Posted on 06/13/2007 6:57:12 AM PDT by philman_36
This morning on Fox and Friends there was made mention that much stricter fines are in the immigration reform bill. While this is true many folks may not know about a few words that follow the language about the tougher fines. Those words make a travesty of any "fines" as they can be waved and the employer could walk away owing nothing in penalties.
Here are the words I've got a problem with...
So while we're being told that "the penalties are tougher" we aren't being told that under some circumstances employers can face reduced or even no fine whatsoever.
At this point of time in our history America can't afford our officials not being completely truthful to us and not stating that the possibility exists for employers to potentially be let off the hook completely is simply unacceptable.
The Los Angeles Unified School District has an annual budget of over 6 billion dollars.
LAUSD has over 3/4 of a million students.
Of these, 314,641 students were classified as "English learners" in 2006, meaning they were not fluent in English. We may safely infer that these students were most likely immigrants. Of course, they aren't allowed to check for legal residency status.
Let us be generous beyond all hope, and grant that only half of those 314,641 are not entitled to be in this country. That would leave us with 150,000 illegal alien students, or 20% (actual percents are probably over 60%, if you include those who have "gained fluency"). That means that illegal aliens are costing the LAUSD, and therefore California's citizens, $1.2 BILLION DOLLARS every year. Minimum. And that's just for education in one major metro area.
“Illegal” means “unlawful”, not “a sick national bird”.
“So for a $2,000 campaign contribution you can get $100,000 in fines waived.... Not a bad investment.
It’s so easy to figure out even a caveman can do it! LOL”
ROTFLMAO
I don’t trust either the govt or the shadow govt. (sarcasm tag) They think we are naive bigots. hah! If we were that naive, we’d still be sending donations to the RNC.
:-)
The problem is that no matter how badly President Bush wants his legacy to include comprehensive immigration reform (a combination of border security and bring illegal workers out of the shadows w/legal status) there is no way that he can overcome the following FACTS about this administration's failure to enforce immigration laws. The President has lost our trust at is pertains to the immigration issue. It will not be regained during his presidency. And it doesn't help him at all to belittle and attempt to marginalize those who are speaking out on this issue.
Fix the following by actually enforcing the laws. Secure the borders. And then a future president may be able to come back to the people and convince us to support some sort of guest worker program and potential legal status for those immigrants who here illegally.
(Stats from the DHS 2004 Yearbook of Immigration Statistics, Analysis is mine.)Employer Investigation Efforts of U.S. Immigration Authorities:
Fiscal Year Worksite Arrests Notices of Intent to Fine 1993 7,630 1,302 1994 7,554 1,063 1995 10,014 1,056 1996 14,164 1,019 1997 17,554 865 1998 13,914 1,023 1999 2,849 417 2000 953 178 2001 735 100 2002 485 53 2003 445 162 2004 159 3 The average annual worksite arrests under Clinton was 9,329 arrests. The average annual worksite arrests under President Bush is 456. This is a 95 percent reduction in average annual worksite arrests under President Bush.
The average annual notices of intent to fine employers of illegal aliens under Clinton was 865. The average under President Bush is 79.5. This is a 90 percent reduction in average annual notices of intent to fine employers of illegal aliens.
And then there is 2004 where, under President Bush, only 3 notices of intent to fine employers of illegal aliens were done. 3!! But that was President Bush's worst year. Let's compare best years then.
Under Clinton his best year for Worksite Arrests was 1997 with 17,554 reported. President Bush's best year was 2001 with 735 worksite arrests reported. This is a 99.7 percent reduction in worksite arrests under President Bush when comparing best years.
Clinton Presidency, Total Aliens Expelled:
1993 1,285,952
1994 1,074,781
1995 1,364,688
1996 1,643,108
1997 1,555,116
1998 1,743,273
1999 1,755,754
2000 1,861,933
Total over 8 years: 12,284,605
Average Annual Total Aliens Expelled: 1,535,575Bush Presidency, Total Aliens Expelled:
2001 1,432,061
2002 1,084,661
2003 1,076,483
2004 1,238,319
Total over 4 years: 4,831,524
Average Annual Total Aliens Expelled: 1,207,881The average annual total of aliens expelled under President Bush is 327,694 LESS than the average under President Clinton. That is a 21.3 percent reduction in aliens expelled compared between Clinton and President Bush.
Deportable Aliens located in non-border sectors (interior enforcement):
Clinton presidency, last four years:
1997 44,246
1998 39,096
1999 42,010
2000 32,759
Total: 158,111Bush presidency, first four years:
2001 30,496
2002 25,501
2003 26,492
2004 21,113
Total: 103,602Total deportable aliens located in interior sectors during the first four years of the Bush presidency represents a 34.4 percent drop compared to the previous four years - the last four years of the Clinton presidency.
Deportable Aliens Located:
Clinton Presidency first four years:
1993 1,327,261
1994 1,094,719
1995 1,394,554
1996 1,649,986
Total: 5,466,520Clinton Presidency last four years:
1997 1,536,520
1998 1,679,439
1999 1,714,035
2000 1,814,729
Total: 6,744,723Bush Presidency first four years:
2001 1,387,486
2002 1,062,279
2003 1,046,422
2004 1,241,089
Total: 4,737,276Total deportable aliens located dropped by 29.7 percent in the first four years of the Bush Presidency compared to the previous four years - the last four years of the Clinton Presidency.
Sources: DHS Yearbook of Statistics 2004 and other DHS and INS sources.
Do you get the feeling that we no longer trust the Bush White House to do what’s best for America with regards to border security and illegal immigration?
Good. We don’t.
And WHY, just why, hasn't the government been penalizing employers who have been hiring illegals all along?
What's the reason for that oversight?
Or show some goodwill -- show us that the enforcement part will work before the other parts of the bill are brought forward. What is the hurry? Don't you have time to prove the governments word is good on this issue? It hasn't been in the past... Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.
You should see this.
To quote F15Eagle
1) BUILD THE FENCE
2) DEPORT ALL ILLEGALS
3) FINE / PROSECUTE EMPLOYERS BREAKING THE LAW
4) INCREASE BORDER PATROL
5) CONTINUE LEGAL IMMIGRATION
This is the job we expect you to do. Thank you.
You would do well to read Free Republic than to just post here.
Now go win the war overseas.
Operation Rollback was directed at one company, Wal-Mart and netted 300 of 20+ million illegal aliens.
And this wasn't a fine. It was a settlement (read: blackmail) paid by Wal-Mart to avoid criminal charges.
Does everyone in the employ of the White House lie as much as Bush?
If anyone is Washington cannot enforce the laws already on the books to PREVENT the problems, we will replace them with people who CAN, and WILL.
BTW- Please tell President Bush to cease ALL action on his plan for the SPP. It is UNCONSTITUTIONAL, and the American people do NOT want it.
We don’t need more immigration legislation. The federal government needs to enforce our current laws more forcefully. Creating more immigration legislation will only result in more laws not enforced.
I stood in the pouring rain for four hours in Ohio back in '04 to cast my ballot for your boss. Sometimes I wonder why.
Good Lord, that says it all!
And Mr. Thompson, it is not just money that will be withheld. You won’t have volunteers to stuff envelopes, make yard signs, go door-to-door, man the phone bank and do all the nitty-gritty things that get Republicans elected.
If this bill passed, I promise you, I will not be available to do the aforementioned tasks for any Republican candidate, at any level, be it for a city, county, state or federal office.
LSAggie
Poll: Voters Want Smaller Steps to Immigration Reform With Focus on Enforcement
Rasmussen Reports ^ | June 13, 2007
Wednesday, June 13, 2007
Just 20% of American voters want Congress to try and pass the immigration reform bill that failed in the Senate last week. A Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey found that 51% would like their legislators to “take smaller steps towards reform” while 16% believe they should wait until next year. The survey was conducted on Monday and Tuesday night as the President was publicly attempting to rally support for the legislation.
Sixty-nine percent (69%) of voters would favor an approach that focuses exclusively on “exclusively on securing the border and reducing illegal immigration.” Support for the enforcement only approach comes from 84% of Republicans, 55% of Democrats, and 69% of those not affiliated with either major party.
Overall, just 21% are opposed to the enforcement-only approach.
Just 30% would favor legislation that focused “exclusively on legalizing the status of undocumented workers already living in the United States.” Fifty-seven percent (57%) oppose that strategy, including 63% of Republicans, 52% of Democrats, and 55% of unaffiliated voters.
Fifty-seven percent (57%) favor a proposal giving “all illegal aliens up to three years to leave the United States. After leaving, the illegal aliens would have to get in line and wait their turn for legal entry into the United States.” Support for that concept comes from 67% of Republicans, 49% of Democrats, and 56% of unaffiliated voters.
The Senate immigration reform bill that failed last week was far more popular in Congress than among the American people. It was strongly opposed by a cross-section of the nation’s voters. At the end, just 23% of voters favored the legislation.
Hellooooooooooo White House. The American People DO NOT WANT THIS BILL.
With all due respect, sir, I make this suggestion:
Tell Ted Kennedy, Jon Kyl, John McCain and Mr. Bush to make up a NEW bill. One that would have the following, pertaining to anyone in this country illegally:
1. No more anchor babies
2. No more food stamps
3. No more WIC
4. No more subsidized housing
5. No more free education
6. No more free medical care (except under life threatening circumstances)
7. Penalize employers (who hire illegals) by not only fines, but removal of their business license
8. No one here illegally should be allowed to sue a citizen under any circumstances - therefor, no free legal representation
9. Illegals in jail should pay for their room and board by having them (under guard and ankle bracelets) do the ‘jobs Americans won’t do’ - such as clean up the garbage they left behind at the border)
10. Social Security should report immediately any SS theft, and the thief would be arrested on the spot. SS should work with the government on this problem. IRS sure does!
You take away the ‘freebies’ and they will self deport within one month. Any person from another country that wants to pledge their allegience to our country must do it the legal way. (No ‘cutting in line)
Most of us would endorse and support a bill like that, and we might be able to restore some confidence in the Republican Party.
Thank you for taking the time to read how we feel. This used to be the Land of the Free and the Home of the Brave. We want it back!
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.