Senator rules out amnesty for aliens

Washington Times ^ | 1-19-04 | Jerry Seper

[JustPiper]

Ping!

[The_Eaglet]

It's good to see some sense coming from the Senate on this.

[FairOpinion]

"The president, of course, espoused broad principles," said Mr. Kyl, chairman of the Senate Judiciary terrorism, technology and homeland security subcommittee, and a member of the subcommittee on immigration.

"It is appropriately up to Congress to work with the administration on the details. I hope we can make a real effort to find some consensus on a guest-worker program," he said. "But any such legislation must not create opportunities for amnesty, nor confer U.S. citizenship to those who have violated U.S. laws."

===

A wise man, Sen. Kyl. Note he stated it without the burning need to bash Bush.

[CyberAnt]

I have a tendancy to agree with Mr. Kyl about this issue.

[JustPiper]

Web Site: kyl.senate.gov
E-mail: Contact Via 'Web Form.'

Washington Office:
730 Hart Senate Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20510-0304
Phone: (202) 224-4521
Fax: (202) 224-2207

Main District Office:
2200 E. Camelback Rd., #120
Phoenix, AZ 85016
Phone: (602) 840-1891
Fax: (602) 957-6838

[JustPiper]

http://capwiz.com/fair/bio/sponsortrack/?id=203

Here is Sen. Kyl's cosponsorship status on our key legislation. Send Sen. Kyl a message by clicking in the "Send Message" column.

Get involved and take action!

[HennepinPrisoner]

Mr. Kyl also is pushing legislation calling for the federal government to reimburse states by $1.45 billion a year for the costs of federally mandated emergency medical treatment of illegal aliens.

Even the amnesty cheerleaders on FR should agree with this proposal.

[Happy2BMe]

Thanks for the ping.

"Mr. Kyl said those questions and numerous others need to be answered during as-yet unscheduled hearings in Congress on any proposed guest-worker program."

Here are a few more questions for the president . .

President Bush - stand up and tell us the truth

[onyx]

Good post, Fair Opinion.

[FairOpinion]

Just pointing out the obvious, that real discussion about immigration reform is possible, without having it turn into a Bush-bashing fest.

But unfortunately the main objective of many here is not immigration reform discussion, but to bash Bush, using that as an excuse.

[Map Kernow]

Mr. Kyl has steadfastly argued that the government lacks either the will or the ability to enforce existing immigration laws and that legal immigrants — those who "followed all the rules, waited patiently and sometimes left their homelands at great risk to become American citizens" — have watched as illegal aliens continue to flood the United States.

He has blamed the government's failure to enforce immigration laws on the lure of cheap labor, the costs of hiring and deploying border agents and other necessary resources, and a "politically correct expression of sympathy with the violators that is often exploited for perceived political gain."

Maybe there are still Republicans who are sensible and patriotic on the immigration issue.

Then again, it probably didn't hurt that Senator Kyl has almost certainly felt some real heat from his overtaxed (in several senses of the word) constituents over the Bush amnesty proposal.

[onyx]

Bashing-Bush has become a blood sport here. For the most part, his vociferous detractors here didn't vote for him in 2000 and they won't vote for him in '04 either.

They're here to try to divide us. "Bush bashing Liberal enablers."

[Reagan Man]

"It is appropriately up to Congress to work with the administration on the details. I hope we can make a real effort to find some consensus on a guest-worker program," he said. "But any such legislation must not create opportunities for amnesty, nor confer U.S. citizenship to those who have violated U.S. laws."

Sounds like Senator Kyl is on the right track. I hope when he says, we need "to do a better job of securing the nation's borders", he means we need to seal the borders shut. If the borders remain porous, the immigration problem will always be with us.

No pardon. No amnesty. Closed borders. Problems solved.

[getgoing]

Thomas Jefferson on immigration:

"Although as to other foreigners it is thought better to discourage their settling together in large masses, wherein, as in our German settlements, they preserve for a long time their own languages, habits, and principles of government, and that they should distribute themselves sparsely among the natives for quicker amalgamation, yet English emigrants are without this inconvenience. They differ from us little but in their principles of government, and most of those (merchants excepted) who come here, are sufficiently disposed to adopt ours." --Thomas Jefferson to George Flower, 1817. ME 15:140

[The_Eaglet]

Actually, the objective of many here is to see the integrity of the Constitution restored where the president exercises the authority which is given to the federal government to defend our borders.

Since many of us object to Bush's attacks on the Constitutional limits of the federal government, usurping the reserved powers of the states and the people, we are encouraging accountability through asking him to change his mind now while supporting potential replacements who aspire to honor the oath of office.

[ETERNAL WARMING]

He noted that in the 28 Southwestern border counties of Texas, New Mexico, Arizona and California, the cost of processing illegal aliens who commit crimes is $125 million annually. Mr. Kyl also is pushing legislation calling for the federal government to reimburse states by $1.45 billion a year for the costs of federally mandated emergency medical treatment of illegal aliens.

These are just the costs for incarceration and processing, and emergency medical care.

These numbers do NOT include welfare, foodstamps, housing assistance. These costs are just for 4 states.

Now tell me America...do you still think they are cheap labor? Is your lettuce price so important that you'll let your taxes double to pay for them?

[My2Cents]

I've come to the conclusion that they're all "Patsies" -- 2000 voters for Pat Buchanan. Their threats to "abandon Bush" this year are 1) hollow, and 2) lies, because they didn't vote for him in 2000.

[HennepinPrisoner]

I might agree to a guest-worker program on the following terms:

1) Employer advertises job for an American at fair-market value. If an American does not take it, and employer hires a foreigner, he must pay a premium to the feds for each hour of a guest worker's employ. The premium will have to be high enough to keep dishonest employers from 'low-balling' salaries offered to Americans.

2) Employer must provide 100% medical insurance coverage for foreign worker and all family members.

3) Children of guest workers are not considered American citizens by virtue of birth (must pass an Amendment to the Constituion to take care of this).

4) Guest worker's children must be sent to private school at the employer's expense. They are ineligible to attend government schools (lucky them!)

5) Guest worker's children are not eligible for employment in the US. If they attend college, international tuition rates prevail.

6) Employer must put up a bond of a certain amount to the federal government to cover guest worker's travel expense back to country of origin.

7) Those illegals that are already here must return to their country of origin and apply from there.

That's all I can think of for now.

[Map Kernow]

Just pointing out the obvious, that real discussion about immigration reform is possible, without having it turn into a Bush-bashing fest.

Just pointing out the obvious, that you regard any criticism of the amnesty proposal as "Bush-bashing." If Bush's proposal is crap, he should take the crap---whether or not you regard it as "Bush bashing."

But unfortunately the main objective of many here is not immigration reform discussion, but to bash Bush, using that as an excuse.

Can I buy a model of that "main objective detection" machine you are apparently using to determine the motivations of those opposed to the Bush immigration proposal? And if you don't have one of those gadgets, can you please refrain from imputing "Bush-bashing objectives" to any and all who want to criticize specific proposals of GW, on immigration and other issues?