|
|
Posted on 12/24/2003 3:02:02 PM PST by Sabertooth
Immigration Reform Advocates Criticize White House Proposal (CNSNews.com) - Advocates for tougher enforcement of U.S. Immigration laws say the White House has put "a lump of coal in the stockings of American workers" with a Christmas Eve proposal to allow more foreign workers to enter the country and amnesty for some workers who have already entered illegally.
Activists working with the administration told the Washington Post Wednesday that the president is working on a strategy that would let foreign citizens enter the U.S. legally, with few restrictions, if they have a job waiting for them. The newspaper's sources said the White House also wants to find some way to grant amnesty to at least some of the nine to 11 million illegal aliens currently in the U.S.
Dan Stein, executive director of the Federation for American Immigration Reform, scoffed at the proposal.
"This Christmas Eve announcement amounts to a lump of coal in the stockings of American workers," Stein said, "while illegal aliens and their employers find expensive gifts, tied up with fancy ribbons and bows, waiting for them in the new year."
The Bush proposal would reportedly allow employers to advertise jobs on a taxpayer sponsored website. The jobs would first be made available to U.S. citizens but, if there were no takers, could then be opened up to citizens of other countries. The plan would also allow many, if not most, of the nine to 11 million illegal immigrants currently living in the U.S. to be "reclassified" as "guest workers."
"The White House diligently avoided using the 'A' word in its announcement," Stein said. "But no matter how much Karl Rove wishes to torture the English language, a program that rewards millions upon millions of people who have cheated to get into this country, who have cheated by working off-the-books and avoided paying taxes, and who have cheated by using billions of dollars in public services ... is still an amnesty."
Bush tried to avert such criticism at a Dec. 16 press conference in which he teased the proposal.
"We need to have an immigration policy that helps match any willing employer with any willing employee," Bush said, quickly adding, "This administration is firmly against blanket amnesty."
The leak of Bush's plan to reporters came two weeks after Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge said current immigration law, which mandates that illegal aliens return to their home countries to apply for legal status in the U.S. is "not workable."
"The bottom line is, as a country we have to come to grips with the presence of 8 to 12 million illegals, afford them some kind of legal status some way," Ridge told those attending a town hall meeting in Miami Dec. 10. "But also as a country [we have to] decide what our immigration policy is and then enforce it."
Phil Kent, executive director of the American Immigration Control Foundation, said the former Pennsylvania governor should resign his position.
"Ridge is clearly incapable of overseeing homeland security," Kent said. "Aside from dynamiting the rule of law by rewarding lawbreakers, how would security interests be served by simply granting legal status to foreigners whose identities and criminal histories can't be verified?
"Besides, this would only serve as a magnet for more illegal immigration," Kent predicted, "as the foolish congressional amnesties of 1986 and 1990 underscore."
Stein warned that the Bush proposal would have a serious economic impact on American citizens and immigrants who have entered the country and obtained permission to work legally.
"In addition to legalizing millions of illegal aliens and countless additional family members, the 'guest worker' provision of this proposal will sound the death knell of the American middle class," Stein predicted. "Employers will never again have to compete for workers by offering better pay or benefits. They will simply have to look across the border, or across the ocean to find an unlimited supply of workers willing to accept whatever they are willing to pay.
"Upward mobility, for most American workers, will become something they study about in history class," he concluded.
Stein said the White House wants to "reward illegal immigrants and punish American workers," when it should be backing Republican proposals to "protect American workers and send a signal to illegal aliens and their employers that U.S. immigration laws have some meaning.
"There are several critical pieces of legislation that would enhance our immigration enforcement capability, improve our antiquated documentation system, and protect American workers, all introduced by congressional Republicans that the Administration should be championing instead of capitulating to the illegal immigration lobby," Stein said.
Procreation, which according to recent Supreme Court decisions leads to voting citizens.
Didn't the president who "wuz" the best also have an amnesty.
The barn door should have been shut a long time ago. Big deal that Tancredo made everybody vote so we could see who was selling out the country -- 30 years too late.
Sure did, here's a discussion on it that was posted today, feel free to join it.
What Bush is proposing now is nothing but pure pandering, there's no way it can be denied and is far removed from what was done 18 yeas ago. Either that or he wants that border opened up for cheap labor reasons, which again does not mirror Reagan's policies in the least.
As of yet I've not heard Bush say anything even remotely similar to Reagan's "a nation without borders isn't a nation", or "this country has lost control of its borders...". It was on Reagan's mind and he made attempts to do something about it.
(We are however strong advocates of serape amnestia.)
|
|
I'm spending the week following Christmas driving around New Mexico, which is going to be a key location in my next novel. In my book it will be named Nuevo Mexico though, after the Solo Espanol laws are passed.
I believe the post was several weeks ago. Here is how this "23rd" article, just like all the others, was sourced;
[Newsmax]:...sources tell NewsMax. According to a law enforcement source who spoke on condition of anonymity...
No, you're wrong. Jon Dougherty is not an "anonymous source." He is 100% reputable.
Of course Jon Dougherty is not an anonymous source. That isn't my claim. My claim is that Jon Dougherty used anonymous sources.
All the information in the article seems to be based on anonymous sources.
The stongest piece of information in the article is the exerpt from the LE bulletin. Has Dougherty actually seen the law enforcement bulletin that is described in the article?
[Dougherty]:A law enforcement bulletin describing the incident said the "family of five kidnapped … by Mexican officials at gunpoint" occurred around 5 p.m. local time Nov. 24. U.S. border authorities were notified the next day.
...Or does he get the description of what was said in the law enforcement bulletin secondhand?
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.