Posted on 07/30/2013 1:51:42 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
The Gang of Eight pro-amnesty Senators are trying to con the House of Representatives into passing parts of an anti-American amnesty bill so they can get a Chuck Schumer-dominated conference committee and bamboozle Representatives into going along with their sellout plans. The few pro-amnesty Republican Senators had Marco Rubio as the salesman for the unpopular amnesty bill, and the few pro-amnesty Republicans in the House have Paul Ryan to play the same un-Republican role.
The Gang of Eight patted itself on the back for successfully passing their bill in the Senate, but, funny thing, the bill was never forwarded to the House for action. The explanation for this irregular omission is fear that the House would "blue slip" the bill.
Article 1, Section 7 of the U.S. Constitution gives the sole power to the House to originate all bills for raising revenue, known as the Origination Clause. If the Senate oversteps and includes a provision to raise some revenue (which it did in the Gang's amnesty bill), the House can reject the bill and send it back to the Senate for correction in what is known as a "blue slip" procedure.
The devious Ryan plan to circumvent this rule is for the House to pass five or six bills on various aspects of amnesty and then use that bunch of bills to call for a conference committee with the Senate. Ryan let the cat out of the bag when he told a constituent audience in Racine, Wis. on July 26 that his revised plan now calls for a House vote, not before the August recess as originally expected but in October.
There is no indication that the Ryan amnesty is any better for Americans than the Rubio amnesty. Amnesty is still a bad deal for all, whether it comes in one package or in six.
The former New York Lt. Gov., Dr. Betsy McCaughey, the only one known to have actually read the 1,200-page Senate bill, says that the bill's text is loaded with "slippery" words (such as "emergency," "comprehensive," "plan" and "reform") that create loopholes giving Barack Obama the opportunity to refuse to enforce any provisions he doesn't like, including border security that the public is demanding.
That's what Obama notoriously did to cancel provisions of other laws, notably Obamacare's date of enforcement and the effective Work Requirement in Welfare Reform. Obama also seems to think he can invent his own new laws never passed by Congress, such as the Dream Act and anti-coal regulations.
There are so many dangerous and costly provisions in Congress' amnesty plans that they are difficult even to itemize, but for starters take the foolishness that amnesty loosens the rules for asylum seekers. We should have learned some deadly lessons from the asylum seekers we have already welcomed who turned out to be terrorists, such as the first World Trade bombers in 1993 and the Boston Marathon bombers this year.
The new amnesty bill reduces the application to be an asylum seeker from the current one-year deadline to as many years as the immigrant wants and, incredibly, allows the U.S. Attorney General to pay the asylum seekers' legal fees. We should absolutely bar all entry from countries that routinely engage in terrorism.
Another highly dangerous and costly provision that should be decisively rejected is the politically motivated plan to outsource duties to community organizers and activists who will be paid by our taxpayers to help immigrants transition to American life and apply for government benefits. That's like pouring tax dollars into the Democratic voting machine to do phone banking and outreach to load new entrants permanently into the Democratic Party.
The amnesty bill even assigns some of these so-called non-profit, left-wing community groups the task of rewriting provisions for U.S. citizenship. This indicates how far the left-wing's "religion" of diversity is taking us: That duty certainly should be performed by Americans, not foreigners.
Here's a good question for a new Congressional hearing. Will the Internal Revenue Service do a thorough audit of these groups' tax-exempt status and demand answers to intrusive questions, as the IRS did with the Tea Parties?
Here's another good question to which we would like an answer in an open congressional hearing. How many young illegal aliens who cross our southern border illegally are valedictorians compared with those who are carrying illegal drugs? The left went into spasms of rage when Rep. Steve King suggested there might be more of the latter, so let's have an investigation to find out if King was correct.
Wouldn’t it be horrible if an illegal immigrant were to hunt down and rape to death one of these members family. After all if the illegal aliens will rape ordinary americans why not elected ones family members.
I guess being elected means never having to say your sorry for not enforcing the law that lets these invaders in to rape 9 month old babies to death or 93 year old grandmothers to death.
Congressmen/Senators thank you for letting these illegal alien rapists into our country. Hope your family is safe from them. Though I do have 50 cents that says that their tune would change quickly if it was one of your family members raped to death by a illegal immigrant.
But this is not a sane world. Legalization would be followed by amnesty, game-set-match. And no republican in their right mind would revoke the legal status of any of these new legalized, ever. Who the he11 is fooling who?
In order to get this before the Supreme Court, you’d have to establish that you’d suffered a reversible harm. Probably be tossed for lack of standing. It’s time to face the fact thay mere citizens no longer have any say in government. Actions of the government being clearly unconstitutional has proven no impediment up to now. Why would this case be any different?
Identity theft
Tax fraud
DUI
Amnesty doesn’t just forgive the way they entered the country
You are right, there are no formal proposals from the House yet, just a whole lot of rhetoric. I would feel a whole lot better if Boner would just come out and say there will be no bill from the House because there are already laws on the books that need to be enforced. Do I think that will happen? No. Remember he doesn’t want to take a position - makes his job too hard!
From my perspective, not being that far from the border, anything that comes out of the House is not going to be in the best interests of conservative U.S. citizens.
Wild guess, not us.
RINO-Dem Coalition is hard to beat
Does "RINO" even mean anything anymore? It seems that liberal RINOs are the GOP norm these days, while principled conservatives are the exception. This is doubly true when it comes to immigration.
I have seen this story for days now and still cannot stop think wtf this stupid arsed mouth breather knows about security. She makse Big Sis look like a Rhodes Scholar.
Your comments would be funny if they weren’t true. In spite of the big push for her to be Homeland Security Secretary, I just can’t see BO making that move. SJL doesn’t share the limelight with anyone nor does Obama. I think he’ll put someone in there from Texas like maybe the Mayor of San Antonio whose mother is a LaRaza activist of the first order. BO really has it in for us here in Texas and he will get even.
Of course I’m sure the House members would love to get rid of SJL and her appointment to this position would certainly do that. Doubt if there is any way this seat would ever be Republican considering her voting block and voter fraud by the City of Houston, which was well documented by True the Vote, but you never know.
Some days I’m just sick of all of them.
Who bothers anymore?
No court would, either. A "right" once granted, cannot be revoked.
Legal status is not a right, but would be treated like one, IIRC. My point is that the Dem PR machine would plaster the airwaves with "racist" labeling of anyone who wanted to reverse such status. Effectively it would be amnesty and the Dems know it. The Republicans have to be stupid or evil to see it any other way.
The best thing for republicans is to remove any incentive for illegals to be here up to and including deportation. If/when the Dems get control of Both Houses and the Presidency, we will get amnesty, period. The republicans need to be in a position to minimize that to as close to zero as possible.
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.