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

To: hobbes1
>Instead of making half assed commentary, a little research
>would be helpful. There is nothing whatsoever in this bill
>that addresses the existing INS backlog.

Yes, there is. By decreasing the level of scrutiny on those that are here, and getting them legal, QUICKLY, the going forward provisions of the bill (Which is really he important part....) can be implemented.

No, not really. According to remarks from Tom Tancredo on the House floor yesterday, all the "going forward provisions" of the bill had already passed the House, so the action yesterday actually did nothing for the important parts of the bill -- they were already passed. These provisions were just repackaged/linked with the 245(i) legislation and passed again (in an attempt to fool people?). Note the lead "House Again Passes Border and Visa Security Legislation" as well as the line in the story: "These protections, already passed by the House without opposition on December 19, 2001, have been held up by Democratic opposition in the Senate." I don't know if having the 245(i) component makes the package more palatable to the Senate, because I don't what Democratic opposition there has been to it in the Senate. The INS may well have to expend considerably more resources dealing with the 245(i) provisions which would prevent them from going forward on other things and, as always, any type of amnesty sends the message that illegal immigration is really okay, accepted, and tolerated. So, we will probably have more illegals in the future to to scrutinize, not fewer. I heard an immigration lawyer being interviewed say that some in the "immigrant community" think that this is a blanket amnesty and if that rumor, although false, spreads how many will try to get in here to take advantage of it?

292 posted on 03/13/2002 12:34:07 PM PST by bam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 197 | View Replies ]


To: bam; Poohbah
So, the House leadership and the White House have finally learned the lesson of the parable of the old bull and the young bull, and are patiently trying again, and putting a carrot on.

Patience is key here. The Dems will tangle themselves up in lies, and we'll be able to say we tried to work it out when we hammer them.

293 posted on 03/13/2002 12:37:36 PM PST by hchutch
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 292 | View Replies ]

To: bam
I don't know if having the 245(i) component makes the package more palatable to the Senate,

Ummmmmm, Which party controls the Senate..? Nuff said?

And while your point that it may tie up some resources short term, I still think that getting them legal quickly, LONG TERM, makes it easier to implement the going forward provisions...

Look at it form a management perspective. it will be atleast 6 months before an adequate Computer system can be developed and even begin to be installed to handle the going forward stuff...INS has next to no (Thank god for that) thechnology, so they are basically starting from the ground up in that regard. It's not like they're going to Office max for Six laptops, and a stand alone Micro server. they have 6 months to a year to get the 245(i) stuff done.

335 posted on 03/14/2002 5:23:05 AM PST by hobbes1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 292 | View Replies ]

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