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

Skip to comments.

AMNESTY FOR ILLEGAL ALIENS? (a question for Freepers)
August 22nd, 2002 | Sabertooth

Posted on 08/22/2002 7:04:53 AM PDT by Sabertooth

This is a vanity post, let's get that straight from the start.

Perhaps the most vain aspect of it is the conceit that it might stay on topic, but I'm going to give it a whirl.

One of the more contentious species of threads encountered on Free Republic are those dealing with the subject of America's immigration policy, particularly with regard to the Illegal Aliens currently in our country. According a range of reasonable sources, the estimates of their numbers here currently here range from six to thirteen million. Whatever the actual count, there are quite a few people now in violation of American immigration law.

One subtopic that inevitably arises is the question of Amnesty:

Should all or some portion of the Illegal Aliens be granted an Amnesty and be thereby allowed to change their status and acquire legal residence in the United States?

That's the question I'd like to put forward to the members of Free Republic.

Almost as inevitably on threads dealing with this subject, flame wars erupt. It's not my purpose to instigate another round of that, they're rather predictable. So I'd like to ask that your comments, if you're inclined to share them, focus on the big picture of American immigration policy, with particular attention to the subject of Amnesty. I'm not interested in the stock and gratuitous divisiveness of race-baiting or referring to the President as "Jorge," or anything of that nature from any quarter. It achieves nothing, it's sulphurous methane heat with no light shed.

I'd also like to avoid ad hominem ambushes. I'm genuinely interested in learning the collective feelings of Free Republic members on this subject. If you're gonna post, I'd like to ask that you ante up with your opinion on the question at hand before engaging the discussion with others. No taking potshots from the obscurity of the sidelines. I'll post my opinion below at #1.

Fair enough?

So, once again, here's the question:

Should all or some portion of the Illegal Aliens be granted an Amnesty and be thereby allowed to change their status and acquire legal residence in the United States?



TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Extended News; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 381-400401-420421-440 ... 921-932 next last
To: PuNcH
There is not only one option and a permanent military force is not needed to stop the horde that is coming across nor at the numbers "every 100 feet" would imply. That we will have reduced illegal crossings in the future is irrelevant. We also would need to go after employers who contribute to the problem and stop giving illegal aliens a handout when they need to be deported.

Is that a fact? There is a self styled INS expert on this site that says the borders are wide open. There are legions that are crying for military involvement. You have a valid point about employer sanctions and there are a rash of illegals being fired because of bogus social security numbers. However, the border state local law enforcement agencies have ALL denied the feds request to hold a illegal aliens for deportation. I am telling you this right now, for illegal immigration to stop to any significant degree it WILL take a military option. Not only at the borders but also in rounding up the ones that are already here right now. To believe any thing else is ridiculous.

401 posted on 08/22/2002 11:45:30 PM PDT by Texasforever
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 394 | View Replies]

To: Sabertooth
Saber... I have been occaisionally checking in on this thread you pinged me to and I wasn't going to offer my opinion on this issue because of the usual tone these threads have. I understand the concerns everyone has on this 226 year old issue, as well as I understand and recognize the incredible task of trying to secure our borders in a way that doesn't hinder our trade relations with our nieghbors as well as our ability to export our goods to the north and south.

I read the majority of the responses to your "question for Freepers" and my only concern is what qualifies an alien as an illegal. I am totally against any alien being granted amnesty for coming here by way of illegally crossing our borders. I do have sympathy for those who have tried to follow the requirements for what it takes to become a legal contributor to our way of life and by no fault of their own the INS has failed to deliver on the application for residency. I feel these people deserve priority status. As far as the people who came here by the way of illegal border crossing, I feel we should deport them with the warning if they attempt to thwart our system again they and their family will be banned from ever becoming a citizen.

With that said... How can any reasonable person hold this administration responsible for decades of neglect by the INS? I know the NYT's have done their best to make many of us who havn't witnessed the gross neglegence of the INS for not confronting the problems with our immigration policies of the past and present.

My question for you would be..... name an administration that has done more to secure our borders than GWB? (I know 9/11 is a huge factor) but I challenge anyone to show me a signed bill that grants amnesty or even a single quote where this President has asked Congress to present him a bill that even comes close to what Ronald Reagan signed into law?

I've heard all the "He would of signed 245i" arguments and the "Jorge Bush" remarks. But the fact remains that we have made improvements on our border security. Have they been enough? "NO" Is it a start? "YES" Will we be able to solve these problems overnight "NO"....

My debate with you has been the same on this issue.... Does it do any good to divide conservatives on this issue ? or does it make sense to recognize the fact that with this president and the aftermath of 9/11 our border issues are at least being addressed. That's far more attention and progress I've seen in my lifetime. I will end this rant by saying... The NYT's and other left wing liberal publications love nothing more than to see this issue divide conservatives. They know very well it's an issue that can't be fixed by a single stroke of a pen or a veto or two. My suggestion to you and others is to contact your represenatives and hold their feet to the fire rather than expecting this President or any President to have the magic pill. NO amnesty bill has been signed and the President has never offered one. I say follow the laws on the books and enforce them vigorously.

Sorry for the long rant, But you, as well as many others have labeled me as an open borders flunkie because I disagree with your assumptions on who is to blame for our immigration policies.

402 posted on 08/22/2002 11:46:24 PM PDT by MJY1288
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 346 | View Replies]

To: Texasforever
Typo.
403 posted on 08/22/2002 11:47:45 PM PDT by FreedomFriend
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 390 | View Replies]

To: PRND21
Define "some portion". Do you mean zero "I"llegal "A"liens be allowed to ever change their status?
A "large portion" "A"mnesty, no.
But a "slim portion" status adjustment is unavoidable and probably historically constant.

"Some" is between "all" and "none." Those are the three generic quantities in logical equations. This isn't by any stretch a scientific poll, I'm just trying to get a feel for the general sentiments on the matter among members of this forum.

As for "slim portions" getting a status adjustment as a historical constant, I'm not sure that's the case without specific legislation enabling the adjustment. That's what the Section 245(i) issue was about. I belileve right now there's no changing of status for an Illegal, short of getting reclassified as a political refugee, which is really a separate matter.




404 posted on 08/22/2002 11:48:42 PM PDT by Sabertooth
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 386 | View Replies]

To: MJY1288
Could you please summarize your post into one or two sentences.
405 posted on 08/22/2002 11:49:27 PM PDT by Joe Hadenuf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 402 | View Replies]

To: All
Home Contact Us Site Help Fax Congress Free
American Workers
Environment
Farmland
High-tech worker visas
Illegal Immigration
Public Opinion
Unions
Urban Sprawl

ADDITIONAL READING

Amnesty facilitates terrorism, May 2002 CIS
Amnesty, in English
Mark Krikorian, CIS
1986 Amnesty increased immigration
INS Report, Oct. 2000
Amnesties beget illegal immigration
Mark Krikorian, CIS
U.S. Amnesties for
Illegal Aliens

Until 1986, the United States had never forgiven the act of illegal immigration in other than individual cases and had never rewarded large numbers of illegal aliens with the opportunity for U.S. citizenship.

Since 1986, Congress has passed
7 amnesties for illegal aliens.

1. Immigration and Reform Control Act (IRCA) Amnesty, 1986: A blanket amnesty for some 2.7 million illegal aliens
2. Section 245(i) Amnesty, 1994: A temporary rolling amnesty for 578,000 illegal aliens
3. Section 245(i) Extension Amnesty, 1997: An extension of the rolling amnesty created in 1994
4. Nicaraguan Adjustment and Central American Relief Act (NACARA) Amnesty, 1997: An amnesty for close to one million illegal aliens from Central America

5. Haitian Refugee Immigration Fairness Act Amnesty (HRIFA), 1998: An amnesty for 125,000 illegal aliens from Haiti

6. Late Amnesty, 2000: An amnesty for some illegal aliens who claim they should have been amnestied under the 1986 IRCA amnesty, an estimated 400,000 illegal aliens
7. LIFE Act Amnesty, 2000: A reinstatement of the rolling Section 245(i) amnesty, an estimated 900,000 illegal aliens
8.Three current bills are vying to be Amnesty No. 8

What is Amnesty?

Amnesties are all too common legislative efforts to forgive the breaking of immigration laws and to make it possible for illegal aliens to live permanently in the United States. Amnesties represent a system of federal rewards and assistance for illegal migrants, and they entice an even greater number of illegal migrants. Census 2000 results indicate that 700,000 to 800,000 illegal aliens settle in the U.S. each year, with an estimated 8-11 million illegal aliens currently living in the United States.

According to INS estimates released in October, 2000, the amnesties granted in 1986 as a result of the Immigration Reform and Control Act significantly contributed to an increase in illegal immigration as the relatives of newly legalized illegal immigrants came to the United States to join their family members. Following the 1986 amnesty, illegal immigration increased dramatically to more than 800,000 a year, before dropping back down to 500,000 a year.

go back to the top of the page

Past Amnesties

No. 1- Immigration Reform and Control Act Amnesty of 1986:
The Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 (IRCA) was enacted by Congress in response to the large and rapidly growing illegal alien population in the United States. The final bill was the result of a dramatic compromise between those who wanted to reduce illegal immigration into the United States and those who wanted to "wipe the slate clean" for those illegals already living here by granting them legal residence. As enacted, IRCA included a massive amnesty program for two main categories of illegal aliens:

1) those who could show that they had resided illegally in the United States continuously since at least January 1, 1982; and

2) those who had worked as agricultural workers for at least 90 days between May 1, 1985 and May 1, 1986.

As a "balance" to this huge amnesty, IRCA also included several provisions designed to: strengthen the enforcement of immigration laws (including sanctions for employers who knowingly hire illegal aliens); increase border controls; and create a program to verify the immigration status of aliens applying for certain welfare benefits.

The IRCA amnesty has been tied to terrorism. Mahmud Abouhalima, a leader of the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, was legalized as a seasonal agricultural worker as part of the 1986 IRCA amnesty. This allowed him to travel abroad, including several trips to Afghanistan, where he received terrorist training. Read the full report.

NOTE: In the 1990 Immigration Act, an additional 160,000 spouses and minor children of aliens amnestied under IRCA were granted amnesty as well. These 160,000 aliens are not included in the total numeric impact of the amnesty.

The 10-year impact of both the SAW and general amnesty in the Immigration Reform and Control Act was 2,684,892. For the computation of the total number of immigrants to be added by this amnesty, click here.

Go back to the top of the page

No. 2 - Section 245(i) Amnesty of 1994
Section 245(i) was added to immigration law when Congress passed this de facto amnesty as part of the FY 1995 Commerce, Justice, State Appropriations bill. Section 245(i) went into effect at the beginning of FY 1995 and was scheduled to sunset at the end of FY 1997 (Sep. 30, 1997).

In nearly all cases, a person must be an illegal alien to benefit from Section 245(i). There are two major kinds of illegal aliens who benefit: (1) Those who entered the country illegally. (2) Those who entered legally on visas but then violated the terms of their visa. Read what Section 245(i) actually does.

The INS estimates that at the end of FY 1997, Section 245(i) applications had resulted in an increase of 578,000 in the adjustment of status application backlog. This does not include Section 245(i) applicants whose status had already been adjusted as the INS does not track that separately.

Go back to the top of the page

No. 3 - Section 245(i) Extension Amnesty of 1997
President Clinton twice signed continuing resolutions to extend the September 30, 1997 expiration date of Section 245(i). The first continuing resolution extended the deadline until October 23, 1997 and the second continuing resolution extended Section 245(i) until November 7, 1997. Section 245(i) was then further extended until January 14, 1998 by Congress as part of the conference report to H.R. 2267.

Go back to the top of the page

No. 4 - NACARA Amnesty of 1997
The Nicaraguan Adjustment and Central American Relief Act (NACARA) is an amnesty program for certain Nicaraguans and Cubans, and a de facto amnesty for certain Salvadorans, Guatemalans and Eastern Europeans.

The original bills that were introduced in the House and the Senate, H.R. 2302 and S. 1976, would have benefited only certain Nicaraguans, Salvadorans and Guatemalans. Cubans and Eastern Europeans were added later to mollify the anti-Communist sentiments of some members of Congress. At the same time, opponents of the amnesty tried to negotiate a requirement that the number of aliens granted legal residence under NACARA be subtracted from legal immigration ceilings, but managed only to secure minor reductions in the unskilled worker and lottery categories. In order to avoid lengthy debate on the costs and benefits of the amnesty and to ensure adequate support for it, the bill language was added as an amendment to the appropriations bill for the District of Columbia (H.R. 2607) and passed as part of that bill.

Nicaraguans and Cubans who have lived in the United States illegally since 1995, along with their spouses and unmarried children, were automatically granted legal resident status under NACARA, as long as they apply by April 1, 2000.

The 10-year impact of the NACARA Amnesty on U.S. population growth is estimated to be 966,480. For the computation of the total number of immigrants to be added by this amnesty, click here.

Go back to the top of the page

No. 5 - HRIFA Amnesty of 1998
The Haitian Refugee Immigration Fairness Act (HRIFA) is an amnesty program for Haitians. It was passed in the aftermath of the Nicaraguan Adjustment and Central American Relief Act (NACARA), when representatives of a long list of nationalities not included in NACARA claimed that it was discriminatory to refuse them the same special treatment. Haitians are the first group to succeed with this claim. As with NACARA, proponents of HRIFA sought to avoid a full congressional debate of the bill and so added it as an amendment to the omnibus appropriations bill for fiscal year 1999 (H.R. 4328), which was passed by both houses of Congress.

HRIFA grants permanent resident status to any Haitians who have been in the United States since December 1995, along with their spouses and children, as long as they apply before April 1, 2000. Haitians granted amnesty under HRIFA will not be counted against legal immigration ceilings, and no legal immigration ceilings will be reduced to make up for the extra number of permanent immigrants.

The 10-year impact of the Haitian Refugee Immigration Fairness Act on U.S. Population growth is estimated to be 125,000. For the computation of the total number of immigrants to be added by this amnesty, click here.

Go back to the top of the page

No. 6 - Late Amnesty of 2000
This amnesty was the result of an agreement between the Clinton White House, Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott, and Speaker of the House Dennis Hastert. The "late amnesty" allowed all illegal aliens who had been part of lawsuits claiming that they have been illegal aliens since before 1982 and should have received amnesty under the 1986 IRCA amnesty but for various reasons were denied, to renew their request for the amnesty.

The Late Amnesty of 2000 is expected to apply to an estimated 400,000 illegal aliens.

Go back to the top of the page

No. 7- LIFE Act Amnesty of 2000
The LIFE Act of 2000 that was passed in December, 2000 reinstated Section 245(i) for the first four months of 2001 (Jan-April).

The House Immigration Subcommittee estimates that 900,000 aliens applied for adjustment of status in the first full year of the reinstatement.

Go back to the top of the page


Bills vying to be Amnesty No. 8

H.R. 4999
Introduced by Rep. Ed Pastor (D-AZ), H.R. 4999, the Immigration Adjustment Act of 2002 would grant amnesty to any illegal alien who had entered the United States prior to January 1, 2000.

H.R. 4037
Introduced by Rep. Tom Davis (R-VA), H.R. 4037, the Central American Security Act, would amend the 1997 NACARA amnesty to reward with amnesty an estimated 2.3 million illegal aliens from El Salvador, Honduras and Guatemala.

S. 2493
Introduced by Senator Tom Daschle (D-SD), S. 2493, The Uniting Families of 2002 Act, would reinstate the Section 245(i) amnesty for one year and remove any eligibility requirement.


Votes on Amnesties that have
not become law:

S. 778
S. 778, the Section 245(i) Extension Act of 2001,would have allowed for a one year extension of the Section 245(i) amnesty by extending the filing deadline until April 30, 2002. The eligibility requirement to apply for a Section 245(i) adjustment of status under S. 778 is January 14, 1998.

S. 778 passed the Senate Judiciary Committee by a voice vote

H.R. 1885
Introduced by Rep. George Gekas (R-PA), H.R. 1885 would have again extended the reinstatement of Section 245(i) that was included in the LIFE Act of 2000 four months past the current deadline of April 30, 2001.

H.R. 1885 passed the House of Representatives by a vote of 336 - 43 in May, 2001.

H. Res. 365
H. Res. 365 is a version of the Enhanced Border Security and Visa Entry Reform Act of 2002 that originally passed the House of Representatives as H.R. 3525 in December of 2001. But under heavy pressure from the Bush Administration, an extension of the Section 245(i) amnesty was added to the Enhanced Border Security and Visa Entry Reform Act of 2002 and it was again voted on as H. Res. 365. would extend the Section 245(i) amnesty until November 30, 2002, with an eligibility cut off date of August 15, 2001.

H. Res. 365 passed the House of Representatives by a vote of 275 - 137.

Farr amendment to H.R. 4775
Rep. Sam Farr (D-CA) introduced the Farr Amendment to H.R. 4775, a supplemental appropriations bill. The Farr Amendment would have re-instated the Section 245(i) amnesty for four months, with the same provisions as those contained in H. Res. 365. Rep. Farr's amendment was offered as a substitute amendment to the Serrano Amendment for a permanent 245(i) extenstion.

The House Appropriations Committee voted against the Farr Amendment by a vote of 27 - 32.

Go back to the top of the page

Polls show most Americans oppose amnesty

Americans oppose amnesty nearly 2 to 1. Hispanics are less likely to reelect President Bush if he supports amnesty.
Zobgy Poll, Sep. 01

 

Nearly 70% of Americans oppose amnesty for illegal aliens
Gallup Poll, Aug. 01

 

61% of Americans oppose giving amnesty to illegal aliens
Harris Poll, Aug. 01

 

 
Back to Top
 

406 posted on 08/22/2002 11:49:56 PM PDT by Marine Inspector
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 373 | View Replies]

To: Joe Hadenuf
LOL, would you like it ebonics or spanish :-)
407 posted on 08/22/2002 11:50:38 PM PDT by MJY1288
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 405 | View Replies]

To: Torie
Watch it. You have lived so long away as an expat, that if you tried to return, you might be regarded as an illegal alien. Have you considered that possibility? Cheers.

I never left. My flag is flying over the country I see as one that provides the greatest amount of potential freedom.

I'll learn Spanish to be free. Hell, I'll move to be free. Even post-Castro Cuba intrigues me.

408 posted on 08/22/2002 11:52:19 PM PDT by nunya bidness
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 392 | View Replies]

To: Texasforever
I am telling you this right now, for illegal immigration to stop to any significant degree it WILL take a military option.

I agree that the military is needed at the borders at least at this point in time. We also need to increase the border patrol and take internal action. If the state didnt simply give handouts to illegals I doubt we'd have to do alot of rounding up.

409 posted on 08/22/2002 11:53:08 PM PDT by PuNcH
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 401 | View Replies]

To: MJY1288
I would prefer a response in english......
410 posted on 08/22/2002 11:54:33 PM PDT by Joe Hadenuf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 407 | View Replies]

To: GoldMan
NO is NO
IN BOTH LANGUAGES

411 posted on 08/22/2002 11:56:50 PM PDT by GoldMan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 407 | View Replies]

To: FreedomFriend
Pitiful.
412 posted on 08/22/2002 11:57:21 PM PDT by Texasforever
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 403 | View Replies]

To: Joe Hadenuf
Well, Now that you have admitted to understanding english!, I suggest you try reading the entire post NOT directed to you instead of whining about the effort needed to actually read it. Sometimes it takes more than a sentaence or two to address problems that you seem to be so concerned about. Try not to be so anal next time and I might try to be less critical :-)
413 posted on 08/22/2002 11:59:54 PM PDT by MJY1288
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 410 | View Replies]

To: nunya bidness
My heavens. You are flying a foreign flag on our shores? I'm calling the FBI immediately. What is the TIPS number? Do you have it handy? Absent that, I will settle for Ridge's number, or in a pinch, one of those cute Bush chicks will do.
414 posted on 08/23/2002 12:00:58 AM PDT by Torie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 408 | View Replies]

To: Texasforever
Pitiful.

Actually, I find Freedomfriend to be very up front and detect that he is a very concerned American.....What I find pitiful is the 10 or so individuals on this forum that make excuses or attempt to minimize this invasion of millions, and the on going chaos that it is creating....

415 posted on 08/23/2002 12:03:09 AM PDT by Joe Hadenuf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 412 | View Replies]

To: MJY1288
But you, as well as many others have labeled me as an open borders flunkie because I disagree with your assumptions on who is to blame for our immigration policies.

First, I apologize for pinging you, as you'd asked me to remove you from my list... I thought I had. But I'm glad you took the time to respond.

I'm actually going to call it a night, so I won't be able to delve into your post further until tomorrow. I do, however, want to adress your last sentence.

I'm quite certain I never called you an open borders anything, and I don't think I called you a flunky either. The reason I'm certain is because of the nature of our disagreement, which from your post, I think is about where we left it.

I don't think you're an open borders type, and "open borders" is a phrase I use sparingly because I haven't encountered too many folks whom I would characterize as being of that persuasion. I can count them on my hand with a finger or two to spare.

NWO is another one that gets bandied about... I just don't use it.

Anyway, good to hear from you... I'll reply more tomorrow.




416 posted on 08/23/2002 12:03:33 AM PDT by Sabertooth
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 402 | View Replies]

To: Sabertooth
If you get any tamer, that tiger will become a lap cat.
417 posted on 08/23/2002 12:05:26 AM PDT by Torie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 416 | View Replies]

To: Torie
Careful, those Bush chicks have their own problems.

Just call the TIPS line and wait for the America's Most Wanted crew to get to your call.

418 posted on 08/23/2002 12:05:38 AM PDT by nunya bidness
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 414 | View Replies]

To: Joe Hadenuf
Actually, I find Freedomfriend to be very up front and detect that he is a very concerned American.....What I find pitiful is the 10 or so individuals on this forum that make excuses or attempt to minimize this invasion of millions, and the on going chaos that it is creating....

I have no doubt that you and him are just the bestest of friends. Hell you two are almost inseparable. What is your point?

419 posted on 08/23/2002 12:06:30 AM PDT by Texasforever
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 415 | View Replies]

To: Sabertooth
I also oppose amnesty for all illegal immigrants. It does not make the wrong right. I believe that the main reason it is even being considered is strictly political. Elections are coming up and both parties are trying to solicit votes.

If you were an hispanic citizen, or any other ethnicity, and had relatives and friends here illegally, who would you vote for? The party that is going to adopt your illegal relatives and friends or the party that is going to throw them out?

420 posted on 08/23/2002 12:07:53 AM PDT by slimer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 381-400401-420421-440 ... 921-932 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