Posted on 05/24/2006 7:00:13 AM PDT by blitzgig
IN the debate over immigration, "amnesty" has become something of a dirty word. Some opponents of the immigration bill being debated in the Senate assert that it would grant amnesty to millions of illegal immigrants. Supporters claim it would do no such thing. Instead, they say, it lays out a road map by which illegal aliens can earn citizenship.
Perhaps I can shed some light. Two decades ago, while serving as attorney general under President Ronald Reagan, I was in the thick of things as Congress debated the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986. The situation today bears uncanny similarities to what we went through then.
In the mid-80's, many members of Congress — pushed by the Democratic majority in the House and the Select Commission on Immigration and Refugee Policy — advocated amnesty for long-settled illegal immigrants. President Reagan considered it reasonable to adjust the status of what was then a relatively small population, and I supported his decision.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
With Fox's recent visit to Utah, his anticipated visit to his "troups" in Washington state we might expect a more bold and brash attitude from the multitude of illegal invaders in those states. Of course, we are beginning to get a glimpse of the long planned "Regional Government" just emerging. Could VF be the unmasked Regional Commander with the blessing of Washington D.C.? Just wondered......
Didn't work the, won't work now. By the Senate, cynically, pretends otherwise.
...and increase incentives for them to return home.
"And there proved to be a failure of political will in enforcing new laws against employers."
Yes, they can double, triple or whatever penalty the government decides vs. employers, but that is comparable to current firearms laws which remain generally unenforced.
Exactly this is a quote from Meese
"The fair and sound policy is to give those who are here illegally the opportunity to correct their status by returning to their country of origin and getting in line with everyone else. This, along with serious enforcement and control of the illegal inflow at the border — a combination of incentives and disincentives — will significantly reduce over time our population of illegal immigrants."
When you read this coming from a republican attorney general, who not only served under Reagan but fought this same battle 20 years ago, why would this administration choose to ignore this advice? The only reason I can come up with is they know this scam won't work and they don't want it to. They want Mexican slave labor.
If they want cheap labor, they are in for a shock. The labor unions are busily signing up illegals and are doing everything in their power to get them the vote. Reminds me of what I read about the Irish imigration. Tammy Hall would sign up immigrants as they came off the boats, carry them to the polls. The big machines were always powered by immigrant votes.
There's only one problem with the RINO talking points on "it's not amnesty": all but one of the alleged "penalties" (English language, no crimes, keep a job, pay taxes) are exactly and precisely the normal requirements for U.S. residency and/or naturalization. They are not special penalties applied to illegal aliens as "punishment" for their crime.
The only other "penalty" that purportedly makes the amnesty, "not an amnesty", is the proposed "stiff fine".
IMO, if that fine is $2,000 or less, it just about equals the cost of ANY immigrant getting from their home country to the U.S.A. , in terms of the costs for filing applications, getting to INS appointments, having legal assistance, getting police records, and having required medical exams. Illegal alliens won't pay any of those costs since they are here already, so the $2,000 "fine" = $2,000 resident visa costs. In other words, it's very nearly a wash.
SO, yes, it is an amnesty.
And I'm really getting disgusted with Republican officials such as Tony Snow, GWB, Arlen Specter and the rest presenting bogus and transparent talking points to Republican constituents.
It's intellectually dishonest and very insulting.
In January 2004 GWB proposed that illegals get a three-year work visa, once renewable.
The you go home, to stay there, or to apply for U.S. residency, or whatever.
Point is (and GWB did make this point), at the end of your "work visa" you go home. If you want residency, you get in line behind law-abading applicants, who in many cases have been waiting 5 or 10 years or even longer.
But somewhere in trip from January 2004 until today, GWB has suddenly found the case for a "a path to citizenship."
Hey Ed you mean like you helped Ronald Reagan to pass in 1986? THAT was a real Amnesty Ed.
Charles Krauthammer said it the best last week on Brit Hume's round table. After Brit bullied Mort Kondracke and Laura Liason into saying this wasn't amnesty, he turned to Charles and asked him. Charles' reply was classic. He said the penalty for illegally entering the US is deportation and if you don't deport the illegals you are granting amnesty. Why this administration continues to hang on to the lie that it's anything else is beyond me. Conservatives see right through the lie and like you find it insulting that our "leaders" think we'll respond like democrats do and go along with the lie. Tony Snows response showed he's already lost his sense of honesty.
He admits it in the article. Unlike this administration they openly called it amnesty. He's not running from that. He's saying it's already been tried and the result was 3 million turned into 30 million. He's only asking this administration to be honest with the American people. They can't even be honest about the word, let alone the fact that their will not be any teeth when it comes to enforcement.
This is a very important article for you to read. It was written by Ronald Reagan's AG. I consider Reagan our greatest president.
That equals amnesty. Permanent barring from becoming a US citizen ought be part of the price paid for those who've broken the law to get here. THEN we can talk of a guest worker program to which those illegal aliens may subscribe.
"The situation today bears uncanny similarities to what we went through then."
Which means D.C. will again, DO NOTHING...
I'm not referring to his support for amnesty. I'm referring to his reluctance to even use the word when I question his honesty. It's like they think as long as they don't use the word amnesty we'll support the sell out of the nation. The polls, including the FR immigration poll should tell them we ain't buying what they're selling.
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.