Democrats offer plan on aliens

The Washington Times ^ | 1/29/04 | Amy Fagan

[Cyropaedia]

House Democrats yesterday proposed granting legal residency and the eventual option of U.S. citizenship to millions of illegal immigrants now working in the United States. Laying out their own principles for revamping the nation's immigration laws in response to what House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi called President Bush's "political ploy," Democrats went beyond Mr. Bush's plan for a temporary-worker program and called for a system of "earned legalization" for illegal aliens. At a Capitol Hill press conference, Democrats proposed allowing illegal immigrants who have worked in the United States for a yet-to-be-determined minimum period of time to stay here and be granted permanent legal residency, creating a "pathway" to eventual citizenship. "The president's proposal is a political ploy, and not the solid foundation on which we can build an improved immigration policy," said Mrs. Pelosi of California. "Democrats have a better way." Mrs. Pelosi said Mr. Bush's recently proposed plan doesn't create a meaningful way for illegal aliens to become U.S. residents or citizens; doesn't reduce the backlog of U.S. citizens' petitions on behalf of relatives who are here illegally; and doesn't help tens of thousands of teenage illegals attend college here and eventually be granted legal status. In addition to proposing measures to address those concerns, Democrats endorsed a temporary-worker program that would give foreigners the option to stay in the United States and eventually earn permanent legal status here. President Bush's plan, in contrast, would allow illegal aliens already here, as well as newcomers, to work in the United States legally for three years under a temporary-worker program. When their three-year permits expired, such immigrant workers would be required to return to their home countries. Once back in their home countries, they could apply for legal U.S. status through the existing system. Under the Bush plan, the three-year work permits could be extended in some cases, but not indefinitely. "The president wants to give [illegal aliens] a lot, but the Democrats want to give them the jackpot," said Steve Camarota, director of research at the Center for Immigration Studies. Sen. John Cornyn, the Texas Republican sponsor of legislation that essentially mirrors Mr. Bush's proposal, said requiring workers to eventually return to their home country will reduce future illegal immigration by strengthening struggling foreign economies. "In my recent visit with government leaders in Mexico City, I was repeatedly told that they want their workers to come back, to return home with capital and skills," he said. "They need those small-business owners, those entrepreneurs to strengthen a weakened middle class." Mr. Cornyn's bill and Mr. Bush's proposal would provide incentives for immigrants to return home after their legal work period here expires. But Democrats like Rep. Luis V. Gutierrez, Illinois Democrat, said it would be unfair and unworkable to deport immigrants who have worked in the United States for many years. He praised Mr. Bush for opening the door to immigration changes, but said the government won't be able to enforce Mr. Bush's plan. "There is not the political will ... to conduct that massive deportation," he said. Mr. Camarota agreed. "At least the Democrats are realistic," he said, adding that illegal immigrants in the United States, "aren't going home now and they're not going to go home with President Bush's proposal." Democrats propose allowing foreign-born minors who are here illegally to stay in the United States, attend college and eventually earn legal status. Democrats said that "at minimum" they support a bill, already approved by the Senate Judiciary Committee, to allow states to grant in-state college tuition rates to illegal-alien students. That bill would also authorize federal officials to halt deportation of such students and allow the students to eventually become permanent U.S. residents. Mrs. Pelosi said if Mr. Bush were serious about improving the system, he would call for immediate action on the House counterpart to that Senate bill, as well as another House bill that would allow 500,000 illegal agricultural workers to become legal permanent residents. Democrats also propose enhanced family-reunification provisions. They seek reinstatement of a law that would allow illegal immigrants, sponsored by immediate family members who are U.S. citizens, to stay in the United States and apply for legal status, instead of being forced to return to their home countries before seeking legal admission. Mr. Bush tried to revive that law in the past, but it was "beaten down in the House," Mr. Camarota said, and the measure is not part of Mr. Bush's most recent proposal.

[international american]

Unions!

[international american]

Conspiracy Guy City!

No down....4% APR!!

[XBob]

30-"You're right. Both proposals are beyond bad. But which one is worse? And if you absolutely had to choose between either of them, which one would you pick?"


XBob's plan:

1. Illegal's responsibility - caught illegals can never return to or work in US
2. Illegal's responsibility - Anchor babies - no longer allowed.
3. Illegal's responsibility - No SSI benefits for illegals.

4. Illegal's responsibility - No IR$ refunds for illegals.

1. Employer responsibility - 1st illegal employee caught - employer returns illegal to home.
2. Employer responsibility - 2nd illegal employee caught - employer returns illegal to home plus another caught by INS.
3. Employer responsibility - 3rd illegal employee caught - employer returns illegal to home plus 3 caught by INS.
4. Employer responsibility - 4th illegal employee caught - employer returns illegal to home plus 4 caught by INS.
5. Employer responsibility - 5th illegal employee caught - employer returns illegal to home plus 5 caught by INS.
etc, etc etc

Results:
Gradualally escalating returns of illegals, lots of self returns, illegals make money for govt rather than cost money.

7 - This plan is rough, but would work. What if FReepers we were add to/polish it up a bit, but keeping it very simple, and make a serious political proposal out of it?

Perhaps add something like migrant workers could only be hired in their country of origin, would have to come directly from it to their job, and be allowed to remain for only one harvest season, or 6 months, or something?

Let's do something constructive, rather than just bitch!!
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1062207/posts?page=9#9

Any illegals who receive medical/food aid at taxpayer's expense will have 25% of their wages deducted until debt is paid. Mexico must also agree to do the same on any wages the worker earns there.

Employers who wish to employ these willing workers must agree to pay any remaining amount their workers take from the social services support system that these workers do not repay.

12 posted on 01/21/2004 10:43:12 AM CST by Helix (Here's to hoping I've proofread

[Conspiracy Guy]

I'm buying beachfront for $12/acre. You in?

CG

[Pubbie]

I get it.

[international american]

"I'm buying beachfront for $12/acre. You in? "

Sold!! 1,000 acres!

[Conspiracy Guy]

We have to wait till they all come here first. At present it is fragmented. As soon as I can piece a thousand conjoined acres together, I'll reserve it for you.

CG

[4.1O dana super trac pak]

That about wraps it up....

[AuntB]

"he is working to defeat America"

I don't believe that Dave. I've been wrong before, but I don't believe that. What does dismay me is that he's carried on this same unworkable non-solution from the past administrations. I do believe he does not have a clue how those policies are affecting far too many American Citizens, including a lot of Mexicans. Let me tell you what works: A bunch of hard headed Americans got together and told their Republican Senator and Representative that they were NOT getting elected if they didn't get off their dead butts and do something about Klamath Falls. Gordon Smith and Greg Walden knew we were dead serious and could do away with them politically. They got on Air Force One, and cornered Bush and showed him that lake as they flew over...that it was FULL. Until then, he didn't know we existed..not with turning the water on, facing down armed federal "employees", Caravans, protests, parades...you name it, we did it. That night, Bush was on the tube and he said, "There's some folks in Klamath Falls, Oregon that haven't been being treated very well!"

Unfortunately, Gordon Smith and Greg Walden still have their jobs, because they finally did something. But they don't forget you when you face them down and if you need their help personally after that, you probably won't get it. I sure didn't. But that's politics.

He doesn't live in our world, Dave..it's not all his fault, that's the "position" we put our leaders in. Please don't try to make him look like the devil, it's just politics, and yes, it sucks.

[B4Ranch]

I don't believe he is stupid, ignorant or uninformed. If I can make a logical determination about what his plans are going to do to our individual communities, then he should be able to do the same. I use advisors, so does he.

In my 25 years of hiring them I have found that they are good for one purpose only and that is to give you a view that you skipped over. So with their advice and professional background in whatever field, I am always the one who makes the final determination about what I need to do, should do or will do and when.

He is sitting in the same chair but has a much larger responsibility than I do, mine involves the care and betterment of four people not four hundred million.

So, if he is not working to defeat our Constitution and Bill of Rights he needs to show all of us doubters where we are wrong. I see Agenda 21 all the way through his actions, not what he swore to do when he took the Office.

[B4Ranch]

Figure out where the fresh drinking water is going to come from yet? I'll but the land next to the drinking water.

[Conspiracy Guy]

Oops

I didn't think about water.

CG

[B4Ranch]

I like salt on my fries not in my coffee. LOL

[AuntB]

"So, if he is not working to defeat our Constitution and Bill of Rights he needs to show all of us doubters where we are wrong."

I can't disagree with that.

And some of his advisors are terrible. But then I don't have a real good history of picking "advisors" either, so I can't be righteous about that. They're not informed either or just corrupt. They live in a bubble. Once in a while you can penetrate the bubble, but not often.

[Conspiracy Guy]

desalinization!

CG

[B4Ranch]

And then we'll sell the salt to the US Ag Bureau!

[Conspiracy Guy]

That's the spirit.

CG

[Unadorned]

Mr. Bush, we have a country. You're not going to destroy it. Our Fathers did not shed blood, did not bequeath us a nation bought and paid for with life, limb, and sacrifice for the foul likes of you to harm but for us to love, keep, and carefully pass down to our grandchildren and theirs, and theirs, and theirs, as our forbears cherished, saved, and handed it down to us more precious than ever inheritance was or could be. It's our legacy, our dearer-than-gold-and-silver, ours to hold not yours to squander, stupid excuse for a man. Now take your soiled Tranzi hands off that which was clean and pure. Pollute it no longer by touching it. Because of you and Karl Rove a line has now been drawn. We are on one side and you, and your brother, and your nephew, and your backstabbing, lying disgrace of a father are on the other forever. Go. Go away. Go to Mexico. Leave. We don't want you here, sad incompetent failure, outrageous destroyer of what was your own country. You are as bad, and as much a traitor, as Bill Clinton. (That's why you never prosecuted him -- you could see absolutely nothing wrong with a single thing he did.)

[Unadorned]

It's clear tonight, with the latest primary poll results in and the scattered voter commentary being reported, that 1) Kerry will be the nominee, and 2) he'll take Bush in a walk, beating him easily by at least ten points without even breaking a sweat -- a landslide. Were Bush not so utterly pathetic he'd be tragic -- but someone who is a complete joke, an absolutely incompetent, clueless buffoon, is never the stuff of tragedy. I hope all Bush's and Rove's enablers, the ones who forbade criticism when there was still perhaps time to bring this now-doomed Administration to its senses, are happy with what they've wrought on the nation: a GOP presidency stopped dead in its tracks and replaced with the Dems. No, the enablers simply couldn't understand why the "lesser of two evils" strategy doesn't apply once a certain point has been reached, the point beyond which *both* sides are become intolerable. Intolerable is a word the enablers can't quite grasp the meaning of. Rather than go to the GOP and try to get the word back to Bush that he'd really and truly better cut this crap, they squelched all criticism of the jackass. The enablers just couldn't grasp what we were so unhappy about; why we simply would not be able to vote for Bush no matter who opposed him unless things changed -- hey, when someone has the equivalent of a choice between Joseph Stalin and Mao Tse Tung he runs right out and enthusiastically supports one over the other, right? Of COURSE! He never grumps about a choice like that! The lesser of two evils -- don't you get it? YEAH -- what more could we want than the equivalent of a choice between Lavrenti Beria and Joseph Mengele to get us all excited about picking one over the other on Election Day? Or let's say, a choice between Fidel Castro and Ché Guévara. Wouldn't that make you proud of democracy and get your juices flowing? Wouldn't that particular choice get you in a hot-to-trot voting mood, everyone, raring to take part instead of staying home and just sitting on your hands? I mean, why were we so hard to please, always complaining about the choice we were going to be given, when the choice was the equivalent of one between Adolf Hitler and Adolph Eichmann? Couldn't we wax enthusiastic about "the lesser of two evils" strategy and go happily to the polls on Election Day knowing we were about to keep the greater of two evils -- Hitler or Eichmann -- out of office by putting the other one -- Hitler or Eichmann -- IN office? I mean, SURELY I ought to be able to scrounge up enthusiasm for my favorite if given the equivalent of a choice between Pol Pot and Khieu Sampan! Gee, I can't BELIEVE we actually had the equivalent of a choice between Joseph Goebbels and Alfred Rosenberg AND STILL DIDN'T APPRECIATE IT, SAYING WE COULDN'T VOTE FOR EITHER ONE! What MORE could we want in the way of a choice than that? What was WRONG with us?