Posted on 10/23/2007 7:49:12 AM PDT by blogsforthompson.com
Fred Thompson is set to announce today a major proposal that would take a huge bite out of the enormous illegal immigration problem in America. Fred will meet in Florida with the Collier County Sheriff, Don Hunter, and will then reportedly announce the details of his plan that would enforce our nation's borders and target cities and employers that harbor and hire illegal aliens. AP writer Brendan Farrington reports on the expected announcement:
Republican presidential candidate Fred Thompson is choosing a county with a large farmworker population to announce an immigration policy Tuesday that will include stripping federal grant money from cities and states that don't report illegal immigrants.Thompson plans to meet with Collier County Sheriff Don Hunter before announcing details of his border security and immigration enforcement proposal.
A major part of the plan will be to reduce the number of illegal immigrants by increasing enforcement of existing law. Sanctuary cities, where city employees are not required to report illegal immigrants to federal authorities, would lose discretionary federal grants, said a campaign source who didn't want to be named because the plan hasn't been announced.
Thompson will also call for stronger laws to force employers to verify that workers aren't illegal immigrants, a more rigorous system to track who is coming in and out of the country and a plan to increase prosecution of "coyotes," smugglers who bring illegal immigrants across the Mexican border, the source said. He will also talk about border security.
Collier County has vast tomato farms that hire thousands of immigrants. Last year it was part of a two-county sweep with 163 illegal immigrants arrested in one weekend. The campaign plans to cite figures that 22 percent of the county's crime is committed by illegal immigrants and that 40 percent of county's arrest warrants are for illegal immigrants.
U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement recently trained 27 Collier sheriff's deputies to enforce immigration laws.
At a campaign stop in Georgia last week, Thompson accused rivals Mitt Romney and Rudy Giuliani of being soft on illegal immigration when Romney was Massachusetts' governor and Giuliani was New York's mayor.
I don’t care if the substantiating documentation of citizenship required is a hospital issued crumpled up microfiche copy from a state’s own vital statistics agency. Employers are pretty saavy when it comes to hiring and should be held accountable.
Are you even a Republican? If so, who’s your preferred candidate?
You and me both, Little Ray.
And what if the city still refuses to abide by federal laws? How much federal funding do cities, as opposed to states, get from the federal government? If the state has a governor who is sympathetic to the scofflaw city, he will see to it that more state funds flow there to compensate.
It's one thing when a Rep. like Trancredo offers up legislation to cut off funding to scofflaw cities when that is what he has the power to do in his position in Congress but it's laughably weak for a president to make such an insignificant proposal.
This is a HUGE positive issue for a candidate. This could potentially propel Thompson into front runner status if he can “market” his plan effectively, meaning if he has the “organization” behind him to take advantage of a positive and popular policy initiative.
I suppose if I were fearful of being turned in and deported at any moment, I would do everything in my power to make my employer happy.
And it is about the hourly wage.
Just ask all the construction guys who lost their jobs to illegals working for 5 dollars an hour less.
How about the gun card? The tax card? The lower spending card?
I see you have received some replies to your post yet nothing further from you.
Self deportation will happen with enforcement, and people will not notice....
Deporting those caught in the commission of a crime, hell everyone can agree to chuck them over the border. Who cares...
But if we start rounding up entire families, it will play on endless loop on the MSM. Then add the ACLU and activist challenging every single deportation through every court in the land. And that is before the cost of the LEO and facilities and logistical support. The general populace will not have the stomach for it after the first year, then where are we. The Dems throw open the gates and we keep the all the ones still here, crooks and all.
We have an opportunity here to beat the dems at their own game, cut their “you guys are bigots” crap off at the knees by saying “ok, here is the deal, we will keep the few million that really want to work and we need to fill those jobs others wont do etc. you back us up on the fence, enforcement and the deportation of the rest” Guess what party those few million remaining hard working soon to be new Americans, who are for the most part devote catholics, pro life and paying taxes will be beholden too. Hit them up with fines, that they will gladly pay to stay, to help defray the cost of deporting their worthless friends.
I say do it, it has never stopped the Democrats before. Why do you think this country is where it is now after they bought all those votes over the past few decades.
Politics is the art of compromise.
We applaud the failure of Senate Democrats to get past the 60 vote cloture number in funding Iraq with surrender language in the bill. We would not applaud a 40 vote bloc of Democrats that stops strong measures against illegals, but that would be the situation faced.
You do not propose extreme positions guaranteed to galvanize the opposition and prevent any future compromise if you want to make any progress at all. Claiming that “we don’t need new laws, enforce the ones we have” is clearly a non starter in that the courts have stopped it.
There HAVE to be new laws designed to dodge the basis of the court decisions. Those new laws can’t become laws unless they get through Congress. Proposing something extreme immediately defined the probabilities of success in that regard as zero.
A more well-considered and analytical proposal designed specifically to appeal to Democrat interests while achieving the goal is the correct course, not issuing a proposal that has already failed in courts and thus making your campaign look stupid.
This is the hot button issue. Fred will win the nomination and the election.
BINGO. We have a Hispanic couple living in a two year old home just up the street. They left Kalifornia because of the illegals and cannot stand the new arrivals. Neither of them can speak Spanish very well, and understand a limited amount.
Both are fourth generation immigrants. She is very Hispanic looking and when the construction workers try to communicate with her, she tells them to speak in English.
Two words will fix the problem: employer sanctions.
Exactly. The key right now is to shut down the border. Not "beef up" or "improve" border security ... but shut down the illegal crossing of the border.
Can't be done absolutely, but it can be done essentially ... if there's the will to do it.
Then we can discuss the rest.
Hopefully Fred sees this.
If he does this the votes will pour in. The wafflers won’t have a chance.
I agree. Personally I'm pro legal immigration. Instead of the GOP always coming out with positions stating what they are against, which will be portrayed as mean and racist, we need to tell Americans what we are for. I'd like to see the candidates stand before an audience of legal immigrants and tell the American people why they should be praised for going thru the legal process while respecting the laws of the country that are now citizens of. Then go into your speech telling Americans how you will set policies that will ensure no illegals are allowed to cut in line of folks like these who play by the rules. That approach will cut the race-baiters off at the knees.
FNC just said Chuck Norris endorses Huckabee!
“But if we start rounding up entire families, it will play on endless loop on the MSM. Then add the ACLU and activist challenging every single deportation through every court in the land. And that is before the cost of the LEO and facilities and logistical support. The general populace will not have the stomach for it after the first year, then where are we.”
Good points. But I say put the greatest onus on the employers through fines and penalties. That, more than anything will bring about the attrition Thompson says he desires. Give employers the option of notifying and obtaining verification from the Feds of those employees who they have reason to believe may be illegal. We can even save several billion on the fence and world condemnation that goes with it.
This will be about the attrition without breaking down doors which nobody will approve.
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.