Posted on 01/27/2005 7:15:50 PM PST by neverdem
WASHINGTON, Jan. 26 - The battle within the Republican Party over immigration policy was joined Wednesday as President Bush vigorously promoted his proposal for a guest worker program and conservatives in Congress introduced an alternative proposal to tighten immigration restrictions.
At a news conference, President Bush said again that he considered his guest worker proposal "a priority" even though Senate Republicans left it off their list of top goals. "A program that enables people to come into our country in a legal way to work for a period of time, for jobs that Americans won't do, will help make it easier for us to secure our borders," Mr. Bush said, adding: "I know there is a compassionate, humane way to deal with this issue. I want to remind people that family values do not end at the Rio Grande border."
Party conservatives, however, have strenuously opposed a guest worker plan since Mr. Bush introduced the idea in 2001, even staging a losing revolt over its inclusion in the party platform at the 2004 Republican convention. Many conservatives call the president's ideas "amnesty" - a term Mr. Bush disputes - because his plan includes ways for currently illegal immigrants to obtain temporary worker permits.
On Wednesday afternoon, Representative F. James Sensenbrenner Jr., the Wisconsin Republican who is chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, again introduced a measure to block illegal immigrants from obtaining driver's licenses.
At a news conference, he said the committee would not consider other immigration proposals, implicitly including the president's, until his own measure passed. A similar measure was removed from a bill to enact the recommendations of the 9/11 Commission last year. Senator Jon Kyl, Republican of Arizona, is expected to introduce a driver's license restriction this year.
Mr. Sensenbrenner said his bill was primarily directed at border security, distinguishing it from other changes in immigration policy. "Immigrants are not terrorists, except a few of them," he said. "The legislation that was introduced today is designed to get the bad apples out of the barrel before the barrel was spoiled."
He said a group of House Republicans had written a letter to Mr. Bush urging him to provide full financing for provisions in last year's antiterrorism bill doubling the number of border patrol agents and tripling the number of beds for detaining illegal immigrants over the next five years. The Department of Homeland Security said recently that it was planning a smaller increase in financing, drawing the ire of advocates of tighter immigration laws.
Asked about the president's proposal, Mr. Sensenbrenner said his committee was "going to be plenty busy with other priorities, a lot of which are the priorities of the White House."
In an interview, Representative Chris Cannon, a Utah Republican who supports the president's plan, said a guest worker program would not amount to an amnesty because it would include a monetary penalty for currently illegal immigrants. "The people who want to kick them all out are not reasonable people," he said.
But Representative Tom Tancredo, Republican of Colorado and chairman of the Congressional immigration caucus, vowed to defeat any program that in his view would reward lawbreakers, even questioning the president's motives. "Could it be just the corporate interests, the money interests that rely so heavily on cheap labor?" he asked
If a man is illegal today and becomes legal tomorrow (or vise-a-versa) does he materially change? Does he automatically become a better driver. Does he change religions, eating habits, clothing, music.....?
I tend to agree, at least about allowing immigrants who are coming from Islamic/terrorist sponsoring states.
They might well be good people, but it's just too risky right now. Folks are forgetting we're at war!
>>Look at the rust belt states where factories sit empty and the population has shrunk.<<
Have you neard about NAFTA yet? That was the result.
We can get along fine without ANY immigration from the middle East ..Cut it off %100 for at least 5 years and then rethink down the road . Would we allow immigration from Japan during WW2 ? Same situation as I see it .
>>. Hospitals don't go out of business because they have too many patients, they go out of business when they have too few.<<
The hospitals on the border are going BANKRUPT because the FEDS are not paying the full costs of treating the ill illegals in the ER rooms.
Massive anarchic illegal immigration = healthy economy?
Is that why California has been an economic powerhouse of late, with the State coffers overflowing?
Do you have a scintilla of evidence to support your claim, save for what's good for the National Restaurant Association is good for America?
Arizona is the temporary home of 500,000 illegal aliens. They cost Arizona taxpayers over $1 billion annually in services for schools, medical care, welfare anchor babies, loss of tax base and prisons.
http://www.federalobserver.com/archive.php?aid=8871
I quoted the part saying the report was not proven true. Here, I'll repost the entire paragraph.
"A second U.S. official said the report is being investigated, but said it could not be determined whether the group of Chechens actually entered the country, as the intelligence source reported. "We don't know whether or not that report is true," this official said. "
You are really not prepared to discuss immigration issues. Why don't you lurk these threads for a few weeks before trying to enter the discussions.
You could hit this boyorod guy in the head with a combat loaded tank, and he either wouldn't get it, or would just refuse to acknowledge it.
"You are really not prepared to discuss immigration issues. Why don't you lurk these threads for a few weeks before trying to enter the discussions."
Thanks for the advice.
I am getting curious as to just who is paying him to wear the blinders.
Why don't you do us a favor and lurk for a while. All you do is hijack these threads and are convincing nobody that Bush's scheme is good for the country. Most of us know better.
I am sorry, but this guy is a commie leftist moron, or just a freak. I don't like getting personal here, but I've had enough of his bull shit. Excuse my french.
The answer is found here.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode08/usc_sup_01_8_10_12_20_II.html
 |
US CODE COLLECTION |  |
| collection home | search | donate |
| TITLE 8 > CHAPTER 12 > SUBCHAPTER II | |
|
SUBCHAPTER II—IMMIGRATION |
|
| Release date: 2004-02-11 | |
|
Search this title: Notes Your comments |
| credits | about us | send email |
"A second U.S. official said the report is being investigated, but said it could not be determined whether the group of Chechens actually entered the country, as the intelligence source reported. "We don't know whether or not that report is true," this official said. "
Thats all you needed to hear, eh?
Get real mon
I just feel that we're completely hypocritical on this issue, because we preach that the illegals drain our system, and are law breakers, but are too afraid to do anything about it. I guess the reason I like the ideas put forth by President Bush is that he's actually confronting an issue which it seems has not been dealt with in at least twenty years. He may not be taking the best stand, but at least he's TAKING one.
I feel we have so many laws which "thwart" illegal immigration, but they still come in by the thousands. If the government really cared, these laws would be enforced, but they're not. So if the government is too afraid to enforce its laws, then at least iron out a way that they are WILLING to deal with this problem. Maybe Bush's plan will be modified to protect everyone's interests. Who knows? But by simply raising the issue, I think he will bring enough attention to it one way or the other, where the people will demand a change.
Maybe the government can develop a program which would close, militarize and strengthen the border, and let in immigrants on a strictly legal basis, the way it was done for years. Maybe simply open a few more seats for average working Mexicans who want to feed their families. Many of them could potentially contribute a lot here; I know of Mexican workers who ARE taxed and whose salaries top those of teachers and other respected professions. These people deserve to be here more than the (unsure of an exact number) of people on the welfare rolls draining the system in that respect, who haven't even opened up to a Classified page in 17 and a half years.
I just feel one way or the other, something needs to be done, and our policy needs to become more clearly defined. I admittedly have a bias toward the Mexican workers because I've witnessed firsthand their work ethic and determination to support their family, which I think is truly lacking among Americans. It's not their fault their government is so corrupt ;)
With your logic - just let illegals and possible terrorists in and we can die rich!
As our old pal Bill Clinton used to say, "I feel your pain". California is the not-so-temporary home of several million illegal aliens. They cost California taxpayers an estimated 9 billion annually for the same services you list.
The person who should be paying the bills is Senor Vicente Fox, who thinks that his outcasts are the responsibility of American taxpayers.
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.