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

Skip to comments.

House Again Passes Border and Visa Security Legislation
Sensenbrenner's press release. ^ | 3/12/2002 | James Sensenbrenner

Posted on 03/12/2002 5:27:41 PM PST by hchutch

WASHINGTON, March 12 /U.S. Newswire/ -- The House today by a 275-137 margin passed legislation providing critical visa and border security safeguards. These protections, already passed by the House without opposition on December 19, 2001, have been held up by Democratic opposition in the Senate.

"This legislation provides vital changes to our immigration laws to fight terrorism and prevent exploitation by some illegal aliens who wish to harm Americans. It builds upon enhanced data sharing requirements in the PATRIOT Act and includes key changes to our immigration laws such as requiring new biometric visas and strengthening the foreign student tracking system," stated House Judiciary Committee Chairman F. James Sensenbrenner, Jr. (R-Wis.). "It's time for the Senate Leadership to act on this legislation. The visa and border security provisions passed almost three months ago and we've seen zero movement by the Senate."

Visa and border security highlights include:

-- Strengthening the foreign student tracking system by requiring that it track: 1) the acceptance of aliens by educational institutions; 2) the issuance of visas to the aliens; 3) the admission into the U.S. of the aliens and the notification of these educational institutions of the admittance of these aliens; and 4) the enrollment of the aliens at the institutions.

-- Requiring the State Department by October 26, 2003 to only issue to aliens visas and other travel documents that are tamper-resistant and machine-readable using standardized biometric identifiers. Aliens entering the U.S. under the visa waiver program will have to possess passports with the same features (if issued after this date). By the same date (October 26, 2003) the INS must install scanners to read the biometric documents at all ports of entry. The INS must implement an integrated entry and exit data system (for nationals of countries other than Canada) containing arrival and departure data from these documents.

-- Requiring U.S. embassies and consulates to utilize terrorist lookout committees in order to ensure that the names of known terrorists are routinely and consistently brought to the attention of consular officials.

-- Barring nationals of countries that are state sponsors of terrorism from receiving temporary visas unless it has been determined that the aliens do not pose a threat to the safety of Americans or the national security of the U.S.

-- Providing an electronic data system that allows current and immediate access for consular officers and INS officials to information in databases of U.S. law enforcement agencies and the intelligence community.

-- Authorizing an additional 200 INS inspectors and 200 INS investigative personnel for each of the fiscal years 2002 through 2006. Also increases the pay and training of INS personnel, including Border Patrol agents, and beefs up consular offices at U.S. embassies. $150 million is authorized for the INS for improving technology at the border.

Today's legislation also included a temporary extension of the 245(i) immigration program. H.R. 1885 will allow qualifying illegal aliens to utilize section 245(i) as long as they have green card petitions filed on their behalf by the earlier of November 30, 2002, or four months after the date the Attorney General issues implementing regulations. It also requires that aliens must have entered the family relationships qualifying them for permanent residence by August 14, 2001. Under H.R. 1885, section 245(i) is a temporary program that will not become a permanent part of U.S. immigration law. A similar extension of the 245(i) program passed the House on May 21, 2001 by a 336-43 margin.


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Foreign Affairs; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: hr1885; immigration; sensenbrenner
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120 ... 181-182 next last
The bulk of the bill is good and necessary, but 245(i) should have never been a part of it.

Immigration yes, amnesty for illegal immigration, NO.

We are a nation of immigrants and we are a nation of laws.

When socialization and assimilation into this country begins with law-breaking, we are setting-up a condition where laws have no meaning, and worse, where law-breaking is rewarded.

I can imagine no possible positive result from allowing people that have broken our immigration laws to remain in this country, much less to reward them for being here illegally.

81 posted on 03/12/2002 11:57:26 PM PST by spodefly
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 80 | View Replies]

To: hchutch;AuntB;nunya bidness;GrandmaC;Washington_minuteman;tex-oma;buffyt;Grampa Dave...

82 posted on 03/13/2002 12:41:45 AM PST by JohnHuang2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
A super bump, at #82???

have you slowed down? =o)

83 posted on 03/13/2002 12:43:03 AM PST by GeronL
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies]

To: StarFan
There is no way that I would even consider voting for Bush again.
84 posted on 03/13/2002 12:56:17 AM PST by sarcasm
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: Miss Marple
None. Read the press release. From the press release, -- Barring nationals of countries that are state sponsors of terrorism from receiving temporary visas unless it has been determined that the aliens do not pose a threat to the safety of Americans or the national security of the U.S.
Now, how many would that be again? I see nothing more than more smoke and mirrors for the bushbots. You people will believe anything you're shoveled. How do you suppose it will be determined an individual doesn't "pose a threat to the safety of Americans or the National Security of the U.S." ??? Amnesty for anyone here ILLEGALLY is nothing but a joke. Lap it up dog's, there's more coming. Blackbird.
85 posted on 03/13/2002 1:05:06 AM PST by BlackbirdSST
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Dane
Because the economy would crumble, like it or not.
Oh, so you mean the next time I go to Wendy's in Dranesville Virginia, I won't be served by non english speaking mexicans. There wasn't one english speaking, non hispanic person on the shift anywhere, I made it a point to look for one. What an economic burden. Toe that party line Dane. Blackbird.
86 posted on 03/13/2002 1:23:20 AM PST by BlackbirdSST
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: BlackbirdSST; Miss Marple
From the Washington Post

Several Republicans said yesterday that the measure would threaten national security. Rep. Dana Rohrabacher (R-Calif.) said it would undermine "this country's ability to find and deport the terrorists among us."

87 posted on 03/13/2002 1:30:41 AM PST by sarcasm
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 85 | View Replies]

To: Miss Marple; Healey22; Dutchy; Arleigh; Starfan
It may not be blanket amnesty, but why didnt we enforce the existing laws first!! This is going to be revealed later whether it is blanket or not, all we need is a swipe of the pen to extend that portion of this bill. I still say this section is awful, and we should be throwing these people OUT, not allowing them to stay AFTER BREAKING OUR LAWS for as long as we have let them do!!
88 posted on 03/13/2002 2:27:48 AM PST by RaceBannon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: RaceBannon
I would suggest that you remember that the priority here is getting some reform into INS so that we gain some control, that the people who apply for amnesty will be the otherwise law-abiding people, that Ronald Reagan also caught the same level of vitriol for his amnesty bill, and that even the Mexicans who are criminals are not flying planes into buildings.

Bush campaigned on this issue. He keeps his campaign promises.

89 posted on 03/13/2002 2:33:12 AM PST by Miss Marple
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 88 | View Replies]

To: Miss Marple
Bush campaigned on amnesty? More historical revisionism.
90 posted on 03/13/2002 2:37:38 AM PST by sarcasm
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 89 | View Replies]

To: Miss Marple
INS APPREHENSION INFORMATION

Date Range: 01/01/2002 To 3/10/2002 EST
(last updated 03/11/2002)

The table below represents all the recorded INS apprehensions for the above time period. At the bottom of the table is a glossary to help you better understand what you are looking at. Once we are done looking at the table, I will present some facts about what these number represent. These facts may shock you. This table will be updated approximately every two weeks.

IDENT Totals District Totals Sector Totals
Encounters 263,493 43,330 (16.4%) 220,163 (83.6%)
LO Hits 4,114 1,779 (43.2%) 2,335 (56.8%)
RC Hits 103,675 11,274 (10.9%) 92,401 (89.1%)

DISTRICT or SECTOR ENCOUNTERS LO HITS RC HITS
Anchorage District 34 0 8
Asylum 1 0 0
Atlanta District 683 6 28
Baltimore District 59 4 5
Blaine Sector 280 8 88
Boston District 167 6 11
Buffalo District 1,031 18 94
Buffalo Sector 134 1 16
Chicago District 826 12 60
Cleveland District 171 1 45
Dallas District 498 8 84
Del Rio Sector 22,880 107 8,891
Denver District 1,872 79 720
Detroit District 101 0 6
Detroit Sector 241 5 83
El Centro Sector 24,727 327 11,962
El Paso District 2,552 56 711
El Paso Sector 20,262 169 8,209
Grand Forks Sector 153 1 50
Harlingen District 3,007 62 699
Havre Sector 244 5 82
Headquarters 92 0 4
Helena District 88 4 14
Honolulu District 237 4 27
Houlton District 46 0 3
Houston District 1,329 41 325
Kansas City District 760 23 227
Laredo Sector 22,734 121 7,454
Livermore Sector 598 30 223
Los Angeles District 1,288 48 167
Marfa Sector 2,222 25 743
McAllen Sector 19,443 162 8,655
Miami District 2,319 30 198
Miami Sector 619 9 101
New Orleans District 208 10 41
New Orleans Sector 905 5 370
New York District 1,136 8 38
Newark District 500 6 16
Omaha District 515 14 159
Philadelphia District 300 16 49
Phoenix District 4,273 221 1,614
Portland ME District 69 1 9
Portland OR District 320 42 119
Ramey Sector 126 3 14
San Antonio District 3,652 86 1,016
San Diego District 11,893 623 3,866
San Diego Sector 21,752 668 9,299
San Francisco District 1,808 262 510
San Juan District 232 0 4
Seattle District 876 69 270
Spokane Sector 215 10 80
St. Paul District 351 17 124
Swanton Sector 117 1 18
Tucson Sector 72,873 523 30,883
Washington District 175 2 10
Yuma Sector 9,592 155 5,177
TOTALS 263,586 4,114 103,679

Table Glossary:

Encounters (also know as "Enrollments"): The total number of encounters (recorded apprehensions) into the system.

LO Hits: (Lookout Hits) The number of apprehensions involving people who have criminal records in the Lookout Database.

RC Hits: (Recidivist Hits) The number of apprehensions involving people who previously had been apprehended and having at least one record in the recidivist database.

District: The INS District is composed of the land Ports of Entry (Inspections), Airports (Inspections), and the District office (Detention, Deportation & Investigations) within that District.

Sector: The Border Patrol Sector is composed of the Border Patrol Stations and Check Points within that Sector.

Lets do some math.

From 01/01/2002 through 03/10/2002 the INS reported apprehending 263,586 illegal aliens in the US.
Now some of these apprehensions are what we call recidivist apprehensions, so well will subtract the RC HITS from the ENCOUNTERS.

263,586 - 103,679 = 159,907.

So, between 01/01/2002 and 03/10/2002 the INS apprehended approximately 159,907 illegal aliens either attempting to enter the US, or already in the US.

Now the fun numbers.

The Border Patrol estimates that for every illegal they apprehend, 4 slip by. Independent Immigration experts estimate that closer to 9 slip by, for every 1 alien apprehended. For this presentation, I will also use a 1 to 2 ratio.

So, if the INS apprehended 159,907 illegal aliens, the number of aliens that made it through undetected would be as follows:

1 to 2 = 319,814
1 to 4 = 639,628
1 to 9 = 1,439,163

This means, that anywhere from 319,814 to 1,439,163 illegal aliens entered the United States undetected since January 1st, 2002. .

Now for some more disturbing figures.

US and Allied troops that invaded Normandy in 1944 = 250,000 + US troops that invaded Okinawa in 1945 = 550,000+ Illegal aliens that have invaded the US in 2002 = between 319,814 and 1,439,163.

Now imagine that just 1/10 of 1% of those illegals are from Middle Eastern Countries.

We now have between 319 and 1,439 possible terrorist undetected inside

I took this from Marine Inspector's Profile page.

http://www.freerepublic.com/perl/profile?h=marine+inspector

91 posted on 03/13/2002 2:54:00 AM PST by B4Ranch
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: B4Ranch
Yes, these are disturbing figures. How does amnesty in a 4-month figure for illegals whose only crime is their status, affect these figures? Do you think terrorists are going to apply for amnesty? Do you think that possibly the amnesty will give us leverage to crack down on the rest who DON'T apply for amnesty? Do you think that Mexicians are going to fly planes into buildings?

Look, I don't like illegals here either. My sister was in a car accident with one who didn't have insurance because she was illegal. The woman was, of course, deported.

However, someone needs to get a handle on this. Trading a four month window for getting increased funding in INS, increased border patrol, and possibly some help from Fox on this situation is not a small thing. It is both physically and financially impossible to deport all illegal aliens, if these figures are correct. It is just not going to happen, I don't care who is president.

I would point out to you that the government IS cracking down on EMPLOYERS who hire these people. If there are fewer jobs for illegals, that will spread through the grapevine as well. The goal is to get some degree of control, NOT to simply punish Mexicans.

Well, at least that's not my goal.

92 posted on 03/13/2002 3:04:50 AM PST by Miss Marple
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 91 | View Replies]

To: hchutch
I don't think three million illegal immigrants will know of this provision in the time frame that could be allotted.

I'll bet they all know about it already.

93 posted on 03/13/2002 3:13:37 AM PST by chainsaw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Miss Marple
If you were to visit Las Vegas or Reno and see what the percentage of casino employees are hispanic, you would be shocked. Why does this occur? Well the feds learned along time ago......Never piss off the wealthy!

When the casinos want something, they ask politely then they receive it. PERIOD. The State and city is building a trench for the railroads to travel through Reno. WHY? Because it interferes with automobile traffic and the casinos. The Border Patrol officers don't dare go into downtown Reno without permission. I have watched this situation for years now and don't expect any changes under Bush or any Democrat president. The Feds know better than to mess with their minimum wage employees.

94 posted on 03/13/2002 4:02:03 AM PST by B4Ranch
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 92 | View Replies]

To: Miss Marple
UPTODATE NEWS on the problems with illegals.

I don't see any improvements in this situation.

95 posted on 03/13/2002 4:05:52 AM PST by B4Ranch
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 92 | View Replies]

To: Miss Marple
I have no idea how many people are attempting to enter America the lawful way. What President Bush has done is to call them all "STUPID SUCKERS" FOR THINKING THEY SHOULD OBEY OUR LAWS! Sneak in and you will receive amnesty because you will be a political prize to one party or the other.
96 posted on 03/13/2002 4:11:23 AM PST by B4Ranch
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 92 | View Replies]

To: hchutch
Look, I don't have all the answers, and neither does the President. Sorry to ruin your evening more than it already is, but that's the fact we have to deal with. Welcome to the real world...

Do you have any better ideas, given the conditions (objective AND political) that we have right now? I'm open for suggestions.

In the real wold, President Bush took his 80% popularity and spit in the eyes of 70% of the American public, who are opposed to amnesty on illegals.

Tell me, please, how politically shrewd is that?

He had more base, and more strength than Daschle on the issue. If he truly opposed amnesty, he could have beat the Majority Leader like a drum, but instead, Bush surrendered...

Just as those now defending him, in their denial, were always warned he would.

Welcome to the RINO world.




97 posted on 03/13/2002 4:42:59 AM PST by Sabertooth
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: holdonnow
On the immigration matter:
According to post 54, this bill isn't going past the Senate, so that makes this thing a political football. So, why not take a chance to get some payback for that disgusting James Byrd ad? The Dems would be setting up some similar race-baiting in a heartbeat.

As for the steel tariffs, there was a different situation with steel as opposed to oil. The problem we have with oil is passing a law to open ANWR. For that, we need to defeat enough Democratic Senators so we can get President Bush's energy plan passed. Hopefully, people will calm down after this conniption fit and recognize that we need to get a better hand to work with in DC.

On steel, the problem is we have steel subsidized by foreign governments being dumped in the U.S. I'm all for free trade, but this is taking liberty for license. Certainly it's fair to punish dumping the way President Reagan did.

98 posted on 03/13/2002 4:45:17 AM PST by hchutch
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: Miss Marple
the people who apply for amnesty will be the otherwise law-abiding people...

So is the burglar living in your house who obeys the traffic signals.




99 posted on 03/13/2002 4:47:26 AM PST by Sabertooth
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 89 | View Replies]

To: GraniteStateConservative
You're trying to reason with FReepers? Ha! How dare you?

Try reasoning with those East of the Mississippi and North of the Mason-Dixon, who haven't a clue as to the folly of surrender on amnesty.

How about we boost the population of your town by 10% to 20% with illegals, flood your schools, and crowd your prisons by 25%?

Then you can pretend you know what you're talking about.




100 posted on 03/13/2002 4:55:43 AM PST by Sabertooth
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120 ... 181-182 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