Skip to comments.
Immigration Proposal Aims to Bridge Republican Divide
The Washington Post ^
| July 25, 2006
| Jim VandeHei and Charles Babington
Posted on 07/25/2006 10:21:33 AM PDT by AppleButter
In an attempt to strike a pre-election Republican compromise on immigration, two conservative lawmakers unveiled a plan today that would allow most of the 11 million illegal immigrants in the United States a chance to work here legally, but only after the government certifies that U.S. borders have been sufficiently secured.
The proposal -- sponsored by Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison (Tex.) and Rep. Mike Pence (Ind.) -- would pressure illegal immigrants to "self-deport" to their home countries within two years of the law's enactment and apply for a new kind of visa that would allow them to return to the United States quickly and work legally if a job awaits them. They would have to work here for 17 years, however, to be eligible for U.S. citizenship.
-- snip --
The impasse will not be easy to break. The push for a pre-election compromise has lost its sense of urgency, as both sides privately calculate that no deal might be the best politics and produce the best policy.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
TOPICS: Culture/Society; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: aliens; amnesty; congress; electioncongress; guestworker; immigrantlist; immigration
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 101-117 next last
To: RSmithOpt
Rewarding criminals is not the answer and never will be.
Pence's plan rewards criminals.
21
posted on
07/25/2006 10:42:32 AM PDT
by
Marine Inspector
(Government is not the solution to our problem; Government is the problem)
To: AppleButter
"allow most of the 11 million illegal immigrants in the United States a chance to work here legally, but only after the government certifies that U.S. borders have been sufficiently secured"
Why do we have to bribe a bunch of illegal law breakers before our government secures our borders like they are sworn to?
Secure the borders. Period.
22
posted on
07/25/2006 10:46:34 AM PDT
by
Jameison
To: AppleButter
23
posted on
07/25/2006 10:49:48 AM PDT
by
Old_Mil
(http://www.constitutionparty.org - Forging a Rebirth of Freedom.)
To: Finop
24
posted on
07/25/2006 10:50:14 AM PDT
by
Jameison
To: sheana
Could you please find one for me too !!
To: bybybill
The all or nothing crowd really don`t want to solve the illegal immigration problem. More fun to moan and complain plus they get to help Rats win elections. Pretty neat deal---for them but hell for the country.
Out of curiousity, do you believe that winning the war on terror is an "all-or-nothing" proposition? How about protecting children from pedophiles? You might want to save your empty rhetoric for a crowd that's stupider than the one that reads this website.
26
posted on
07/25/2006 10:53:35 AM PDT
by
Old_Mil
(http://www.constitutionparty.org - Forging a Rebirth of Freedom.)
To: AppleButter
I thought the Washington Post was going to provide "fair" coverage on the immigration issue. Now they are just touting the National Chamber of Commerce's plan they stuck into the hands of their second tier lackey Pence, a person looking to be paid off in return for future promises of cash for his fantasy 2008 prez run.
27
posted on
07/25/2006 10:53:40 AM PDT
by
Shermy
To: ichabod1
....we still have to deal with the problem of 11-20 million angry (mostly) men of military age who've already shown a willingness to get in the street, in our face. And the number keeps growing every day.
To: Marine Inspector
Exactly!!!
Why does no reporter on TV in the mainstream media ask the point blank question?
Why is it no politician or government official seems to have the ability to state exactly that fact as to why their level of government chooses not to enforce this aspect of federal law? So, is fraud, bribery, armed robbery, embezzlementm murder and hate speech the only government enforced laws now?
Why is it no reporter will press a government official to start to enforce its own laws?
I think employers should immediately be required to verify immigration status before for all new employees are hired and put on the payroll.
"The Pence-Dunce Plan"??
29
posted on
07/25/2006 10:55:51 AM PDT
by
RSmithOpt
(Liberalism: Highway to Hell)
To: AppleButter
Immigration Proposal Aims to Wedge Republican Divide
30
posted on
07/25/2006 10:57:37 AM PDT
by
MrEdd
(Bad spellers of the world - UNTIE!,)
To: AppleButter
They keep their jobs. The employers who hired them get to keep hiring them, except now we call them legal instead of illegal. And they can choose whether or not to leave when the visa runs out. How is this not amnesty?
31
posted on
07/25/2006 10:57:54 AM PDT
by
mysterio
To: Jameison
There is always excellence in truth! :)
32
posted on
07/25/2006 10:58:13 AM PDT
by
Finop
(Liberal wisdom defined... "It's not fair that you work harder than I do")
To: finallyatexan
Me, too.
We can find one big enough, and found "FReeperland".
33
posted on
07/25/2006 10:58:29 AM PDT
by
Politicalmom
(Nearly 1% of illegals are in prison for felonies. Less than 1/10 of 1% of the legal population is.)
To: bybybill
More fun to moan and complain plus they get to help Rats win elections. Pretty neat deal---for them but hell for the country.It's the pro-immigration crowd that will guarantee the Democrats permanent control over the country. Illegal aliens are the raw material for Democrat voter fraud, and since Mexicans are natural-born socialists, they'll go with the Democrats if they become citizens.
To: bybybill
The all or nothing crowd really don`t want to solve the illegal immigration problem.We thougt the problem was solved with Reagan. But since we have had Bush, Clinton, Bush nothing has been solved. As ol George Wallace said, "there isn't a dime's worth of difference in them."
35
posted on
07/25/2006 10:59:39 AM PDT
by
texastoo
("trash the treaties")
To: AppleButter
Explain how you will "pressure them to self-deport" when you've already announced, repeatedly, that you won't
actually deport illegals? Every politician (except, Tancredo, AFAIK) is spouting the tired mantra, "You can't realistically deport every illegal immigrant." While this statement is false
and misses the point, it shows the pervasive lack of resolve on the part of our legislators and the executive.
Fellas, you've already shown your hand. Now you're going to bluff?
36
posted on
07/25/2006 10:59:44 AM PDT
by
TChris
(Banning DDT wasn't about birds. It was about power.)
To: TChris
Fellas, you've already shown your hand. Now you're going to bluff?Excellent point.
To: Politicalmom
That would be GREAT - can I be President !!
To: AppleButter
The long term plan has never changed.
You can never have One World Government until the standard of living in this country is reduced to 3rd world level.
That's what it's all about on the bottom line.
39
posted on
07/25/2006 11:04:24 AM PDT
by
dalereed
To: finallyatexan
You ought to see all the malcontents with bad backs, homeless people and mentally ill folks lapping up our Social Security. I drive them places for a living. It would make you very ill.
40
posted on
07/25/2006 11:07:31 AM PDT
by
Luke21
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 101-117 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson