Dec 26 2006
Will Bush Make Adjustments On Illegal Immigration?
Now that the Congressional Republicans have made themselves impotent on national issues by sacrificing progress to grasp onto politically unsustainable positions, the President is going to do what it takes to get major problems addressed. And while no solution is perfect, progress is a winning strategy over holding issues hostage. The big issue for the right is going to be immigration. The Fence Only crowd are now completely out of the political equation, so the question is whether Bush stands by his long term position on immigration reform, which held the broadest support in the country, or whether he will make adjustments.
Counting on the support of the new Democratic majority in Congress, Democratic lawmakers and their Republican allies are working on measures that could place millions of illegal immigrants on a more direct path to citizenship than would a bill that the Senate passed in the spring.
The lawmakers are considering abandoning a requirement in the Senate bill that would compel several million illegal immigrants to leave the United States before becoming eligible to apply for citizenship.
The lawmakers are also considering denying financing for 700 miles of fencing along the border with Mexico, a law championed by Republicans that passed with significant Democratic support.
Details of the bill, which would be introduced early next year, are being drafted. The lawmakers, who hope for bipartisan support, will almost certainly face pressure to compromise on the issues from some Republicans and conservative Democrats.
Still, the proposals reflect significant shifts since the November elections, as well as critical support from the Homeland Security Department.
First off, the Democrats will not want to repeat the disasterous mistake of the Republicans and not address the issue. If they try to play for time like the House Reps did they will rappidly lose any momentum they have (and they don’t have a lot given they are seen as the lesser of two evils right now). So Bush has the stronger hand. No one is going to force him into a position he disagrees with deeply. That means strengthening the borders will still be a key element of the final solution. But so will the Guest Worker program.
Say a thankful good-bye to the excessively punitive approach lauded by the far right. There are punishments in the Bush approach. People need to pay up all back taxes. That takes years to do and really constricts a family’s spending money. Then there will be the move to put immigrant jobs onto the open market under full employment and tax laws. That will further reduce the take home pay of those in those jobs as money goes from salary to taxes and benefits. The lesson of economics is a harsh one that cannot be avoided. So there will be a huge financial penalty in the guest worker program that will last for 3-5 years as people make amends for all those years working illegally. The need to ship them across the border for a day or two and force them to lose their homes, etc is not accomplishing anything. But it does make it undesirable to partake in the program. And we want people to go willingly into the program so we don’t have to spend law enforcement resources on this effort – which only takes away from anti-terrorism efforts.
In addition, the fact that immigrant workers will not be allowed to use any of their time here illegally to apply for citizenship is another well tuned penalty. I am not so worried about the immigrant who becomes a citizen 10-15 years from now as I am about the lack of security on the border and the enormous illegal population inside this country that can ccover up an Al Qaeda force of hundreds. Our national priorities do not include excessive punitive measures against migrant workers which have no effect on the wages of American workers (who are not field hands by nature) but do effect the prices we face and we can export.
I predict Bush gets his package pretty much as is and the Dems will claim they took out the punitive, right wing aspects of the program. And Bush will be the one who saves the border enhancements. And the right will not be grateful one bit, setting the stage for the 2008 repeat losses. And the general populace will see this all as a good thing.
Bikerken, you misinterpreted a little of what I said. I said it would be meaningless as far as HELPING the illegal situation., I agree with you about the implementation, basically there would be none. It is just physically impossible. I also agree with you about the numbers. I don’t see how anyone can have a meaningful number. No one knows if 200 or 400 cross the border each night. No one is even attempting to enforce the border crossings. If anyone knows of anyone even attempting to enforce any immigration laws, they should publicize it.
My original comment disappeared.
To answer some of the poits raised, I would say that this an impeachable offense not only for the President, but it is his duty to ENFORCE the laws and to PROTECT our country.
This amnesty breaks at least these…
bikerken,
i reside in the capital of illegal immigration along with their attendant rights–san francisco, california where all immigration law gets written.
i will tell you this–no matter what laws get passed none will be enforced that upset any small particular group. various legal suits will be brought so that there will not be any enforcement that is punitive. it was for these reasons, and a few others, that i support a 2000 mile fence akin to the israeli fence.
http://tinyurl.com/guk5a
as for the folks that are here, it’s too late to do anything about them except throw any past, present or future felons over the fence and green/national ID card the rest for employment purposes. the goal of the fence is strictly to prevent another 40 million and their future children from coming–and they are coming–and to keep the criminals and gang bangers permanently out. with a 20 year break from illegal migration blue collar wages might go up, our balkanization might end and this reality might be prevented:
http://tinyurl.com/gz9v7
the real hoot in all this is we think we can fight a war on global terror yet we can’t even secure our border. i laugh so hard i cry. if al quaeda wants to come here they can simply stroll across the border the way the other 2 million do every year. welcome to america!
It sounds like if For Enforcement is still capable of putting two and two together he might even recognize America’s immigration
problem is more dangerous to America than France’s immigration
problem is to France, hence his scorn for France on the issue is
at best a “misery loves company” phenomenon.
I sent out an article the other day that said in 1980, the average Meat Packing Job payed $19.00 per hour. Today they average $9.00 per hour.
Swift has Raised it’s pay, and Americans are now applying!
Also, it looks like Kennedy and Mc Cain are re-writting their bill to grant Amnisty and take out any provision that states anyone will have to leave this country.
The Fence, no matter the length, looks to be dead. Never to be built.
I just finished Mexifornia by Victor Davis Hanson. Certainly the most Moderate of all the books I’ve read on this issue. I think A.J would like it more than I. Most of his family is either dating, or married to people from Mexico. I honestly think A.J. and a few others here would enjoy it. Of the 5 I’ve read, it’s the tamest. But I like to get everyones opinions and Ideas on this issue.
I’ve never seen any analysis by anyone, anywhere, that stated the Republicans lost because of any pro Enforcement of Immigration Laws. I’d be interested in read any that A.J. or anyone else has found. Thru my research, I’ve found it was a lack of enforcement, Spending, Pork add ons, Iraq, etc. Can anyone cite such analysis? A.J. says it in every post, but unless I’ve missed his linking to it, which is possible, I’m not aware of it.
Everyone, have a great new year!
One more thing. Six years ago, the Hispanic Population at the Mecklenburg County Jail was 1%. Now, it’s 15%. Luckily, the Sherriff here is serious about this problem, and was one of the first in the Country to get his Deputies trained with the Fed’s. to check their Immigration Status. Nearby Gaston County is now doing the same. The Ms 13 Gangs, as well as other Hispanic Gangs, are really hurting this area. But this region is trying to respond. Hopefully, Charlotte will get of the Top 10 List of most dangerous Cities in the U.S. But it wont be quick, and I’m sure it wont be easy.
Here’s a simple rule to follow: anytime Strata posts on immigration,
go to http://www.vdare.com to obtain a corrective vision.
http://blog.vdare.com/archives/2006/12/27/gerald-ford-dies-1965-remembered/
speaking of vdare and Strat’s honored Gerald Ford. Read how Ford betrayed America in 1965 on immigration and again on the discriminatory anti-white Michigan University quota issue.
I was wondering what the frequency was, Ken. Now that the \\:// dare has been thrown down, I’ve got it. Yikes! Force fields UP.
dbostan, as I said, signing a bill into law that congress passes is not an impeachable offense.
I respect Gerald Ford as one who did the right thing at the right time in pardoning Nixon. I believe what Nixon did was wrong, but up until that point, it was similar to many things that most of the President’s did routinely. Once the Dems set out to get him, and succeeded, it changed politics for all time. But Ford did the right thing in the pardon.
The one negative of Ford was that he was a member of, and upheld the conclusion of the Warren Commission that L. H. Oswald was the lone assassin of JFK.
Anyone that has even made a cursory exam of the facts know that Oswald was only the patsy. The Warren Commission claims to have made their conclusion because it was ‘best’ for the country to believe there was no conspiracy. It may have been best, at that time.
Ken,
I use to go to V Dare quite often. In fact, I think that is where I found, and baught the book: Fighting Immigration Anarchy- American Patriots Battle To Save The Nation by Daniel Sheehy. It was a good book with many different perspectives from people of many different backgrounds. Terry Anderson’s story on the changes in L.A. were amazing. I try to read as many different books and articles as possible. Each one is a bit different, and each has many unique perspectives. I think most of the posters at this blog have read very little in book form. Mostly the local paper,Wash Post, N.Y.T., cable news etc. I don’t watch any tv news anymore, even though I have a satellite dish. I just think it’s all pretty bad, even FOX. But that’s just me. From time to time I’ll catch a special on a particular topic, if I get advanced notice it’s going to be on. I’ve enjoyed reading a few posters here, including many of yours, BikerKen, Enforcement, etc.
Two other things on immigration I don’t think many people take into consideration. Water and Electricity. Legal or Illegal, has anyone thought about these two concerns? The more our population grows, the more we need more of each. Question: are there any new reservores or Electrical plants in your area? I Thought so.
My mother lives in Central Florida. The big problem: WATER
I currently live in the Charlotte, N.C. area. The Big Problem: WATER
I moved here from Norfolk, Va. Their big Problem: WATER
Arizona is the biggest growing state. The Big Problem: WATER Nevada is second in population growth. Their Big Problem: WATER
As a kid we lived in Anaheim, Ca. The big problem: WATER
Lets face it, our country could fit a Billion People in it. But the problem is, people tend to move where there are jobs. Where there are jobs, there are problems with WATER! Virginia Beach built a pipeline to Lake Gaston, N.C., several hundred miles away. it took 9 years to complete if I remember correctly. Desalination Plants are way too costly. All that sea water, and you can’t drink it! So, we just do not have the infrastructure to support million more people without finding many more sources of WATER. And we all know we need more Electrical Power Plants. But the wackos wont let us build Nuclear Plants. They don’t want more Coal Plants either. We certainly need to solve these problems, I would think, before we keep letting more and more legal and illegal people in here. Our Tax Burden will be huge in the years to come. In fact, my water and sewer bills have already went from an average of $6.00 a month in 1999 to $17.00 a month now. That is for EACH, not combined.
Yes, SteveVVS, the posters here don’t read an ything that rocks their world, which is old-fogey moderately conservative 1970s rehash.
For Enforcement makes it clear he doesn’t read any “liberal rags.”
Turns out however amconmag.com is a “liberal rag” because it opposes the war–and the AP newswire is a “liberal rag” in his Humpty Dumpty world of redefined-to-suit-and-soothe -him
words. Now that’s “cloistered,” and that’s why he lives in a world where conservatives still support the war even though more than half polled don’t. The site is too sophisticated in structure for the unread to dominate and Strata’s intricate dissection of the Litvenenko
issue compared to his rather distanced and detached rah-rah on the war is telling. “You can’t handle the truth,” as Jack said…
Strata on immigration is pretty much Wall Street Journal /US Chamber of Commerce/ cheap labor-loving moderate on the real war and “pour more troops in” on the phony and failed war, so
be forewarned.
stevevvs, The French guy is right, (rare for him) I don’t read the liberal rags. basically the same ones you said you don’t read. If you want to know what’s going on, and you read the NYTimes, all you get is mis-information. Same with all the liberal rags. Fox News, at least, attempts to get it right and at least you occasionally get some conservative news on Fox. You never get any positive conservative news on CBS, etc. amconmag, formerly a conservative mag, but has gone off the deep end supporting the libs, so what’s the difference in being a liberal rag and only printing liberal drivel. The NYTimes hasn’t written anything with the truth in it for at least 15 years, probably a lot more. (they don’t even pretend that what they write is true) Even those traitorous items they write are not correct, but they are traitorous. I read quite a bit, usually having at least 3 books going at any one time. The biggest problem I have in reading about the immigration issue is that it’s very discouraging. There is a solution to the problem, but we’ll never see it for many of the reasons you state. But the main reason is that the politicians DON’T want it solved. Everyone just jockeys for position and holds the view that will get them the next votes in the next election. People that say the fence won’t be built are, in effect, saying it’s all a shell game. Pass the law, don’t build it. Pass any other law, don’t do it.
Why do conservatives want us to win in Iraq. So that the people in France, like French guy, and most other countries in the world can continue to live in freedom without having to worry that when you get in your car to go to Walmart that you won’t run over an IED and blow yourself to hell. So that less events like 9/11 happen. So that we can sit here half the day, every day and write whatever we want to. If we don’t win in Iraq, we will be the ones living in the caves, like UBL, and afraid to use our satellite phone or internet because some nut will come and blow us up. If you only read liberal rags, you don’t understand that.
Water supply, there is no shortage of fresh water in the world, it’s just in the wrong places. For example 70% of all fresh water on earth is in Anarctica, so it doesn’t help us a hell of a lot. Where I live, there is no water shortage and will never be. In addition to several huge reservoirs, fresh water occurs from the surface down to 3 miles deep. So we don’t have anything to worry about in my state. I know there are serious probs in other areas though.
I visited in Phoenix a few years back and was surprised to find that they don’t have a water prob there. They have a huge reservoir nearby and seem to have an endless supply from the mountains.
Let’s deal with this issue:
“world where conservatives still support the war even though more than half polled don’t.
Most conservatives may or may not “support” the war, it depends on the difinition.
If the question is: Do you want America to lose in Iraq? what would the % be?
If the question is: Are you happy with the progress that is being made in Iraq? what would the % be.
If the question is: Is your unhappiness with the war because it is not going fast enough and we are only hearing negative news from the liberal rags? what would % be?
The question can be restated several ways. It is usually asked in a manner to get the answer that you want to get.
Believe it or not, there really are some people in the US that doesn’t want the US to win in Iraq and only hope for the worst.
Ken says that regularly. O’Reilly asked Letterman and Rosie on TV, Do you want the US to win in Iraq? both of them refused to answer the question. What does that say about them.
Let me ask Ken the same question.
Ken, do you want the US to win in Iraq? yes or no, simple question.
I know you’ll blow smoke and not give a yes or no answer, so the challenge is on. Yes or No?
Slightly off topic, but definitely related to immigration…
Michael Medved lets it rip today in his blog and I couldn’t agree more. It’s a scorcher and I’m pleased to see it posted at Townhall because there has been way too much of the extreme and outright kook point of view around that place.
[SNIP] The idea that there’s some malevolent, hidden agenda to abolish the USA through working more closely with Mexico and Canada to combat potential flu outbreaks is only slightly less sick and pathetic than the belief that our government orchestrated 9/11, or that Y2K would end civilization as we know it (because Bill Clinton wanted to declare martial law and suspend the election—remember that one?) The same bastards and creeps and jug-heads and drunks and reprobates (yes, they are all of the above) who are now scaring you over SPP or NAU or the Monster Highway were busy 7 years ago peddling the Year 2000 computer bug crapola (which I consistently derided and denied on the air). Did you huddle in fear, expecting blackouts and riots and food shortages on New Year’s eve seven years ago? If you did, don’t you feel embarrassed to entertain these new fears from the same asinine sources?
See:
Shame on Demagogues Exploiting “North American Union”!
http://michaelmedved.townhall.com/Blog.aspx
Enforcement,
I agree Fox is the best in news. But I still can’t stand them anymore. I use to watch Hannity and Colmbs. After 6 months of it, I was burnt! I just could not take Alan anymore, and frankly, Hannity repeats himself way to much. And some of the guests are nuts, and it usualy turns into a shouting contest. I like Brit Hume, but tire of many on his round table. I still watch 70% of the Fox News Sunday Shows, but that’s it. And no other Sunday Shows.
Water is a problem in much of the South and Southwest. Phoenix may currently be an exception, but many other cities in the region are having problems. Part of the problems are just finding sources of water, I.E. rivers, that we can still tap into. Many Communities oppose building such things, and Environmental groups always seem to find an insect, bird, or fish that just cant be disrupted! I’ve experianced the same thing in communities I’ve lived in when it comes to landfills. We all want our garbage picked up, but try opening a new landfill these days! Not In My Back Yard is always the cry we hear.
My current community landfill has about 2 years to go before it is “Full”. It is on land adjacent to Lowes Motor Speedway. And boy, is it a Mountain now! You can watch it’s growth each time you go to a NASCAR Race there! I’m waiting for the County to announce the next proposed location. There will be a lot of screaming, court battles, etc.
And now our entire region is connected by pipelines to help with WATER problems. I guess we will all run out together now, as we are not building or finding new sources. But we should be. Growth here is continuing at rapid paces.
What AJ fails to look at is the back end of any “legalization” program.
1) when legal, illegals will then be allowed to bring all immediate family members (wife, children, parents) into the United States.
2) when legal, illegals will then be demanding prevailing wages, the very thing that prevents employers from hiring legal citizens and creates the need for illegals in the first place.
3) once prevailing wages are demanded, the need for more “undocumented workers” will increase and the current crop of illegals will have put themselves out of a job, just as they have put American workers out of a job.
4) when legal, once those who worked for substandard wages will be eligible for social services, along with their family members who have come to the United States to join them. (it’s called welfare).
5) when legal, they will also be eligible for Earned Income Tax Credit refunds that could be as high as $4,000 per year which is your tax dollars given to those who earn less than about $35,000 a year.
6) the companies that once hired the illegals to gain substandard wage earning workers will not either look for more illegals or will ship their jobs overseas.
It is quite possible that for every “illegal” that is made legal, the number of immigrants could grow by three times accounting for the immigration of their family members. These will be people who have no skills, cannot contribute to our economy with taxable wages, who will be eligible for social services and will create an even greater drain on the tax bases. Not to mention there will be plenty of pro-illegal groups to advise them on how to collect social services and get a tax refund on taxes they never paid into the system to begin will. LULAC and LaRaza are just two such organizations.
Perhaps we could avoid all that by starting an “Adopt An Illegal” program where those of you who feel they have a right to be here, although they broke the law, could cover the cost of their medical bills, education for their children, housing and other services they will then be entitled to.
For Enforcement is a very confused cave-dweller. Over half of polled conservatives turned against the war very specifically because they
believed it was not winnable. Nor do they believe victory or loss
in Iraq affects the fanciful Wal-mart shopping explosion Neanderthal paranoids and their Israel-first indoctrination has taught them to fear. Many in fact agree with the CIA that US presence in Iraq makes an attack here MORE likely.
Now as to the mainstream media. All of it BACKED THE WAR initially whereas amconmag.com and chroniclesmagazine.org, two
“America First” periodicals on the Right, did not. So For Enforcement’s “liberals” were in his camp until the war went sour.
When the war went sour, the neocon rags tried to keep it hidden for as long as possible from their readership and the public. Phony “good news” out of Iraq was manufactured. Meaning even the “liberal
rags” were eventually more honest about the war’s debacle than
the liars For Enforcement salutes in his senility.