reform bill.
Many migrants from El Salvador received the temporary status after a devastating earthquake struck the C
Huckabee, who supports guest worker programs and is not an immigration hard-liner, said he believes opposition to comprehensive immigration reform is 'irrational in many cases.' And he did not discount the causative factor of racism.
"If I were to say that some of it is driven by just sheer racism, I think I would be telling you the truth.
Today's Wacky but Thought-Provoking Immigration Quote of the Day is featured in the article "Immigration bill sticker shock". The quote source is John Young, co-chairman of the Agriculture Coalition for Immigration Reform:
"In my opinion, the fairer question is: How will illegal immigrants impact the costs of healthcare, local education, and social services without passage of comprehensive immigration reform? ...Had we solved this problem in a truly comprehensive way in 1986 ...
Friday evening, the Congressional Budget Office released their estimate of just how much the Senate's massive illegal alien amnesty would cost us financially: $126 billion over 10 years:
Supporters of the legislation cautioned that the CBO's total needs to be put into context.
Mexican Ambassador Carlos de Icaza visited his forward outpost in Atlanta and proferred words of wisdom for us all:
"We need to start talking like neighbors, stop the 'blame game' and start looking at this issue constructively... We need both the United States and Mexico to acknowledge that international cooperation is essential in immigration issue. No country can solve this dilemma by itself...
[De Icaza] praised growing cooperation that has allowed increased trade and security efforts between Mexico and the United States while encouraging U.S. lawmakers to approve reforms that allow "legal, safe and orderly human migration."It's good to know that he's going to allow us to have certain rights, but the second sentence is wrong. Enforcement across the board would be enough.
"We respect the right of every country in the world ... to enforce its laws and protect its borders," de Icaza said. "But enforcement by itself won't be enough."
The ambassador, who said the decisions on immigration policy lie in Washington and with the American people, also acknowledged that his country was to blame for not creating economic conditions that encourage Mexican citizens to stay in Mexico... "We have a shared responsibility," de Icaza said. "In Mexico we also have to recognize that we need our people to stay."There's no time like the present, and helping us repatriate their citizens would be a good way to show that they're not just full of hot air.
Icaza's remarks are similar to what he said before (which I thought I'd covered but I guess not):
Mexico's ambassador to the United States says his country is committed to finding a solution to the growing problem of illegal aliens, but the United States and Mexico "must address this phenomenon in a comprehensive and mutually beneficial manner."
"Mexico absolutely respects the sovereign right of every country to control its borders and enforce its laws," Ambassador Carlos de Icaza told The Washington Times. "However, given that this is a complex challenge that affects both countries, we are absolutely convinced it is necessary to work together under the principle of shared responsibility for the proper bilateral management of the migration phenomenon.
"It is essential that Mexico is engaged in the solution because of the international implications, which require actions and commitments from Mexico," Mr. de Icaza said.
The SDUT devotes most of this story to discussing the thoughts of those who favor illegal immigration, but an important comment from Darrell Issa does get mentioned:
Meantime, Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Vista, the grandson of Lebanese immigrants, accused Mexico of threatening America's long tradition of legal immigration because the vast majority of illegal immigrants here come from that nation.Earlier in the day, the illegal immigration supporters held their own press conference. Here are the thoughts of Melissa Daar, California policy and field director for People for the American Way:
Why, Issa asked, does illegal immigration come "99 percent (from) one country [Mexico] when the Statue of Liberty intended us to look at the downtrodden of the world equally?"
"(Illegal immigrants) are here in our economy, they are working, they are buying things – you can't just pretend that they don't exist or pretend that we are going to kick them out, because we're not... We are not going to build a fence high enough to keep them out. So why not bring them in the system and have them pay more taxes, and give them insurance? ...It is more logical, it is more rational."If her argument has any validity, it would apply in the future, right? So, we can fully expect to see Daar making this same argument after we have millions more new illegal aliens. So, in effect, Daar is promoting not open borders, but highly porous borders where almost anyone who can make it over the border and settle in for a bit will be granted citizenship. Her argument is "logical" and "rational", just as long as she realizes that's what the impact of her thoughts would be. However, a huge majority of Americans - once the impact of her thoughts was described - would oppose what she and PFAW want.
Reaching even further down into the barrel:
Dolores Huerta, co-founder of the United Farm Workers, said the House-passed immigration bill would result in the incarceration of undocumented workers and represents a type of "ethnic cleansing."Does anyone - aside from the Democratic Party and the MSM - take anyone who says things like that seriously? She also echoed earlier thoughts:
"(This) is about putting people who are undocumented into prisons and building more prisons at the taxpayers' expense. . . . We think it is the prison-industrial complex that is supporting this bill, and the American public needs to know," she added.
Huerta said the country historically has extended legalization to immigrants who have come to the United States to work.A similar analysis as that above for Daar's comments applies. If people have the preconception, than millions more illegal aliens will come here to take advantage of future amnesties. It's better to disabuse them of that notion than to have to do this every decade or two.
Then, at the same level of the barrel, we've got Rosemary Johnston, a board member of the Interfaith Coalition for Immigrant Rights:
"We have a different set of questions that drive comprehensive immigration reforms, like how many deaths will it take (until) we know that too many have died along the border with Mexico."And the Most Rev. Gilbert E. Chavez, Auxiliary Bishop of the Diocese of San Diego:
"Every day we see in our parishes the humanitarian consequences of a broken system: families which are separated, migrant workers that are exploited by smugglers and unscrupulous employers, and human beings who die in the desert."Shouldn't someone tell them that those who support illegal immigration - such as themselves - are partially responsible for those issues? Is it that they can't figure that out, or that they don't care?
Popular Spanish-language radio host El Cucuy (real name: Renan Almendarez Coello) is on a 10 city bus tour trying to register members of his audience as voters. He kicked off the campaign in San Jose (California) on Monday, and joining him on his fun bus were Lt. Gov.
Earlier today, president Bush delivered speech #5B in Miami (whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2006/07/20060731-1.html). For those who left their program at home, that speech number designates 10% Cuban-oriented content, and 10% ports-oriented content, with, of course, the remaining 80% being offal, stuffing, straw, lies, and bits and pieces from other speeches.
However, near the end, he provides an argument that can be used against any form of amnesty or whatever he falsely claims it is. Here are parts of the speech:
America is home to 5 percent of the world's population.
U.S. Commerce Secretary Carlos Gutierrez said the U.S. needs immigrants to meet the employment needs of a growing economy and urged Congress to approve immigration legislation that includes a temporary-worker program.Obviously, those he's refering to aren't "immigrants", they're illegal aliens.
Gutierrez said there were 4.1 million U.S. job openings in May, many in the hospitality industry, that immigrants are needed to fill because Americans can't or won't do that work.
"We have jobs today that either American citizens aren't willing to do or aren't able to do," Gutierrez, an immigrant from Cuba, told the Senate Judiciary Committee. "Immigrants aren't crossing our borders to look for a handout. They're seeking jobs that are available."
He gets asked a few tough questions in this Lars Larson interview. Note that Gutierrez is also involved in the push for the North American Union.
"My dad came here, sometimes worked three jobs, but the jobs were there for him and the opportunities were there for him," Gen. Peter Pace, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff said as he choked back tears during a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing at Miami Dade College.
The Hagel-Martinez Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act of 2006 is a swindle wrapped in a deception inside a lie. Although marketed as immigration reform, the bill provides corporate welfare on an unprecedented scale. Hagel-Martinez is a historically significant bait and switch that will diminish the prosperity of the average citizen.
The goal of this malignant legislation is to restructure the American economy.
Among those who will be cleared of past crimes under the Senate's proposed immigration-reform bill would be the businesses that have employed the estimated 10 million illegal aliens eligible for citizenship and that provided the very "magnet" that drew them here in the first place.
Buried in the more than 600 pages of legislation is a sec
The restaurant industry makes heavy use of "immigrant" workers, the (other) NRA has donated hundreds of thousands of dollars to politicians, and most of our politicians refuse to make sure that our immigration laws are enforced.
...Comprehensive immigration reform promises that people already in the United States illegally can apply for citizenship, but requires them to "go to the back of the line." But a key question is, the back of which line?
Our immigration system is broken. And we need your help to fix it.
In his address to the nation last night, President Bush showed the way to getting real results on this difficult issue. We need your help today to stand up in support of the President's bold plan.
That rag provides "Border Illusions":
President Bush's speech from the Oval Office last night was not a blueprint for comprehensive immigration reform. It was a victory for the fear-stricken fringe of the debate.
Because, we know that anyone who supports the sovereignty of this nation is simply driven by fear.
Rather than standing up for truth, Mr.
President Bush continues to push his guest worker program and amnesty for anywhere between 11 million and 20 million illegal aliens, and he insists still that nothing less than what he calls comprehensive immigration reform is acceptable.
And the lies keep coming from both political parties.
One good way to reduce illegal immigration - or at least try to stop an amnesty - would be if Americans would go to appearances by politicians and ask them tough questions. Then, make sure that the question and the answer are publicized.
He informs his nearly-silent listeners that "our borders are broken, they are not under our control... the first obligation of every government is to enforce our borders." Then, he promotes his "guest" worker scheme.
Then, he lies. He offers a false choice, saying that we only have three possibilities:
1. The status quo with its associated abuses.
2. "Just send them all back." He even references George Will's similar false choice argument.
3. Pass Kennedy-McCain, which he informs isn't amnesty.
Then, he repeats a couple times, "if you have a better plan, let me know."
Someone apparently tried to chime in, but McCain said he wanted to finish. It's not known whether that person was able to say anything and what it was, but if it was me I would have asked something like:
"You forgot the fourth option: simply enforce our current laws. That will encourage millions of illegal aliens not to come here, and millions who are here now to leave. And, it's your job to make sure that our laws are being enforced. Since you say that 'the first obligation of every government is to enforce our borders', it should be clear to anyone that our government is not doing its job, despite that being well within its powers. Furthermore, if you aren't enforcing the laws now, why should we believe you when you say you'll enforce the new laws?"
It needs a little work, but since John McCain wants your input, please go to his appearances and try to ask him something similar.
John Derbyshire provides this handy-dandy cut-out-and-clip glossary to terms used in the immigration "debate":
"legalization" ----- amnesty
"guest worker plan" ----- amnesty
"temporary worker plan" ----- amnesty
"path to citizenship" ----- amnesty
"out of the shadows" ----- amnesty
"comprehensive reform" ----- amnesty
It's surprising because in a rare move for the AZ Republic it comes close to reporting the actual truth. They come close to implying that Western Union and their parent company First Data are profiting off illegal immigration, are encouraging illegal immigration, and are corrupting our political system.
...In recent years, Denver-based First Data has openly campaigned for immigration reform, which could legalize millions of undocumented workers, and has created a $10 million "Empowerment Fund" for the same purpose.In brief: First Data not only profits off illegal immigration, they encourage massive immigration. I'll leave it to the reader to determine whether what they do qualifies as encouraging illegal immigration. However, note that Proposition 200 was designed to fight illegal immigration, and First Data opposed it.
It has held seminars on migration law, published how-to guides for migrants, sponsored English classes, given money to a charity that helps Mexican women whose husbands are in the United States, and showered immigrant-sending communities with aid.
First Data has stepped up its political donations in recent years. It also "directly, actively" fought against Arizona's Proposition 200, a First Data official told the Mexican Senate in 2004.
...Those migrants send a torrent of money to their families. Mexicans in the United States alone sent home some $20 billion in 2005, up from $6.6 billion just five years ago.
The increase has been a windfall for wire-transfer companies. Western Union, which also owns the Vigo and Orlandi Valuta chains, saw its revenue nearly double from $2.3 billion in 2000 to $4.2 billion in 2005. It made $1.3 billion in profit last year.
"Their real key to success is the immigration from Third World to Second World and First World countries. That is the ultimate secret sauce," said Kartik Mehta, an analyst with FTN Midwest Securities.
...The company also sponsored the printing of 300,000 guides telling Salvadorans how to apply for the U.S. Temporary Protected Status program. The program gave legal residency to 248,000 migrants following two earthquakes in El Salvador in 2001.
In 2000 the company formed the First Data Western Union Foundation, which is funded by First Data, its employees and its agents in other countries.
The foundation has given out more than $16 million, funding everything from seminars on home buying for migrants in Broward County, Fla. to English classes at the Chicago and San Antonio campuses of the National Autonomous University of Mexico.
It gives money to a legal aid groups and organizations like the Massachusetts-based Immigrant Learning Center, which along with running English classes, produces studies "promoting immigrants as assets to America," according to one of its reports.
...Furthermore, some of the foundation's programs almost seem to reward migration, say some border-control advocates.
In the Mexican state of Oaxaca, the foundation gave $250,000 "to provide assistance to women living alone because their husbands are working in the United States," according to a foundation news release...
It also has pledged $1.25 million to the Mexican government's 4x1 Program in Zacatecas state. The program provides matching funds for each peso that migrants invest in small businesses in their hometowns...
Another foundation-funded program helps Mexican migrants go to U.S. universities "because they don't have the documents necessary to go to a college and pay tuition as international students," First Data's public relations director Mario Hernandez said during a forum in the Mexican Senate on Nov. 10, 2004.
The foundation made headlines by funding a 56-page booklet for migrants called "A Survival Guide for Newcomers to Colorado."
..."They're promoting whatever is going to enhance their bottom line, and if that means encouraging mass immigration, that's what they're going to do," said Mike McGarry, acting director of the Colorado Alliance for Immigration Reform, which has opposed First Data's advocacy efforts in its home state.
...During a panel discussion organized by the company at the National Press Club in Washington, D.C., First Data's then-chief executive, Charlie Fote, announced the creation of a $10 million "Empowerment Fund" to push for an overhaul of U.S. immigration laws, though he gave few details of how the money would be used.
...Since then, First Data has held panel discussions around the country to campaign for immigration reform. The company also said it used its money to fight Arizona's Proposition 200, a measure passed in 2004 that bars illegal immigrants from receiving some state services.
"Our company directly, actively and with financial support, supported the business, political and community groups that opposed this proposition," Hernandez, the public relations director, told lawmakers during the 2004 forum at the Mexican Senate.
First Data also has stepped up its campaign donations. The company has spent $247,000 on federal elections since 2001, compared to $145,000 in the five years before that, according to the Center for Responsive Politics.
A political action committee, First Data Employees for Responsible Government, has donated $128,000 since it was formed in 2000. And that's not counting hefty donations by individual executives. Fote and his wife, for example, gave $46,800 to 32 federal candidates between the beginning of 2000 and Fote's retirement in November.
Most of First Data's beneficiaries are members of the Senate and House committees on banking and financial services. Much of the money also has gone directly to the Republican and Democratic parties in the form of "soft money" donations.
Left out of the largesse: Republican Rep. Tom Tancredo, one of the most vocal immigration-control activists, who also happens to be First Data's hometown congressman. First Data, its PAC and many of its executives gave money to Joanna Conti, his Democratic opponent, in the 2004 election.
It is unclear if the $10 million Empowerment Fund has gone into campaign donations. First Data would not give The Republic details on how that money is being spent...
And, they then donate part of the money they've obtained from those engaging in illegal activity to politicians, including Democrats like Conti.
Judiciary members on both sides, however, cautioned Mr. Frist not to bypass them.
"The majority leader is wrong," said Sen. Dianne Feinstein, California Democrat. "It's impossible to build a political consensus in that time. We need time. We need time to talk."
In a letter to Mr. Frist yesterday, Mrs.
The Western Governors Association on Tuesday called on Congress to pass comprehensive immigration reform including a temporary guest worker program.UPDATE: As you might expect, it's even worse than the blurb suggests. Utah's "Republican" governor Jon Huntsman is working with Arizona's Janet Napolitano on the "guest" worker scheme and immigration "reform" in general, and they have demands.
The group that represents 18 western states passed the policy resolution unanimously while meeting at the National Governors Association annual conference...
For instance, they want to avoid creating incentives to emigrate here illegally by... making legal immigration easier. Until such time as we allow a billion or so people to move here, that's not going to work.
They don't want "amnesty", but, then again, all of those who want amnesty claim they don't want what they want. Instead, they want to fine illegal aliens before giving them amnesty. Orwell would be proud.
And, it appears to have been a setup:
Immigration was among the topics President Bush touched on during a Monday morning meeting with governors - possibly in anticipation of today's policy proposal, Huntsman said.I don't know about Napolitano, but I have no qualms about calling Utah's governor un-American:
Utah Gov. Jon Huntsman Jr., Mexico, and illegal immigration
Utah's problem with "American" politicians