Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Tancredo doubts he can block amnesty-extension bill
Denver Post ^ | March 8, 2002 | Bill McAllister

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.


TOPICS: Front Page News; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: freetrade; hughhewitt; immigrantlist; nwo; terrorwar
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 1,261-1,2801,281-1,3001,301-1,320 ... 2,941-2,945 next last
To: Reaganwuzthebest
In 1846, Mexico was a far better place also. For one it hadn't been independent from Spain all that long and was in much better shape than it is now ---you didn't see Mexicans fleeing Mexico when the Spaniards ruled. Mexico seems to be our problem to solve now ---too bad Lee didn't win out and it would already have been solved. I'm not sure the US can begin to fix the problems there, the elites have an awful lot of money now and they're not about to let go of it.
1,281 posted on 03/10/2002 3:25:33 PM PST by FITZ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1274 | View Replies]

To: Reaganwuzthebest
Do you think it would still have been better if Robert E Lee had finished off Mexico in 1846 and made it a US state? What would life be like for us if we had done that?

You didn't ask me specifically, but I cannot resist (putting on my ex-grad student history hat).

First off, I believe the treaty was signed early in 1848, and the actual fighting was over by late 1847. Robert E. Lee was just a junior officer; the generals in command were Taylor in the north and Scott in central Mexico.

Short answer: making all of Mexico part of the USA would have been a bloody disaster. Think Quebec; think Yugoslavia. A bad idea.

1,282 posted on 03/10/2002 3:26:35 PM PST by Vast Buffalo Wing Conspiracy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1274 | View Replies]

To: Semaphore Heathcliffe
Don't be suprised when America becomes unlivable, there isn't a flock to the great white north. Canada, the country we pick on sometimes which has less personal freedom than us as of now, may see a tide of Americans fleeing poverty and chaos. Hard to believe, but it's very possible. And of course the illegals will follow, looking for a better life to work hard, scrub the toilets, and pick the lettuce.
1,283 posted on 03/10/2002 3:28:32 PM PST by Reaganwuzthebest
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1280 | View Replies]

Comment #1,284 Removed by Moderator

To: VA Advogado
Actually, under the Constitution, the states still have the power to regulate immigration into their own jurisdictions. The 14th Amendment chains the states to providing equal protection under the law to everyone within the state's jurisdiction, but nowhere in the original articles or in any amendment was the power to restrict or allow immigration ever delegated to the federal government.

The way the Constitution works, unless a power is specifically listed as a federal power, it ain't one and unless a power is specifically delegated by the states to the federal government or specifically prohibited to the states by the constitution, then any power claimed by a state in its own constitution is a valid state power. See the 10th amendment.

Federal usurpation of the power of the states to limit or even prohibit immigration is unconstitutional. Section 9 of the Legislative article shows that states have this power regarding immigration because the section is placing a temporary condition upon this state power. BTW, that condition lapsed in 1808.

Your pitiful flailings at the supreme law of the land would embarrass any sober person. Fortunately for you, you're seldom sober or you would be too embarrassed to pretend to be an attorney.

1,285 posted on 03/10/2002 3:30:24 PM PST by Twodees
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1157 | View Replies]

To: Reaganwuzthebest
It's looking more and more like they want us to merge with Mexico.

Bush and Fox seem to be working on a plan for merging that doesn't involve the Mexican leaders stepping down from power or the elites releasing their griphold on the wealth. Merging with a separate political entity can't work ---we can't have two presidents and two Congresses. Back in 1846, the merging would have been like it was for Texas, New Mexico, Arizona, California----they came under US rule and were cut off from Mexican rule. This plan now seems to allow both governments jurisdiction.

1,286 posted on 03/10/2002 3:31:36 PM PST by FITZ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1279 | View Replies]

To: Scratch shooter
Those are called "OTM"s (Other Than Mexicans). Ask Marine Inspector; believe the OTM traffic has skyrocketed in the last 3 years.
1,287 posted on 03/10/2002 3:31:52 PM PST by Regulator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1284 | View Replies]

To: Semaphore Heathcliffe
Could you be thinking of Somalia...not in the Middle East but a pit (surprised?) none the less. Aideed had at least one son and maybe two who were in the US military.

 

 

Online NewsHour: DEATH OF A WARLORD -- August 2, 1996
... When Somali warlord Mohamed Farah Aideed died on Thursday, hopes of a peace in the
fractured country rose again. Steve Scott of ITN reports on the leader and ...
Description: Trascript for the Online NewsHour program.
Category: Society > History > ... > Wars and Conflicts > Somalian Civil War
www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/africa/august96/warlord_8-2.html - 20k - 09 Mar 2002 - Cached - Similar pages

1,288 posted on 03/10/2002 3:32:49 PM PST by dennisw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1271 | View Replies]

To: Vast Buffalo Wing Conspiracy
No problem, glad you joined in. Yes you're right on those points, it was Generals Zachory Taylor and Scott who led the Mexican expedition. But I do remember reading (my history is a little fuzzy at this point) that Lee was pushing the senior officers to take all of Mexico. But he was resisted fortunately. Lee, as he proved in the Civil War was a fighter. Not always right but a good general nonetheless.
1,289 posted on 03/10/2002 3:33:07 PM PST by Reaganwuzthebest
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1282 | View Replies]

To: Vast Buffalo Wing Conspiracy
making all of Mexico part of the USA would have been a bloody disaster

It seems that's what is happening. Fox is calling for completely open borders, Castaneda says he wants the whole enchilada ---which means they get everything they are demanding. At least Lee's way, Mexico would have been placed under US rule, they'd follow the Constitution and there wouldn't be a President Fox today.

1,290 posted on 03/10/2002 3:34:51 PM PST by FITZ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1282 | View Replies]

To: FITZ
Yes, and Canada may be included in the mix.
1,291 posted on 03/10/2002 3:34:57 PM PST by Reaganwuzthebest
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1286 | View Replies]

To: TEXICAN II
Professor Williams is an honorary Southerner who should have official naturalization. I admire that old man like I do nobody else in academia and only regret that he will have retired before my daughter is old enough to study economics under his tutelage at GMU.
1,292 posted on 03/10/2002 3:35:52 PM PST by Twodees
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1172 | View Replies]

To: Scratch shooter
The Mexican border is quite easy to get tons loads of drugs across ---the same guys being bribed to let that stuff over might easily be bribed into letting anything else over.
1,293 posted on 03/10/2002 3:36:54 PM PST by FITZ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1284 | View Replies]

To: Vast Buffalo Wing Conspiracy
You're right taking all of Mexico was a bad idea in 1848 ---but compared to what Fox is saying we must do now, it would have been a much better thing to do it the way Lee suggested.
1,294 posted on 03/10/2002 3:38:37 PM PST by FITZ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1282 | View Replies]

To: Reaganwuzthebest
Don't be suprised when America becomes unlivable, there isn't a flock to the great white north. Canada, the country we pick on sometimes which has less personal freedom than us as of now, may see a tide of Americans fleeing poverty and chaos. Hard to believe, but it's very possible. And of course the illegals will follow, looking for a better life to work hard, scrub the toilets, and pick the lettuce.

"Your information is antiquated" says I, quoting the dragon Smaug from The Hobbit.

Canada is fast becoming a cesspool of corruption, political correctness, crime, multi-culturalism, and third world immigration - usually under the guise of "asylum" seekers. I used to subscribe to some Canadian immigration reform newsletters - the situation is actually worse in Canada. True, they don't have that big border with Mexico we have, but virtually anyone who can make it to Canada and mutter "I am seeking asylum" through an interpreter ends up living in Canada, at taxpayer expense. And Canada has none of our constitutional protections on free speech, free press, freedom of assemby or association, or any kind of 2nd amendment-style gun rights.

No, you had better forget Canada. Either we fix things here, or we go under. There's nowhere to run to anymore. Time to stop running away.

1,295 posted on 03/10/2002 3:39:02 PM PST by Vast Buffalo Wing Conspiracy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1283 | View Replies]

To: dennisw
That's it! thanks.
1,296 posted on 03/10/2002 3:43:52 PM PST by Semaphore Heathcliffe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1288 | View Replies]

To: Twodees
Ah, but his books are easily had! He is the funniest guy I have heard in a long time-my wife gets soo very angry over my descriptions of his methods of dealing with Mrs. Williams. I am going to get her some kichen mittens a 'to do list' someday! When I have a flak-jacket, I will! I am equally impressed with his intellectual running partner Thomas Sowell-look up www.FreedomsNest.com. Sowell is so smooth in his written work & so good ole boy in the flesh & did you know he was a Marine Corp pistol instructor? The lib's hate his very guts & fear him!
1,297 posted on 03/10/2002 3:45:58 PM PST by TEXICAN II
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1292 | View Replies]

To: Reaganwuzthebest
No problem, glad you joined in. Yes you're right on those points, it was Generals Zachory Taylor and Scott who led the Mexican expedition. But I do remember reading (my history is a little fuzzy at this point) that Lee was pushing the senior officers to take all of Mexico. But he was resisted fortunately. Lee, as he proved in the Civil War was a fighter. Not always right but a good general nonetheless.

I have nothing but admiration for Lee; an excellent general but an even better war leader, capable of instilling nearly worshipful devotion in his troops. And also a fine and honorable man the likes of which we have rarely seen since.

My memory of the Mexican War histories is a little fuzzy too; Lee may very well have made certain suggestions, but he was a junior officer, and his superior officers were constrainted by orders from Washington. Moreover, anything they did would have had to have been ratified by Congress, and there was no way Congress was ever going to agree to annexing all of Mexico, for two reasons: 1) it would make Mexicans into US citizens (bad idea for many reasons), and 2) It would have vastly increased the number of potential slave states, thus upsetting the national balance of power between the North and South. Indeed, many historians see our victory in the Mexican War as a prime cause of the Civil War 12-13 years later.

1,298 posted on 03/10/2002 3:47:51 PM PST by Vast Buffalo Wing Conspiracy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1289 | View Replies]

To: Vast Buffalo Wing Conspiracy
No doubt about it, Canada has less personal freedom than us. Free speech is slowly becoming a thing of the past, and so are gun rights. But think about it, Washington appears tone deaf to our pleas to knock off the nonsense. We don't want to be invaded, and we don't want lawbreakers rewarded.

If there's any large scale amnesty, as some are saying Bush may want after this one, you can kiss America goodbye. With at least 3 or more million Mexican illegals now here, after they bring in their relatives it could easily be 20 million or more. It's going to be a slow death of the country. Communities are not going to be able to assimiliate all these people. And taxes are going to go through the roof to care for them.

I'm not saying Americans are going to run to Canada, but if these get so out of control here many might. Less freedom and all.

1,299 posted on 03/10/2002 3:50:54 PM PST by Reaganwuzthebest
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1295 | View Replies]

To: VA Advogado
Sorry, boy. That's federal statute, not the Constitution. Watch for these statutes to come under challenge now that we have a President who thinks he's a wetback.
1,300 posted on 03/10/2002 3:52:29 PM PST by Twodees
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1252 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 1,261-1,2801,281-1,3001,301-1,320 ... 2,941-2,945 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson