Wednesday, June 06, 2007
Two Amendments for the Immigration Bill
For Bush, the apology would be nationally televised and during the next 12 months every public speaking appearance would include a brief apology. All Senators and Representatives would hold formal public apologies in their respective states and districts.
Secondly, the federal government would give to the citizens of the U.S. any and all funds predicted to be collected and from illegal immigrants in back taxes, fines , etc. as well as any funds collected above the predicted amount for the next ten years. Note the word "predicted." If the government doesn't collect the money, we get it anyway. And, no new taxes. Cut programs if necessary.
Lou Dobbs has some thoughts about why Congress has forgotten the American people.
Almost five decades ago, there were only four Congressional caucuses. Today there are about 200, most of which are dedicated solely to particular countries, regions, races, ethnicities, specific issues and special interests.
Group and interest politics have overwhelmed not only our public dialogue but also our legislative process. When our elected officials spend more time and effort legislating on behalf of specific interest groups, the common good and national interest are subordinated by the very people we elect to serve all citizens and the nation. It should be no surprise that approval ratings of the president and Congress are so low or that so many of us believe this country is headed in the wrong direction.
Are we as a nation well-served by a Congress that created the Albanian Issues Caucus, the Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus, the Congressional Black Caucus, the Organic Caucus, the Caucus on Indonesia, the Caucus on Swaziland, the Congressional Israel Allies Caucus or the Congressional Caucus on India and Indian Americans?
What about the 280 million working men and women and their families? We would be better served if we rid Congress of these spurious and divisive caucuses that serve narrowly focused special interest groups and instead create the We the People Caucus.
I'm still amazed by Bush's arrogant statements.
Yet Bush now condemns them as unwilling to do “what’s right for America” and accuses their allies in Congress of using “empty rhetoric” to misrepresent the bill as a form of amnesty for illegal aliens. Bush appealed for “a chance to fix the problems in a comprehensive way that enforces our border and treats people with decency and respect.”Bush accuses the immigration bill's opponents of not wanting to do what's "right for American" and "empty rhetoric." Then he talks about treating people "decency and respect." I wonder if he listens to himself.
It's all about money. Both parties are interested in making sure the agricultural industry, construction industry and their other corporate friends have a large supply of cheap labor. What a great way to look good. Raise minimum wage as if you're helping the poor. Then bring in the cheap labor to ensure real wages stay low. PsychoPhil talks about losing 35% of his family income because minimum wage was raised in his home state.
a regular guy makes some excellent comments. The Immigration Reform and Control Act (1986) -
"It created a law against hiring illegal immigrants AND it gave amnesty to Illegal Immigrants that worked in the USA since January 1982. At that time 2.7 million Illegals where given amnesty. Sound familiar? It's deja veu all over again."
"President Bush asked commented just last week that the main reason people do not have confidence in this bill, is due to the Government's perceived inability to enforce it. He said, ' give us the chance to show you'. Mr. President, you did show us...this is called history."
"The 1986 bill is still intact and being abysmally enforced. The new bill [S1348 in the Senate] in fact gives the same offerings, yet the amnesty happens over a longer period.
Does it not makes sense to tighten the controls fist, get the rules and processes in place first a.k.a. a foundation, then consider how to handle the tonnage of illegal immigrants."
S1348 is on its last legs for now but the fight is not over.
The thing that got my attention on this bill (there's many, this is just one of them) is the notion of ending chain migration. "This bill will do it" - well that is if you enjoy the Chinese water torture approach!!!
Here's the deal - the 'chain' ends when the backlog is complete and adresses family-based applications. Sound reasonable till you read the numbers. The back log is ~ 5.9 million folks. So S1398 'ups' the allotment of immigrants from 147,000 to 440,000 that can enter per year.
The backlog is exhausted in 12.7 years. Hummm smells a bit fishy yes? Well, you say, we will scale up, and get the best and the brightest with this allotment, a win-win. According to New Immigrant Survey the numbers indicate that 60 percent of family chain immigrants have only a high school degree or less; 38 percent have not made it through high school.
OK, but you say that is no better then what we produce in the USA on our own soil , well the numbers suggest 91% of native-born Americans complete their high school degree. So the best and the brightest is a moot point in this effort.
If you care to read more on this , let me offer two data points:
White House, "Fact Sheet: Ending Chain Migration", May 29, 2007, at www.whitehouse.gov/infocus/immigration/
Always good to confuse the issues with facts!
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
Links to this post:
Subscribe to Posts [Atom]