Posted on 06/22/2007 9:57:08 AM PDT by 3AngelaD
Senate negotiators of a compromise immigration bill are writing a catchall amendment, sponsored by Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., to bolster enforcement provisions of the bill, including a more robust "touchback" requirement for illegal immigrants. Republicans outside the negotiating team are asking that Graham's amendment, as well as a few others, get a floor vote before a cloture is attempted on the bill. "If they want the bill to have a chance, that's what has to happen," said Sen. Richard Burr, R-N.C., who said he is willing to vote for the first cloture motion to proceed to the bill to allow the amendment process to begin.
Burr left open the possibility he would vote for the second cloture motion, which would ensure a final vote on the bill, if the bill is improved from his perspective by the amendments. In addition to a new touchback requirement for illegal immigrants, negotiator Sen. Mel Martinez, R-Fla., said the Graham amendment will include jail time for immigrants who enter the country illegally or overstay temporary visas...
The amendment also will tweak the 200,000 annual cap on the guestworker program to allow more of them into the country by exempting workers who are returning for a second time. If negotiators are able to hammer out a deal on the H-1B program, that language also will be included in the Graham amendment.
Burr said he wants the new touchback provision in Graham's amendment to require all illegal immigrants in the country to return to their home countries before they apply for a "Z" visa. Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison, R-Texas, is seeking a vote on a similar amendment to require those touchbacks to occur within two years.
Burr said Graham's touchback provision would allow illegal workers to have a provisional visa while background checks are being conducted. "I believe the provisional period can be whatever length of time it takes to fully vet all these people that they are who they say they are. Does their employment record check out? Does their law enforcement record check out? It doesn't entitle them to anything except the ability to apply" for a Z visa, he said....
Senate Judiciary Immigration Subcommittee Chairman Edward Kennedy, D-Mass., said Thursday he now expects the first cloture vote on the immigration bill to occur Tuesday. Depending on how the amendment process develops, the immigration debate could spill into the weekend before the July Fourth recess. Several Republicans who avidly object to the bill have vowed to use every procedural tactic available to them to stop the bill from moving forward, which could slow the debate, but not foreclose final passage.
Touchback requirement? Hey, Lindsey, touch THIS!
Introduce a bill to enforce existing law. If they can’t do this then there is no insurance that any other law will be enforced. It’s all talk or like you said “lipstick” on a clown.
I have a question for Burr, Graham and Matinez. If you can send them home before they can get you z viza, why can’t you deport them? We keep hearing we can’t send them all home, and we are being unrealistic, well which is it? How is send them home different from deport them, and if you are going to send them home, why not make them stay there, and get to the back of the line?
Since they have ignored enforcement laws...for years. They will merely ignore any new ones in this bill. What ticks me off is that the ‘triggers’ are for citizenship. Most of these people will not become citizens. They don’t have to. They can not be deported and will enjoy all the rights and benefits of American citizens-what a deal.
Been lurking for years but finally got the nerve to post for the first time. I’ve been avidly following the threads on immigration and the question about enforcing the laws keeps coming up. I know we already have laws on the books but I can’t figure out who is responsible for enforcement. Does congress have authority to do this?
Send it out to your e-mail contacts and family not on freerepublic to get them involved too, let them know a few of the important, ugly points against the amnesty bill and ask them to call their Senators.
Since embassies are considered "foreign soil" even in the U.S., the touch back provision doesn't mean anyone has to actually go to their country by leaving the states.
The government has shown again and again that it is not interested in enforcing even the laws we currently have if that inconveniences the "open borders" businesses who use illegal cheap labor.
This is just more window dressing to try to hoodwink the American people into granting amnesty to the tens of millions of illegals.
Once these traitors manage to get that amnesty they want into the net and onto the boat, you can forget about any "enforcement" measures. The government won't do it, and "open borders" businesses don't want it. They're going to need millions more dirt cheap illegals in about 10 years, anyway. Reliance on dirt cheap illegals is like a heroin addiction for these "open borders" businesses.
Burr said he wants the new touchback provision in Graham's amendment to require all illegal immigrants in the country to return to their home countries before they apply for a "Z" visa. Burr said Graham's touchback provision would allow illegal workers to have a provisional visa while background checks are being conducted. "I believe the provisional period can be whatever length of time it takes to fully vet all these people that they are who they say they are. Does their employment record check out? Does their law enforcement record check out? It doesn't entitle them to anything except the ability to apply" for a Z visa, he said
But the government is simply incapable of doing meaningful "background checks" on these people. It doesn't matter how long you give them. These people are foreign citizens. How is the US government going to do "background checks" on these people? We don't have the information or resources necessary to check anything very meaningful, and we don't have the ability to detect fraudulent affidavits or other documents submitted or as to whether people are even using their real names.
Anything to fool the gullible. When it gets into conference Teddy and his good buddy Trent will remove anything that even resembes a requirement that illegals leave their home let alone the country.
Enforcement of laws = Executive Branch.
Oops, make that Lack of enforcement.
I thought the number of amendments was already set in a bid to get moving on cloture?
So it’s ok to offer an amendment that makes it more likely to pass, but an amendment that would make it harder is not ok?
This whole thing SUCKS! They’re gonna find a way to shove it down our throats EVEN IF NINETY NINE PERCENT OF AMERICANS ARE AGAINST IT!
Remember this, traitors in DC:
PAYBACK’S A BITCH!
Since embassies are considered "foreign soil" even in the U.S., the touch back provision doesn't mean anyone has to actually go to their country by leaving the states, they just go to their nearest embassy.
The executive branch is SUPPOSED to enforce the laws. That is what the Justice Department and the Department of Homeland Security are SUPPOSED to be doing. Congress makes the laws and provides the executive branch with the funding, courtesy of the taxpayers, it is SUPPOSED to use to enforce the laws. None of this is happening with our immigration law. But look what happens to you if you don’t pay your taxes, and you’re not Marion Berry. This is why so many people are upset about the illegal immigration situation.
ping
If your Senator votes "yes" on cloture and then "no" on the bill then they are for this bill!!!!! Don't let them lie to you come re-election time!
Good job 3AngelaD
I was going to say,
Dress a pig up any way you care to and still it is a pig.
Kay Bailey is voting NO on cloture and don’t know why you keep saying otherwise. She announced it formally yesterday — she is voting NO on cloture and NO on the bill.
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.