May 17, 2007

The immigration deal.

In the Senate:
The bill would provide an opportunity “right away” for millions of illegal aliens to correct their status, said Mr. Kennedy, Democrat of Massachusetts. It would emphasize family ties as well as employment skills in weighing how soon immigrants could become legal residents, he said.

But it would also emphasize improved border security and would call for “very strong sanctions” against employers who knowingly hire illegal immigrants, according to Senator Arlen Specter, Republican of Pennsylvania.

Both senators acknowledged that the bill, whose general terms are agreeable to the White House, is likely to come under fire both from the political right and the political left — decried either as “amnesty” or as “not humanitarian enough,” as Mr. Specter said....

Stephen W. Yale-Loehr, who teaches immigration law at Cornell University, said: “The legislation taking shape in the Senate represents a major philosophical shift. It tells the world that we are emphasizing characteristics that will enhance our global competitiveness, like education and job skills. We would not rely as much on family background as we have in the past.”
I haven't written much about immigration because I see it as a complex policy issue that needs a pragmatic solution. I have no ready-made ideological response. So I'll just say I hope they figured it out as well as they could, congratulations for agreeing on something, and thanks for extracting this issue from the 2008 presidential campaign.

Unlike me, Mickey Kaus is constantly talking about immigration. I have never understood why he's so heated up about it, but since it's his thing, let's see what he's saying:
This is looking more and more like the Bush administration's domestic version of Iraq: a big risky gamble, based on wishful thinking and nonexistent administrative competence, that will end in disaster. What disaster? 1) Lower wages for struggling unskilled--and semi-skilled--American workers (including, especially, underclass men) even when the labor market should be tight; 2) Income inequality moving further in the direction of Latin America--maybe even to such an extent that social equality between the rich and their servers becomes difficult to maintain; and 3) A large semi-assimilated population along our southern border with complex, understandably binational allegiances--our own Quebec. ... Actually, I can see why some Republicans might not be so bothered by (1) and (2). But what about Democrats?

68 comments:

Doyle said...

I have no ready-made ideological response.

Perish the thought. Maybe you could borrow one from John Hinderaker!

Make it more persuasive than his "nothing to see here" take on the TSP approval process. Apparently Bush chose not to deploy it, for reasons I can't imagine.

MadisonMan said...

My pragmatic view is that an immigration bill that comes under fire from both the left and the right is probably the best bill that's gonna happen.

rightwingprof said...

Barletta, the mayor of Hazelton, Pennsylvania who cracked down on illegals to national headlines a few months ago and earned the ire of the ACLU, did not only win the GOP nomination in the primary Tuesday, but so many Democrats wrote his name in he won both tickets.

Jeremy said...

Wouldn't a "correction in status" mean deportation? That would be the correct status.

It's a clever play on words Mr. Kennedy.

StephenB said...

...and thanks for extracting this issue from the 2008 presidential campaign.

No kidding. If there's one issue that I really don't want to have to deal with in '08, it's this immigration issue. Like you, I can't provide an ideological response; I can see several sides of the argument. And we all know that's no fun in presidential politics.

Mike said...

“The legislation taking shape in the Senate represents a major philosophical shift. It tells the world that we are emphasizing characteristics that will enhance our global competitiveness, like education and job skills. We would not rely as much on family background as we have in the past.”

That's good to hear (assuming it's true).

Simon said...

I wasn't going to go quite as far as Jeremy, but that caught my eye, too. How very Orwellian: calling amnesty a "correct[ion]" of their status is rather like calling a jailbreak a "correction" of one's incarceration.

blake said...

I actually have an ideological response in the sense that open-borders make the most sense to me. People should be able to go where they please.

What disturbs me, though, is that I don't get the sense that The American People feel the same way, and that our representatives are going out of their way to not be very representative of that.

Also, both Dems and Reps should be in favor of tighter border control, theoretically. Dems for economic reasons (it hurts the poorer people they allege to care about) and Reps for security reasons. But, with some notable exceptions on both sides, the debate is largely about how much to reward people who have violated the existing laws to get here.

My cynical explanation is that the influx feeds the big bureaucracies, and that triumphs over ideology, security, and basically everything.

Moira Breen said...

"I have never understood why he's so heated up about it..."

Why so, Ann? Do you find his stated concerns unfounded? If they aren't unfounded, they're pretty damned serious concerns.

"and thanks for extracting this issue from the 2008 presidential campaign."

Well, I'm sure (most) of the candidates are dearly hoping that this is so. (Was it Huckabee who was in Iowa a few weeks ago plaintively asking if somebody, anybody, had a question that wasn't about immigration?)

stephenb: If there's one issue that I really don't want to have to deal with in '08, it's this immigration issue. Like you, I can't provide an ideological response...

Well, that's settled then. We needn't deal with an unpleasant, divisive issues if we all agree to kick the can down the road.

mike: re "major philosophical shift" in immigration policy: "That's good to hear (assuming it's true)."

It's not.

"'But it would also emphasize improved border security and would call for “very strong sanctions” against employers who knowingly hire illegal immigrants...'"

Deja vu all over again, eh?

Are there people out there who are really buying this hoo-ha?

SteveR said...

Count me as one who wishes this would go away, but as the details emerge and with the realities of our bureacratic system, I do not have any optimism about this.

These organizations cannot deal with their existing burdens and so we'll create more. (Consult the history of the Department of Homeland Security if you need clarification)

Sigh!

ShadyCharacter said...

Looking 10 years out, does everyone posting who sees no problems with this really think 100 million non-educated, non-english speaking peasants are really what this country needs?

Democrats get a new permanent underclass of voters. Republicans (or at least "conservatives") never win another national election, but get to have house servants again just like their grand-pappies...

Lower middle class America gets the shaft.

Revenant said...

I like how they managed to not talk to a single one of the Republican opponents of illegal immigration during the writing of this article. Anyway...

decried either as "amnesty" or as "not humanitarian enough,"

As the article notes:

Most of the estimated 12 million illegal immigrants now in the United States would be offered legal status under the bill

That's an amnesty. You can say it is a justified amnesty or an unjustified amnesty, but denying that it *is* an amnesty is simply Orwellian.

"We are not going to put 12 million people in jail," Mr. Graham said. "Nor should we give them an advantage over those who played by the rules to become citizens."

First of all, the bill is obviously giving an advantage over those who played by the rules -- it lets them skip the process required to become legal residents. Normal immigrants have to go through a lengthy and burdensome process to become legal residents. As legal residence is the single biggest obstacle on the path to citizenship, the bill has the effect of letting twelve million people jump the line.

Secondly, we don't have to jail 12 million people. Build a wall on the Mexican border, shoot anyone who tries to climb over it or dig under it, and expel from the country any illegals caught here. That solves the overwhelming majority of the problem right there.

Revenant said...

If there's one issue that I really don't want to have to deal with in '08, it's this immigration issue.

It was never going to be an issue in the first place. Clinton, Obama, Edwards, Giuliani, McCain, and Romney are all pro-amnesty and anti-enforcement (but pro-talking-about-enforcement).

ShadyCharacter said...

12-20 million illegals, more likely 20 million get “Z Cards”

5 million in the green card backlog get instant green cards

400,000 “guest workers” a year

chain migration as they eventually get naturalized every five years or so

In ten years we have 86 million new citizens from Mexico.


DO YOU PEOPLE UNDERSTAND THE NUMBERS INVOLVED? It's not just the illegals already here mowing your lawns and taking care of your kids, it's scores of millions of uneducated non-english speakers entering the country in a matter of YEARS, not DECADES.

Population of the US jumping from 300 million to 400 million, with that 100 million being almost entirely uneducated and quasi-literate. Have you BEEN to Mexico? Do you really want to live as an oligarch in a peasant society?

Ugh...

LonewackoDotCom said...

I follow the issue even more closely and in much more detail than Kaus, and I wouldn't waste my time if it weren't one of the most important issues the U.S. faces.

And, dealing with illegal immigration isn't a policy issue: it's one of massive political corruption. Legislation cannot address that.

ShadyCharacter said...

Think how the simple population increase will affect your daily life. Traffic? Much worse. Urban sprawl? Accelerated enormously. Crime? Well what do you think? Overcrowding in schools? Already happening. Add another 35 million school children. Welfare, medicare, medicaid? Skyrocketing costs.

Doyle said...

I follow the issue even more closely and in much more detail than Kaus

That's chilling.

ricpic said...

For the Democrats this is majority party status for as far as the eye can see.

For the Republicans it's suicide.

PatCA said...

Mickey Kaus writes about it often and I talk about it often because we both live in California, where half the households do not speak English at home and intend to continue their separate existence. You cannot understand the impact of racially divided metropolitan areas until you have lived in one. We are what you will become.

Contrary to this bit of wishful thinking--"It tells the world that we are emphasizing characteristics that will enhance our global competitiveness"--this tells the world we will reward anyone who can sneak in, including the Duka brothers, including the hardworking family next door, and penalize anyone with the decency to wait his turn. We are saying our citizenship is nothing at all of value.

Shame, shame, on these whores in Washington.

LonewackoDotCom said...

Doyle: sorry to disturb you, but I have literally thousands of posts about this issue, pointing out how the MSM lies and misleads, showing links between various far-left groups and the Mexican government, showing how politicians are lying to you, and so on. Obviously I can't include all those posts here, but if you scan them and do some thinking about everything involved in this issue, you might see how vital it is and all the other issues it touches.

Tim said...

It codifies failure; it legalizes law breaking; it is a cynical political power play for Democrats; it is a cynical play by Republicans for cheap labor. It presumes the nation has nearly infinite capacity to absorb immigrants and its values are immutable to changing demographics. Mickey Kaus is constantly talking about immigration because he sees what is happening in Los Angeles and southern California and, despite political correctness, understands this is a serious problem for the Republic.

Luckyoldson said...

Estoy disponible para ajardinar el trabajo el viernes.

Luckyoldson said...

Tim es lleno de mierda.

Luckyoldson said...

patca says: "half the households do not speak English at home..."

Where the hell in California do YOU live?

Are you actually saying that there are 17,000,000 people in California who can't speak English??

I-don't-think-so.

No Acute Distress said...

I can comment on the medical aspects of this legislation. If you enjoyed your 5 hour wait in the ER, you're gonna LOVE it when it jumps to 10 hours. If you think making an appointment with a doctor is bad now, wait until there are more illegals in the queue, and there are fewer doctors. Fewer doctors because the only way to finance this is through HUGE tax increases and HUGE cuts in reimbursements to providers. Guess what's gonna happen? You're going to see a HUGE wave of early retirement among medical personnel.

StephenB said...

Moira said:
Well, that's settled then. We needn't deal with an unpleasant, divisive issues if we all agree to kick the can down the road.


What I was saying when I said that I didn't really want to deal with immigration in '08 is this: It's a multi-faceted issue that doesn't lend itself to an easy decision based on two competing sides of the same ideology. Because of this, Congress doesn't know what to do, and neither do the presidential candidates. No single plan is going to appeal to either the liberals and their voters or the conservatives and their voters. There is going to have to be a compromise of some sort. No one is going to walk away from the table completely happy. Given that, why make it a huge part of the '08 presidential campaign. Hillary doesn't have some grand plan. Neither does Mitt. Barack doesn't. Rudy doesn't either. Nobody does. So lets just spare America the long, over-played, Kerry-esque 'I've got a plan but I'm not going to tell it.'

Okay?

StephenB said...

Moira said:
Well, that's settled then. We needn't deal with an unpleasant, divisive issues if we all agree to kick the can down the road.


What I was saying when I said that I didn't really want to deal with immigration in '08 is this: It's a multi-faceted issue that doesn't lend itself to an easy decision based on two competing sides of the same ideology. Because of this, Congress doesn't know what to do, and neither do the presidential candidates. No single plan is going to appeal to either the liberals and their voters or the conservatives and their voters. There is going to have to be a compromise of some sort. No one is going to walk away from the table completely happy. Given that, why make it a huge part of the '08 presidential campaign. Hillary doesn't have some grand plan. Neither does Mitt. Barack doesn't. Rudy doesn't either. Nobody does. So lets just spare America the long, over-played, Kerry-esque 'I've got a plan but I'm not going to tell it.'

Okay?

Revenant said...

Where the hell in California do YOU live? Are you actually saying that there are 17,000,000 people in California who can't speak English??

The actual figure for illegals in California is more like 7 million, so far as I know -- about one in five of us for the state as a whole. Most of those are in Southern California, though, so it could be close to half of households there. That's still probably inflated -- but, of course, the one in five figure is heinous enough.

From my personal experience as a resident of San Diego I'd say that *maybe* one in ten people working a menial job that doesn't explicitly require English skills are capable of carrying on a non-trivial conversation in a language other than Spanish. Indeed, a friend who came here to work as a chef had to move back home because she didn't speak Spanish and therefore couldn't communicate with any of the other kitchen staff. I've had contractors working on my house for months and none of them, except the actual contracting company owners and crew bosses, can speak this country's language.

Cripes, you have an easier time getting by without Spanish as a Tijuana tourist than you do dealing with menial workers in Southern California. At least the Tijuana nightclubs make *their* staff learn to effing speak English.

PatCA said...

Here's an overview, idiota, as of 2003.
http://www.calinst.org/bulletins/b1029.htm#_1_3

It's much worse now.

Luckyoldson said...

Revenant,
In regards to "speaking the language"...

...why would someone who's working for about 20% of what an English speaking American worker would charge (if not much, more) want ot need to speak the language?

We apparently don't find the need to pay them what they actually deserve for the work they do. (That we won't)

Hey...think maybe that's the problem???

Luckyoldson said...

Rev,
Oh, and I also live in San Diego.

Cedarford said...

I see this as a gathering firestorm. The anger will get worse as people slowly begin to realize this is the end of much of America as they knew it. Just how much their future and their childrens have been betrayed.

35 to 80 million 3rd worlders getting here in under 10 years? With free healthcare and school and access to middleclass jobs?

The tax burden will increase at a shocking rate.
One bill will effectively bring enough new ill-educated people in that we can forget about students matching those of Asia or Europe for generations and have to accept a lower standard of living, on average.

And that "mass dump" of part of the 4 billion wanting into America just negates any energy conservation savings we achieved in the past 35 years.

End of good healthcare systems in much of the country, a destruction of good share of the middleclass as 4 billion people wanting in try in hopes they get the deal the 35-80 million got.

Wait for the taxes that have to pay for it. Either the "legalized" 3rd worlders directly or the lower skilled whites and blacks thrown out of good jobs.

Watch as America dissolves into a 70% lower working class, 25% still middle class, and a 5% of Ruling Elite of Jews and WASPs that control 95% of the power and wealth of the nation.

Can you say "revolution"? It's already happening in LA between blacks and Hispanics.

Wait till the globalists begin the next wave of mass outsourcing of services jobs.

What is now the middle class of America had best buy every man and boy a good, semi-automatic rifle in commonly available bullet calibers -.22, .223, 7.62X39.

They may need it in years to come to force the Ruling Elite to redistribute wealth, or defend neighborhoods if the rest of America goes tribal...as LA has.

Revenant said...

...why would someone who's working for about 20% of what an English speaking American worker would charge (if not much, more) want ot need to speak the language?

The way things are today, there's no reason an illegal immigrant working that kind of job would want to. There's plenty of reason Americans would want them to, though. And since what's good for Americans is important and what's good for Mexicans isn't, that means there's good reason to want them to speak English.

We apparently don't find the need to pay them what they actually deserve for the work they do.

What they "deserve" is a bullet in the ass from the Border Patrol.

Luckyoldson said...

Cedar: RUN!!!!!!!! IT'S THE END OF THE WORLD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Consiga verdadero.

Luckyoldson said...

rev,
Think any of those brown people building your house are illegal? Would the contractor ever tell you? Would it effect your price?

Are you planning on shooting them?

And.please...the silly argument that Americans would take the work they do...for the same money??...is total bullshit.

If you live in San Diego...tell me who picks the strawberries along interstate 5? Know anybody who's applied for the job?

gary said...

> extracting this issue from the 2008 presidential campaign

Not a chance. fyi, the easiest way by far of researching what each candidate has to say about immigration is to watch their YouTube videos here...

www.ExpertVoter.org

gary

Sloanasaurus said...

I am not as disturbed as many conservatives about the prospect of some sort of amnesty. The real issue is to put a halt to future immigration. We need to build the fence and put employers in prison for hiring illegals. We need to turn off the spout.

As for those here. I say, you have 5 years to learn to speak fluent english and pass the citizenship test. If you do it, you get a green card. If you don't, you are gone along with your dependents and any child of yours that has been born here.

Yeah so what if it is technically amnesty. We gave amnesty to 500,000 rebel soldiers. All of whom were traitors.

PatCA said...

"...why would someone who's working for about 20% of what an English speaking American worker would charge (if not much, more) want ot need to speak the language?"

Go have a few more beers. The day laborers at Home Depot won't work for less than $10/hr. plus lunch.

Tim said...

"extracting this issue from the 2008 presidential campaign"

That appears to be a premature assessment, as the reaction from grassroots Republicans suggests this bill doesn't get out of the Senate. Momentarily, the NRSC and RNC are about to see some major funding problems. This is beginning to look like the Harriet Miers appointment and the Dubai Ports deal.

Take the under on the cloture vote.

Luckyoldson said...

PatCA,
I've been a contractor for 30 years and if you're paying $10 an hour for your "day laborers," you're getting ripped off.

And you think THEY need to learn the language??

Moira Breen said...

StephenB: "What I was saying when I said that I didn't really want to deal with immigration in '08 is this: It's a multi-faceted issue that doesn't lend itself to an easy decision based on two competing sides of the same ideology. Because of this, Congress doesn't know what to do, and neither do the presidential candidates. No single plan is going to appeal to either the liberals and their voters or the conservatives and their voters. There is going to have to be a compromise of some sort."

I can appreciate your lack of interest in having to listen to presidential candidates talk crap for months on end on an issue they'd rather not have to address seriously. Why listen if they're determined not to do anything about it? And if the majority of citizens - who aren't in love with massive, non-stop, uncontrolled immigration - won't hold their feet to the fire, it'll be our own damned fault that the problem becomes ever more "multi-faceted".

I don't think you're quite up on the issue, however, if you think it's aptly characterized as a problem that, well, just "doesn't lend itself to an easy decision based on two competing sides of the same ideology". Wait, scratch that. I'm not even sure what you mean by that. Are the "competing sides" happy, clappy liberals all hot for open borders, vs. nativist xenophobes? That's not what's going on.

Tim: "That appears to be a premature assessment, as the reaction from grassroots Republicans suggests this bill doesn't get out of the Senate. Momentarily, the NRSC and RNC are about to see some major funding problems. This is beginning to look like the Harriet Miers appointment and the Dubai Ports deal.

Take the under on the cloture vote.
"

One can hope.

Roger said...

What Madison Man said--when as many people on both sides of the argument are exercised, its probably the best bill we are going to get--and just a small reminder: this is the Senate version; there is still that organization called the house of representatives and then, if it survives there, a conference committee. Here's the reality: we have NO idea what the final bill is going to look like, so every one chill.

Fen said...

Nope. We were promised a fence back in 86. Same old bait and switch. Nothing will be done, nothing will get built. Any type of amnesty without enforcement of border security is like installing new carpet before you fix the hole in your roof.

I'm registering as an independent today. As are many others. I'm done with the spineless corrupt weasels that represent the GOP in congress.

Fen said...

ricpic: For the Democrats this is majority party status for as far as the eye can see. For the Republicans it's suicide.

Exactly. The Dems get their slave votes, the Repubs get their slave labor. And the middle class gets the shaft. Shameful.

Someone mentioned ER waits would increase from 5 to 10 hourse? Its more likely your local hospital will be forced to shutdown.

Fen said...

Fred Thompson: "With this bill, the American people are going to think they are being sold the same bill of goods as before on border security. We should scrap this bill and the whole debate until we can convince the American people that we have secured the borders or at least have made great headway.”

And I think Sen McCain has now lost any shot he had at getting the nom.

vet66 said...

Revenant;

I recently spent a couple of nights in an RV park in San Diego (Mission Bay) and Carlsbad. The Mission Bay complex had armed guards and high fences given the proximity to Tijuana. Carlsbad was livable west of 101 but north of 101 was problematic. Oceanside is almost gone as it is turning into a barrio. Most of the grocery stores I remember are now abandoned or beauty colleges. The only grocery store I could find reminded me of an upscale abbatoir in Kingston, Jamaica.

This immigration bill is a disaster. It legitimizes illegals and the barriozation of U.S. cities. It also assumes that the money earned in the U.S. stays in the U.S. WRONG! Most of it goes back to Mexico.

Close the borders, enforce the laws, and deal with the organized gangs that populate L.A. and congregate in MacArthur Park. Check I.D.'s and send the illegals back to Mexico when they are found. Sanctuary cities should not get federal assistance to pay for the added expense these folks bring with them.

I just paid a premium on my car insurance that covers uninsured motorists and underinsured motorists. Much of my property tax goes to pay for indigent care, mostly illegals, who descend on county hospitals to receive first class care at our expense. The savings on my tax bill would make up for the extra cost in housing construction and agriculture. I am cynical enough to suspect that the benefits of this cheap labor is not being passed on to the consumer, in any case.

We are rapidly on our way to becoming a suburb of Mexico and all the third world problems that go with it. Close the borders now! We can talk about the niceties later! Or you can press "2" for ingles!

hdhouse said...

it was widely speculated on a lot of talk radio yesterday (i had a 7 hour drive each way so was trapped) that Mr. Bush's approval ratings will be in the single digits next week as over half the core that supports him will vanish over this fiasco of a compromise.

i think the democrats who support this are crazy. i think bush is being idiotic.

seems we have to do something about the influx. we also have to find some way to deal with those already here. so what do we do? build a fence and add another layer of law over a layer we ignore.

i just don't get it.

PatCA said...

"I'm registering as an independent today. As are many others. I'm done with the spineless corrupt weasels that represent the GOP in congress."

And then fax your new registration to the state and national RNC. Unfortunately, I'm already an Independent.

Luckyoldson said...

vet66 says: "I recently spent a couple of nights in an RV park in San Diego (Mission Bay) and Carlsbad. The Mission Bay complex had armed guards and high fences given the proximity to Tijuana. Carlsbad was livable west of 101 but north of 101 was problematic. Oceanside is almost gone as it is turning into a barrio. Most of the grocery stores I remember are now abandoned or beauty colleges. The only grocery store I could find reminded me of an upscale abbatoir in Kingston, Jamaica"

I live in San Diego and this entire rant is a real hoot.

1. I have no idea where "north of 101" would be. 101 runs north and south.

2. Mission Bay is at least 25 miles away fro Tijuana and the fences at the RV park are certainly not there to keep the Mexicans out.
(Seaworld, the Zoo and Petco park are EVEN closer to Mexico...SO WATCH OUT!!!)

3. Oceanside is most certainly not a "barrio." If you don't believe me, try to find a house for less than $350,000...and anything west of 101 is at least $600,000...and therer are plenty of restaurants, grocery stores and other retail outlets with English speaking workers.

This kind of lunacy doesn't help the cause.

Luckyoldson said...

Is everybody registering as an Independant going to vote for Bloomberg?

Revenant said...

Think any of those brown people building your house are illegal?

It is just about guaranteed.

Would the contractor ever tell you? Would it effect your price?

If I knew of a contractor who used nothing but Americans and legal immigrants on his crew I'd hire them in an instant. But California law makes it impossible for me to even find out that information. I could respond, I guess, by refusing to hire any Mexican who doesn't speak English as a first language -- since the vast majority of people in that category are illegals -- but that would be (a) illegal, subjecting me to criminal and civil penalties and (b) unfair to that small minority of Hispanic immigrants who actually did the right thing.

It isn't a matter of money. I'm sick of my wiring being done by some Mexi-hick who was mowing lawns for $3 an hour before someone offered him $4 to work as an electrician. I'm sick of my landscaping being done by a guy who needs everything explained to him ten times because he has a four year old's comprehension of English. The quality of the work is shit and the "workers" can't respond to a question with anything other than "que?".

Luckyoldson said...

rev says: "But California law makes it impossible for me to even find out that information."

That's not true.

You can ask your contractor to provide specific documentation of his worker's citizenship or a contract that attests to his hiring practices, with legal penalties if they are not true...along with insurance coverage information...and worker's compensation.

It's fun listening to you whine, but there are many avenues of protection. I think you're more interested in the "price" than immigration.

The Drill SGT said...

I think this bill is an unmitigated disaster. It should be wall and sanctions first and then legalization. As I read the bill:

1. immediate legalization for 12-13 million illegals here.
2. sucking sound as 2-3 million more rush in and phoney up documents to establish that there too were here on 1 Jan 2007. don't think it wont be that many? think the CIS will check to see that 25 people somewhere in the country havent used the same PG&E gas bill for Dec 2006 to establish residence? hahaha
3. the bill calls for legalization of additional parents, spouses, and kids of the now 15 million in the US. what are we up to now, 30 million?
4. so now we get 300 miles of wall? and if the wall doesnt slow down the next 30 million folks, the first 30 million dont go back to illegal, they just stay as Z visa have have US children who speak spanish.

5. Nobody has talked about the impact on social services. Medicare and Social Security were going bankrupt before. add 5 million instant senior citizens who never paid into it, add 60 million more minimum wage folks who draw more out than paid in?


Calfornia already has a NET outflow of US citizens. their population is growing, but citizens are fleeing. Mexifornia is just about there.

McCain just lost any chance of being President and most Likely Guilani as well. Thompson and Rommney look to me like they have the best shot once the GOP voters figure out the details.

Revenant said...

And I think Sen McCain has now lost any shot he had at getting the nom.

Not that I'd have voted for McCain anyway, but yeah... I think Thompson might have just gotten my vote.

Revenant said...

it was widely speculated on a lot of talk radio yesterday (i had a 7 hour drive each way so was trapped) that Mr. Bush's approval ratings will be in the single digits next week as over half the core that supports him will vanish over this fiasco of a compromise.

Maybe... I think most of the people who care about this issue *already* abandoned him, though. It has been obvious for years that he's pro-amnesty.

Revenant said...

You can ask your contractor to provide specific documentation of his worker's citizenship or a contract that attests to his hiring practices, with legal penalties if they are not true...along with insurance coverage information...and worker's compensation.

I know that, lucky, but you're ignoring the glaringly obvious fact that (a) businesses that hire illegal immigrants fake the paperwork and (b) I have no way of telling if the papers they show me are real or fake.

I think you're more interested in the "price" than immigration.

I'm supposed to care what some ignorant leftist asshole thinks my real motives are?

We need a wall, and a policy of shooting anyone who tries getting over it. Its that simple. I'll happily pay that "price", whatever it may be.

The Drill SGT said...

Revenant

exacatly. As I keep saying to my Dem wife.

first build a big ass wall, then we can talk about the rest of the problems with the 13 million illegals here.

amnesty or arrests, or whatever. but cut the flow down first.

no bill was much better than this bill

Fen said...

hdhouse: it was widely speculated on a lot of talk radio yesterday (i had a 7 hour drive each way so was trapped) that Mr. Bush's approval ratings will be in the single digits next week as over half the core that supports him will vanish over this fiasco of a compromise. i think the democrats who support this are crazy. i think bush is being idiotic.

Echo. If both hdhouse and Fen can agree to oppose your bill, you're doing something really stupid.

Luckyoldson said...

rev says: "I'm supposed to care what some ignorant leftist asshole thinks my real motives are?"

You don't have to be left or right to understand what you're actually whining about...and...that if you really wanted to do something about it, you'd use a reputable contractor who would gladly provide all of the documentation you need...or say you want.

I've been a contractor in San Diego for almost 30 years and have people ask for exactly what you're saying you can't get...and we gladly provide it. (California driver's licenses, SS Cards, Insurance verification with Workman's Comp attached...REFERENCES, etc.)

Your bullshit comment that the contractors will just falsify the documentation is just that, bullshit. Unless of course, the contractorS themselves are not honest. (Of course the "honest" ones cost more...but you already know that.)

You're taking advantage of illegals to save money, while at the same time, bitching and whining about how bad illegal immigration is.

This is exactly why we have a problem. Hypocrites like yourself who want it both ways.

Luckyoldson said...

Drill SGT:
If you're going to build this "big ass wall" you mention (which will be about 1,800 miles long and only cover the southern border), you'd better plan on hiring plenty of illegal immigrant workers because if we use the same kinds of ALL-AMERICAN contractors we've used in Iraq and New Orleans...it will cost billions...and last about six months.

*Oh, and I suppose we'll have to hope the Mexicans forget how to climb, dig or swim.

Revenant said...

You don't have to be left or right to understand what you're actually whining about...and...that if you really wanted to do something about it, you'd use a reputable contractor who would gladly provide all of the documentation you need

You've obviously never dealt with these people, which perhaps explains why your head's so far up your ass on this subject. You ask for the paperwork and they give it to you, but telling the real thing from a fake is impossible unless you work for the government -- which is controlled by people who like illegal immigration and do what they can to encourage more of it. Lots of luck getting them to investigate based on a sneaking suspicion that a truckload of illiterate Mexican workers might not be strictly on the up-and-up.

As for finding a contractor that doesn't employ Mexican labor -- there aren't any. If you'd like to claim otherwise, name one and provide the phone number and address. I'm not talking about some guy working out of his garage, I'm talking about a real outfit capable of taking on a big job. I guarantee you that whoever shows up to do the work was born south of the border.

There aren't any. The ones who refused to hire illegals went belly-up years ago. That's why it isn't about price -- there aren't any more-expensive but actually-legal companies to hire. You can't advertise "my prices are higher but my workers are legal" because you can't prove your rivals' workers aren't legal too.

Revenant said...

If you're going to build this "big ass wall" you mention (which will be about 1,800 miles long and only cover the southern border)

Because as we all know, we have a serious problem with all those millions of illegal Canadian immigrants. Every time I go to Home Depot there's a crowd of pasty-faced guys in parkas saying "need some work done, eh?".

Anyway, sure, some of the illegals will travel to Canada and cross there, but most can't afford to.

you'd better plan on hiring plenty of illegal immigrant workers because if we use the same kinds of ALL-AMERICAN contractors we've used in Iraq and New Orleans...it will cost billions

California alone spends $9 billion PER YEAR more on taking care of illegals than it receives from them in taxes. So what if a wall costs "billions"? "Billions" is a bargain.

and last about six months.

Where -- other than "your ass" -- did you pull that figure from? The San Diego wall has lasted longer than that, as any resident knows. And building it worked -- illegals now go around it, causing the usual bleeding hearts to whine about how "dangerous" it is for them to cross out there in the desert.

Well, build it all the way along the border and they can't go around it. Instruct troops to enforce American sovereignty at gunpoint and fewer still will dare. It doesn't have to be impossible to cross -- just costly enough that many are discouraged.

halojones-fan said...

Why are you people so upset about this? This is EXACTLY THE KIND OF THING WE WANT.

See, here's the money quote:
"But it...would call for “very strong sanctions” against employers who knowingly hire illegal immigrants, according to Senator Arlen Specter, Republican of Pennsylvania."

That is how you stop illegal immigration--by creating a situation where there's nobody to hire those illegal workers. Fences? Walls? Pfah. There's any number of ways to deal with border security. But if there's no reason for illegals to come, then...well, the problem solves itself!

And easy legalization makes it dead simple to tell who wants to Be Part Of The American Dream, and who's just looking for a quick buck. Legalization also solves, in one fell swoop, all those complaints about overburdened schools and overcrowded hospitals and uninsured drivers. These legalized people are now in the tax records as part of the population.

The problem right now is that, to the government, a hospital with two million citizens and one million illegals looks like a hospital with two million patients...and therefore it's only funded at 66% of its actual requirement. Make those illegals into citizens, and suddenly everyone "realizes" how badly-underfunded the hospital really is.

Same deal for insurance. You can't get insurance if you're illegal; but if you're a citizen, you've got no problems.

As I said before, this bill is precisely the solution we need--easy immigration, plus harsh penalties for hiring illegals.

Also: Yes, I know you've been waiting for however-long to enter legally. What stops you from taking part in this program?

Moira Breen said...

halojones-fan: "See, here's the money quote:
'But it...would call for “very strong sanctions” against employers who knowingly hire illegal immigrants, according to Senator Arlen Specter, Republican of Pennsylvania.'
"

Do your friends call you "Born Yesterday"? The 1986 amnesty also required super-duper, we mean it this time, we're really putting the hammer down, don't let us have to tell you again, "strong sanctions" against employers who knowingly hire illegal immigrants.

"Legalization also solves, in one fell swoop, all those complaints about overburdened schools and overcrowded hospitals and uninsured drivers. These legalized people are now in the tax records as part of the population.

The problem right now is that, to the government, a hospital with two million citizens and one million illegals looks like a hospital with two million patients...and therefore it's only funded at 66% of its actual requirement. Make those illegals into citizens, and suddenly everyone "realizes" how badly-underfunded the hospital really is.
"

Oh, that's all right then. As soon as we get these people "on the books" the magic money tree will start funding their health care and the burden on taxpayers will be removed. Same for education - all the problems with, say, California public education just require more funding, which the magic money tree will also provide. And...

Oh wait. Sorry, I'm really dense sometimes. You really had me going there, you wag.

Luckyoldson said...

Rev says, dismissing my comment regarding our new "big ass wall" only protecting us on our southen border:

"Because as we all know, we have a serious problem with all those millions of illegal Canadian immigrants. Every time I go to Home Depot there's a crowd of pasty-faced guys in parkas saying "need some work done, eh?".

Anyway, sure, some of the illegals will travel to Canada and cross there, but most can't afford to."

Hold on a minute...are you saying we're ONLY concerned with the "brown" people coming in from Mexico? The WAR ON TERROR is over?

And you assume the Islamic TERRORISTS would NEVER think of coming into America...via CANADA??? (Too expensive?)

Have you read a newspaper in the last couple of years...or...are you only concerned with those pesky Mexicans sneaking in to take away those jobs we all want...like picking strawberries??

Moron.

Luckyoldson said...

Rev,
You REALLY need to read more and talk less.

If the San Diego "wall" is so effective, what are you bitching and whining about?

As for the 9 billion you say California spends...can you also provide any numbers relating to how much the Mexican labor has saved California? Or how much $$$ they pour into the coffers via their spending?

Oh, and we've spent 300 billion in Iraq already...does that bother you at all??

Luckyoldson said...

Rev says: "As for finding a contractor that doesn't employ Mexican labor -- there aren't any."

I never said anything about contractors who do not employ Mexican labor, I said there are contractors who only hire "legal" Mexican labor...like MY company.

From what you've had to say, I think you deserve whatever you get from contractors, you apparently have absolutely no idea of how to vet those who provide services.

GFL.

lodger said...

Let's face reality. All problems are driven largely by overpopulation. More people means greater need for energy, water, roads, schools, hospitals, etc.
We cannot grow our way out of problems indefinitely.
Mexicans need to stand up to their corrupt government and the sex-obsessed Catholic Church.
As we allow the Mexican government to use the USA as a dumping ground for surplus people, we help the Mexican elite delay their day of reckoning. This is bad for both nations.