Posted on 05/13/2011 7:08:14 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
Edited on 05/13/2011 7:13:36 AM PDT by Admin Moderator. [history]
I
(Excerpt) Read more at nationalreview.com ...
Krauthammer is an idiot. Does he really understand what an amnesty would do to this country?
Any legislation that legalizes the status of those who broke our laws by entering our country illegally and allows them to stay is amnesty. We must not only prevent the Democrats and some moderate Republicans from hijacking the meaning of the word amnesty, but the public must be made aware about the true impact of an amnesty. The Heritage Foundation concluded that the cost of amnesty alone would be $2.6 trillion, just for the entitlement programs. And the number of additional LEGAL immigrants who would join those who were the recipients of amnesty through chain migration, i.e., family reunification, would approach 70 million over a 20-year period, assuming there are only 12 million illegal aliens. We cannot assimilate such numbers. An amnesty would destroy the United States of America with the stroke of a pen.
In 1986 we were told that it was a one-time amnesty, the last one ever. The USG estimated that 1 million would apply. The true number turned out to be 2.7 million and the process was rife with fraud. Imagine if we have three times more illegals than the 11 million the USG estimates this time around. We don't even know how many are here and yet idiots like Krauthammer would support an open-ended policy of blanket amnesty.
Oh, and Charles, you dumb sh*t, securing our borders will not stop the flow of illegals. About 40% of the illegals in the US came here legally and overstayed their visas.
If we had anything close to a truly neutral, fact-finding media in the USA today, Obama and his evil, anti-American administration would be TOAST. This hideous excuse for an administration will do or say ANYTHING to stay in power so they can continue to channel trillions of $ to their special interests. As bad as the Republicans are, they are AMATEURS compared to the neo-fascist/Marxist wannabes currently running the country. We are the ones who will be TOAST if we don’t stop these folks soon. Sadly, too many well-meaning folks still attribute good motives to the left, refuse to see what’s happening in front of their eyes, and drown out whatever left or right says as simply politics. No. These leftists aren’t playing. They are in it for change, and they aren’t your mom and dad’s Democrats—not by a long shot! Krauthammer is mushy on some issues, but he’s balls on here. President Obama is undeniably the worst US president of all time. He’s not even American, regardless of whether or not he was born here.
So I gather you are in favor of the legalization of 11 to 20 million illegal aliens?
Majorities would support a path to legalization if the border was truly secure and illegal immigration was essential eliminated. I believe Krauthammer is correct. That doesn’t mean I support legalizing all the many millions who are currently here, but I think most Americans would support it. Personally? I’d like to see the vast majority deport themselves. The only way to do that is to create a hostile environment here for them. However, I’d support legalization under certain circumstances. The DREAM Act, for example, would have been acceptable to me for the truly hard cases, i.e. children who were brought here very young, are fluent in English, have been here for long times like a decade or more, and have no criminal records beyond their immigration status.
BTW, I don’t believe for an instant that the Democrats or RINOs will secure the border or put reasonably rigorous conditions on those they already intend to amnesty. They certainly don’t intend to restrict amnesty to only the hard cases. Would Americans support legalization in the hypothetical situation where the border was truly secure? Yes, polls support that contention, but note polls don’t say what kind of path to legalization most Americans would accept. There would need to be serious conditions, belief that the illegals truly want to integrate, and trust that our leaders are acting in good faith with Americans.
I disagree. If Americans understood that legalization would not only legalize the status of those already here, but it would mean that they could sponsor another 70 million moire LEGAL immigrants thru chain migration, i.e., family reunification (assuming there are only 11 million illeals here--a low estimate) and that it would cost $2.6 trillion in entitlement benefits alone, they would not support legalization.
I wonder if most Americans know that at least 50% of illegal alien adults lack a high school degree (Pew estimate--the Center for Immigration Studies estimates the number at 61%) or that 40% of the illegal aliens did not enter the US thru the border but legally on visas. If we have an amnesty, it is game, set, and match for this country at the stroke of a pen.
However, I’d support legalization under certain circumstances. The DREAM Act, for example, would have been acceptable to me for the truly hard cases, i.e. children who were brought here very young, are fluent in English, have been here for long times like a decade or more, and have no criminal records beyond their immigration status.
Do you understand what is in the Dream Act? It is really an amnesty bill disguised as some attempt to help some unfortunate "children" up to the age of 35.
Estimating the Impact of the DREAM Act
This Memorandum examines the costs and likely impact of the DREAM Act currently being considered by Congress. The act offers permanent legal status to illegal immigrants up to age 35 who arrived in the United States before age 16 provided they complete two years of college. Under the act, beneficiaries would receive in-state tuition. Given the low income of illegal immigrants, most can be expected to attend state schools, with a cost to taxpayers in the billions of dollars. As both funds and slots are limited at state universities and community colleges, the act may reduce the educational opportunities available to U.S. citizens.
DREAM Act Offers Amnesty to 2.1 Million
Thus the total number of potential amnesty beneficiaries is 2.1 million (assuming no fraud). This does not include 1.4 million siblings and parents of qualifying illegals who may end up receiving a de facto amnesty.
Why do we need to legalize the status of lawbreakers who have committed multiple crimes beyond just entering this country illegally, e.g., ID theft, tax evasion, misrepresentation on empoyment forms, working illegally, etc.? We tried amnesty before. It doesn't work. You just get more of it. Will we be saying this time that it is the last time? What about the third blanket amnesty?
And what are the electoral consequences of legalizing 11 to 20 million people, most of whom are poor and uneducated, and allowing them to bring in 70 million more of their relatives thru family reunification? 53% of immigrant headed households are on welfare. We are already making the Dems the permanent majority party. Demography is destiny.
Immigration, Political Realignment, and the Demise of Republican Political Prospects
There would need to be serious conditions, belief that the illegals truly want to integrate, and trust that our leaders are acting in good faith with Americans.
That really is irrelevant. Either you believe in the Rule of Law or you don't. Immigration to the US is a privilege, not a right.
Conferring rights and privileges upon illegal aliens has a corrosive effect on the Rule of Law, the very foundation of our Republic. It is also a slap in the face to legal immigrants who have followed the rules and obeyed the laws. There are millions of immigrants waiting their turn overseas to enter the U.S. legally and approximately 40 million immigrants living in the U.S., most of whom followed the law. What kind of message does this send to the rest of the world? And what does it say about the value of US citizenship?
Krauthammer is always mushy except when he is proponent of sending US forces on worthless humanitarian efforts. I can’t listen to this pompous Lefty Hawk any longer and between him, Juan, the standard Lefty, NeoCrap Kristol, creepy Chris Wallace/O’Reilly and all WH correspondents FOX has become another statist mouthpiece.
I do understand the DREAM Act. What I meant was I agree with the concept in principle. For truly hard cases as I noted, I’m not opposed to legalization. If the DREAM Act had been written to address just those hard cases AND the border was secure AND our leaders were willing to vigorously enforce immigration law, I wouldn’t have been opposed to it. Of course the DREAM Act wasn’t written in those circumstances, but my point is clear. Most Americans would be willing to compromise on some of the most extreme cases, but we have ZERO faith in our leaders and know they aren’t operating with our best interests in mind.
The DREAM Act wasn’t about illegal adults who intentionally violated our laws. It was written to address the problem of minors who have grown up here and are now Americans in all but legal status. The Democrats and RINOs expanded it to cover far more than the extreme cases. They sold it as being a humanitarian attempt to address the hard cases, but they broadened the requirements so much that it was becoming a de facto amnesty for millions.
I’m pragmatic in that I don’t think we’ll ever get rid of all of the illegals, at least not without turning the US into a police state. I’m humanitarian in that I think we can forgive a small minority of the illegals who were brought here in truly exceptional circumstances. That doesn’t mean I support chain migration, amnesty, unsecured borders, etc. I’m all for the Arizona immigration law and other attempts to deport the vast majority of illegals.
LOL. Then we are no longer talking about the DREAM Act. I have no idea what you mean by "hard cases" or what you mean by a "secure" border or "vigorous" enforcement of our immigration laws. The devil is always in the details. Do you have any notion of how many "hard" cases are out there?
FYI: Of the 1.2 million LEGAL immigrants who are given green cards each year to enter this country, 60% involve change of status, i.e., they are already here under a different status--not on immigrant visas. Once you get here, it is very difficult to deport you. Extreme cases can be adjudcated individually, you don't need blanket, detailed federal laws.
Like so much of what politicians do, the DREAM Act was meant to fool and deceive with an Orwellian use of language to obtain a piecemeal amnesty. Hatch was part of the cabal that was behind it. The Dream Act was included lock, stock and barrel (and called as such) in the 2007 McCain-Kennedy amnesty bill. Polls show that Americans are about 50-50 on the issue, which is testimony to how effective the pro-amensty types have been in deceiving the public.
The Dems always use "the children" to garner sympathy. Of course, if we legalize the status of college students or those who serve in the military (contrary to some who think otherwise, the military does not accept illegal aliens into the military now), they can sponsor their illegal alien parents, siblings, grandparents, etc. once they attain the age of 21.
What about "the US children" of US parents who are incarcerated? Should we allow the parents to be freed from jail so they can help support their children? Aren't these children also victims due to the sins of their parents? Sorry, but the children of illegals have benefitted from being in the US, educated at US taxpayer expense, and more than likely, receiving other benefits such as free medical care. We are bankrupt. There are literally billions of people who want to come here. Where do we draw the line?
I’m pragmatic in that I don’t think we’ll ever get rid of all of the illegals, at least not without turning the US into a police state. I’m humanitarian in that I think we can forgive a small minority of the illegals who were brought here in truly exceptional circumstances. That doesn’t mean I support chain migration, amnesty, unsecured borders, etc. I’m all for the Arizona immigration law and other attempts to deport the vast majority of illegals.
The proponents of amnesty are wont to create the false choice between a blanket amnesty and mass deportation of 12 to 20 million illegal aliens. In reality, we have other choices and alternatives that don’t reward people who have broken our laws with the right to stay and work here and an eventual path to citizenship. The 12 to 20 million illegal aliens did not enter this country overnight and they will not leave overnight. Attrition through enforcement works. We have empirical data from Georgia, Oklahoma, and Arizona proving that it does. During the 2006 amnesty debate, the Center for Immigration Studies (CIS) commissioned a Zogby poll offering respondents not the false choice between mass deportation or amnesty (a word CIS did not use in the survey), but rather a three-way choice between mass deportation, earned legalization, and attrition — and attrition was preferred two-to-one over legalization.
I work on the immigration issue every day as part of a grassroots organization that lobbies on the Hill and in Richmond. I am attuned to the deception and demogoguery used by the other side. The Dream Act is going to be used as part of the 2012 campaign to paint the GOP as heartless obstructionists and to divide Republicans, many of whom think like you do. It is really the camel's nose under the tent. The push for another amnesty will continue. In the meantime, legal immigration policies translate into what amounts to an amnesty every 10 years. Amnesty would just hasten the process of destroying this country. The 1965 Immigration Act changed the demography of this country forever and will eventually lead to its demise.
The U.S. adds one international migrant (net) every 36 seconds. Immigrants account for one in 8 U.S. residents, the highest level in more than 80 years. In 1970 it was one in 21; in 1980 it was one in 16; and in 1990 it was one in 13. In a decade, it will be one in 7, the highest it has been in our history. And by 2050, one in 5 residents of the U.S. will be foreign-born. Currently, 1.6 million legal and illegal immigrants settle in the country each year; 350,000 immigrants leave each year, resulting in a net immigration of 1.25 million.
Since 1970, the U.S. population has increased from 203 million to 310 million, i.e., over 100 million. In the next 40 years, the population will increase by 130 million to 440 million. Three-quarters of the increase in our population since 1970 and the projected increase will be the result of immigration. The U.S., the world’s third most populous nation, has the highest annual rate of population growth of any developed country in the world, i.e., 0.977 percent (2010 estimate), principally due to immigration.
Like you wrote, the devil is indeed in the details. I agree a lot of it comes down to outright deception. The political class, for whatever reason, wants amnesty. The politicians love to concentrate their rhetoric on the hard cases but then throw in everything including the proverbial kitchen sink when they write the bills. I also know that “securing the border” is a complete scam. How exactly do they decide when it’s secure, let the president certify it? Nevertheless, I’d really like to help those small numbers that were brought here as young children, have lived here a long time since, and are American in all but immigration status.
BTW, I’m not a big fan of our current legal immigration programs either. We should be focused on bringing the right kinds of people here, people who want to learn the language, history, and culture to become real Americans and people who have skills that benefit the country.
Advocate a pro-immigrant policy of low immigration. Conservative Republicans need to provide the American people with their own comprehensive immigration reform plan, i.e., give people a reason to vote FOR something rather than just attack the other side’s proposals. Such a plan should contain the following elements:
Formulate a merit based immigration system that brings in the skills and talents to keep us competitive in the global economy;
Reduce immigration levels based on need more closely approximating 300,000 a year;
Eliminate extended chain migration, i.e., family reunification, limiting it to the nuclear family;
Secure the border;
Enforce existing immigration laws to reduce the current illegal alien population and limit future illegal immigration, i.e., attrition thru enforcement. Enforcement would include: (1) ending the job magnet; (2) increasing coordination at the federal level by eliminating barriers to information sharing among agencies; (3) leveraging state and local enforcement resources; (4) fully implementing the US-VISIT Program to track and deport visa overstays; and (5) make mandatory and improve such programs as E-Verify and 287 [g] authority to assist employers and law enforcement in identifying illegal aliens;
Eliminate birthright citizenship;
Ensure that anyone who enters this nation illegally is not rewarded by being permitted to stay and work here; i.e., no amnesty;
Streamline the processing and adjudication of immigration cases;
Promote pro-immigrant measures that help newcomers assimilate and embrace the values and principles of our Founders and the Constitution.
Maybe he doesn't. But if we do it for 12 million or 20 million, whatever the number here, why stop? Let's offer citizenship to all the Americas too! Maybe the whole of humanity could become Americans.
I was only writing in favor of a path to citizenship for hard cases, not for our 12, 24, or 36 million uninvited guests. I also oppose LEGAL immigration outside of what is healthy for the country. A lot of folks keep saying they are in favor of legal immigration, but what if our politicians passed laws permitting up to 100 million legal immigrants per year? We certainly cannot afford to bring the world’s destitute here in those numbers, because we cannot afford the social welfare state we have now. I didn’t see anything in kabar’s list that I oppose.
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.
