Immigration bill fails key test, is withdrawn

[jamesrage]

The pro-illegals rats in office loose.What needs to be done is for the country to throw out every rat in office who voted for this amnesty bulls**t and pressure the politicians who are still in office to enact laws that make amnesty illegal and talks of amnesty illegal.I am glad that Oklahoma has some decent politicians who did not vote for this amnesty BS.




http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/06/07/congress.immigration.ap/index.h tml
WASHINGTON (AP) -- A broad immigration bill to legalize millions of people unlawfully in the United States failed a crucial test vote in the Senate Thursday, a stunning setback that could spell its defeat for the year.




IF anyone remembers the Reagan amnesty bill they should know that this part of the amnesty bill will never be enforced.

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/06/07/congress.immigration.ap/index.h tml
The legislation, which had been endorsed by President Bush, would tighten borders, institute a new system to prevent employers from hiring undocumented workers and give as many as 12 million illegal immigrants a pathway to legal status.

[cannon_fodder]

quote:talks of amnesty illegal

If our government ever passes laws that makes talking about an idea illegal, then all hope is lost.  No matter how bad YOU think the idea may be, that doesn't mean it does not at least warrant discussion.  If nothing else, to remind people how bad the alternative is.

The Immigration Bill had many things in it that I disagreed with.  It had many things that people on the opposite end of the spectrum disagreed with.  However, at this point, ANY item that would move us towards progress on immigration is welcomed in my little world.  We can tweak it later, but do SOMETHING.

It is clear that the current system of ignoring illegal aliens is not a long term solution.  We can not tell WHO is entering and what their purpose is and there is no system to normalize their status.  It is also clear that the "threw 'em out, they took our jobs!" crowd is mis or under informed on the situation.  If we removed the 20,000,000 illegals who have jobs we would be short some 16,000,000 workers instantly and the long term prospects are even worse.  A economy starved for workers will by necessity export the very jobs and opportunities they think they are protecting.

Something needs to be done.  A bill that completely satisfies the "open the flood gate" NOR the "day took 'er jobs!" crowd will ever happen.  Welcome to democracy.

[jamesrage]

quote:Originally posted by cannon_fodder

If our government ever passes laws that makes talking about an idea illegal, then all hope is lost.  No matter how bad YOU think the idea may be, that doesn't mean it does not at least warrant discussion.  If nothing else, to remind people how bad the alternative is.

Politicians should not be allowed to sell our sovereignty down the toilet for cheap votes and cheap labor.Laws should be enacted against this kind of behavior.

quote:
The Immigration Bill had many things in it that I disagreed with.  It had many things that people on the opposite end of the spectrum disagreed with.  However, at this point, ANY item that would move us towards progress on immigration is welcomed in my little world.  We can tweak it later, but do SOMETHING.

It is clear that the current system of ignoring illegal aliens is not a long term solution.  We can not tell WHO is entering and what their purpose is and there is no system to normalize their status.  It is also clear that the "threw 'em out, they took our jobs!" crowd is mis or under informed on the situation.  If we removed the 20,000,000 illegals who have jobs we would be short some 16,000,000 workers instantly and the long term prospects are even worse.  A economy starved for workers will by necessity export the very jobs and opportunities they think they are protecting.

Something needs to be done.  A bill that completely satisfies the "open the flood gate" NOR the "day took 'er jobs!" crowd will ever happen.  Welcome to democracy.

Doing nothing is a lot better solution than the amnesty bill.Because at least with doing nothing the illegal immigration situation slowly gets worse and perhaps more manageable for when we get more honest politicians in office.If the Reagan Amnesty has taught us anything is that amnesty makes illegal immigration worse because it will encourage more people to violate our laws.  They will grant the amnesty and ignore the rest of the bill,so that in ten to twenty years we will be dealing with 40-100 million illegals with all the pro-slave wage,pro-cheap votes, pro-globalization/anti-americans, Amnesty citizens and anchor baby citizens pushing for the legalization of all those illegals while at the same time promising that if they get this amnesty they will secure our border and crack down on those who hire illegals.

The when it comes to dealing with illegal immigration the government has a history of going back on their word to deal with.With the last amnesty deal they were supposed to crack down on those who hire illegals,secure our borders and only let qualified people get amnesty.They let all the illegals become legal.The once in a blue moon token gesture  round up of illegals while at the same time not throwing the business owner in jail is not cracking down on employers who hire illegals. Since there are 12-20 million people in this country illegally it is obvious that they did not secure our borders.

With the federal government's history of dealing with illegal immigration the McCain Kennedy amnesty is only seen as a benefit for the illegals,the pro-slave wage lobby and pro-cheap vote lobby,not the vast majority of Americans who want our borders secure and our immigration laws respected,obeyed and enforced.

[cannon_fodder]

It appears that you are blind to any reason on this issue and have interest in discussing it, but perhaps other people do so I shall respond:

1)   You used the word "amnesty" 9 times in your response in 12 total sentences.  The bill had conditions attached to it, it did not grant amnesty.  No matter how much Rush and Clark Howard use the word to describe the bill, it does not make it so.  A return trip to their country or origin, a $5,000 fine and other stipulations are no "amnesty" by definition.  A convicted DUI offender who gets community service did not receive "amnesty."  Perhaps they got off light, but the word amnesty essentially means "pardon."

2) This bill had nothing to do with our sovereignty.  Granting immigration status is the right of a nation and the exercise of our sovereign power, not giving it away.  I believe you have this concept confused with something else.

3) I think you are unique in thinking doing nothing is a viable solution.  If this is not your true opinion, what is the solution?  Keeping in mind that even the most mexican hating realist who knows anything about the labor market pretends we can fill all the positions in which the Mexicans "took 'er jobs."

4) Have you though of the consequence of removing 20,000,000 workers from the labor force?  There are not that many unemployed American's - so who is going to fill those voids?  

Never mind the fact that no economic model shows that immigration has an appreciable downward effect on wages, the loss of such a workforce would result in a massive economic recession.  Pretending each worker has an economic impact of $25K (which is a dramatic under estimation, IMPACT does not equal wages), that is a direct loss of $625,000,000,000.00 to the economy.  The real effects would be well in excess of $1 TRILLION in GDP.  That would be a remarkable recession.  

5) No alternative.  The United States does not issue enough visas to keep up with demand from the outside, nor from the inside.  Those that want to come in and qualify must wait a decade.  Those that are here and want to bring in workers, relatives, or other people have similar issues.  People that try as hard as they can and are extremely qualified to come to the USA and prosper are often not given the chance.  

I know attorney's, doctors, accountants, artists and engineers that could not get a permanent visa to the USA.  Thank god we kept their filth out or we would REALLY be in trouble.

6) You're right, the government does a horrible job with immigration.  That's why it needs to change.  However, punishing the employer who needs labor as lack of immigration starves the market doesnt make much sense.  Punishing the farmer who wants to find a better life for his family and has no way of legally entered seems contrary to American values.  At the same time, having a flood of undocumented illegal SOMEONES running around the country possibly posing a security risk, avoiding taxes, lacking insurance, and over whelming public services is not acceptable...

so doing nothing does not seem like a good idea.

[Lister]

From what I understand, Kennedy wanted to grant felons the right to stay in the U.S. if they would sign a document declaring that they would no longer commit any felons. Is that true?

I am quite sure about this; the Kennedy/McCain bill would have allowed known gang members to stay in the U.S. if they were to simply sign a document stating that they would no longer be involved in gang activity. This is crazy.

I don't have the time to argue every point that you made right now CF (although I respect your argument), but the government has allowed this illegal immigration problem to grow to the point to where it is now a huge problem. They allowed it to grow by refusing to enforce the laws and secure our borders for decades.

Now, as you argue it, we have this problem and the only way to solve it is to grant a pathway to citizenship for people that have broken the law to get here. It may not be total amnesty because of fines and such, but tell me what the government is going to do to enforce the fine and returning these people to their place of origin if a large majority of them refuse to do so under the proposed new law?

By your own admittance, we don't have the power or will to enforce the laws as they are today, so how will this very same government enforce fines and return people to their own country if the bill would have become law?

How are they going to keep track of the 12-20 million and enforce fines if they can't do it now? Do you honestly believe that the large majority of these people are going to come forward and fess up and honor our laws if they haven't done so already? BTW, nothing (I mean nothing) should be done, in my opinion, until we secure our borders using a fence combined with technology and personnel.

[Lister]

Hey, I just noticed, I'm now a "Citizen." You can't make me pay any fines!!! [^]

[Conan71]

I think the enormity of the problem is sinking in with our legislators.

I'm sure there are a lot of them saying: "If we would have just sealed the border back in '86..."

John Sullivan, like him or not, was on Joe Kelley's show on KRMG this morning.  He said the Senate is pretty out of touch with reality on the issue.  He alluded to one Senator making the comment: "I guess my constituents must really care about this issue."

[Lister]

quote:Originally posted by Conan71

I think the enormity of the problem is sinking in with our legislators.

I'm sure there are a lot of them saying: "If we would have just sealed the border back in '86..."

John Sullivan, like him or not, was on Joe Kelley's show on KRMG this morning.  He said the Senate is pretty out of touch with reality on the issue.  He alluded to one Senator making the comment: "I guess my constituents must really care about this issue."

That's one of the reasons I'm for term limits. Career politicians simply lose touch with what it's like being an everyday Joe. I realize that term limits would ensure some good ones got ousted along with the bad, but I think our government is starting to take on more of a ruling class persona rather than one that is representative of the people. The fact that it's taken this long and so many people screaming for them to only start "getting it" now is a perfect example of that.

[Lister]

I've been reading S 1348 (the bill online) and you know what I think it all boils down to?

Trust.

The bill actually has provisions in it that, if they were judiciously carried out, I wouldn't have much of a problem with.

But, if the government actually thinks the public trusts them anymore, they are grossly mistaken. They'll no more enforce the provisions in this bill than they would the current laws they've been neglecting for over 20 years.

Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.


Here's a good example of what I'm talking about. The following is an excerpt from the bill.


''(a) ANNUAL INCREASES.—The Secretary of Homeland Security shall, subject to the availability of appropriations for such purpose, increase the number of positions for full-time active-duty border patrol agents within the Department of Homeland Security such positions for which funds were appropriated for the preceding fiscal year)
(1) 2,000 in fiscal year 2008;
''(2) 2,400 in fiscal year 2009
''(3) 2,400 in fiscal year 2010
''(4) 2,400 in fiscal year 2011
''(5) 2,400 in fiscal year 2012

Wasn't one of Bush's campaign promises to increase the border patrol by 2000 (or more?)? Didn't happen as far as I recall.

Also, didn't the Senate vote to fund a border fence for 700 miles across our Southern Border before the elections? Suddenly, that got cut back to less than a third of its original size after the elections..


All of these are smokescreens to get votes, and once those votes are attained and these creeps get into office, they renege on their promises.

I think the American people are frankly getting fed up with promises and trust being broken. That's probably the biggest reason this bill didn't pass - because they simply don't trust these career politicians any longer.

[Conan71]

Lister- in re: term limits.

That is what happens when people set their own salaries and limits on tenure.

How many people do you know with a $180K per year job who would say: "I promise I'll quit after six years!"?

The whole forgotten "Contract For America" is why Newt Gingrich wouldn't get my vote if he formally announces for President.  I figured term limits would vanish like a fart in the wind and it did.

We allow it to happen though.  The only way to ever change it would be a 100% overhaul (i.e. refusing to vote for a single incumbent) of the Congress & Senate, but that will never happen.

It's all about votes and being able to stay in a cushy job.  What is happening with this bill is they are fighting over a potential 20 mm voting bloc whilst trying to piss off the fewest amount of presently registered voters.  Good luck with that, I say. [V]

[Lister]

quote:Originally posted by Conan71

Lister- in re: term limits.

That is what happens when people set their own salaries and limits on tenure.

How many people do you know with a $180K per year job who would say: "I promise I'll quit after six years!"?

The whole forgotten "Contract For America" is why Newt Gingrich wouldn't get my vote if he formally announces for President.  I figured term limits would vanish like a fart in the wind and it did.

We allow it to happen though.  The only way to ever change it would be a 100% overhaul (i.e. refusing to vote for a single incumbent) of the Congress & Senate, but that will never happen.

It's all about votes and being able to stay in a cushy job.  What is happening with this bill is they are fighting over a potential 20 mm voting bloc whilst trying to piss off the fewest amount of presently registered voters.  Good luck with that, I say. [V]

I hear ya Conan, and agree. I guess we've turned into a country of crooks, only out to please our wallets instead of standing up to do what's right. In this whole mess, the real villains are sitting right up there in DC. I hate to think what this country will be like in 10-20 years, and not because of illegal immigration, but the trend people have toward lining their pockets as much as they can instead of standing up for what they believe is right.