Perhaps Republicans in congress will be emboldened by polls showing solid majorities against illegal immigration and opposed to making it easier. President Out To Lunch meanwhile continues to make speeches calling for an amnesty/guest worker provision as part of any reform. Here is the problem with that approach. We already know his administration will not enforce the minimal laws we have now, and nearly five years after 9/11, cannot even bring itself to hire border patrol agents or build a damn fence. Hell, under Bush's timid approach, we tolerate mexican soldiers invading our country and shooting at out-gunned local sheriffs and border patrol agents to protect drug smugglers. Bush has already called the Minutemen "vigilantes." With that record, it is clear he can't be trusted to enforce any reform provisions that inconvenience illegals. Therefore, any legislation that appears "balanced" in enhancing enforcement as it provides a guest worker --which is really an amnesty program-- in practice will be all carrot and no stick. ********************************* Polls: Public Concerned About Immigration Mar 27 2:43 PM US/Eastern Email this story By The Associated Press Most people in the United States think illegal immigration is a serious problem. A solid majority oppose making it easier for illegal immigrants to become legal workers or citizens. Some findings in recent polling: _ Some 59 percent say they oppose allowing illegal immigrants to apply for legal, temporary-worker status, an NBC News-Wall Street Journal poll found. _ More than six in 10, 62 percent, say they oppose making it easier for illegal immigrants to become citizens, according to a Quinnipiac University poll. Nine in 10 in that poll say they consider immigration to be a serious problem _ with 57 percent of those polled saying very serious. _ Three-fourths say the United States is not doing enough along its borders to keep illegal immigrants out, a Time Magazine poll found. The NBC-WSJ poll was taken in March, Quinnipiac in February and Time in January. The NBC-WSJ and Time polls surveyed about 1,000 adults and had a margin of sampling error of plus or minus 3 percentage points. The Quinnipiac poll of 1,892 registered voters had a margin
Senate Cuts Part of House Immigration Bill Mar 27, 4:03 PM (ET) By SUZANNE GAMBOA (AP) WASHINGTON (AP) - As immigration rights activists rallied outside the Capitol, senators broke Monday from the House's get-tough approach by refusing to make criminals of people who help illegal immigrants. The Senate Judiciary Committee adopted an amendment by Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., that would protect church and charitable groups, as well as individuals, from criminal prosecution for providing food, shelter, medical care and counseling to undocumented immigrants. "Charitable organizations, like individuals, should be able to provide humanitarian assistance to immigrants without fearing prosecution," Durbin said. The committee also approved more than doubling the current force of 11,300 Border Patrol agents in an effort to stem the tide of new undocumented workers arriving daily. It voted to add 2,000 agents next year and 2,400 more annually through 2011. In December the House voted to make offers of non-emergency aid a felony. Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, proposed Monday requiring humanitarian groups providing aid to illegal immigrants to register with the Department of Homeland Security but withdrew the idea in the face of opposition from the Senate panel. The immigration bills have sparked protests around the country, and with the committee's action on Monday, demonstrators at the front of the Capitol claimed to have already had an impact. Among the more than 1,000 demonstrators were at least 200 clergy members, dozens of them wearing handcuffs to protest the House's action. "This is not about legislation any more," said Jorge Medina, an immigrant from Honduras now living in Charlotte, N.C. "This is about feelings now. We are Americans, too. We are not from Mars and we are not from the moon." President Bush used a naturalization ceremony Monday for swearing in 30 new citizens from 20 countries to warn critics of his proposal to let some illegal immigrants remain in the United State against stoking anti-immigrant feelings. "The immigration debate should be conducted in a civil and dignified way," the president said as lawmakers began tackling the hot-button election issue of what to do with the nation's estimated 11 million illegal immigrants. More than 500,000 people rallied in Los Angeles on Saturday, demanding that Congress abandon the House-passed measures that would make being an undocumented immigrant a felony and would erect a 700-mile fence along the 2,000-mile U.S.-Mexico border. Similar but smaller protests were held in Dallas, Phoenix, Milwaukee and Columbus, Ohio, over the weekend. On Monday, thousands of demonstrators, many waving U.S. and Mexican flags, marched through Detroit. And hundreds of students walked out of high schools Monday in Dallas and Huntington Park, Calif. The committee faces a midnight deadline for completing a bill with a version of the "guest worker" program that Bush wants for illegal immigrants. The House rejected that program and Majority Leader Bill Frist has said the Senate will start debating a bill Tuesday without it if the committee fails. Overhauling the nation's immigration laws "is not going to be easy," Bush said at the naturalization ceremony at Constitution Hall two blocks from the White House. "No one should play on people's fears or try to pit neighbors against each other," Bush said. "No one should pretend that immigrants are threats to America's identity because immigrants have shaped America's identity. "No one should claim that immigrants are a burden on our economy because the work and enterprise of immigrants helps sustain our economy," the president said. "We should not give in to pessimism. If we work together I am confident we can meet our duty to fix our immigration system and deliver a bill that protects our people, upholds our laws and makes our people proud." Since the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, calls for tougher border security have dominated debate over the knotty problem of controlling immigration. But a tough immigration-enforcement bill passed by the House last year has galvanized forces that want worker programs for illegal immigrants already in the country. "We will not accept enforcement-only approaches," said Cecilia Munoz, vice president of the National Council of La Raza, a Hispanic advocacy group. Senators up for re-election this year are being forced by the debate to juggle the demand from voters for tighter borders to keep out terrorists and businesses who look to the tide of immigrants to help fill jobs. Employers and immigration advocates prefer a bill drafted by Sens. John McCain, R-Ariz., and Edward M. Kennedy, D-Mass., that would allow illegal immigrants to become eligible for permanent residency after working for six years. Both McCain and Frist are likely candidates for the Republican presidential nomination next year. Another approach offered by Cornyn and Sen. Jon Kyl, R-Ariz., would let illegal immigrants get temporary work permits for up to five years. They would have to leave the United States but could then apply for legal re-entry.
I'd say impreach Bush for everything you have written, but the Repubs are fine with invasion of Mexicans as long as its under the Bush Admin, and the Dems would rather try and impreach Bush because the NSA listened to some terrorists making phone calls . . . such a shame . . .
Bush has either lost his mind or is so totally in the pocket of the employer lobby that he doesn't mind taking the republicans down to a crushing November defeat. Consider his statements: "No one should play on people's fears or try to pit neighbors against each other," Bush said. "No one should pretend that immigrants are threats to America's identity because immigrants have shaped America's identity. "No one should claim that immigrants are a burden on our economy because the work and enterprise of immigrants helps sustain our economy," the president said. "We should not give in to pessimism. If we work together I am confident we can meet our duty to fix our immigration system and deliver a bill that protects our people, upholds our laws and makes our people proud." This from a President who has resolutely refused to enforce the immigration laws. Perhaps he should talk to the Governor of California about how much of a burden illegal immigrants are on that state's economy. And I guess having entire sections of cities that do not speak what should be our official language, English, doesn't change the character of the country at all. Or having one set of laws for native born, taxpaying citizens who have to have valid driver's license, liability insurance,etc and another for illegals is not a problem either. Or allowing a vast migration of people who think the entire southwest should be part of mexico. If our economy is dependent on illegal day laborers, we are in more trouble than anyone suspected. Here's an idea: maybe GM could solve its problems by firing all those expensive union workers and hiring illegals to do the work.
Ironically, what you suggest could well happen. If enough republicans are turned off by this surrender to illegals, the Dem's could take over the House and Senate. I'm sure one of their priorities would be to impeach Bush.
I'm glad you're so liberal when it comes to criticizing the punishment of African-American criminals yet you imply "how dare" to impoverished Mexicans immigrating to El Norte in hopes of earning a living wage. Perhaps we should just let Mexicans starve at home and then we'll do the "humanitarian" thing like maybe airlift them some Spam.
AAA, being that I'm a guy who has a certain prejudice against all Americans who aren't of Euro descent, I should have a natural axe to grind on this argument. Certainly two things are true. One, porous borders best enable terrorists to sneak in the United States. Two, there's been clear social dis heaval in certain border states/cities who've shouldered the burden of illegal immigration. Those are super duper important considerations. We'd all agree that we need strong borders. But what about those who are already here? You and immigration foes are kidding yourselves if you fail to recognize the logistical, legal, economic and moral considerations of an imposed cleansing. There's whole industries that would be shut down. Not to mention the issue of children who were born here. After all, they're legal citizens. Bush is basically on the right side here from most angles of the debate.
So basically what you are saying is that because of Bush's intentional failure to enforce the law, the problem is just too big to solve now? Sorry, I can't accept that. Maybe we don't deport every illegal, but why can't we deport the ones that the police pick up? Now in many cities the police are not even allowed to ask about their status and are under orders not to report them. Even when they do report them to Immigration, often the reponse is, let them go, we don't have space for them or people to pick them up. Until that situation is resolved, I can't see how we can even discuss reforms that would allow more to stay here legally and encourage no telling how many more to come illegally. Because we really mean it this time? Who would believe that? I am not all that moved by the plight of businesses who can only be viable by violating the law. First, it disadvantages those who are not willing to violate the law. Second, it hurts our own workers. Construction work used to be considered a pretty decent blue collar job. Now forget it. Only mexicans need apply. This thing is going to split the republican party. I won;t say down the middle because large majorities reject Bush's position, so if just a fraction of those normally reliable republican voters stay home, Bush and his congressional majorities are toast.
No kidding here. Not sure what you mean by an imposed cleansing, but if the current laws were simply enforced and illegal aliens were not given all the handouts in the form of welfare, free education, and free health care, and were made to pay taxes, like everyone else here legally, many would simply deport themselves. But, why enforce the laws? Instead the President wants "guest workers" . . . but the joke is on him, they won't leave. If they all came here to work, where did all the gangs and crime come from??? Now more than ever they are going to bring everyone in their huge familia here. SO we the taxpayers get to pay for grandma and grandpa's stay in nursing homes. They don't pay taxes, they aren't gonna start. Not to mention what they have done to wages (drove em into the ground.) They demand free healthcare, and we'll give it to them, while suckers like you and I pay more and more every year. Not sure about you but the drug resistant TB and Hansen's disease they bring BECAUSE THEY ARE NOT SCREENED, kinda scare me . . . No reason for them to learn english, they just have to press two (on the phone), and of course at great cost to the government they must be provided interpreters. They are just as every bit racist as the next person. At best they don't care for you, and your culture, many by into the class welfare and communist crap, and you have what they want and if you don't give it to them, they will just take it (As seen on TV Saturday) I can attest to all of this, I live in California, I see it every day, several times a day. Dismiss me as a racist, or whatever, time will tell, actually it already has . . .
What language is Los Angeles, San, Diego, San Francisco, San Mateo, Santa Cruz, Santa Ana, San Simeon, Chula Vista, Mission Viejo, Bakersfield....Well maybe not the last one. That's probably Buck Owens or Merle Haggard. Not often I disagree with you and AAA. Perhaps you guy's are right but in Chicago Mexican's are vital to economic growth. And I also believe immigrants are a big variable in the housing boom. They supported the lower end of the market themselves, allowing a trickle up in prices throughout the country. I read in the NYT that even Watts is now majority Mexican. Wouldn't you rather see Oakland and Hunter's Point be Mexican rather than what's there now?