Bush to Seek Immigrant Benefit Protection

Washington Post ^ | January 4, 2004 | Mike Allen

[Ian McGreggor]

CRAWFORD, Tex., Jan. 3 -- President Bush will propose protections for the Social Security taxes paid by the workers who would come into the country under massive changes to immigration laws he plans to announce on Wednesday, Republican officials said Saturday.

Bush's plan would make it possible for such workers from Mexico and perhaps other countries to collect retirement benefits without being penalized by their home countries for the years they spent working in the United States, the officials said.

Officials began releasing details of Bush's plan shortly before Christmas and provided new details over the weekend. The officials said Bush's plan will contain a new system to help workers who want to enter from Mexico or other countries if they have jobs waiting for them. It also includes a mechanism for some undocumented residents to continue working in the United States and get on a path to legal status.

[Ian McGreggor]

"Ever figure out the cost of "beefing up" the border security?"

Versus what... Not beefing it up? The cost of 9/11 staggered this nation. If we can find $18 Billion to rebuild Iraq, I think we can find enough money to protect our borders.

[Cultural Jihad]

No one calls you racist or xenophobic. But if the shoe fits ...

[4.1O dana super trac pak]

Why does a popular President with no opposition, a virtual shoo-in for reelection, constantly flirt with liberalism and socialism? It makes no sense.

[Sabertooth]

No one calls you racist or xenophobic. But if the shoe fits ...

Not my size, despite your implication.

C'mon, CJ... one non-fallacious post. I double-dog dare ya.

[Cultural Jihad]

I believe one of the moral dimensions comes from the fact that they are paying into the system with no hopes of ever getting a return.

[Cultural Jihad]

It's hardly the fault of economic refugees that citizens are allowing Democratic politicians to provide hand-outs.

[janetgreen]

You call them economic refugees. I call them freeloaders. American citizens shouldn't have to support freeloaders. And it isn't just the Democrats that are doing the pandering, the head panderer sits in the Oval Office.

[Mamzelle]

They are breaking laws, scoffing at laws, flouting the laws, bilking the social services out of millions. LACounty (just one county) paid out $300M just for uncompensated ER (just one kind of service) visits by illegals. Is Vicente going to chip in anything here?

No? I didn't think so. Now please tell me why we owe Vicente anything--since he was distinctly unhelpful in Iraq. And also explain to me why returning US citizen military--and legal resident alien military!--should have to compete with illegal labor.

These are all questions I'd like to hear Bush answer, too. Why isn't he loyal to the lawabiding citizen, the lawabiding legal resident, the taxpaying soldier? Why is he so devoted to the lawbreaker?

If they didn't break the laws, they wouldn't have to pay into the system.

I say make the employers pay, and throw 'em in jail, too.

[janetgreen]

I'm beginning to think that Bush owes Vicente something, a promise maybe, no matter what Americans think? How else can his pandering to Mexico be explained? Americans shouldn't have to compete with lawbreakers for jobs. It's sick. Companies who employ illegals are laughing all the way to the bank while American taxpayers foot the bills.

[Ian McGreggor]

Your sig ('The Elites want to turn our Nation into a multicultural socialist hell on Earth') might offer a better explanation than I can give.

[Mamzelle]

re: How else can his pandering to Mexico be explained? )))

I don't know--I have one pet theory: His vanity was seriously chafed when he did poorly with Hispanics in 2000. Bush was popular among Hispanics in Texas and that probably hurt his feelings when they fled him in the presidential race--he has made much effort at inclusiveness.

Now, you'd think that'd tell him something about what to expect when he hands over amnesty.

As with McVain, I don't think the injured pride of any male can be underestimated in its irrational affect.

[Cultural Jihad]

While the breaking, scoffing, and flouting of laws is generally not a good thing, the law is not some kind of religion or the highest arbiter of right and wrong. Indeed, sometimes it becomes a moral necessity to break, scoff, and flout the laws. Jewish people were "illegals" in Germany 60 years ago, and everything that Hitler ever did was all perfectly legal according to the then German constitution.

The law cannot force one to be compassionate. The law cannot compel you to stop and help another person. The law is not a religion. We need much more than mere human laws in order to have a healthy, functioning society. But even so the law does have an important role to play.

[dagnabbit]

Huh--Gephardt ought to try this in front of an audience and listen for applause

Unfortunately, that would be yet another 180 for Gephardt. This fall, he was out in front of a large group of illegal aliens and their supporters in Washington DC (the amnesty bus ride). He promised the illegals blanket amnesty if they voted for him. Really. (Though I'm sure his campaign would explain that he was only addressing the US citizens in the group)

The sad fact is we have 10 Democrats and one Republican candidate for president, all of whom appear committed to abolishing the United States as a sovereign country in favor of a de-facto merger with Mexico.

[Luis Gonzalez]

janet, don't get yourt panties in an uproar girl.

You all talk about "beefing up" the border as if the ONLY borders are land ones.

BILLIONS!!!

You would pay for the increased security AND the increases in goods and services, PLUS the deficit in the Social Security Administration.

[Cultural Jihad]

I don't know

That goes without saying.

I have one pet theory:

... which apparently does not take into account the realities of our common border and uncommon economic disparaties and birth rates.

[Luis Gonzalez]

Are you claiming that our borders are not protected Ian?

It's difficult for anyone to consider your opinions when they are so blatantly propagandized.

[Mamzelle]

re: But even so the law does have an important role to play. )))

Looks to me like Bush is going to create new *law* to bankrupt SSec once and for all--and he'll expect the lawabiding to abide by that law.

Our immigration laws are the most generous on earth. Mexico's, BTW, are some of the most restrictive, almost as bad as NZ's. They're not exactly even as generous as some Euros were to Jews.

My country deserves an orderly and stable influx of immigration, designed to serve more than the interests of one poorly-managed third-world nation.

[4.1O dana super trac pak]

That John Birch magazine is making more sense to me all the time.

[winker]

There needs to be a Rallying Point to which all Americans can come to a consensus and agree on. A National Referendum would do this and then the Congress would have proof of what the vast majority of Conservative Americans support and want! This needs to happen and the sooner the better!

[JackelopeBreeder]

The southern borders have been greatly tightened around all the heavily-populated regions in recent years, and hence the increase of immigration through the desert.

Meanwhile, those of us who live in the desert are getting boned. I think one of my neighbors came up with the right answer:

"Under the RICO statutes, it is illegal for criminal activity to be moved across state lines. So why did the federal government conspire to and succeed in moving the UDA problem out of El Paso and San Diego into the remote southern parts of Arizona? Perhaps it all boils down to votes. A lot less people, hence a lot less votes. Why are my rights to live in peace in a rural environment less important than a San Diego or an El Paso urbanite? It is not right, nor is it just, nor is it legal. If we do not protest, there will be nothing left to protect."