Posted on 06/10/2007 7:30:35 AM PDT by gpapa
Last year, President Bush set out his views on immigration reform to the American people, saying there must be "a rational middle ground between granting an automatic path to citizenship for every illegal immigrant, and a program of mass deportation."
I agree with the president that a rational middle ground can be found between automatic citizenship and mass deportation, but the amnesty bill that was defeated in the Senate was not the middle ground.
(Excerpt) Read more at washtimes.com ...
The Pence-Hutchison plan excluded everyone outside of Latin America. I’d say that’s not rational.
I think it is rational, unless you want to get blown up.
>> The purpose of requiring illegal immigrants to leave the country to get right with the law is not simply to do a quick “touchback.” That is a gimmick. The purpose of leaving the country to get right with the law is to require people to apply for the legal right to enter the United States in the same way all other visa applicants apply to come into the United States.
If a person applies from outside of the country and is denied, then the person does not need to be deported because he or she is already gone. If the person, however, applies from outside the country and is accepted, which would mean the person passed a background check and a health screening and has a job, that person has corrected his or her original illegal act and has been granted legal entry to America without amnesty.<<
Kay Bailey Hutchison was going to bring up an amendment to the Senate amnesty bill that sounds like this proposal.
1) The current set of buffoons in the Senate would not accept this (unless she changed it to sound good but do nothing) because it would be a “killer” amendment. I can just hear Kennedy say that no illegal would sign up for this because they wouldn’t trust our government. What about the US Citizens’ trust of you and your accomplices, Teddy?
2) Lots of details are unclear in this proposal. However, even if they mandated a good faith certification of the border and employment verification (not just some political hack or the POTUS, but e. g. 65% of all state legislatures), the same traitors who have been pushing this would begin to push new laws that would weaken it.
Once they pass anything that legalizes illegals in any form, the will use that as a wedge to open the door wider. A “comprehensive” immigration bill that combines enforcement with legalization is a recipe for disaster. They need to close the border AND truly shut down illegal employment (including systems that truly work). If they do that, then they could submit a separate bill with the Pence/Hutchison plan.
>>I think it is rational, unless you want to get blown up.<<
?????????????????
I believe his first step, sanctions on employers, has to be instituted at the same time as step 1, up front. Only that way can you control the illegal immigration — border barriers alone won’t do it.
Sorry, should be “his fourth step”
It sounds very reasonable and a much better start than anything Kennedy and McCain have been pushing. Still, the devil is in the details. And a lot of work would have to go into filling in the details and in the actual implementation.
How about we exclude people from the Middle East, instead of from England, or Germany, for example. Only people there I’ve seen blowing things up are also from the Middle East, or converts to one of the more politicized sects of their major religion.
The real question is does the country really benefit from the presence of 12 million uneducated, illiterate, anti-American immigrants. If not, then why would we pass a bill allowing them to stay here forever.
How about we slow down immigration to a trickle until we don’t have to “press 1 for English” anymore?
“The Pence-Hutchison plan excluded everyone outside of Latin America. I’d say that’s not rational.”
I agree. Favoritism to our southern neighbors is the opposite of what we need.
Any ‘rational middle ground’ has to include an end to anchor babies via Constitutional amendment and a wall on our southern border.
Agreed. I’d like to do it by religion, frankly, but our courts apparently feel like foreigners have the same constitutional rights that we do.
Just say NO to Amnesty!! Keep calling!! It’s NOT OVER!!
U.S. Senate switchboard: (202) 224-3121
U.S. House switchboard: (202) 225-3121
White House comments: (202) 456-1111
Find your House Rep.: http://www.house.gov/writerep
Find your US Senators: http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm
The four steps Congressman Mike Pence outlines could be the basis for a bill conservatives might support.
Excerpt:
Any future effort at immigration reform must reflect the following four-step process:
Securing our border is the first step. As President Reagan said, “A nation without borders is not a nation.” Therefore, we must make America a nation with borders. We must man the door. No temporary worker program should begin until border security measures are completed. The border must continue to be certified as secure for a temporary worker program to continue.
The second step is to decide, once and for all, to deny amnesty to people whose first act in the United States was a violation of the law by requiring all illegal immigrants to leave the country to get right with the law.
The third step is to put in place a temporary worker program, without amnesty, that will establish “Ellis Island Centers” outside the country where private sector employment firms can match employers with willing temporary workers who pass a background check and learn English.
The final step is tough employer sanctions and an employment verification system that ensures a full partnership between American business and the U.S. government in enforcing our immigration laws.
I opposed the Senate immigration bill because I believe we can solve the crisis of illegal immigration without amnesty or a massive new federal bureaucracy.
The third step about temporary workers is not needed or necessary. We already have programs in place to fill jobs American firms need to continue functioning and remain competitive in world markets, although enforcement measures to avoid abuses in those programs are not entirely effective. What the Senate bill proposes is to increase the numbers of those temporary workers dramatically. Such an increase is opposed by unions, and blue and white collar workers whether they are Republicans, democrats or independents, because they feel the additions will put downward pressure on overall wages much to the disadvantage of citizens and legal residents of the USA.
The third step about temporary workers is not needed or necessary. We already have programs in place to fill jobs American firms need to continue functioning and remain competitive in world markets, although enforcement measures to avoid abuses in those programs are not entirely effective.
*******************
I hear ya.....the part I liked was the idea of “Ellis Island Centers” outside the country where private sector employment firms can match employers with willing temporary workers who pass a background check and learn English.”
We do have such centers, they are called consular or embassy offices, where many such workers apply for temporary employment VISA’s, that are codified in existing law, to work in the United States. There are currently 20 types of VISA’s for temporary stays, like work, education, transit, crews, religious, etc., in the US, not including travel for vacations, conferences, and the like, for which requirements vary by country.
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.