Immigration bill - does anyone have a wooden stake?

Or perhaps a silver bullet?

from JoeUser Forums

Some garlic cloves perhaps, or some magical, mystical, mumbo jumbo words to say that will ensure that the Immigration bill finally completely dies.

As noted previously, the new immigration bill that has been making it's way through the Congress in the U.S.A. (as of June 2007) is probably one of the worst bills in the history of all congressional bills, but it just doesn't seem to want to die already.

We thought it was dead and pretty much buried, but Pres. Bush and those that are supporting the bill wound up applying the defibrillator to it and brought it back to life, or at least to the level of a faint pulse.

When last I read about the issue, Pres. Bush was pleading with the Hispanic population to flood congress with calls supporting the bill.  While I don't begrudge the rights of Hispanics in the U.S.A. who wish to lobby on the issue, I would sincerely hope that the voices of thousands upon thousands of others would be drowning out those voices with demands that the congress step up and pass real, significant, immigration reform that includes real, strong, controls on our (U.S.A.) borders and real, strong, penalties for those that employ illegal immigrants in this country.

AFTER we tighten our borders, and after we nail those that have cheated the system by employing undocumented workers and paid them with money under the table, then perhaps we can take the time to decide just how many legal immigrants we wish to let into the country to perform jobs that people don't seem to want to do.  But lets please be sure that events happen in the proper order, and that we don't open up the gates to the country until we have our ducks all in a row.

politics
5,763 views 18 replies
Reply #1 from JoeUser Forums Top

I still think we may need some of these:

Buffy the Slayer with her Stake

... to really kill off the bill that just won't die.

Reply #2 from JoeUser Forums Top
FREE the political prisoners of MS-13!

While we're at it, free Mumia, resurrect Tookie, and open our borders. Let's give out country back to the criminals!
DeskScapes - Bring your desktop background to life.
Reply #3 from JoeUser Forums Top
This legislation is not just a free pass for anyone in the country illegally. It addresses exactly the issues, you say you are concerned about, border security and workplace enforcement.
Reply #4 from JoeUser Forums Top
This legislation is not just a free pass for anyone in the country illegally. It addresses exactly the issues, you say you are concerned about, border security and workplace enforcement.


Really, Loca? How does giving amnesty to gang members who came here illegally secure our borders? How does nullifying past blatant transgressions of the law amount to workforce enforcement?
Reply #5 from PolMach Forums Top
It doesn't give amnesty to gang members. Background checks will be made to root out the criminal element, and they will be deported. There is a lot of propoganda being put out about what this bill does or doesn't do. It doesn't do a service to anyone to be spewing out misinformation. This bill is stuck on one thing, the notion that illegal immigrants are being given amnesty. They are not. They being asked to pay a heavy fine for their activities and to go through a lengthy process that would give them a green card, and no guarentee of a path to citizenship.
Reply #6 from JoeUser Forums Top
It doesn't give amnesty to gang members.


You are denying that the bill contains a provision for gang members who renounce violence, whoman? You are willing to stick by that? So that when I prove you wrong with the TEXT of the bill everything you say loses ALL credibility?

I've already documented my position, whoman. It DOES grant amnesty for gang members. You know, for two people who have bashed Bush so repeatedly, you and Locamama are sure loving on him now!
Reply #7 from JoeUser Forums Top
It DOES grant amnesty for gang members.


http://truthlaidbear.com/immigrationbill.php

From the current bill

(B) by inserting after subparagraph (E) thefollowing: `(F) ALIENS ASSOCIATED WITH CRIMINAL GANGS- Unless the Secretary of Homeland Security or the Attorney General waives the application of this subparagraph, any alien who a consular officer, the Attorney General, or the Secretary of Homeland Security knows or has reason to believe has participated in a criminal gang (as defined in section 101(a)(52)), knowing or having reason to know that such participation promoted, furthered, aided, or supported the illegal activity of the criminal gang, is inadmissible.'.

(c) DEPORTABILITY. Section 237(a)(2) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8U.S.C. 1227(a)(2)) is amended by adding at the end the following:"(F) ALIENS ASSOCIATED WITH CRIMINAL GANGS- Any alien, in or admitted to the United States, who at any time has participated in a criminal gang (as defined in section 101(a)(52)), knowing or having reason to know that such participation will promote, further, aid, or supportthe illegal activity of the criminal gang is deportable. The Secretary of Homeland Security or the Attorney General may in his discretion waive this subparagraph."



You know, for two people who have bashed Bush so repeatedly, you and Locamama are sure loving on him now!


Even a broken clock is right two times a day.
Reply #8 from JoeUser Forums Top
I guess it's just a vast right wing conspiracy, Loca:

June 7, 2007 -- http://www.tothecenter.com/news.php?readmore=2091

In one of the higher profile votes of the day, the Senate voted 51 to 46 to reject an amendment proposed by Republican Sen. John Cornyn of Texas that could have made hundreds of thousands of illegal immigrants ineligible for legal status. According to the New York Times, the proposal would have permanently barred gang members, terrorists, and other convicted felons from the U.S. The amendment would have also denied legal status to illegal immigrants who had “flouted deportation orders or been convicted of identity theft or fraudulent use of identification documents.”

June 4, 2007 -- http://sessions.senate.gov/pressapp/record.cfm?id=275456

Instead of ensuring that members of violent gangs such as MS 13 are deported after coming out of the shadows to apply for amnesty, the bill will allow violent gang members to get amnesty as long as they “renounce” their gang membership on their application. [See p. 289: 34-36].

http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-na-immig7jun07,1,5061340.story?coll=la-headlines-politics

WASHINGTON — Supporters of a bipartisan immigration bill on Wednesday rebuffed one of the most serious challenges so far, defeating a measure that could have denied legalization to many illegal immigrants and moving the complicated legislation a step closer to passage in the Senate.

June 16, 2007 -- http://www.heritage.org/Research/Immigration/wm1468.cfm


7. Amnesty for Gang Members: Under Section 601(g)(2) of the bill, gang members would be eligible to receive amnesty. This comes at a time when violent international gangs, such as Mara Salvatrucha 13 (or "MS-13"), have brought mayhem to U.S. cities. More than 30,000 illegal-alien gang members operate in 33 states, trafficking in drugs, arms, and people. Deporting illegal-alien gang members has been a top ICE priority. The Senate bill would end that. To qualify for amnesty, all a gang member would need to do is note his gang membership and sign a "renunciation of gang affiliation."


Reply #9 from JoeUser Forums Top
As for the identity theft: if identity theft is no big deal, can I get a copy of all your identifying documents? I'd like to cash in on the demand by selling them.

Identity theft is a FELONY, Loca, for everyone except illegals!
Reply #10 from JoeUser Forums Top
Let's just say, Loca, I'm willing to stipulate to the biased nature of MY sources, if you're willing to stipulate to the biased nature of YOURS. And therein lies the rub. I would be willing to move to the center to find a workable solution for those who DO want opportunity (although one that wasn't a kick in the nads to all those who went through the legal process), IF and ONLY IF the left would make a concentrated effort to identify and deport criminals, and STOP pretending that what we see in city after city isn't there! There is a VERY ugly side to illegal immigration and until the left will acknowledge THAT, then there's no room for debate! I'm being reasonable here, you're moving out on a limb that's almost making Col. Gene look sane! You've let emotion override reason here, IMO, which is odd because that's not like you.

But I suppose you'll tell me the Latino gang members who took over the park's in the city's poor district are just a figment of my racist imagination, right?
Reply #11 from JoeUser Forums Top
Identity theft is a FELONY, Loca, for everyone except illegals!


It is a felony if illegals do it to. If illegal immigrants commit a crime, prosecute them. I have never said otherwise. My argument is that the pending legislation is not immunity from prosecution. It is not amnesty.

I put the link that I found the CURRENT immigration legislation in my response. It is the actual document so I do not believe that it is biased info. I will admit that I have a very hard time finding unbiased info on the web. If a study or statistics are referenced, I try to find the actual study and back up the statistics but it's not always possible.

The legislation is still a work in progress. I believe some of your info is not the most current.
Reply #12 from JoeUser Forums Top
Where's Van Helsing when you need him.
Reply #13 from JoeUser Forums Top

The legislation is still a work in progress.

Laws are not "works in progress".  They are the end.  If this one is not up to snuff (and it fails by a long shot on many counts), then either rework it (highly unlikely) or get rid of it.

Reply #14 from JoeUser Forums Top
First, thank you very much for that link, Loca. It is highly confusing, lol, but a useful link nonetheless.

Now I'm going to have to state that to understand what I am about to say, you need to understand that in other sections (near the one you cited) it acknowledges the AG's right to waive some of the requirements. And in 601(g), we find the following passage (entire passage cited so as to be read in context). My comments continue below:


(g) Content of Application Filed by Alien."

(1) Application Form.--The Secretary of Homeland Security shall create an application form that an alien shall be required to complete as a condition of obtaining Z nonimmigrant status.

(2) Application Information-

(A) In General.--The application form shall request such information as the Secretary deems necessary and appropriate, including but not limited to, information concerning the alien's physical and mental health; complete criminal history, including all arrests and dispositions; gang membership, renunciation of gang affiliation; immigration history; employment history; and claims to United States citizenship.

(3) Security and Law Enforcement Background Checks-

(A) Submission of Fingerprints- The Secretary may not accord Z nonimmigrant status unless the alien submits fingerprints and other biometric data inaccordance with procedures established by the Secretary.

(B) Background Checks- The Secretary shall utilize fingerprints and other biometric data provided by the alien to conduct appropriate background checks of such alien to search for criminal, national security, or other law enforcement actions that would render the alien ineligible for classification under this section.

(h) Treatment of Applicants-

(1) IN GENERAL- An alien who files an application for Z nonimmigrant status shall, upon submission of any evidence required under paragraphs (f) and (g) and after the Secretary has conducted appropriate background checks, to include name and fingerprint checks, that have not by the end of the next business day produced information rendering the applicant ineligible -

(A) be granted probationary benefits in the form of employment authorization pending final adjudication of the alien's application;

(B) may in the Secretary's discretion receive advance permission to re-enter the United States pursuant to existing regulations governing advance parole;

(C) may not be detained for immigration purposes, determined inadmissible or deportable, or removed pending final adjudication of the alien's application, unless the alien is determined to be ineligible for Z nonimmigrant status; and

(D) may not be considered an unauthorized alien (as defined in section 274A(h)(3) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1324a(h)(3))) unless employment authorization under subparagraph (A) is denied.

So it seems that once again the truth lies between the two extremes. While renunciation of gang membership is not an AUTOMATIC guarantee of obtaining a visa, the possibility DOES exist. I'm going to reiterate an earlier challenge, Loca. I'm willing to stipulate to the bias of my sources if you're willing to stipulate to the bias of yours.

Try to put emotion aside on this, Loca, and look at it from a position of reason (which experience has proven you're more than capable of doing). Yes, the extreme isolationist side is problematic and wrong, but so is the open borders crowd, which is a strong contingent among those who are providing a lot of the information on the other side. There are ways that we can still be compassionate, still provide opportunity for those who want it and at the same time slam the gates on the lawbreakers. You've not once acknowledged my concerns about the war zones on the border brought about by the drug traffickers. These traffickers ARE endangering the lives of Americans and casting a bad name on ALL illegals, and a good plan to improve relations would center around driving these elements OUT.
Reply #15 from JoeUser Forums Top
There are ways that we can still be compassionate, still provide opportunity for those who want it and at the same time slam the gates on the lawbreakers. You've not once acknowledged my concerns about the war zones on the border brought about by the drug traffickers. These traffickers ARE endangering the lives of Americans and casting a bad name on ALL illegals, and a good plan to improve relations would center around driving these elements OUT.


I agree. I do not want criminals to be giving citizenship. I think any illegal alien who commits a crime should be prosecuted for that crime. I do think the drug trade is a huge problem. I have heard that Laredo, my dad's hometown, is in crisis because of the ongoing drug problems.

I agree that the truth lies somewhere in between the extremes of rhetoric. I just get tired of the villification of all illegal immigrants as the number one cause of all problems in our country. Yes, illegal immigration is a problem.

As far as sources go. It's no secret that I've had a hard time finding unbiased information. I do try to find an unbiased source but it's not always possible.
Reply #16 from JoeUser Forums Top
I just get tired of the villification of all illegal immigrants as the number one cause of all problems in our country. Yes, illegal immigration is a problem.


I find a lot of the rhetoric about the bill going in that direction, but I have not seen many here at JU that take the villification route.

Most of the villification here abouts has been on the politicians, and the lies they are propigating, to further their agenda on this issue.
Reply #17 from JoeUser Forums Top
I am curious if any of these propenents of this immigration bill have given any thougt to what and who is going to stop the Mexican gangs and drug cartels that are going to take over the illegal drug trade and the child ponorgraphy rings that they are spearheading just across the border? Not to mention the crime wave that will inevitably follow the unstoppable drug epidemic. Someone better start thinking and they better start thinking quick. These politicians are not thinking straight. There is no way that once this element is legalized that all hell is going to break loose. I personally would not be one bit surprised if these drug cartels and gangs are now antisiipating and preparing for this accurance as we speak. One of the strategic moves by these cartels and gangs would be to continue to help sending illegal alliens over at excellerated rates causing law makers to be of the belief that the situation is impossible to queal and force them into wrong decisions. Contrary to the president's thinking that america needs cheap labor and more illegal drugs, the cost to america and it's people will be too great.
Reply #18 from JoeUser Forums Top
And I am not even going to give the guy that is posting that gangs and drug cartels will not be able to get into the country the time of day. They are already here stup. I can't believe how far into the sand some people's heads have to be to not smell the coffee. Wow Wow Wow,,, Does the guy that thinks that the drug cartels and mexican gangs will not be allowed into the U.S. know what Mexican pot is?? what about mexican brown??? What about the new crystal meth that is being muled across right now. Wow. They really must think that we are a big bunch of morrons and I guess by what I have read in this forum about someone thinking that they are going to keep the gangs and the drug cartels out of the U.S. we deserve what ever we get. Wow, I really didn't know that we were in that bad of shape as far as being neive about reality.