You guys got any info on this?
Posted on 07/01/2003 3:46:42 PM PDT by TLBSHOW
by Rush Limbaugh
One of the conspiracy theories evolving out there has George W. Bush and Tom DeLay working together, while appearing to be at odds, to kill certain legislation conservatives don't like. The prescription drug bill would be a prime example.
Bush gets the opportunity to say publicly that he's for it, and gets the credit from Democrats for trying, but ultimately it doesn't happen. The close vote in the House of Representatives on their version of the prescription drug bill had no wiggle room in there, but there's all kinds of wiggle room in the Senate. So whatever the conference committee between the House and Senate produces, if it's not almost exactly what the House came up with in the first place, the House could vote it down, meaning there would be no prescription drug benefit added to Medicare at all.
Conservatives win when the votes are counted on the legislation, and Bush wins too, because he's been all over the map demanding it. There's not a person in this country who does not know that George W. Bush wants this prescription drug benefit on his desk now and wants to sign it. This is by no means, a slam-dunk, but it's a theory that more and more people are glomming onto. This is either a very fortunate accident or it's one of the most clever bits of maneuvering and strategery that we have seen yet.
I discuss the ins and outs of this in a little further detail in the audio link below, but I do issue this warning.
Some of you out there may be assigning mythic proportions to this man, George W. Bush, much like the liberals did with Bill Clinton, assuming he's doing everything for a reason, and that in the end, he's always going to snooker the other side.
I'd be a little careful about that, folks. I don't necessarily believe that there is any strategery going on here. If this bill dies, it won't be because of a secret plan.
It will be because of principled conservatives in the House of Representatives, conservatives like Rep. Mike Pence of Indiana, who went to the White House and told the president in person that he could not and would not support this bill.
You guys got any info on this?
Traditionally, our apprehensions have always steadily declined througout the summer. However, the total apprehensions for each month have been lower compared to the same months last year. Ever since the government installed RVS cameras along the border, load vehicles attempting to drive across our border is a thing of the past. We have recieved more equipment, more agents and more vehicles. We have several different types of special operations going on. For all these reasons and more, many of the smugglers in our area have moved east into Yuma's Sector. Last I heard Yuma was losing 200 load vehicles a month. Obviously, they need the kind of attention that El Centro Sector received. I know Yuma and all the other Sectors will get the help they need, at least under this administration.
If the government would overhaul welfare, make welfare recipients work these low paying jobs that 'no one' will take, illegals may think twice about coming here. After all, if there are no jobs and no handouts, why would they come?
Considering the push for Homeland Security, which technically *should* help control the numbers, my answer would be no.
But, has any President in recent memory ever had a reduction in the number of illegals? I'm curious.
What is the group, Texans for Immigration Reform, doing to publicize all this? It sounds dumb, but you should send your story to an investigative journalist who has some teeth. Bill O can be silly and trite sometimes, but he has a HUGE issue with the borders. He may bite on this one if you send him a well-thought out email with actual proof of fraud.
You must be joking. Open borders is not one of my main concerns, but I didn't think there was a person in the nation who believed there are less illegals now than in 2000.
I shold have read further before my previous post. So your contention is based on anecdotal data? By your logic, the next Ice Age is upon us here in Virginia...
According to the INS website, illegal immigrants grew by 350,000 per year in the 1990s to a total of 7 million in 2000. You can click here to find that data.
Although I'm unable to source this, I read that as of 2003 the INS believes there are 8.5 million illegals in the US. And I suspect most others join me in believing these numbers are vastly understated.
Evidently not.
has any President in recent memory ever had a reduction in the number of illegals? I'm curiousAgreed.
No. I've always taken the position that this has been a bipartisan failure of both parties and the last four Presidents, since the Reagan Amnesty of '86. Clinton and the Democrats got the first of the Section 245(i) Amnesties passed, and then after '94, the GOP Congress renewed it two or three times. About a million employer-sponsored Illegals got "regularized" through this process, and several hundred thousand legal immigrant candidates were kept out of the country as a result, to comply with the annual immigration caps.
Yes, I am.
It doesn't matter where you live; if you can't see GW's pandering to the Hispanics you are either blind or extremely naive.
The problem is that both political parties benefit from mass immigration.
The Democrats get votes, the Republicans get money from corporations who need cheap labor.
Yeah, he should learn to be a cheerleader for the Bush and the leftist programs he pushes. The man just can't learn to adapt to liberals in Republican clothes. Shame on him.
It's my understanding that post-9/11, Illegals already established stateside didn't return home so often, requiring less return trips and exposure to apprehension, which would account for at lest part of the decrease. In any event, over 900,000 Illegals were apprehended on entry or within 72 hours of it between October 2001 and October 2002 (see chart).
LENGTH OF TIME IN THE UNITED STATES
- 865,399 (81.5%) of the aliens apprehended were apprehended at entry into the United States.
- 38,114 (3.6%) of the aliens apprehended were apprehended within 72 hours of entry into the United States.
- 21,774 (2.1%) of the aliens apprehended were apprehended after 72 hours and within 30 days of entry into the United States.
- 44,454 (4.2%) of the aliens apprehended were apprehended after 30 days and within 1 year of entry into the United States.
- 92,547 (8.6%) of the aliens apprehended were apprehended after 1 year of entry into the United States.
Given the drop off between apprehension of Illegals on entry (over 80% of the total), and subsequent apprehensions, the overall picture shows that once Illegals get past the border, their chances of apprehension fade toward zero. We learned under Clinton's "Operation Gatekeeper" that heightened border security alone can't solve the problem.
I've seen estimates of the proportion of apprehensions to successful border crossings at anywhere between one to two to one to five. That means that for the 900,000 apprehensions at the border, there were somewhere between 1,8 million and 4.5 million successful crossings of our borders in FY 2002. Even assuming a large number of repeat crossings, what we see is that there are still a substantial number of first-time Illegals entering the country.
The crucial understanding of apprehensions, as related to the overall population of Illegals currently established in the United States, is that apprehensions are a rough indicator of the rate of growth of the Illegal population living here. In other words, when we stipulate no decrease in the efficiency of border security, a reduction in apprehensions does not indicate a reduction in the number of Illegals living in the United States, it means, at best, that the growth rate of their population has slowed.
A slower growth rate is still a growth rate, and growth means "more," as in "there are more Illegals in the United States now than there were in January of 2001."
We should note that there have been no contrary Census, INS, or Homeland Security estimates that the number of Illegals in the United States has been in any way reduced since the Inauguration of President Bush. There won't be, without substantial deportations from the American Interior.
I have not been to the restaurant, but will keep it in mind for future reference. I have been to the ballpark. Have fun!
Oh, are you one of those who interchanges the term "Hispanic" with "illegal"? I see your problem.
I am neither naive or blind.
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.