Posted on 03/21/2013 6:22:11 AM PDT by SoConPubbie
WASHINGTON -- Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) gave a full-throated endorsement on Tuesday for comprehensive immigration reform that would allow undocumented immigrants to become citizens but not expand the employment verification system, putting him at odds with members of his party.
. . . . . . . . ..
But Paul differs from many Republicans, and some Democrats, on employment verification. Paul singled out E-Verify, an already-existing federal effort to check employment status. It's considered necessary by many to ensure businesses aren't hiring workers they shouldn't, but it's also criticized as cumbersome for employers and too likely to give false positives that would keep citizens and legal immigrant workers from being hired.
"My plan will not, though -- and this is where I disagree with some in the bipartisan group -- impose a national ID card," he said. "It will also not have mandatory E-Verify. I don't mind if there's E-Verify, maybe related to the tax code somehow, but I don't like the idea of making every business owner a policeman."
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/03/19/rand-paul-pathway-to-citizenship_n_2906587.html
Will these "legal residents" pay local, state and federal taxes?
If not, why not?
If so, how can we have people required to pay taxes and have no representation in the government which imposes the taxes.
Where the founding fathers wrong when they said "No taxation without representation."
Or is Mr. Paul wrong when he advocates permanent legal status WITH taxes and WITHOUT representation?
They both can't be right.
Sure, he wants the status quo to change, by giving our enemies, the left, everything they could want on this issue, millions of more Democrat voters.
He goes against every conservative principle there is to do this.
On this issue alone, Rand Paul has become a traitor to conservatives.
Based off a liberal media report DESIGNED to drive Core Conservatives away from Rand Paul based off the misrepresentation of Rand Paul’s stand on this issue????
The Media is playing you like a fiddle....
Enjoy your tyranny...
That absent free benefits, the only people coming here would be those who want to BE Americans. Those coming to attack us would first have to contend with an armed populace willing to fight back.
Doesn't match reality. Nor is it what Rand is saying. In fact, his position isn't "libertarian" at all. But it DOES encapsulate a lot of what we have discussed here on FR over the last 10-12 years as possible solutions.
Being for smaller, more Constitutional government doesn't automatically make you a libertarian.
So... Let’s not stick with the status quo...
Rand isn’t sticking with the status quo.
Permanently legal doesn’t mean citizen.
We don’t give representation to those paying tariffs, either, or sales taxes with tourists from foreign countries.
Does someone crossing the border violate anyone's rights? This sounds like a 'crime' against the regulatory state.
There was a time when American citizens and our government prided themselves as being "a nation of laws" as opposed to being like a third world mud-hole where inconvenient laws are openly disregarded.
Now we have a culture where people feel they do not have to obey constitutional laws they don't like.
It is against our law for foreigners to enter the country illegally, to remain here illegally, to lie about their citizenship, to use false ID, to seek employment and to seek government benefits using false identification.
How can you just say that it is okay for illegal aliens to break the law because it is only a 'crime' against the regulatory state?
It is a crime against the sovereignty of the nation and against every law abiding legal citizen.
Illegals spit on us as citizens, and on our country, when they break our laws and take taxpayer paid government handouts provided for citizens.
Entrenched interests support the status quo and fight it in any number of ways, since they get to play both sides.
1. They can be the voices crying “Xenophobic, Hispanic haters.”
or
2. “Love, compassion, it’s all for the children”
or
3. “I’ll support nothing less than deportation of illegals”
or
4. “Anything resembling amnesty is anti-American”
and on and on and on.
The problem is that it’s easy for them to dynamite any discussion and get folks at each others throats.
And the whole point is to have the status quo continue.
My sense is that it’s not going to change. In the meantime we get the status quo: open borders 24/7, drug cartels, terrorist crossings, illegal labor driving down wages and sucking up jobs, enormous costs in education, health care, and other social benefits, and a host of new voters for the democratic party.
And the democrats can act concerned and like elder statesmen as they lament the lack of compassion but also the need to get things under control. They get to say whatever they want while the status quo stays in effect.
You carefully parse your words to up a straw man - then knock it down.
The discussion has nothing to do with Rand proposing a "NEW PATHWAY".
The discussion centers around the fact that his proposal allows a pathway to citizenship for illegals by giving them amnesty for their illegal entry into the country. Rand acknowledges that fact as true. He just doesn't want it called a "pathway".
In general, as it now stands, illegals in the country are not allowed to apply for citizenship. There are individual exceptions when the government gives some special consideration, but for the majority there is no existing "pathway".
Rand and others would legalize illegals which would allow them to get in line for citizenship.
That isn't a "pathway" - it's a super-highway.
Most of the Employers that are whining about E-Verify are the same ones that pay Illegals cash below average wages.
It isn’t about E-Verify. It’s about lowlife Employers whom wish to exploit the system to get rich.
I’d much rather pay an extra 25 cents a head of lettuce than the 100 dollar tax every month that goes to pay for the Criminal Invaders and their kids education, housing, clothing, food, medical care etc.
See #67, SoCon.
What I’m saying is that it doesn’t matter what Paul says.
The entrenched interests are NOT going to let the status quo change.
Would you if you were them?
If it stays the same, they own Texas in a decade or so, and with Texas they will own the US electorate. Texas, California, and New York cannot be overcome, and especially with Florida acting as if it, too, were yours. That’s about 150 electoral votes out of 270 needed before you even start a campaign.
Your great grandkids will be experiencing hetero-mammalian marriage with the liberals in charge.
He SAID they would have to “get in line behind everyone else” while remaining here enjoying the fruits of OTHER PEOPLE’S labors. What are they getting in line for? Girl Scout Cookies?
THAT’S AMNESTY!!!!
Don’t look at me. I think the whole thing needs to be burnt down and rebuilt upon the original Constitutional footings with a completely blank USC.
Nothing less than ripping the current Powers That Be out by the roots will change anything.
Understandably, my viewpoint is in the minority.
Of course not.
There are probably no more than 2 or 3 billion who fall into that category.
Just let them come in, along with all of their relatives, and we can end the controversy.
/s
“but I don’t like the idea of making every business owner a policeman.” “
Well, who does??? What choice do we have now?? IF any of these talking heads had bothered to keep them out in the first place we wouldn’t have to worry about that!
I hope Cruz stays strong on this...he’s the only one left!
Like Prohibition?
Now we have a culture where people feel they do not have to obey constitutional laws they don't like.
Slavery was constitutional, but it still deserved no adherence by moral people.
It is against our law for foreigners to enter the country illegally, to remain here illegally, to lie about their citizenship, to use false ID, to seek employment and to seek government benefits using false identification.
I'm not debating what the law is, but rather advocating for what it should be. The law should welcome people who want to come to the U.S. and work, don't you think? If the law prevented you from working to take care of your family, would you break the law or resign yourself and your family to misery?
How can you just say that it is okay for illegal aliens to break the law because it is only a 'crime' against the regulatory state? It is a crime against the sovereignty of the nation and against every law abiding legal citizen.
And does a crime 'against the sovereignty of the nation' break your leg or pick your pocket?
Illegals spit on us as citizens, and on our country, when they break our laws and take taxpayer paid government handouts provided for citizens.
Ahh, so we're back to welfare (I swear, at the heart of EVERY argument I see against immigration is actually an opposition to welfare). If the law forbid federal welfare handouts to illegal immigrants (and it does, read the link provided earlier), on what grounds do you reject people who come to America seeking to work and fulfill that proposition known as the American Dream?
Immigrants are less likely than Americans to not be in the workforce. Their second and third generation progeny actually have higher earnings than the median native born. Immigration and immigrants are a boon to our nation's future, and it is a mistake to conflate the subject of immigration with the injustice of the welfare system. Focus your anger and desire for change in the right place. Like I said before, the GOP won't find a greater ally in the desire to roll back the welfare state than Paul.
I stand with Rand.
That being said IMO all the politicians are ignoring the fact that the overwhelming majority of the illegals are Mexican. They are highly nationalistic and studies have shown that if offered amnesty and citizenship only about 20% of them would come out of the shadows and apply for it. The other 80% would just stay in the shadows and continue to work without paying taxes, sign the kiddies up for free school and get the welfare and free healthcare.
Out of the 11 million who are here I would at this point support securing the border (which will never happen), open a window of 12 months to allow those who really want to apply for legal status and a work permit (no promise of citizenship) and then after the 12 months shut down work, education, healthcare, and any kind of govt assistance without proof of citizenship or a work permit. I’m guessing based on 11 million that 2.2 million or less would sign up and then once the faucets are turned off the other 9 million or so would head for the exits.
Its not really that hard to get rid of people but the truth of the matter is that high up in govt the US has an agreement with Mexico not to secure the border. We are the escape valve for the corrupt Mexican govt. Somewhere near 50% of the Mexican GDP is from money being sent back across the border from the US by illegals working here. If we shut down the border Mexico would collapse.
As long as both parties are willing to believe that we need the cheap labor and can obtain new votes from these illegals amnesty will be on the table.
I fully expect a bi-partisan bill to be passed in the next 12 mos basically letting all of them stay and putting most on a path to citizenship even though they will probably not take advantage of it.
Look, if they stay here they have to work and pay taxes. That’s why it’s called a work visa.
What’s the alternative? Deport them all? I like the idea, but an electorate that voted for barack obama twice will not support arresting all Mexicans. At some point we just have to be realistic.
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.