Posted on 02/01/2006 12:04:11 PM PST by Icelander
Advocates on both sides of the immigration debate said President Bush missed an opportunity in his State of the Union address Tuesday night to direct Congress on immigration reform, weeks before Senate lawmakers begin to tackle the divisive issue.
Breezing by the issue in just a few sentences, Bush endorsed a program that would allow foreigners to work temporarily in this country, saying the nation needs orderly and secure borders but that the economy couldn't function without immigrants.
His brief mention drew a disappointed rebuke from Rep. Tom Tancredo, R-Colo., who has led an effort to tighten the nation's borders and enforce immigration laws.
Bush could have "broken the Washington stalemate and secured the most significant immigration reform in a decade," Tancredo said.
Angela Kelley, deputy director of the pro-immigrant National Immigration Forum, also said Bush fell short. "It's really important for him to step up and provide some leadership on this issue," she said.
Senators are expected to take up immigration legislation in the coming weeks.
Immigration has featured heavily in Bush's State of the Union speeches in past years. But with his own party deeply divided over the issue, he devoted just over a paragraph to the subject Tuesday.
Still several lawmakers praised Bush.
Rep. Chris Cannon, R-Utah, said he was pleased Bush "called for an immigration system that deals with the influx of illegal immigrants realistically. Now it's time for both the House and the Senate to rise to the president's challenge and enact meaningful, comprehensive immigration reform."
How to deal with the estimated 11 million illegal immigrants in the country now _ and the thousands crossing the border each year _ has divided Congress and is becoming an increasingly volatile issue at the state and local level.
Even non-border states are wrestling with how to provide government services, such as health care, to illegal immigrants and whether to restrict drivers' licenses and withhold benefits to illegal workers.
Jennifer Allen, who directs the Border Action Network, based in Tucson, Ariz., said immigrants she works with are watching anxiously as Congress talks about building walls at the Mexican border and increasing the penalties for being in the country illegally.
She and other advocates are loudly calling for Congress to fix the nation's troubled immigration system.
This summer, Democratic Govs. Bill Richardson of New Mexico and Janet Napolitano, of Arizona declared a state of emergency in their border counties to free up money for immigration-related needs.
Richardson said Bush's brief mention in the State of the Union was a signal the White House would not make it a major issue in the coming months.
"The message I received is that on immigration, we're going to leave the burden on the states like New Mexico and Arizona, and it's sort of like 'You're on your own,'" Richardson said.
In the Senate, Jon Kyl, R-Ariz., John Cornyn, R-Texas, and John McCain, R-Ariz., and Edward Kennedy, D-Mass., have proposed programs that regulate when and how immigrants can come to the U.S.
Kyl said Tuesday that he would have liked to hear more from Bush about immigration, but he was glad "the key elements were there" in his speech.
"It is a very serious problem for Arizona," Kyl said. "I think everyone in the Senate wants to get something done ... whether the president mentions it or not."
They can always hire legal residents, citizens. The only reason that those "farmers" are now dependent upon illegal aliens is because they're comfortable with the process.
If it comes down to them not being able to plant and harvest if they continue to break the laws, they'll be hiring citizens and right quickly. Do whatever it takes. I'm familiar with agricultural and ranching lands and communities and there are people who will do the work if the work is available and the wages are paid.
They will just have to start running a tighter ship, accept that legitimacy is preferable to illigitimacy and change their ways.
And line up workers a year before, offer incentives. Might be a rough change at first but isn't everything.
The reasoning that is based upon the maintaining of bad behavior because it's what works and what is easiest makes the bad behavior preferable is just wrong.
I read Tom's....good plan. : )
BTW, 'incrementalism' is 'boob-bait for bubbas'...
It surely must be a powerful feeling, as they kept doing it over and over. Apparently they get the same rush from gaining nothing that crack gives to dope heads.
our diversity is our strength.
I'll remember to have that carved on my headstone.....lolololol
Excellent comments! DITTO.
DITTO to that, too!
We headed in the same direction.>>> Oregon is beautiful<<<<
Be sure and stay for our Rain Festival!
It won't work if another 10 million arrive every year, above and beyond what we now have in the country.
Over half of Mexico's population says they'd move to the U.S. if the could, that they "want to". Start a Guest Worker program, and those fifty million or so will show up. All it took to vastly expand the existing illegal alien population in the U.S. at the start of Bush's first term was the mere mention of the word, "amnesty."
No. It's Rita that provided more work than my hubby can handle in our neck of the woods. From what we hear here, NO is filled with illegals doing rebuilding there. There's good pay my nephew told me. He's there working.
No way! That can't be true. That is a job Americans won't do!
I know. Aren't you tired of hearing that expression? It's such a lie.
IIRC, Landrieu was having a cow not too long ago about illegals doing the work. Now, Mitch Landrieu is talking about running for mayor there. Ahhhhh, nepotism, what a glorious thing to behold.
Shucks that ain't nuthin, we have a genuine Urine festival here.
I Kid you not. Golden Showers and all.
I don't know if others have considered this or not, but, I've often thought that the reason that AQ has not made an attack (yet) that brings notice to the access to the country via our Southern border (from Mexico), is because, if/when they did/do, it will force the issue as to Southern border insecurity.
Thus, I do believe that they are "preserving" their access ability using the Southern border of the U.S. by NOT focusing any more interest/concern than is necessary.
However, I regard people -- both in elected office and otherwise -- in our country who denounce the idea of increased Southern border security (among other promiscuities related) as being indulging the problems facing our nation as to security. They actually service the enemy..."a fence won't work" and similar is nonsense but it also seems a suspect statement, in my view. Entirely suspect.
ping
What a pisser.
Evidently Bush has taken to channelling the wit and wisdom of Jimmy Carter. Great minds thinking alike.
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.