Posted on 04/19/2013 3:46:19 AM PDT by markomalley
The Gang of Eight’s “comprehensive” immigration-reform bill contains a number of superficially attractive security mandates: It would require the federal government to have 100 percent “situational awareness” of the border, to catch 90 percent of illegal border-crossers in high-traffic areas, to establish a tracking system to address the problem of those who enter the country illegally but overstay their visas, etc. So attractive are those goals that we have supported them in the past, on the many occasions upon which the government has promised to achieve them. Disappointingly, Washington keeps failing to deliver on its promises. The unspoken premise of the Gang of Eight bill is: This time it’s different. We are skeptical that this is so. And regardless, there is a great deal in this package that is deeply objectionable.
Unfortunately, this is the same amnesty-first/enforcement-later model that has burned us before. Senator Marco Rubio’s admirers like to compare him to Ronald Reagan, and in this case he resembles the 40th president in putting too much faith in the willingness of Washington to deliver border security in the face of opposition from ethnic-solidarity politics and the cheap-labor lobby.
Congress mandated the creation of a visa-tracking system, for instance, in 1996. Since then, Congress has on multiple occasions reiterated its demand that the executive branch comply with the law, and the executive branch has on each occasion failed to do so: Bill Clinton’s administration failed to do so, George W. Bush’s administration failed to do so, and Barack Obama’s administration thus far has failed to do so. The system the bill would mandate is even weaker than the system already mandated: It would apply at airports and seaports, but not for land crossings. If we are being asked to believe that this requirement will inspire President Obama to suddenly get religion on the subject of illegal immigration, we say that the evidence is against such a proposition, and that hoping that whoever follows him will do so is simply an act of faith — and though prayer availeth much, it is insufficient grounds for national-security policy.
Consider the standards already at work: Under President Obama’s Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) initiative, some illegals are given a discretionary grant of relief from deportation after what is supposed to be a rigorous screening process to weed out criminals and national-security threats. But “criminals” has a rather loose definition — you can have a couple of convictions and remain golden in the eyes of Obama’s DHS, so long as you pled any felony charges down to misdemeanors — the result of which is a 99.5 percent approval rate. Presumably, we can expect such “rigorous” standards to prevail throughout this process.
There are other, better provisions. We very strongly support mandating the use of E-Verify or a similar system nationwide in order to ensure that businesses hire only those workers who are legally eligible to be employed in the United States. While there are some procedural challenges associated with creating an effective national E-Verify system, doing so would be the easiest — and probably most effective — way of policing those who enter the United States illegally for economic purposes. (Casual day labor would remain a draw.) Mandating E-Verify is so obvious and sensible a move that it should have been done years ago in a standalone piece of legislation, but that bill was rejected — and those who opposed it, including business interests and farm-state Republicans, will have similar incentives to water down enforcement provisions in any compromise bill that passes Congress. There is nothing in this bill’s compliance-and-sanctions provisions that suggests enforcement would prevail over those who would prefer a looser system.
The full implementation of the three main security measures — national E-Verify, the visa-tracking system, and the 100/90 border-control standard — would have to be ratified before the second stage of the program, a “path to citizenship” for former illegals, would be implemented. If those goals were not met within five years, then a panel of border-state governors and attorneys general would inherit the responsibility and authority for seeing to it that they were met thereafter. Our admiration for the border-state leadership is mixed — Governor Rick Perry and Attorney General Greg Abbott are our cup of tea, Jerry Brown and Kamala Harris less so — but at any rate, it is far from clear that the leadership of four states should be entrusted with overseeing a policy that affects the entire country; Virginia and Nevada do not border Mexico, but they have a stake in the illegal-immigration battle, too. Essentially, this bill would give us immediate amnesty in exchange for a DHS plan backed by a border-state panel’s plan to have a plan.
Unhappily, the foregoing observations are among the best things that can be said about this bill. It not only would offer amnesty to the 11 million or so illegals currently in the country but also would readmit many of those who have been deported. The argument for normalizing the status of illegals already resident in the United States has in the main proceeded from the fact that they are already resident in the United States — offering legal status for those who are not living in the United States is indefensible.
Further, the bill would open up the floodgates for unskilled laborers. Many of those unskilled laborers would be brought in under guest-worker programs, which are in and of themselves objectionable. They amount to nothing more than the creation of a caste of second-class workers for the benefit of certain business interests. Congress should be establishing standards oriented toward attracting highly skilled, highly educated workers; this bill would move in the opposite direction, though it would liberalize visa rules for some skilled workers.
Another way this helps Obama and the commies is: It attracts another wave of “undocumented immigrants” who bring their poverty, medical problems, and “need for education” here. After the social workers discover that this new wave is below the poverty line, sick, and uneducated, that creates an excuse for more government “help” as well as future amnesties.
Plus, perpetual importation of 3rd world diseases makes the USA average lifespan decrease, thus “proving” that the European socialist way is best. The USA always loses when compared to the lifespan of countries like Japan, with very strict immigration, but the reasons the “experts” provide never include open borders.
I need to repeat this in response :
Rubio says at least 10 years wait and the wait will be soooo long for US citizenship that the illegals who apply here will wish they left the country and got on the line in whatever country they were born in. His plan will make them sorry they came here.
And they will get zero benefits for those long 10 to 15 years.
And Shumer and Durbin and Obama agree with all this..
Rubio is such a tough negotiator he has them eating out of his hand.....(alarm bells ringing)...
There will be no wait.
Will they all do prison time for breaking the law?
driving without license/insurance? working illegally? ID theft? using false documents?
If not, will US citizens also get a pass for these same crimes?
The GOP deserves a lot of blame for illegal immigration by turning a blind eye to this problem due to the business community. As long as they have bribed the GOP in the form of campaign contributions, they could care less.
Liz compiled a great list of these.
But Rubio looks like such a nice guy....
Rubio says they get zero benefits for the 10 to 15 years not even Obama-care(???how does that even work???) and Schumer and Durbin and Obama all agree with that.
Tough negotiator or what? so why is Schumer smiling so much?
Oh, please, don't be so unreasonable (/snix).
(Sniffle) don't you know that AT ALL TIMES, the Gang of Eight was guided by the founding principles----government of the people, by the people, and for the people (sob).
The "people"---that's us.
:)
Could be partially right....its for SOME people OK but I dont see how its you and me....what do we get (good) out of it?
FYI
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3009500/posts?page=1#1
Gang of 8 brings Norquist, Trumka together
This amnesty profits two people...K st. Lobbyists and Unions!
That's all?
How about the utterly bogus claim of welfare denial to the Amnesty immigrants?
Does anyone believe that will happen?
Starving immigrants will be denied Food Stamps?
Republicans will campaign on denying them food if they lose their low paying jobs?
And sick immigrants who lose their low paying jobs will be denied Medicaid or ObamaCare?
Republicans are going to campaign in favor of that?
No mention by NR that I saw that Amnesty immigrants in the USA will be allowed to import their spouse and minor children.
The 11 million will instantly become 20 million.
Will Republicans demand that the new immigrants have no babies on USA soil?
That instantly gives that family a whole new set of rights since the baby is a USA citizen, because of a deranged interpretation of the 14th Amendment.
Did I mention that no Republican candidate for president has ever received more than 40% of the Hispanic vote?
Did I mention that new immigrant citizens vote 80% for the Democrat Party?
Did I mention that employers have a $3,000 per year incentive to hire Amnesty immigrants instead of USA citizens, because, according to the bill, they are not eligible for ObamaCare?
And Marco Rubio, the “Savior of the Republican Party,” wrote this bill?
“If, and that is a big IF, the two terrorist in the Boston bombing broke into this country and came here illegally via the Mexico border, that will be the end to any push for immigration amnesty! “
It’s worse than that. They are here on VISAS, like this amnesty will issue MILLIONS of. The feds don’t vet anyone now and they won’t with another amnesty. Once they lost 100,000 applications, so they just issued them visas anyway.
CUTLER: But it`s not even just the border. Look, last year U.S. CIS, the division of DHS that gives out citizenship and immigration benefits, claimed that they lost — are you ready for this — 111,000 immigration files and then went ahead and naturalized 30,000 aliens without their files.[snip]
http://towncriernews.blogspot.com/search?q=lost+files
AND THAT is how we wind up with terrorists!
Exactly Travis! YOU nailed it ...again!
Borrowing that one!
Washington, D.C. May 27, 2007. An immigration "reform" deal has been drafted and the gang of guffawing goofballs gather to glorify their guile. How easy it is to put one over on the masses. They were wrong.
Today another gang of guffawing goofballs
.. Let's listen in.
"The public believes us! That this is not amnesty and that we will enforce E-Verify and border security.. bwahaha!"
“What is it about immigration “reform” that makes advocates so jolly? “
Follow the $$$.
Their big donors like Microsoft & the unions give these political hacks LOTS of money. The top 1% benefit from amnesty, no one else.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3009500/posts?page=36#36
” I know many businesses want this and in return Dems want the illegals voting so both are making a deal with the devil.”
And America is screwed .
: )
How are they supposed to confirm what percentage of crossers they catch? By the very nature of the crime they don’t know how many they don’t catch, yeah they might see a few and miss them, but there’s no way to know how many they didn’t even see. Provisions like that are pure feel good measures.
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.