Illegal Immigration Legislation in the State of Georgia

I received an email concerning the issue of SB 529 and implementation dates. Please know we have just passed the most comprehensive bill against illegal immigration of any state in America.

We started with a bill that would only verify legal status of those applying for public benefits. We ended with a bill that does all of the following;

5.requires a verification of lawful status of everyone booked into jail on felony and DUI charges

6.requires lawful verification of all public employees statewide and every person working on public contracts

SB 529 is being hailed by the Federation of American Immigration Reform as the strongest illegal immigration bill ever introduced and passed in any state.

Yes there were negotiations, as there always is in politics, but the end result is much better than anything we could have ever imagined.

Sincerely, Chip Rogers State Senator 21st District State Capitol Atlanta,GA 30334

The Georgia House of Representatives on March 23 approved a bill (123-51) aimed at curbing taxpayer benefits to illegal immigrants and regulating the employers that hire them.

Topics: illegal immigration, immigrants, Georgia, State Laws, bills, legislation, Victory, DA King, Dustin Inman Society

Atlanta Business Chronicle
3/24/2006
Ryan MahoneyStaff Writer

Senate Bill 529, authored by state Sen. Chip Rogers (R-Woodstock), passed the House by a vote of 123-51 after less than two hours of discussion as leaders in the immigrant community called for a boycott and work stoppage on Friday in protest.

State Rep. John Lunsford (R-McDonough), who carried SB 529 in the House, described the bill as an urgently needed fix to a long-standing problem, while state Rep. Tom Bordeaux (D-Savannah) implied its passage would usher in a new wave of segregation.

State Rep. Alan Powell of Hartwell, one of several Democrats who voted for SB 529, called it a measure that did not go far enough but "might actually encourage some of those Congressmen to stop playing games [with U.S. borders] and to start enforcing the law."

"What part of 'illegal' does our Congress not understand?" he asked.

The House voted down an amendment by state Reps. Jay Shaw (D-Lakeland) and Pedro Marin (D-Duluth) that would have put off the bill's effective date, including giving employers until as late as 2011 to comply with provisions requiring them to verify the legal status of their workers.

Legislators had already stretched the compliance deadline to July 1, 2009 from July 1, 2006.

With four days remaining in the 2006 legislative session, SB 529 will return to the Senate, which can agree to the changes or hash them out with the House in a conference committee.

One possible bone of contention could be a provision that would charge illegals a 5 percent fee for wire transfers to other countries. The language was inserted at the last minute by the House committee that debated the bill.

Tony Blankley got it right:

Mexican illegals vs. American voters
By Tony Blankley
March 29, 2006

It is lucky America has more than two centuries of mostly calm experience with self-government. We are going to need to fall back on that invaluable patrimony if the immigration debate continues as it has started this season. The Senate is attempting to legislate into the teeth of the will of the American public. The Senate Judiciary Committeemen — and probably a majority of the Senate — are convinced that they know that the American people don't know what is best for them.
National polling data could not be more emphatic — and has been so for decades. Gallup Poll (March 27) finds 80 percent of the public wants the federal government to get tougher on illegal immigration. A Quinnipiac University Poll (March 3) finds 62 percent oppose making it easier for illegals to become citizens (72 percent in that poll don't even want illegals to be permitted to have driver's licenses). Time Magazine's recent poll (Jan. 24-26) found 75 percent favor "major penalties" on employers of illegals, 70 percent believe illegals increase the likelihood of terrorism and 57 percent would use military force at the Mexican-American border.
An NBC/Wall Street Journal poll (March 10-13) found 59 percent opposing a guest-worker proposal, and 71 percent would more likely vote for a congressional candidate who would tighten immigration controls.
An IQ Research poll (March 10) found 92 percent saying that securing the U.S. border should be a top priority of the White House and Congress.
Yet, according to a National Journal survey of Congress, 73 percent of Republican and 77 percent of Democratic congressmen and senators say they would support guest-worker legislation.
I commend to all those presumptuous senators and congressmen the sardonic and wise words of Edmund Burke in his 1792 letter to Sir Hercules Langrishe: "No man will assert seriously, that when people are of a turbulent spirit, the best way to keep them in order is to furnish them with something substantial to complain of." The senators should remember that they are American senators, not Roman proconsuls. Nor is the chairman of the Judiciary Committee some latter-day Praetor Maximus.
But if they would be dictators, it would be nice if they could at least be wise (until such time as the people can electorally forcefully project with a violent pedal thrust their regrettable backsides out of town). It was gut-wrenching (which in my case is a substantial event) to watch the senators prattle on in their idle ignorance concerning the manifold economic benefits that will accrue to the body politic if we can just cram a few million more uneducated illegals into the country. ( I guess ignorance loves company.) Beyond the Senate last week, in a remarkable example of intellectual integrity (in the face of the editorial positions of their newspapers) the chief economic columnists for the New York Times and The Washington Post — Paul Krugman and Robert Samuelson, respectively — laid out the sad facts regarding the economics of the matter. Senators, congressmen and Mr. President, please take note.
Regarding the Senate's and the president's guest-worker proposals, The Post's Robert Samuelson writes: "Gosh, they're all bad ideas ... We'd be importing poverty. This isn't because these immigrants aren't hardworking, many are. Nor is it because they don't assimilate, many do. But they generally don't go home, assimilation is slow and the ranks of the poor are constantly replenished ... [It] is a conscious policy of creating poverty in the United States while relieving it in Mexico ... The most lunatic notion is that admitting more poor Latino workers would ease the labor market strains of retiring baby boomers ? Far from softening the social problems of an aging society, more poor immigrants might aggravate them by pitting older retirees against younger Hispanics for limited government benefits ... [Moreover], [i]t's a myth that the U.S. economy 'needs' more poor immigrants.
"The illegal immigrants already here represent only about 4.9 percent of the labor force." (For all Mr. Samuelson's supporting statistics, see his Washington Post column of March 22, from which this is taken.) Likewise, a few days later, the very liberal and often partisan Paul Krugman of the New York Times courageously wrote : "Unfortunately, low-skill immigrants don't pay enough taxes to cover the cost of the [government] benefits they receive ? As the Swiss writer Max Frisch wrote about his own country's experience with immigration, 'We wanted a labor force, but human beings came.' " Mr. Krugman also observed — citing a leading Harvard study — "that U.S. high school dropouts would earn as much as 8 percent more if it weren't for Mexican immigration. That's why it's intellectually dishonest to say, as President Bush does, that immigrants 'do jobs that Americans will not do.' The willingness of Americans to do a job depends on how much that job pays — and the reason some jobs pay too little to attract native-born Americans is competition from poorly paid immigrants." Thusly do the two leading economic writers for the nation's two leading liberal newspapers summarily debunk the economic underpinning of the president's and the Senate's immigration proposals.
Under such circumstances, advocates of guest-worker/amnesty bills will find it frustratingly hard to defend their arrogant plans by their preferred tactic of slandering those who disagree with them as racist, nativist and xenophobic.
When the slandered ones include not only The Washington Post and the New York Times, but about 70 percent of the public, it is not only bad manners, but bad politics.
The public demand to protect our borders will triumph sooner or later. And, the more brazen the opposing politicians, the sooner will come the triumph.
So legislate on, you proud and foolish senators — and hasten your political demise.

I understand your frustration. I don't have a problem with people speaking Spanish. I lived overseas for 9 years in 2 countries. German is a harsh language, and I always loved going to Italy where the people seemed to speak less harshly. People coming to Germany, not knowing the language sometimes see Germans speaking on the street and think they are mad at each other. In fact, they are just speaking German.
I lived in Saudi Arabia were many languages were in use, fortunately, English is widely spoken (as was Germany). Culturally, Hispanics are more like us that other cultures, and people can be rude in all cultures.
I think when we get the impression that people don't seem to be assimilating into our culture, it concerns us. As it should.
I lived in the Washington, D.C. area for several years and the Hispanics have really moved in there. They buy a 1300 sq ft home and move 12 people into the home with 4 or 5 cars usually more than 15 years old. The kids fill up the schools and cars fill up the neighborhood. Fortunately, those people seem to be assimilating. It concerns me that when Hispanics dominate the population like in Southern California than they are not assimilating.

Check out Victor Davis Hanson's book "Mexifornia."

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.