Bush's Amnesty Plan Triggers Jump in Illegal Immigration

HUMAN EVENTS ^ | January 27, 2004 | Joseph A. D'Agostino

[sarcasm]

Beginning two to three days after President Bush proposed a plan that would allow illegal aliens to stay in the United States on renewable three-year work visas -- a plan that critics describe as an amnesty in disguise -- the number of illegal aliens caught trying to cross the U.S.-Mexico border jumped dramatically, says a spokesman for the union representing Border Patrolmen.

In the San Diego sector of the border "we have two to three times the number we had a few weeks ago," Senior Border Patrol Agent Shawn Moran told HUMAN EVENTS. Moran is spokesman for the local San Diego chapter of the National Border Patrol Council, the patrolmen's union.

"In one place, we have eight times," said Moran.

Asked if this could just be a seasonal increase, Moran replied, "We usually get something of an increase at this time of year, but nothing like this." The trend showed no signs of abating, he said.

Moran says he is certain Bush's plan is motivating the illegal aliens who have caused the spike in illegal border crossings. "Because 95% of the people we're catching say that's why," Moran said. "They say they're coming for the amnesty. A lot of these people have not been caught before. They have no immigration histories."

Moran also said the Bush proposal has caused a change in the urgency and demography of illegal border crossers. "We're catching them repeatedly throughout the week," Moran said. "They're desperate to get this amnesty even though we told them it's only a proposal. . . . We're catching more women and children than we have since 1999."

Moran said that he and his fellow agents oppose Bush's immigration proposal. "I have yet to find a single Border Patrol agent that thinks it's a good idea," said Moran. He noted that many illegal aliens transformed into guest workers are likely to have children while working in the United States. Those children, he said, would be American citizens, meaning their parents would almost certainly never be deported but would instead stay here for life.

He said that illegal immigration could be brought under control if the federal government wished to do so. "What's lacking is the political will to do it," he said.

Moran said the Border Patrol union is preparing a lobbying effort to stop the proposal.

[CMAC51]

No need to mention the plan. Good plans have been mentioned from MANY quarters MANY times before. The answer has been presented time after time in thread after thread.

You don't deport them. You set up the circumstances so they leave of their own free will.

It is already a federal felony to knowingly hire an illegal alien. A pattern of committing felonies is organized crime, covered by RICO.

If employers know they will a) go to jail, b) pay thousands or millions in fines, and c) possibly lose their business if privately held, they will quit hiring illegals. With no jobs they will go home without being evicted. This process can be helped along by denying them things such as driver's licenses, welfare benefits, and citizenship rights for children born of parents here illegally (anchor children).

It is really very simple. When someone ignores the obvious and tries to make this difficult, it causes me to believe they don't want a resolution to the problem

I don't see a platitude - just the truth.

It is obvious to me with this issue that there are those here at FR who a) don't see a problem with the number of illegals in the country, or b) approve of the number of illegals in this country. Perhaps your case would be better served by telling the truth about how you feel on the subject of immigration control, rather than saying it (control) can't be done.

I highly disapprove of illegal immigration. Given a viable method I would deport every one of them tomorrow. That being said, I am realistic enough to acknowledge "viable" is the key issue.

What you say is simple is quite the opposite. By law an employer is required to verify a potential employee is eligible to be hired. The potential employee must present 2 of a possible 24 items to verify eligibility. If presented, the employer cannot be held liable for the status of that employee. Even if one of the items is a pathetic forgery, the employer is still absolved because the letter of the law has been complied with. There is no requirement that the employer verify that the item is not a forgery, primarily because of court rulings involving discrimination.

Now if you have a plan for employers actually verifying the validity of documents that will pass challenge in the courts, THEN, perhaps the process becomes simple. Until you can present such plans, perhaps you should be more careful of your indictments of people's motives.

Incidently, denying citizenship to anyone born within the borders of the United States would require a constitutional ammendment (Article XIV, Section 1). Ammending the constitution is simple?

[rolling_stone]

Again, Bush did not propose in any shape of form any type of Amnesty!

Um what do you call it when you legalize illegals?

[Consort]

He said that illegal immigration could be brought under control if the federal government wished to do so.

I wish I'd thought of that. He's a genius.

[Lady Eileen]

bump

[CMAC51]

Again, Bush did not propose in any shape of form any type of Amnesty!

It does pose an interesting question of cause and effect. Which is responsible, Bush presenting a plan which he states does not include amnesty or the media and opponents who claim Bush is proposing amnesty?

The illegal crossing the border is highly unlikely to have looked at the plan.

[Sabertooth]

So you would bankrupt businesses and put native born Americans out of work in the process.

Rush had a caller who smugly said that businesses could raise prices. I guess he didn't own a business. Rush put it very bluntly. Busineses are not in business to employ people, but to make money. I guess you are for a new government regulatory agency such as the IRS to regulate the millions of legitimate businesses for their crime of finding people who will work hard and do good things such as roof houses, clean toilets, and make beds in hotels.

A very economical argument on behalf of a peculiar institution:

The employment of Illegal Aliens by unscrupulous businesses.

[ought-six]

Dane has been an advocate for and enabler of illegals for quite some time. It's blatantly obvious in his posts.

[Dane]

From your response to my post, I suspect you (or a friend or family member) own a business and employee illegals

Nope, no one I know. I was just commenting on how you are going to put through your new regulations. It's easy to spout off, let's go after the employers. What about native born Americans who work for that company. Do you want to throw them out on the street? Rush had had a caller yesterday, who smugly said, raise the prices. That ain't going to work. Business is in business to make money and in this highly competitive marketplace, raising prices is suicidal to a business, but what the hey we gotta get rid of the dirty immigrants who clean our toilets, wash our dishes, and make our beds in hotels. No matter their work ethic. Bush's proposal gives them a chance to go above ground, while not granting citizenship.

In closing it seems that you want a new beauracracy in the form of the IRS or OSHA. Isn't business regulated enough.

[Sabertooth]

KevinDavis: Again, Bush did not propose in any shape of form any type of Amnesty!

cmac51: Which is responsible, Bush presenting a plan which he states does not include amnesty or the media and opponents who claim Bush is proposing amnesty?

The Amnesty proposal of President Bush is, in fact, an Amnesty, no matter what he tries to call it, and a repetition of the past.

Effect on Illegal Aliens	Reagan Amnesty	Bush Amnesty
Legalizes millions, but not all, Illegal Aliens.	Yes	Yes
Charges a fee to Illegal Aliens for legalization.	Yes	Yes
Initially grants temporary, not permanent status to Illegal Aliens.	Yes	Yes
Provides path for subsequent permanent status for legalized Illegals.	Yes	Yes
Provides path to eventual U.S. citizenship for legalized Illegals.	Yes	Yes
Wasn't officially called an Amnesty	Yes	Yes

Take the Reagan Amnesty Pop Quiz!

[Itzlzha]

No mention of a plan, just a platitude.

Gee...I must have missed the story about how the economy must have had a "boom" of "Toilet-Scrubbing" jobs...isn't that why they come here ILLEGALLY Dane?

[CMAC51]

The Amnesty proposal of President Bush is, in fact, an Amnesty, no matter what he tries to call it, and a repetition of the past.

As an authority on the subject, perhaps you can answer definitively. Is there a penalty (monetary or otherwise) that a currently illegal alien pays for guest worker status that an alien who is not illegal does not pay for guest worker status? I have heard the question answered yes, but not by an authority. I have not seen enough details of the plan to answer the question authoritatively myself.

The answer, whatever is correct determines if an Amnesty is involved.

According the Marion Webster dictionary, an amnesty is granting a pardon to a large group. A pardon is forgiving an offense without a penalty having been paid.

If a penalty is paid, no amnesty exists. The argument is then over how appropriate the size of the penalty is, which I would presume is negotiable during the formation of any bill.

[The_Eaglet]

Campaign Finance Reform thread-day 47

[junta]

You are right it is easier to raise taxes to support business' cheap labor. Business has a lobby the taxpayers gets the shaft.

[Right Wing Professor]

Business is in business to make money and in this highly competitive marketplace, raising prices is suicidal to a business, but what the hey we gotta get rid of the dirty immigrants who clean our toilets, wash our dishes, and make our beds in hotels. No matter their work ethic.

The problem is, neither the businesses nor the immigrants pay the full costs of immigration - the massive increase in educational costs from the influx of non-English speaking and special-needs children, the increase in crime, the increase in uninsured people needing health-care, etc.. Illegal immigrants don't generally earn enough to pay significant amounts of state tax; which means the rest of us pick up these costs. Thanks, but I'd rather see the meat-packing industry and the hotel industry pay higher wages to hire native-born Americans, and pay the higher prices for meat and hotel rooms, than pick up the tab in my tax bill.

[WayneM]

I was just commenting on how you are going to put through your new regulations.

I believe there are already regulations on the books that prohibit hiring of illegal aliens. The solution lies not in new regulations, but with the proper enforcement of existing regulations. In many cases these existing regulations have been on the books for decades, so it’s not like something new is being sprung on anyone.

It's easy to spout off, let's go after the employers. What about native born Americans who work for that company. Do you want to throw them out on the street?

If a business cannot turn a profit while staying within the law, then it should go out of business. I work for a software company. If my company needed to sell crack in order to turn a profit, then maybe we should be shut down.

Rush had had a caller yesterday, who smugly said, raise the prices. That ain't going to work. Business is in business to make money and in this highly competitive marketplace, raising prices is suicidal to a business, but what the hey we gotta get rid of the dirty immigrants who clean our toilets, wash our dishes, and make our beds in hotels. No matter their work ethic.

Nobody can raise prices unilaterally. However, consider a labor market where all cleaning services use 50% illegal labor. If they are forced to give up the illegal labor, and then raise prices to compensate for the higher wages necessary to attract American workers, then they will all just have to bite the bullet and do it. But guess what – it is a level playing field and they will ALL have to do it. Therefore no one company is at a competitive disadvantage.

Bush's proposal gives them a chance to go above ground, while not granting citizenship.

Isn’t that just great. Forgiveness for past misdeeds such as entering illegally, plus all the financial and societal benefits of citizenship without any of the messy obligations. Lawbreakers and linebreakers are rewarded, businesses get their cheap labor subsidized by the American taxpayer – what a wonderful world this could be.

In closing it seems that you want a new beauracracy in the form of the IRS or OSHA. Isn't business regulated enough.

Once again – no need for a new bureaucracy. We already have federal agencies that are responsible for enforcing these laws. Except they have been told they cannot enforce them

All we need to do is untie the hands of existing agencies and personnel responsible for enforcing immigration. Once the first few crackdowns result in a few thousand fines of 10k-20K per illegal worker, businesses will begin to police themselves.

[american spirit]

Obviously, you don't know the tax laws concerning an employer's responsiblities regarding paying and reporting payroll taxes to various state/federal agencies otherwise you'd understand why there's such widespread vehement opposition to this idiocy. As someone who employs only Americans and pay all my required payroll taxes, it infuriates me to no end seeing all these other businesses openly breaking federal law by employing and EVADING their tax duty by hiring illegals. Where in the hell is it written that it's Ok to have a double standard in this country when it comes to enforcement of employment laws? Either we have equality under the law or a banana republic....what do you care to live in?

[Sabertooth]

Is there a penalty (monetary or otherwise) that a currently illegal alien pays for guest worker status that an alien who is not illegal does not pay for guest worker status? I have heard the question answered yes, but not by an authority. I have not seen enough details of the plan to answer the question authoritatively myself.

The President calls it a "one-time fee." Illegals have to pay it to be legalized. Legitimate guest worker applicants don't have to pay a fee.

Undocumented workers now here will be required to pay a one-time fee to register for the temporary worker program. Those who seek to join the program from abroad and have complied with our immigration laws will not have to pay any fee.
Text of Bush immigration speech
President outlines plan to give illegals legal status
World Net Daily - January 7, 2004

The answer, whatever is correct determines if an Amnesty is involved.

According the Marion Webster dictionary, an amnesty is granting a pardon to a large group. A pardon is forgiving an offense without a penalty having been paid.

If a penalty is paid, no amnesty exists. The argument is then over how appropriate the size of the penalty is, which I would presume is negotiable during the formation of any bill

Yeah, I've seen the dictionary argument before. It doesn't fly.

Here's the most relevant passage from the most famous pardon in American History...

Now, therefore, I, Gerald R. Ford, President of the United States, pursuant to the pardon power conferred upon me by Article II, Section 2, of the Constitution, have granted and by these presents do grant a full, free, and absolute pardon unto Richard Nixon for all offenses against the United States which he, Richard Nixon, has committed or may have committed or taken part in during the period from July (January) 20, 1969 through August 9, 1974.
President Ford's Pardon of Richard Nixon
September 8th, 1974

Why do you think that President Ford took such pains to grant a "full, free, and absolute pardon" to Richard Nixon?

The answer is because not all pardons are "full, free, and absolute."

Neither are all Amnesties.

President Bush's Amnesty for Illegal Aliens is an example of that.

There are different kinds of pardons, and different kinds of Amnesties. Pardons and Amnesties can be conditional or unconditional.

Need evidence?

The Google Search on conditional pardon yields over 23,000 results.

The Google Search on unconditional pardon yields over 22,000 results.

The Google Search on conditional amnesty yields over 21,000 results.

The Google Search on unconditional amnesty yields over 32,000 results.

This is not make believe, these are real and long-standing legal doctrines. Selectively parsing an unreasonably narrow definition of "pardon" or "Amnesty" does not erase these doctrines.

[CMAC51]

There are different kinds of pardons, and different kinds of Amnesties. Pardons and Amnesties can be conditional or unconditional. Need evidence? The Google Search on conditional pardon yields over 23,000 results. The Google Search on unconditional pardon yields over 22,000 results. The Google Search on conditional amnesty yields over 21,000 results. The Google Search on unconditional amnesty yields over 32,000 results. This is not make believe, these are real and long-standing legal doctrines. Selectively parsing an unreasonably narrow definition of "pardon" or "Amnesty" does not erase these doctrines.

Nice try, but no prize. Delving deeper into your "legal" vernacular. A condition is different from a penalty. Requiring illegal aliens to reside outside the country for 6 months prior to application would be a condition. Requiring them to pay a fee based solely on the their illegal status is a penalty.

Now, since we've gotten past amnesty. Which is the correct question? "Should there be a guest worker program? or What penalty is great enough to warrant consideration for guest worker?" Or is it that from your point of view that after breaking the law, no penalty is great enough to atone for the offense?

[Sabertooth]

Nice try, but no prize. Delving deeper into your "legal" vernacular. A condition is different from a penalty.

President Bush used the term "one-time fee."

"Penalty" is yours.

Fees are certainly conditions.

Requiring them to pay a fee based solely on the their illegal status is a penalty.

When I go to a campground, I pay a fee. It's not a penalty.

Now, since we've gotten past amnesty.

Guess again. You're not being honest with yourself.

Splitting hairs about penalties, fees, conditions, etc., ain't gonna cut it. The Bush Amnesty function essentially as the Reagan Amnesty did. That's your bottom line.

Guest worker programs are fine, so long as they aren't trojan horses to legalize millions of Illegal Aliens.

That's Amnesty.

[swampfox98]

He said that illegal immigration could be brought under control if the federal government wished to do so. "What's lacking is the political will to do it," he said.

What gives a leader the political will to make drastic changes in a failing policy? If we only knew maybe we could send some to GW.