He will be appearing at an upcoming political function in east Tennessee, where I should have the opportunity to ask him that very question in person.
Posted on 03/08/2002 1:24:33 PM PST by sarcasm
Friday, March 08, 2002 - WASHINGTON - Rep. Tom Tancredo takes credit for thwarting the Bush administration's last effort to offer partial amnesty to thousands of illegal residents, but Thursday the outspoken immigration foe said he may have been outmaneuvered by the White House.
President Bush has struck a deal with the House leadership to place legislation that offers an extension of amnesty on its consent calendar before Bush heads to Mexico for a state visit next week, the Colorado Republican said. That action should ensure quick House passage of legislation that Bush has repeatedly sought from Congress. It would allow an undocumented person to receive legal standing, such as a valid green card, by filing a declaration with the Immigration and Naturalization Service. It presumably also would require the person to have been in the United States by a certain date and have filed a declaration with the INS from an appropriate sponsor, such as a relative or employer, and pay a $1,000 penalty. "The terms are still up in the air," said Dan Stein, executive director of the Federation for American Immigration, a group that has been allied with Tancredo. "We've heard to the effect that the president wants something to bring down to Mexico." The initial Bush proposal, designed exclusively for Mexicans, once was high on the president's legislative wish list, but it was delayed after the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11. However, as the president noted Wednesday in a speech to the Hispanic Chamber of Commerce, he now is pushing for the extension of the amnesty program known by the section of immigration law that covers it, Section 245I. The president hailed it as a way to reunite family, separated by the border. "If you believe in family values, if you understand the worth of family and the importance of family, let's get 245I out of the United States Congress and give me a chance to sign it," Bush told the chamber members. Tancredo, the head of a congressional caucus on immigration issues and proponent of halting virtually all immigration, said he had blocked a previous attempt by Bush to push an extension of the amnesty program through the House. But this time, he said House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert, R-Ill., had agreed to place the issue on the suspension, or consent, calendar, making it difficult to defeat the proposal. The Senate might be more favorable to the bill than the House, expanding the numbers of individuals who can apply, Tancredo said.
Nah, you probably scared him so much that Gekas got on the phone to swap a vote with someone who was originally going to vote no but ended up voting yes in exchange. We've been had here.
Arizona, Shadegg, Hayworth, Kyle and Flake were against. Ed Pastor and J. Kolbe were FOR.
I'm going to recheck, but this is a border state and Phoenix has enough problems on a local level.
Every guy deployed to Afghanistan should know what just got done to them. Send them the list.
The staffer that you spoke with was lying. Flat out lying. We are now routinely lied to by our "representatives". In this particular case, 245i does only one thing: it DONATES United States citizenship to numerous more millions of illegal invaders into our land. It has NOTHING to do with people "who enterend legally" or who the "INS did not process in time". Thanks for letting us hear one of the lies that our "Representatives" are slinging. You might want to post this Congressman's name.
This is an important point to consider for those many people who "support legal immigration but oppose illegal immigration". These people do not realize just how slippery and dishonest our politicians (of both parties) are. Notice how the Affirmative Action folks, in response to court decisions, laws, and public opinion, relabeled "racial quotas" as something more innocuous: as "goals", "objectives", or "guidelines", or simply used other methods to achieve the same ends (such as "race norming", or getting rid of SAT and other standardized tests, or giving more weight to inflated school grades and other less objective criteria). In other words, the policy continues on, impervious to law, democracy, or public opinion.
So also with immigration. Do opinion polls show more people opposed to illegal immigration than to legal immigration? Fine. The open borders crowd will simply relabel the illegal immigrants as something else - undocumented migrants, guest workers, whatever - and legalize their presence in this country. You oppose illegal immigrants but "support" legal immigration? Hey presto! *poof* All of those "illegals" are now legal. Where's your support of "legal immigration" now? Once enough people wise up to these games, they will realize the futility of trying to be moderate and "reasonable" on the immigration issue; until then, they will be duped by salami tactics and deception of the most blatant kind.
TWO DEAD TERRORISTS are APPROVED FOR STUDENT VISAS> oH MY GOD, AND THEY JUST VOTED to keep letting them in, and INS will handle it oh so well.
He will be appearing at an upcoming political function in east Tennessee, where I should have the opportunity to ask him that very question in person.
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.