Showing posts with label immigration. Show all posts
Showing posts with label immigration. Show all posts

Sunday, June 21, 2009

Wonk Room Pulls the Race Card

Oh, the irony. Sonai Sotomayor is in a woman's only elite group called the Belizean Grove. But instead of concerning with a future member of the Supreme Court doing and saying things along racial and gender identity lines that would be verboten for a white male. There is complete media silence on this, akin to the media's aversion to discussion of Obama's racist pastor friend/mentor Jeremiah Wright. Liberals groups rally around Sonia for SCOTUS, while both reveling in the latina identity politics and ignoring the inherent reverse-bias aspects of her statements and behaviors.

Instead, Wonk Room worries about a journalist who reported on the bad effects of sanctuary city policies. Using the tired old guilt-by-association ploy, they lambaste a journalist for daring to accept an award from the CIS, or Center for Immigration Studies, which they call an 'anti-immigration hate group.'

CIS is definitely NOT an ‘anti-immigration hate group’: They are against illegal immigration and for legal immigration so long as it is reasonably controlled, as position many if not most Americans hold. Here is a welcoming speech Mark Krikorian gave to newly minted naturalized citizens - immigrants. It was a welcome and a tribute from a Grandson of immigrants in the 'melting pot' tradition of Teddy Roosevelt.

Wonk Room sours politics and does it a disservice by phony ad hominems against this group. Nowhere in their article is their any substance to their name-calling.

Sunday, May 18, 2008

Swedish Welfare State Collapses as Immigrants Wage War

Swedish Welfare State Collapses as Immigrants Wage War. Those war-waging immigrants are Muslim immigrants who have contempt for Swedish law, Swedish culture and Swedes themselves. The lesson is: Weak-on-crime plus multi-culturalism plus unlimited immigration = Attacks on your people and your culture.

Will America repeat the mistakes of Sweden? Barack Obama is a weak-on-crime open-borders multiculturalist. hmmmm.

Monday, July 9, 2007

Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison on Comprehensive Immigration Reform

Below is the body of an email I just received from Senator Hutchison regarding the amnesty for illegals bill that "We the People" defeated - the first such Email since Victory in DC Day:

Dear Mr. ,

Thank you for contacting me regarding comprehensive immigration reform. I welcome your thoughts and comments on this issue.

Texas is a state that uniquely benefits from the contributions of legal immigrants, but it is also uniquely vulnerable to the dangers of illegal immigration. Since I was first elected to the U.S. Senate in 1993, my principles have been clear and consistent: we must secure our borders while discouraging illegal behavior. As a member of the Senate Appropriations Committee, I have worked to appropriate funds for border security, which includes new Border Patrol agents, Immigration and Customs Enforcement investigators, detention officers, and detention beds. We have ended catch and release and accelerated the deportation process. I strongly supported provisions for an additional $1.9 billion in immediate funding for border security to cover the first 1,000 of 6,000 new Border Patrol agents hired this year and in 2008. These funds, as provided in the fiscal year 2006 Emergency Supplemental appropriations bill, will assist with the temporary deployment of up to 6,000 National Guard troops aiding the Border Patrol with surveillance and logistics. Yet, more needs to be done to secure our borders, and I continue to seek additional emergency spending to immediately address this national security issue.

On May 9, 2007, Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid of Nevada introduced
S. 1348, the Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act of 2007. Initially, the bill consisted of the same language from S. 2611, the Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act of 2006, which the Senate considered last year. On May 19, 2007, Senators Harry Reid and Ted Kennedy (D-MA) introduced a substitute amendment, S. AMDT. 1150, to the bill. The amendment replaced the original text of the bill with new language to be considered. The new language was negotiated over several months between the Bush Administration and a small group of senators.

The legislation addressed several key issues of comprehensive immigration reform. First, the bill concentrated on border enforcement by mandating the hiring, training, and deployment of 20,000 border patrol and immigration enforcement agents; the construction of 370 miles of border fencing; the completion of 300 miles of vehicle barriers; and, the deployment of 4 Unmanned Aerial Vehicles. The bill also would have provided for 105 operational ground-based radar and camera towers on the southern border and authorized that 31,500 detention beds must be available so that apprehended aliens can be detained. All other provisions of the bill were contingent upon these security provisions first being met.

Second, the bill sought to strengthen workforce enforcement through the use of an electronic employment verification system (EEVS). When the EEVS was in place, the Administration predicted that within 18 months, illegal aliens would find it extremely difficult to gain any legitimate employment. Under the bill, illegal workers would not only have been subject to removal from the country but would have been permanently barred from any U.S. immigration program, and employers who knowingly hired illegal workers would have faced stiff penalties.

The bill aimed to overhaul the current U.S. immigration system by enacting a merit-based immigration system or “point system.” Under such a system, immigrants to the U.S. would have garnered points through various characteristics they possess. Examples of these characteristics would have included, but were not limited to, job skills deemed helpful to the U.S. economy, level of educational attainment, and degree of English language proficiency. Once a hopeful immigrant reached a certain point threshold, they would have been eligible to enter the country with a visa, subject to numerical limitations, background checks, and public health screenings.

The fourth component of the bill was the enactment of a temporary worker program where individuals would have been able to come into the United States for a period of two years. At the end of the two-year period, the worker would have been required to return home for at least one year. Eligibility of such a worker for this program would have spanned a total of three cycles (totaling six working years within the U.S. with one year out of the country between each term). Proponents claim that Americans would have been given the first opportunity to fill the jobs, and market forces would have determined how many foreign workers were needed.

The final element of the bill attempted to address those who are currently in the United States illegally. Through the creation of a Z-visa category, current illegal immigrants would need to meet several criteria prior to being considered for legal status or U.S. citizenship. They would first have to pay a $1,000 fine, with an additional $500 fine per dependent. These individuals would also be subject to strict work requirements. All Z-visa holders would have to remain employed in order to prevent their deportation. After a period of eight years, non-immigrant workers would have been eligible to leave the country, pay an additional $4,000 fine, and apply for lawful permanent resident status in the United States, or they could opt to remain on the Z-visa indefinitely, subject to background checks.

Some of the beneficial features in S. 1348 included provisions to increase border security, which must be our number one goal. The bill sought to secure our borders by increasing border fencing, vehicle barriers at the Southern border, the size of the Border Patrol, and installing ground-based radar and camera towers along the Southern border. I believe that any legislation addressing immigration must first address the safety and security needs of the United States, and there were benchmarks that were finite for border security within the bill and were required to be reached before any temporary worker program, or dealing with the backlog of people who are in our country illegally, could begin. Nevertheless, I think the security provisions within the bill could have been made stronger through the amendment process. For this reason, I supported amendments to strengthen border security and remove illegal immigrants convicted of aggravated felonies from the United States.

In addition to border security measures, the bill also contained provisions for a temporary worker program. Temporary work visas play an important role in ensuring U.S. companies have the workers they need to succeed in an increasingly competitive global marketplace. A temporary worker program is also essential to border security. If we do not have a way for people to legally come into this country and fill the jobs where labor is in critical demand, then we will never be able to control our borders. By incorporating the use of an EEVS, we would greatly enhance the success of our efforts to hold companies accountable for employment activity, ensure fair treatment of temporary workers, and make certain those who legally enter our country abide by our laws. A tamper-proof biometric identification card should also be incorporated into any worker program.

While I supported many of the provisions of S. 1348, I also had serious concerns with some parts of the bill. I was very concerned at how this bill could affect the Social Security system, which we all know is on the brink of failure. In 2017, Social Security will start to pay out more than it receives. By 2041, the trust fund will be exhausted. I do not think it is fair to grant credits while illegally working in our country, especially when the solvency of Social Security is in question. To this end, I introduced an amendment that would have disallowed credits into our Social Security system for work performed by persons without lawful status. My amendment addressed both those who came into our country illegally and those who have overstayed their visa. My amendment, which would protect the integrity of the Social Security system, was agreed to by the Senate.

Another concern I had with the bill was found within Title VI of the legislation. Namely, I opposed the amnesty provisions that would have allowed people who came to this country illegally to never have to return to their home country. For this reason, I offered an amendment that would have required all adult illegal immigrants to leave the U.S. before they could apply for legal permanent status. I believe that granting citizenship or legal non-immigrant status to those who entered our country illegally would only encourage others to break our laws in the future. Unfortunately, my amendment was tabled by a 53-45 vote; thus, I could not support the bill as offered and voted against cloture. Ultimately, the cloture vote to end debate failed in a bipartisan 46-53 vote, and Majority Leader Reid pulled the bill from the Senate floor.

I believe an issue as important as immigration should be debated openly and freely and subjected to due consideration and review with time for senators to hear the concerns of their constituents. We have a broken immigration system that is not fair to those who are waiting to enter the country through the legal channels, or to the American people who live by the rule of law. It is the responsibility of the federal government to fix the broken immigration system and to secure the borders of our great nation. This is a duty that I take very seriously.

I have heard the concerns from my constituents regarding this issue, and you may be certain I will keep your views in mind as I continue to work to improve the flaws in our current immigration system.

I appreciate hearing from you and hope you will not hesitate to keep in touch on any issue of concern to you.


Sincerely,
Kay Bailey Hutchison

Thursday, June 28, 2007

We The People Won

The amnesty for illegals bill is dead thanks to you, and you over there, and the legal immigrant here up front, and the union member over there, and the Barry Goldwater Republican in the middle and the Ronald Reagan Republican over here on the right, and the Libertarian over there on the fringe, and the conservative Democrats there in the corner, and the talk show hosts (Savage, etc. - you little devils, you), and the grassroots lobby groups like Roy Beck's NumbersUSA (my personal favorite) and Steve Elliot's Grassfire, and yes, of course, you Senator Sessions, and Senator Hutchinson, and Senator Cornyn, and Senator Burr (I list you because yours was the only office that when I called after business hours I found I could leave a voice message) and the 49 other Senators that voted "NO" to amnesty today. And let's not forget to mention our indebtedness to Al Gore who, of course, invented the Internet that made it so easy for our Senators to hear from We the People.

No, Mr. President, no thanks to you, or McCain, or Kennedy, or Kyl, or Lott, or Martinez, or Clinton, or Graham, or the other 39 Senators who counted themselves losers today by voting against the will of two-thirds, and more, of the American people -- you all are out of touch with political reality.

I'm tired. I have that feeling you get when you reach the top of the mountain -- that moment of exhilaration followed by the realization of real fatigue. It should not have taking so much effort to convince our elected officials that two-thirds, and more, of Americans did not want those officials to disregard the rule of law by granting amnesty to 12-20 million people who came here illegally.

UPDATE & ADDED COMMENTS:
Senator John Cornyn is a hero who not only voted right but stood up and exposed the flaws in the bill on the Senate floor. His bottom line: "So once again, I fear that like in 1986, we are promising something to the American people that we cannot deliver."

Senator Tom Coburn on the Senate floor exposes the immigration sham for what it is:
“We have failed to instill the confidence in the American people in the Congress that we are about doing what is in the best long-term interest of our country. It’s not about being against immigration or for immigration. It’s not about being against or for an ethnic group. It’s not about liberal or conservative. It’s about the worry the American people have about the concept we call liberty…There’s worry that the thing that gives us liberty, which is the rule of law, is somehow being tinkered with in a way that undermines our confidence and security in what the American Dream is all about.” - Senator Tom Coburn
American citizens and taxpayers opposed the Senate immigration bill strongly because it was a costly, unworkable, unimplementable fraud that was designed to fail - it pretended to uphold border security and enforcing the law, but it actually undermined them completely with the Z visa amnesty/legalization program and its many 'gotchas'. The immigration debate will go on, but the open borders elites can no longer shut the American people out of the process. Today was a victory for grassroots democracy and 'people power' activism.


Monday, June 25, 2007

Omissions in published letter

I am pleased that the Statesman published my letter on 6/24.
However, the following two items were cut from the letter:

VIZ:
How does Congress propose to completely seal the border?
How will Congress insure that workers do not overstay their permits?

Perhaps making points in the form of questions is not a good idea. Perhaps there are too many points in the letter. Perhaps these are sensitive issues, each better dealt with in separate letters.

So, let's write some more letters -- this bill is an abomination.

BTW, the word count of the original was exactly 150, so going over the allowed lenghth cannot be the reason.

Thursday, June 21, 2007

Letter to Editor on Immigration Bill

Your editorial (6/18/07) presented good points but this immigration legislation troubles me.

I am not anti-immigrant. My wife immigrated legally after health and background checks, learned English and passed the citizenship test. She is fully assimilated.

What troubles me, however, is a Congress presuming to tackle anything “comprehensive.” Fixing immigration requires a well thought-out, individual solution for each factor, not a mish-mash of political deals.

Border security is not just to stem the unregulated flow of immigrants but, even more importantly, to guard against imported diseases, crime and terrorism. How does Congress propose to completely seal the border?

Does Congress realize that a guest-worker program with tamper-proof identification and job matching could only work if the applicants have access to employment offices, staffed by US officials and preferably in their home country to enable mandatory health and background checks?

How will Congress insure that workers do not overstay their permits?

Carl E. Schlaepfer
cschlaepfer@austin.rr.com

Tuesday, June 19, 2007

Quote of the Day: "An important moment"

Jed Babbin lays down the gauntlet and issues a clarion call - "Kill (their immigration) Bill":

"We are at an important moment in the history of our nation, one that will be analyzed for hundreds of years to come. It is a moment when conservatives can falter, worn out from the fight, or reach down into our collective character and find the strength to keep up the fight now and in months and years to come." - Jed Babbin


I believe the real conservatives in this country are becoming more united than we have been in a long time, as we find ourselves all in this fight against the largest illegal immigrant amnesty ever.

We are now fighting on common and secure ground of rock-solid conservative principles:
  • We are defending American sovereignty and our right to decide who crosses our borders
  • We are fighting to defend law and order, both in the immigration laws itself and in general
  • We are fighting to stop the pillaging of taxpayers, the expansion of our welfare state, the undermining of working Americans, and the degradation and corruption of our Government
  • We are fighting to defend American heritage, culture, language and unity against the multi-culturalist ideologues and the enemies of American exceptionalism


The one thing we conservative need now is ... a victory. If it is at the hands of the grassroots,
even as a negative 'victory' that stops a bad idea for a season, how sweet that will be. For it will confirm another key conservative principle - the strength of a free nation is in its citizens, not its leaders. It's up to us to make our own corrupted weak leaders do the right thing.

Sunday, June 17, 2007

Immigration Roundup

"The immigration system is not "broken," the only thing that is broken is the will to uphold the law. Your administration's lack of will to meet its obligations regarding immigration enforcement is disrespectful toward all American citizens and legal immigrants." - Costa Mesa City council, letter to the President on immigration.

The vampire bill is back. Low support for Senate immigration bill. The Senate immigration bill is opposed by a more than 2 to 1 margin (Rasmussen poll): Favor 23%, Oppose 50%. "Sixty-nine percent (69%) of voters would favor an approach that focuses “exclusively on securing the border and reducing illegal immigration.” Support for the enforcement only approach comes from 84% of Republicans, 55% of Democrats, and 69% of those not affiliated with either major party."
And why not? Working Americans are not stupid about immigration. Not to mention the politics of Blacks vs immigrants.

Conservative bloggers revolt over immigration - Gee, no kidding. Bush flunkies bashing the base doesn't help any. Ingraham smokes Tony Snow on borders. And Bush's emotions are no way to lead on immigration policy. Bush at all-time low in approval on heels of his support for 'comprehensive' immigration amnesty. Now we see Operation Payback underway. Heather MacDonald on the GOP's Hispanic Delusion. Gerson recites the pro-amensty talking points, and talks down to the right.

NRO: Harry Reid's plan to pass the immigration bill. Bush's $4 billion border bribe tries to buy votes. The key vote is cloture and Sentor Lott pre-announces the plan to sellout America by stripping amendments in conference. The process is an outrage and the product is a monstrosity. Good news: It can be stopped. Bush's clout is 'all used up' on immigration. Public pressure has to stop the Senators from getting pulled by the insider-lobbying. Latest update.

20 Loopholes in the Senate immigration bill. Z Visa: Z IS FOR ZERO. ZERO ENFORCEMENT. ZERO DEPORTATIONS.

Krauthammer talks sense - why not do the one thing we all agree on? Secure the border first. Micheal Steele says it too; this man should have been our RNC chair, instead of Martinez! Immigration bill is a fraud.
Too Much Federal Meddling in verification. Verification that can work.
The sham of Jobs Americans won't do.

What the White House said about the fence - last October. Bush's Top 5 Reason for doing immigration reform. Malkin: Clear the backlogs first and Rules of engagement on why we don't deport criminal aliens.

What to do? You can call Senators: 1-800-882-2005. (Spanish number) 1-800-417-7666. (English number),1-866-340-9281, or 1-202-224-3121, send a fax or send Congressional emails.

UPDATE: Grassroots activism is having an effect - "The feedback we are getting from you about your phone calls and the intelligence your NumbersUSA Capitol Hill Team is picking up suggests that Senate Republican Whip Trent Lott (R-Miss.) is not nearly as solid in passing the Bush/Kennedy amnesty tonight as he was last night."

UPDATE 2: The Cramdown list. Senator Reid has a pre-packaged deal of 24 amendments for the second sham-nesty attempt. Here are some of the amendments:

_An amendment by Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison, R-Texas, to mandate that all illegal immigrants return home within two years to gain lawful status. The bill only requires those seeking green cards to do so.

_A proposal by Sen. Robert Menendez, D-N.J., to increase the number of points under a new merit-based green card allocation system that could be awarded for being related to a U.S. citizen or green card holder.

_An amendment by Sen. John Thune, R-S.D., to condition any legal status for unlawful immigrants on the measure's border security and workplace enforcement measures. The bill would instead allow such immigrants to get probationary legal status while those so-called "triggers" were being met.

_A proposal by Sen. Claire McCaskill, D-Mo., to increase penalties on employers who repeatedly hire illegal immigrants.

_An amendment by Sen. Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, to replace the employment verification system with a less-burdensome alternative.

_An amendment by Montana's Democratic Sens. Max Baucus and Jon Tester, who opposed moving to a final vote on the bill, to remove requirements that workers present "REAL ID" driver's license to prospective employers.

_An amendment by Sen. Norm Coleman, R-Minn., to let law enforcement agencies share information about people's immigration status.

_An amendment by Sen. Bernard Sanders of Vermont, the sole Independent to oppose the June 7 test vote, to bar companies that have had mass layoffs from hiring foreign high-tech workers.

Thursday, June 14, 2007

THE VAMPIRE STRIKES BACK

Senators to Revive Immigration Bill, trying to cut behind-doors deals to bring this bill back on the Senate floor.
Inside dope on it.

UPDATE: SELLOUT DEAL IS MADE:

"We met this evening with several of the senators involved in the immigration bill negotiations,” Reid and McConnell said in a joint statement. “Based on that discussion, the immigration bill will return to the Senate floor after completion of the energy bill."


July 4, will have special meaning this year ... we will know by then whether the next generation will have an American Republic worthy of the name.

Time to tell 'em what we think. The Senate numbers are 202-224-3121.

GOP Base Revolts on Immigration II

President Bush loses base over immigration falling from base support in the 80% plus range until recently and now plummeting to around 40%:

When asked about various areas of the illegal immigration issue, 97% of respondents said that it was “very important” to focus on “border security and reducing the number of people who enter the country illegally.” That number drops to 43% on the topic of “resolving the legal status of the illegal aliens already in the U.S.” Only 18% felt it was “very important” to set up a temporary worker program. ... When asked if they supported the “illegal immigration legislation that was being debated in the U.S. Senate,” 93% of respondents said “no.”

Tuesday, June 12, 2007

Travis Monitor Stops Immigration Bill!

Guess who visited our blog last Thursday? Weblog stats showed a visit to our humble blog from the U.S. Senate, which was followed later on Thursday by the collapse of the legislation in a failed Senate cloture vote. Coincidence? We'd like to think there was a connection.

No, our efforts did not stop the bill alone, Travis Monitor was but a drop in an

ocean of citizen discontent that boiled over and hit the Senators considering this misguided bill. In many ways, the last few weeks show the power of new media and grassroots activism once again. No major media outlet publicized the bills flaws - they are still boosting amnesty.

Yet it's not over yet. President Bush is trying to revive the bill, ingoring the obvious colalteral political damage and the many flaws in the bill. The price of liberty continues to be eternal vigilance.

PS. From the grapevine: "I just got an email from the anti-immigration activist Roy Beck. He says that Mitch McConnell has yielded to GWB, and last Thursday’s “victory” was nothing of the sort. The sellout continues."

Saturday, June 9, 2007

Operation Payback

What we need to do now on immigration - Enforcement First: "The abandonment of the Kyl-Kennedy bill heeds the wishes of most Americans. It opens the way for a new approach: Enforcement first, amnesty last, and lower numbers of more highly skilled immigrants above all."

To make sure that the dragon of amnesty-for-illegals is really slain, here is what the conservative Republican base needs to do. We need ... OPERATION PAYBACK:
1. Defeat Lindsay Graham in the GOP primary.
2. Defeat Chuck Hagel in the GOP primary next year or force him to quit.
3. End John McCain’s presidential hopes.
4. Defeat all pro-amnesty Democrat Senators next year. They include:
- Biden, Durbin, Harkin, Kerry, Lautenberg, Levin, Reed.
5. Serve notice to all other ‘squishy’ GOP types that their misbehavior on immigration must end and we must have a united GOP behind the idea of “Enforcement First”.
6. Continue to pressure the White House to give up their Amnesty-Jihad. No rhetorical support for a White House that disses its own base, until it throws in the towel.

Austin, sanctuary city



The deadly consequences of bad illegal alien sanctuary policies are recounted here. Giving 'sanctuary' to criminal illegal aliens (they are the main beneficiaries of this policy) gets innocent people killed.


UPDATE:
Heather MacDonald on the consequences. See also NRO:“in Los Angeles, 95 percent of all outstanding warrants for homicide (which total 1,200 to 1,500) target illegal aliens. Up to two-thirds of all fugitive felony warrants (17,000) are for illegal aliens. ... The Department of Homeland Security estimates that 15 percent to 20 percent of illegal aliens wouldn’t qualify for amnesty based on their criminal record ... A whopping 28 percent of Mexican-American males between the ages of 18 and 24 reported having been arrested since 1995, and 20 percent reported having been incarcerated — a rate twice that of other immigrant groups.”


Sanctuary leaves the local PD unable to deal properly with crime in our midst.

Mr President, build up that wall!

The Vampire of Senate immigration amnesty is dead, but the ghouls of bipartisan mis-leadership are trying to revive it: Talk of Resurrecting Immigration Bill Begins as Autopsy Goes On. But this nutty sentence - "The White House -- which regards immigration reform as key to reviving public support for President Bush" - so at odds with the reality that popular opposition derailed the bill, has my mind so boggled it made me fire off a discontented missive to comments@whitehouse.gov.

Dear Mr President,

The Senate immigration bill dies because people rejected it and the Senate was unwilling to push it through in the
face of such clear and adamant public disapproval. The Washington Post tells us that:
"The White House -- which regards immigration reform as key to reviving public support for President Bush"

Who is the retard who thinks this would happen? This idiot needs to be fired. And if the President himself thinks this, God help us!

Don't you get it? I am more than twice a voter and volunteer for Bush, in 1994, 1998, 2000 and 2004.

I OPPOSE AMNESTY/LEGALIZATION FOR ILLEGAL ALIENS. I oppose vigorously and strongly the Senate immigration bill. So does practically all of the Republican base. I don't know of a single grassroots activist or Republican stalwart who likes this bill, but I personally know hundreds who are vehemently and in some cases angrily opposed to this sellout of Republican law and order and national-security (= border security) principles.

So do the American voters, by a 2 to 1 margin, oppose this Senate bill. (See the Rasmussen poll, which asked directly about the Senate bill; it has only 23% support and majority opposition). They oppose the offense of amnesty (and you fool nobody by denying that's what it is) married to phony 'triggers' that won't work (and are designed to fail). The calls to the Senators were running 98% against the bill. Just ask the Senate staffers. The phony 'comprehensive' approach failed in 1986 and the American people reject foisting this failure on us again.

The more Bush pushes for this travesty of a bill, the more he loses popular support. The more we American citizens learn about it, the more upset and opposed we become. Good Amendments, like the Cornyn Amendment to deny legalization path to all criminals, and Coleman amendment to require local law enforcement involvement, were turned down by the pro-legalization forces. Can Bush defend that travesty? Can he defend letting people who have absconded from the law become citizens? Or allowing continue breakdown in enforcement by having local law enforcement not even notify the Federal authorities of illegal aliens in their custody?

We oppose this bad bill and the bad idea of amnesty/legalization not because we are uninformed, but because we are very much informed. We are not going to be fooled, we are not going to stop opposing this travesty, and we are not going away. Any continued attempt to push this bad, unpopular bill will only result in the destruction of President Bush's remaining support and credibility, and the destruction of the Republican party. Yes, it is that serious. It could be worse than Watergate. 25% of pro-amnesty/legalization Republican incumbents lost their seats in the last election.

Mr President, here is how to fix the situation: COME OUT IN FAVOR OF ENFORCEMENT FIRST. Acknowledge that you cannot get the bill you want now, but that you will redouble efforts to secure the border and enforce immigration law in the workplace. Acknowledge that you have failed to do these things for 6 years and that you are turning over a new leaf by letting the issue rest for this year in Congress and focus on ENFORCEMENT.

Meet with Senators Sessions, Coburn, DeMint, Vitter, Inhofe and Cornyn; let Rep Sensenbrenner, Rep Steve King, Rep Duncan Hunter and Rep Lamar Smith join them; and instead of talking, do some listening. Ask what they would have you do next, and follow their advice. They are the ones who are standing for the real conservative and Republican approach to these issues.

One last thing, Mr President: Build up that Wall! Build the border fence the whole 800 miles and make it really work.

Only then can you dig out from the hole that you have dug for yourself.

Wednesday, June 6, 2007

12 million Z visas, .5 million more illegals, 51 sellouts

I told you so. Immigration Bill Won't Work: "The Senate's immigration bill will only reduce illegal immigration by about 25 percent a year ... The bill's new guest-worker program could lead to at least 500,000 more illegal immigrants within a decade, said the report from the CBO." And that's not counting the 12 million illegal aliens who become legalized, and their families. So what's getting 'fixed', here, except for the cheap labor lobby's 'fix' for supply?

Meanwhile, 51 Senators vote to allow criminals to get amnesty, voting against the very reasonable Cornyn Amendment which tried to bar all illegal aliens with criminal backgrounds from getting access to the Z visa amnesty program.

The 51 sellouts were mostly Democrats, including all four Democrat Presidential contenders, and the usual RINO suspects: Akaka (D-HI), Bayh (D-IN), Biden (D-DE), Bingaman (D-NM), Boxer (D-CA), Brown (D-OH), Cantwell (D-WA), Cardin (D-MD), Carper (D-DE), Casey (D-PA), Clinton (D-NY), Craig (R-ID), Dodd (D-CT), Domenici (R-NM), Durbin (D-IL), Feingold (D-WI), Feinstein (D-CA), Graham (R-SC), Hagel (R-NE), Harkin (D-IA), Inouye (D-HI), Kennedy (D-MA), Kerry (D-MA), Klobuchar (D-MN), Kohl (D-WI), Kyl (R-AZ), Lautenberg (D-NJ), Leahy (D-VT), Levin (D-MI), Lieberman (ID-CT), Lincoln (D-AR), Lugar (R-IN), Martinez (R-FL), McCain (R-AZ), McCaskill (D-MO), Menendez (D-NJ), Mikulski (D-MD), Murray (D-WA), Obama (D-IL), Pryor (D-AR), Reed (D-RI), Reid (D-NV), Salazar (D-CO), Sanders (I-VT), Schumer (D-NY), Specter (R-PA), Stabenow (D-MI), Voinovich (R-OH), Webb (D-VA), Whitehouse (D-RI), Wyden (D-OR)

BTW, Romney Surges and McCain falls in latest GOP Presidential polls. Romney slammed the phony Z visa as amnesty while McCain defended it in the June 5 debate - connection? Meanwhile, Senators are shocked by the outrage, support for Bush on immigration crumbles and the bill itself is opposed by a margin of 2 to 1. Yet the Senatorial lemmings are marching off the cliff to pass a terrible bill that repeats the errors of the 1986 immigration amnesty. Most summer sequels are bad enough, but when the original was a disaster - look out!

Monday, June 4, 2007

Immigration Facts: Where Illegal Aliens Reside

Over 1 million illegal aliens in Texas in 2000. How many are in Texas today?


Friday, June 1, 2007

GOP Base Revolts on Immigration

WND: RNC fires all phone solicitors as cash 'evaporates' over Bush":


Previous GOP donors have given RNC solicitors a lashing about the president's proposed immigration measure.

"We have not heard anyone in our donor calls who supported the president on immigration," said a fired phone solicitor, who described himself as a Republican activist.

"We write these comments up from each call, and give them to a supervisor who passes them on to the finance director or the national chairman," he said. "But when I talked with the White House, the people there told me they got nothing but positive comments on the president's immigration stand."


Yikes. Talk about out of touch.


I had to send this note to the RNC:

I am one of those who has stopped giving to RNC because of the support of pro-amnesty candidates, and the fact that Bush decided to install a pro-amnesty figurehead to lead the RNC. Unless and until the RNC stops being supportive of such candidates, I will take my political contributions elsewhere.

For goodness sake, tell the White House the truth. Tell them that the President's eager support for legalization for illegal aliens, and his failure to secure the border and enforce immigration law, is destructive to the unity of the party and is demoralizing, disaffecting and angering the Republican base. We cannot follow leaders who walk away from our values and ideals!



UPDATE: New York Times posts an article on the GOP rebellion over immigration, noting the hue and cry from the GOP base:

This week, after Mr. Bush’s suggestion that those opposing the Congressional plan “don’t want to do what’s right for America” inflamed conservative passions, Rush Limbaugh told listeners, “I just wish he hadn’t done it because he’s not going to lose me on Iraq, and he’s not going to lose me on national security.” He added, “But he might lose some of you.”


Such sentiments have reverberated through talk radio, conservative publications like National Review and Fox News. They have also appeared on Web sites including RedState.com and FreeRepublic.com, where postings reflect a feeling that Mr. Bush is smiting his own coalition in pursuit of a badly needed domestic accomplishment, and working in league with the likes of Senator Edward M. Kennedy, a co-author of the legislation.


White House officials said it had led them to engage the blogosphere in a concerted way for the first time, posting defenses on liberal and conservative sites.



White House officials are welcome to have their claims dissected, but I'll give the same advice Senator Coburn gave: “I think President Bush hurts himself every time he says it is not amnesty,” said Senator Tom Coburn, Republican of Oklahoma, referring to the bill’s legalization process for immigrants. “We are not all that stupid.”


UPDATE: DC Chapter of FreeRepublic 'freep' of the RNC HQ on June 4 to protest amnesty for illegal immigrants:

Saturday, May 26, 2007

This Immigration Bill is Built to Fail

The current immigration bill being considered by the Senate is so large, complex, and full of legalistic 'gotchas', that there is no telling what unintended consequences will flow from its passage. There is however one thing we can count on: It will not in way solve our immigration woes.

To critics of the immigration bill, this bill will irredeemably change America for the worse through the instant create of a new underclass. Whether it is called amnesty or another name, giving blanket legalization and citizenship to the 12 to 20 million illegal immigrants here in this country is the most significant part of this bill. This plus the further migration of these legalized immigrants' families may lead to 100 million more Americans in about a generation. This massive legalization will cost taxpayers $2.5 trillion, according to Robert Rector of the Heritage Foundation; it will hasten Social Security and Medicare's demise by creating more future demands than will be commensurately paid in via taxes, and will constitute the largest unfunded mandate ever on state and local Governments. Today's largely impoverished illegal immigrant class will become tomorrow's citizen-clients of our expanded welfare state.


Proponents for this bill retort by waxing poetic about immigration and blurring the difference between legal and illegal immigration. It is said that today's immigration is like the waves of immigration from 1880 to 1920, when masses "yearning to breathe free" came to our shores, mostly from Europe. It's no wonder they want to confuse the legal versus illegal distinction. Legal immigration, especially high-skill immigration (e.g. under H1-B), has been a net plus for our economy. Illegal immigration, mostly low-wage and low-education, is decidedly not, when one accounts for the full social costs of supporting low wage families and compares it to their much smaller tax contributions such low-wage workers make. No doubt illlegal immigrants would like to be here, and that cheap-labor employers would like them so as well. However, neither low-wage employers nor low-wage migrant workers pay the full cost of health insurance, education, welfare and income subsidies that will be the entitlement of these future citizens. Even today, illegal immigrants are a fiscal drain; it will only be greater should they be given a legalization path.


The cost of this shift will be borne by taxpayers and by today's low-wage Americans, who will be under further wage pressure by the competition of so many low-skill immigrants. Median incomes have been stagnant for working men in this country, a wake-up call that the clear supply-and-demand consequence of large-scale illegal immigration has been to curb wage scales. Curiously, we harken back to the 'good old days' for 1945 to 1965, when family incomes rose as fast the economy; it was an era of much lower levels of immigration. Which trend should we prefer?


The losers in this bill are also today's legal immigrants, who played by the rules and who have had to jump through many hoops to stay legal, and pay much more in immigration fees than the $1,000 the illegal alien has to pay to get the Z-visa. They will face more delays as our bureaucracy will be swamped with millions of amnesty applications.


Illegal immigration has other social costs, Drug smuggling and human trafficking are rampant on our out-of-control southern border. Illegal immigrants make up more than a quarter of the prison population in California, commit a disproportionate number of crimes. As Heather MacDonald has shown, 'sanctuary cities' have, as a consequence of failing to enforce immigration laws, become incapable of enforcing other laws as well: "Sanctuary mandates create vast law-free zones where illegal immigrants know that they face virtually no risk of apprehension; the zones have notoriously protected criminals as well as itinerant roofers." Time and again, deportable criminal aliens have been let go due to lax immigration law enforcement, only to commit crime again.


What makes this bill truly horrific is that this bill is built to fail; it is deliberately constructed to fail to solve even the basic immigration issue at hand: Can we as Americans determine who comes here and who does not?


We have a border with Mexico where every day Federal law is violated thousands of times; yet despite a Federal budget of $2,800 billion, we cannot find the $1 billion it would take to build a secure barrier. We have tens of thousands of criminal aliens in America, yet we do not actively deport most of them, nor, thanks to our insecure border, can we assure that once deported they won't succeed in returning (many do). We have millions of fraudulent social security IDs in Government databases, many known to the IRS already, and yet nobody is bothering to cross-check and investigate these apparent law violations. Pitifully few employers are checked for immigration law violations.


In the recent Fort Dix terrorism case (the plot to attack an Army base that was foiled), three of the six terrorist plotters were illegal aliens. We've seen that script before: Several of the 9/11 plotters broke immigration law by over-staying visas; even after 9/11, the INS sent Mohammed Atta valid US visa six months to the day after he died. John Lee Malvo, co-conspirator in 2002 DC area sniper killing, was an illegal alien, a Jamaican stowaway, who was caught then released. The holes in our current system continue to be exploited by criminals.


The real crisis in immigration is this: Our country has lost control of immigration, and without control of immigration, we as Americans can't ensure that immigration is in our best interests. We can't be sure the people who are here are the ones we want to be here.


Solving the crisis is stymied by special interests who are more afraid of effective immigration law enforcement than they are afraid of the economic, social and national security costs of out-of-control system. To these special interests, the 'crisis' in effect is the scary possibility that someday we might end up with an immigration system that actually enforces the intent of our law. Then where would the agri-businesses and meatpackers be, without a ready source of illegal and therefore pliant fruit pickers and factory workers?


The proponents are saying there is a crisis, but do not identify the crisis nor the root cause. They believe that no amount of crisis would be sufficient to actually deport any significant number of illegal immigrants.


Can there be a system that is both 'in control' of immigration and at the same meets the needs of would-be immigrants, employers, and the rest of us? If there is a solution, it is probably the following: First, secure our borders. Second, enforce immigration law in the workplace far beyond the current pitiful levels. Third, replace our current immigration system, tilted too far in favor family-based migration (known as "chain migration" to some), with a system that leans more towards employment-based immigration. With 1-2 million jobs created each year, if our current legal level of immigration were mostly employment-based, it would be more than sufficient to meet any supposed labor needs.


The current Senate bill makes a few moves in the above direction, but they are only a garnish around the main entree of amnesty. The author of our current immigration misery is Senator Ted Kennedy, who pushed through the 1965 immigration bill that initiated waves of chain migration and incited illegal immigration. In 1986, Senator Kennedy helped author that year's amnesty program, while knocking the legs from under employer enforcement, actually making it a crime for employer's to question legalization status of employees except under restricted conditions. The one-two combo of amnesty plus a system designed to be unenforceable led to massive fraud in amnesty applications and fraud in employment documentation, and encouraged massive further illegal immigration. We went from two million illegal immigrants then to over twelve million today. The amnesty didn't curb illegal immigration, it multiplied it.


Having Senator Ted Kennedy author this bill is like asking an incompetent doctor who botched an operation to conduct the surgery to fix his own mistakes. In 1986, Senator Kennedy said "We will never again bring forward another Amnesty Bill like this." Today, he brings forward the 1986-redo bill, only bigger. Kennedy has joined with La Raza and cheap labor lobbies to ensure that American immigration stays as out-of-control as possible, and the result is predictably bad.


The bill continues to gut enforcement, not even funding border guards that were authorized years ago; it fails to properly put in play employer sanctions and make sure they are working before the 'amnesty' happens; they play shell games with border security, asking for only a portion of the much-needed fence to keep out human-trafficking and drug smuggling, a fence put into law last year but which has not been fully funded, with only a few miles of 700 miles built so far; it guts "English only" assimilation while claiming to support it; so-called triggers are undermined by language which allows them to be easily waived; a better way to handle legal immigration, a point system, is deferred for 8 years, sure to be abolished and undermined again before it becomes real. Even worse are provisions that allow even criminal aliens who have multiple convictions to become legal citizens. This list of abuses and errors in this bill goes on.


Perhaps this is why the bill was rushed to the Senate floor without getting vetted first by a committee hearing.


Those same forces who are against solving our real immigration problems have written this Senate bill. This bill ensures that more waves of illegal immigrants will continue to arrive, assured that deportation will never happen and another amnesty some day likely will. Cheap labor employers are happy to have cheap non-union labor; the Kennedy Democrats are happy to have new welfare-state clients and potential voters; and the 'immigrant rights' groups are happy to flex political muscle and grow their ranks and power. The rest of us - American-born citizens, legal immigrants, taxpayers - are the suckers who will pick up the tab and shoulder the burden.


But rest assured. This bill is built to fail; it will fail to control the border, it will fail to enforce immigration law, and it will fail to eliminate the massive numbers of illegal immigrants in our midst. More will come to await the next amnesty. The crises this bill creates will be far greater than anything it solves, and the immigration crisis will surely continue to be with us if we make the mistake of making this law.


As such, we can be sure that another grand compromise will be hammered out to 'fix' the problems this bill creates. I just hope Senator Kennedy won't be around to write the next bill when that happens. Three strikes and you're out, Senator.

Wednesday, May 23, 2007

Immigration Sellout, part III - amnesty for criminals?!?

Senator Grassley on immigration deform:

Terrorists and criminals can apply for amnesty – The Secretary of Homeland Security is allowed to waive the grounds of ineligibility for those who have an outstanding administrative final order of removal, deportation or exclusion. Currently there are more than 637,000 alien absconders in the United States that have defied orders to leave.

Every time you think the bill couldn't get any worse, you find a provision where, sure enough, it really is worse than you thought possible.

Update: Senator Cornyn submitted an amendment to address this loophole. If the Senate cannot bring itself to vote for this, they are truly off the deep end.



Update 2: Another disgrace - they are limiting debate of a complex bill to only a few days, no committee hearings, only limited amendments. This is not democracy, this is a farce.

Sunday, May 20, 2007

Immigration Sellout, part II

The Senate immigration bill, this 'Grand Compromise' between Kennedy, McCain, Bush and a few others is Amnesty fraud according to Sowell and Worse than Amnesty according to David Limbaugh. I don't know of a single conservative who likes this deal - Mark Levin,
Hugh Hewitt (reviewing the fine print), and many (but not enough) Republican Senators, including Hutchison and Cornyn, are coming out against this bill, as did Mitt Romney and Duncan Hunter.

Some of the clunkers in it:

  • The cost is huge - "This direct cost of giving 20-30 million mostly unskilled people full rights is estimated at $2.5 trillion."
  • taxpayers pay legal bills for illegal aliens:
    Boehm said, "If passed, this bill will make taxpayers pay the legal bills for illegal aliens seeking amnesty. Tucked away on page 317 is a provision that would allow lawyers in the federally-funded legal services program to represent illegal aliens, which they are presently barred from doing."
  • The illegal aliens who get legalized dont even pay back taxes that they didn't pay when underground.
  • David Limbaugh notes: The bill's so-called "triggers" -- the events that must occur as a sop to enforcement types before the wrist-brushings and windfalls kick in -- are virtually defined out of existence in many cases by exceptions that swallow the rule.

It is a travesty to ram this through the Senate without full committee hearings and much more study. The Tsunami of social change wrecked by the most massive amnesty in world history and the 20-30 million in new immigrants with rights to social security, welfare, medicaid etc. is reason enough to take time to review it. But the 'fast track' is the only way to keep this bloated monstrosity alive; like a vampire, it wouldn't survive long in the light of day.

What is further maddening is the utter political blindness of the Bush White House and others, who foolishly think the following: "If they vote Democrat, it will be because they perceive the Republican Party as anti-immigrant." Thus, in one fell swoop, they buy into the lie that 'illegal immigrant' and 'immigrant' are the same thing (my legal immigrant wife gets incensed at the comparison, as do many other legal immigrants); they further buy the lie that only immigration policy is why Hispanics vote. How patronizing and clueless. The lower-class illegal immigrants that we are importing with this massive amnesty how low education levels and will have low income levels; they will be the clients for the liberal welfare state and will vote accordingly. These lower income voters will vote for the party that they think is looking out for them, and a social system based on more handouts is what they will vote for. The amount of money transferred to this group over time will amount to $2.5 trillion, and they will vote for the party of higher taxes and more spending to ensure they get it.

The only hope for the GOP is to fight for policies that defend the middle class and keep it as whole as possible. We WILL pay higher taxes if this passes, and the Republican party cannot compete with the Democrats on pandering to welfare state clients; when they do, our budgets get seriously busted; consequently, this is a sure prescription for a Democrat-majority country with a bigger welfare state We saw this happen in California, which went from a mostly-Republican state to a 'blue state' in 15 short years, due to the 1986 amnesty, which is a baby compared to this giant. Expect to see Arizona, Florida, Texas, and a few other states (Georgia?) to follow the trend. As a consequence, the political realignment that saw California become a blue state can and will be visited upon Texas within 20 years, should this pass.

Americans prefer 'enforcement first' by a 2-to-1 margin over the 'comprehensive amnesty' idea. Mark Krikorian explains why amnesty is a non-starter and what immigration hawks actually want:
..is steady, predictable, unapologetic enforcement of the laws, with an eye toward downsizing the illegal population through attrition, as more and more illegals give up and deport themselves. This would, of course, cause hardship for illegals and their employers, but it would be hardship with a purpose — to reassert control over the immigration system and establish legal status as a labor standard.

Duncan Hunter's statement states most of what needs to be said, so I am showing it in its entirety - HUNTER EXPRESSES “FIERCE DISAPPOINTMENT” OVER SENATE AMNESTY PROPOSAL:

I vow to oppose this legislation supported by Senators Edward Kennedy and John McCain. It provides a vast new immigration benefit to millions of illegal aliens who have broken our laws to live in the United States.I opposed the 1986 amnesty act because of this same reason. It proved to be the draw that we predicted it would be. I am deeply disappointed to see history repeating itself.

This package will confirm to the world that the U.S. does not really mean what it says when it comes to immigration enforcement. As a result of the citizenship benefit included in this legislation, despite the fine print, we will see a stampede across our borders.

This vast new amnesty and expansive guest worker program will surely be ridden with fraud and abuse, and ultimately lead to millions of public-assistance-dependent immigrants.

The Senate’s decision to blatantly ignore the Secure Fence Act signed into law last year and only require construction of 370 miles of fence, as opposed to the 854 miles mandated by the law, is a dramatic failure of this legislation.The San Diego border fence has proven that fencing works. The time has come to quickly implement the Secure Fence Act, not retreat from its mandates.

I believe that this package will result in lower wages for America’s already-struggling families by encouraging the importation of cheap foreign labor rather than investing, developing and growing a domestic workforce that will sustain our economy far into the future.

Amnesty is not the answer. Border enforcement must be first and it must be comprehensive. To do otherwise is to repeat the mistakes of the past. This Senate bill is bad for Americans, bad for our workers, bad for law enforcement and, most importantly, bad for national security. I will fight it. Please join with me.