Posted on 04/02/2007 5:47:45 AM PDT by pissant
Mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani criticized Senator Bob Dole today for supporting Republican-sponsored legislation that would restrict Government aid to immigrants and called those restrictions "a terrible, terrible mistake."
Mr. Giuliani cited measures in the legislation that would restrict public benefits to legal immigrants, allow states to bar illegal immigrant children from public schools and force local authorities and hospitals to report undocumented aliens who report a crime or seek emergency medical aid.
The Mayor did not single out Mr. Dole during a speech before the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, a policy and research organization. But in response to questions from the audience, he warned that Mr. Dole, the likely Republican Presidential candidate, would be committing a damaging political mistake if he followed public opinion polls that show broad antipathy to illegal immigrants and to immigrants who receive public benefits.
"He'd be responding to the political consultants' analysis of how he should run for President as opposed to a more intuitive analysis, which would be: This is an opportunity to show you're a leader, a statesman and that you can step beyond the most immediate form of public opinion and really go to the core of what makes America such a great country," Mr. Giuliani commented after his speech.
(Excerpt) Read more at query.nytimes.com ...
I know the whole story, your side and the other side, and my own thinking falls somewhere in the middle. But the US Supreme Court has ruled that children can't be denied access to public schooling on the basis of immigrant status. So it would probably take a Constitutional Amendment, not simply an act of legislation, to change that. And from a pragmatic view, one can see big problems with not allowing these children into the schools.
But I do agree that we need to find a better way to control our borders and to make sure that everyone working in this country is paying their share of the taxes.
You're right. How's this?
Bush, Rudy and the Dems are all wrong on illegal immigration!
re: 'settling' for Rudy--
I'm reminded of a story I heard in Sunday school one time.
So to teach them a lesson, he made some brownies.
Regular old brownies, which they eyed gleefully, because they loved brownies. As they were about to put them in their mouths though, the dad cautioned them:
"Those look and smell awfully good, don't they? But while I was making them, I decided to add just ONE little extra ingredient to the mix, not much of anything, really won't make a difference at all..."
"What did you add, Dad?" The kids were anxious to eat the brownies.
"I added 1 gram of cat poop from the litter box, not much, really, when you think about all the rest of the good ingredients!!" Dad smiled at the expressions on their faces as they grimaced with distaste and quickly dropped the brownies back to the plate. "Hey, what's wrong?? It's only a *little* bit of cat poop, what can it hurt??"
They got the message.
The reason it was signed in October by huge bipartisan majorities was because it was before election time and the politicians wanted to demonstrate that they were strong on enforcement. Having watched many of the pre-election debates leading up to the mid-terms, I found it odd to say the least that the vast majority of Dems, when asked about securing our borders and cracking down on illegal immigration, stated that they agreed with the President's position on immigration, which essentially undercut their Rep opponent who was trying to make a distinction between the two parties on immigration reform.
Chertoff is just reflecting the WH position. He is not a free agent. The WH position on immigration matters runs counter to the majority of the GOP. Jim Sensenbrenner was incensed about the WH perfidy on his enforcement first bill. Sensenbrenner: Bush Turned Back on Bill
Bush included funds in his fiscal 2008 budget to build 1/2 of it. Now WE must pressure congress to make sure they fund AT LEAST that much. This is very, very important, so contact your congresscritters.
Neither the WH or the Dem controlled Congress want it built. Nor does the government of Mexico. I am a member of the American Council for Immigration Reform. Rep Hunter spoke to us a few weeks ago. He said that he would focus on the fence construction "like a laser." However, when pressed, it was clear that the decision was up to the Dems. He did promise that if elected, one of the first things he would do is to build the fence in its entireity. I am dubious.
This weekend, I attended a town meeting held by Rep Tom Davis (R-VA). Immigration was raised repeatedly by concerned citizens who are believing "their lying eyes" rather than the politicians spin on the issue. The Northern Virginia region and the DC metro area are being inundated with illegal aliens who are cramming themselves into houses and apartments and congregating in various communities on the streets waiting for local contractors to pick them up each morning for day labor. Communities like Herndon and Manassas are fighting back through grassroots organizations. The federal government has not been very helpful. The demographics of the metro area have changed dramatically over the past decade.
Davis also used the "undocumented worker" phrase and had no real answer when I asked him, as the former chairman of the government oversight committee, why aren't our current laws being enforced? He said that there have been hearings and INS said they needed more resources. When they were given the addtional resources, they still didn't do the job because they were ineffectual. I responded that is well and good, but who is ultimately accountable and responsible for enforcing our laws? A shrug of the shoulders was the answer.
I am very pessimistic that the fence will ever be built and fear that the Dems' comprehensive immigration reform bill will be signed by the WH. If that happens, we are finished as a country. It will just be a matter of time, not if but when, the whole house of cards collapses. A sad legacy for our children.
Do you have a specific USCS ruling that pertains to this issue? We can stop them from getting various federal and state benefits based on their status, including things like in-state tuition for higher education.
Initially, I am not advocating that we stop them from attending school, but I do want the local schools to require that their immigration status be identified and that this data be accummulated to get a handle on the problem. I want the hospitals to do the same. Pragmatically, I find it hard to accept that we must pay property taxes to fund the education of people who are illegally in our country. Or pay increased health insurance payments to pay for their care in our hospital ERs. By doing so, we are attracting more illegal aliens to our shores. There is a limit to our resources, pragmatically speaking.
But I do agree that we need to find a better way to control our borders and to make sure that everyone working in this country is paying their share of the taxes.
I am for Mom and apple pie too. Such pollyanish statements do little to solve this growing problem. The devil is in the details. It may take measures like cutting off all social welfare benefits to stem the tide. We have a very small window of opportunity that is closing fast to turn things around. Our opponents will soon be able to use the political system to achieve their objectives.
That was 25 years ago. I think the issue needs to be raised again. This time the states and local jurisdictions should seek reimbursement from the federal government for such costs involved in educating illegals. This would require the schools to gather data so that they could bill the USG, which is responsible for maintaining our borders and enforcing our immigration laws.
Thanks for saving me the time! :)
I hear what you're saying, but I wonder if barring kids from public schools should be the first or the last thing we do to help secure our borders.
Fred Thompson's my guy. Hoping and praying that he runs.
To me, this (among SO MANY OTHERS) is an INCENTIVE for citizens from other countries (ie: illegal aliens) to want to come to America illegally--to give their children an education they probably wouldn't receive in their home countries.
Remove INCENTIVES, remove MOTIVATIONS to break America's laws.
Pretty easy to understand, actually.
My opinion is that it would be foolish to bar kids from school before we took other steps aimed at keeping people from crossing the border illegally. People try to come here for many reasons aside from the schools, and they will bring their kids regardless of whether the schools will let them in or not. And I don't want legions of kids running around outside of school.
That also seems pretty easy to understand.
That makes it okay then?
I don't think so. Having worked in an inner city school for several years at a school with high illegal immigrant concentration, it's a bad idea. Somebody has to pay for their education, what liberals call 'free' really ain't free.
Of course they do - they believe in winning elections at all costs, apparently.
George Bush and the Dems agree on illegal immigration and AMNESTY!!
WRONG!
He wants a technological fence, which makes perfect sense because it is impossible to "fence" the entire border. High tech is the only way to go.
Very smart! You won't get the truth about anything from the RudyPhobes here.
Impossible? Funny, they already started building it.
And THAT Rudy, is why you will NEVER be President of the United States! The only "terrible terrible mistake" would be having you as our President. You are a RINO; a Republicon!
Where do all of these idiots get the idea that taxpayers should pay for illegals? I didn't like Rudy before, but I can tell you for sure that after reading this, I detest him!!! I wouldn't vote for him if he was the only one in the race! He's dead in the water!!
Conservatives are never going to support him. Only people who will compromise their own values will vote for him.
FYI:
Funding for 700-mile border fence falls short
12:11 AM CST on Tuesday, February 6, 2007
By TODD J. GILLMAN / The Dallas Morning News
tgillman@dallasnews.com
WASHINGTON – President Bush’s budget includes enough money to build only half the U.S.-Mexico border fence Congress demanded last fall, leaving supporters of a 700-mile barrier seething Monday and immigration advocates shrugging that it was just an election-year ploy.
With 75 miles of fencing already in place, the $1 billion in extra money proposed for border infrastructure would be used to build 150 miles of fence by the end of this year and 370 miles by the time Mr. Bush leaves office in early 2009, Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff said. That’s far less than the 700 miles Congress approved last fall and Mr. Bush signed into law.
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.