It would allow undocumented immigrants with otherwise clean criminal records to quickly achieve probationary legal residency after paying a fine and back taxes.
But they could pursue full citizenship — giving them the right to vote and access to government benefits — only after new measures are in place to prevent a future influx of illegal immigrants....
[And they] would be required to go to the end of the waiting list to get a green card that would allow permanent residency and eventual citizenship, behind those who had already legally applied at the time of the law’s enactment.
January 28, 2013
The bipartisan group of 8 senators presents an immigration reform proposal containing a pathway to citizenship for the 11 million who've illegally immigrated.
Here's the document. Summarized here:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
162 comments:
Given the shitty economy, how many of the 11 million even want to stay at this point?
How do we know they even want to become citizens? I heard a Mexican immigrant on the radio today say many don't want citizenship. They just want to work here.
It would allow undocumented immigrants with otherwise clean criminal records to quickly achieve probationary legal residency after paying a fine and back taxes.
Color me surprised if this is enforced in any meaningful way.
First Build a Big F'ing Fence
What does the agreement say about step one making them eligible for all our social network.
Among other things, most all of the 11 million would be in the subsidy part of Obamacare or Medicaid...
Given the shitty economy, how many of the 11 million even want to stay at this point?
And Mexico's economy is much better?
One citizen: Um...how about building a wall?
Eight Senators: Arrest that man!
Ok, good for them.
Hopefully the house will vote the bill down.
mccullough's right; one problem the Demos have is that one of their permanent underclasses is aborting itself out of existence while the other is heading on back to Guadalajara because things are better there. It's why they're willing to do something.
As to the conditions - what I see I like although the "fine" should be on a sliding scale based on years lived here and the amount of government services used.
The real problem is there's too much to like here. I smell another, "If you like your plan, you can keep it", scam.
Oh, this is going to work out well. At some point, you have to enforce your immigration laws. You know, like Mexico does.
Nonapod said...
Given the shitty economy, how many of the 11 million even want to stay at this point?
And Mexico's economy is much better?
Compared to ours, yes.
That's why at least 2 million have already gone home.
How do we know they even want to become citizens? I heard a Mexican immigrant on the radio today say many don't want citizenship. They just want to work here.
This. Except not all of them 'just want to work here'. Some are here just for the free stuff.
How about adding to the bill, that citizenship is not awarded upon birth if your parents aren't here legally?
Comments from an ex-immigration paralegal (10 yrs - primarily business immigration):
The issue with the fine and the back taxes - as one who has managed hundreds of USCIS applications, I can't even begin to imagine how that is going to be researched and documented for USCIS - knowing how they are, they want back up for everything you are claiming in your petition. The process of determining exactly how much in back taxes is owed...I am curious to see how this plays out. I see a clusterfuck mess.
RE: going to the back of the line for the green card. Green cards can be quick if you are an L1-A multinational manager - or, years and years and years (and YEARS) if you came to the US from India or China on an H-1B and your job requires only a bachelor's degree. Which line are these people going to be at the back of? If its the longest line...they could easily wait several years for that green card, all the while probably sending more $$$ to USCIS to continually renew whatever limbo nonimmigrant status USCIS will have these people in for years.
Well, yes, the economy is bad now, but it will recover.
Then, we will welcome another 11 million, or 20 million immigrants, who because they are already here, will have to be granted citizenship as a matter of decent humanity.
Thus, the Democratic Party acquires more new voters and the welfare system becomes ever more entrenched.
And, screw American workers! They're just bigots!
The problem with "immigration" reform is that the US doesn't have an "immigration" problem. It has a "Mexico" problem.
Immigration reform involves making the whole immigration process saner & more humane for everyone, be they from Mexico or Burkina Faso.
The problem comes about because the Mexicans have the advantage that they can walk into the US, and the Fasonians can't. The Mexicans therefore have no reason to support REAL immigration reform because it negates their natural advantages, and treats all potential immigrants equally.
Call what the Mexicans want by its real name --- amnesty. But that's a much harder political sell than immigration reform.
— only after new measures are in place to prevent a future influx of illegal immigrants....
If they changed that to - only after the new measures to prevent a future influx of illegal immigrants have proven successful.... then we would have reached a point where we could start negotiating over the details. Until then, no thanks.
"This. Except not all of them 'just want to work here'. Some are here just for the free stuff."
Can't we limit "free stuff" to citizens?
It would allow undocumented immigrants with otherwise clean criminal records to quickly achieve probationary legal residency after paying a fine and back taxes.
Althouse, you bought the WaPo's watered down version.
The actual memo says nothing of "otherwise clean" which could imply most any level of criminal activity is exclusionary. Like MS-13 membership.
The actual memo says, you can only be excluded if they have a "serious criminal background"
They should just go ahead and include a voter registration applications with "Democrat" checked. That'll save paperwork and we don't want to disenfranchise them.
And Mexico's economy is much better?
Fast&Furious' body count has created a labor shortage back home.
bpm4532 said...
How about adding to the bill, that citizenship is not awarded upon birth if your parents aren't here legally?
Birthright citizenship is in the 14th amendment; as such, it can only be changed by a constitutional amendment.
If only we had a living constitution, we wouldn't have to worry about such details...
First, our Republican and Democratic betters got together for the great bipartisan reform known as the subprime mortgage Ponzi scheme... and looted the economy.
Now, they're getting together to ensure a steady supply of cheap labor to suppress the wages of lower and middle class Americans, and make the expansion of the welfare state a permanent reality.
A government of grifters and criminals in cahoots with one another.
Although small in number, there are undocumented Europeans, Canadians, Australians present in the US. The typical stories I hear: they are young, globe-trotter types that fancy themselves "citizens of the world". Usually from families that are reasonably well-off, they feel "entitled" to stay in the US simply because they want to. Once they get into a romantic relationship with a US citizen...they are entrenched here.
I want a front row seat to see how these types of undocumented immigrants will be dealt with. Will they be given amnesty as well, like those from Mexico? And if not, why not?
Considering in 1846, we occupied Northern Mexico, we should have just stayed.
This illegal immigration problem would be fixed in two weeks if only they'd let me experiment with my prototype transporter beam.
An awful lot of college students could not find summer jobs in the last few years while their parents struggle to pay college tuition bills.
How come the pols never make the connection that illegals are taking the summer jobs of American students? And the entry level jobs of other Americans?
How come the pols never make the connection that illegals are taking the summer jobs of American students? And the entry level jobs of other Americans?
You think they aren't making the connection?
Considering in 1846, we occupied Northern Mexico...
According to the 'Aztlan' folks, we're still in Northern Mexico.
Amazingly, half my family is now Filipino, and I live among a large community of Filipinos.
They're all here legally, even though the Philippines is on the other side of the earth.
And, the Philippines is just as poor, or poorer than Mexico.
If any black citizen who is represented by a member of Congress that is black, they should be extremely upset about this idea. There probably isn't but a handfull of businesses that would hire a black before a Mexican.
I'm Joe Swanson ... from San Antonio!
Permanent residency I can accept given appropriate safeguards. NO CITIZENSHIP!
Isn't a POTUS --> Senate --> Congressional pathway for any new law evidence of a fundamental reversal of sausage making in the US? That alone is worrisome.
Where will SCOTUS fit in this paradigm?
If it is going to work, it has to be simple, and this proposal is not simple.
See ALP above. "Fines and Back taxes" is just BS. Our government does not have the competence to collect, and most of these people do not have the ability to pay if the government could.
The way to prevent another wave of "undocumented" immigrants in the future is to block them from participation in any welfare programs and enforce existing laws against employing anyone here illegally.
(And please, it is not the "illegals" that opened all these programs to themselves in the past, nor did they vote to block enforcement of the existing laws. We did.)
Here are my proposals.
1) No criminal record, a work history, less than 10% of your time here on the public dole, various other criteria showing that you've assimilated into American culture (e.g., you can speak English) - permanent residency (but still deportable if you commit a crime), no citizenship.
2) The CEO, COO, CIO/CTO, CFO of any company hiring illegal aliens goes to jail for at least 1 year if your company hires illegal aliens. Use of eVerify is an affirmative defense.
3) Any bank making either a personal or corporate loan to an illegal alien or any non-citizen using an ID other than a passport with proper visa, or permitting them to open any kind of account (including credit card) loses all eligibility to participate in FICA or any other Federal insurance program or Federal contracts, and must prominently post a notice of the same at all enterances on the top screen of the home page of their web site.
I have two things to say about the immigration reform:
First, I hope they stop discrimination based on marital and family status. Up until now, "family reunification" has been the rule, to the effect of dumbing down the quality of immigrants and denying immigration to same-sex spouses and partners of singles. This needs to stop.
Second, I hope they put in a provision allowing an Amerikan citizen to trade citizenship with a foreigner. I'm an Amerikan who, following Depardieu and Saverin, would like to get the hell out of stupidities like our tax system and Obamacare.
Original Mike said...
Can't we limit "free stuff" to citizens?
Racist.
Sounds good... but this is where it falls apart from my limited perspective... "only after new measures are in place to prevent a future influx of illegal immigrants".
As long as the incentives for coming here illegally are not commensurate with the disincentives - ie what happens when caught, if at all - nothing will change.
Twenty years from now we will be right back where we are now... but instead of the 10 or so millions that are here now illegally, it be 20 to 30 million.
But they could pursue full citizenship — giving them the right to vote and access to government benefits
I'm guessing many of them in Wisconsin are already voting. What would stop them?
On any immigration reform proposal, here's what I want to know: (1) Is there any limit on immigration under this proposal, or is it open immigration for anyone who wishes? and (2) If there is some limit, how do you intend to enforce that limit?
edutcher said...
Compared to ours, yes.
That's why at least 2 million have already gone home.
It's not that Mexico's economy is "better" than ours, rather it's that the reasons for immigrating (jobs) have dried up.
@Edutcher,
In 1848 President Polk indeed wanted to annex "Northern Mexico" almost down to the latitude of Mexico City. (That would indeed have made United States very interesting for the nect 165 years!)
That is partially how our envoy, Nicholas Trist, was able to negotiate the Treaty of Guadaloupe Hidalgo, which just involved ceding Texas (+ the Brazos strip), Nuevo Mexico, and Alta California, not Mexico itself.
Mexico at that point was not in a position to resist whatever demand was made, and recognized that if they did not accept Mr. Trist's proposal, Polk would impose a worse one.
As a former immigration attorney who saw the hoops people had to (and were willing to) jump through to come here legally, I have nothing but disgust for any reform that will put them at a disadvantage over the people who came here illegally. The "back of the line" green card is nice, but not nearly enough (they're still here, getting benefits and making connections, aren't they?).
High fence, wide gate. That's a reform I think most Americans could get behind.
Why even bother with such trite and quaint ittle nicities such as national sovereignty? We are the world!
"If it is going to work, it has to be simple, and this proposal is not simple."
Politicians are incapable of making anything simple, which goes a long way toward explaining why virtually everything they do causes more harm than good.
Ostensibly this reform move is to prevent the break-up of families.
Therefore, it would make perfect sense to add a sponsorship requirement through an affidavit of support by an individual or organization with means.
BTW, does the government actually enforce those things now?
I read the summary. It does virtually nothing...all window dressing and pap. Nonsense.
For example: Do you really think an illegal is going to fess up his total income for all time here and pay taxes on it in arrears, with the penalties and interest IRS will assess? Even with the statute of limitations on IRS issues, the time frame is still more than any illegal will confess to...so it is a a futile gesture.
But, ou ou ou-ow, it feels good to be so compassionate...while Benni the Beaner flips you the bird. As he should.
"Permanent residency I can accept given appropriate safeguards. NO CITIZENSHIP!"
Those safeguards should include voter ID.
@EDH,
Those requirements exist now and have for a long time, but, of course, only effect those (like me) who came here legally.
The problem is no enforcement of the laws regarding legal residence in this country, and opening our welfare programs to illegal aliens in flagrant opposition to those laws.
And it is our elected representatives and their appointed official that commit these malfeasances in office.
Time Maguire said ...
High fence, wide gate. That's a reform I think most Americans could get behind.
American government folks, legislative or bureaucrat, do NOT like the KISS principle, it gives them a rash. Good luck.
But they could pursue full citizenship — giving them the right to vote and access to government benefits — only after new measures are in place to prevent a future influx of illegal immigrants....
Didn't we do this once before when Reagan granted amnesty and those preventative measures immediately fell down the memory hole?
By 1846 the local hispanics in New Mexico, Arizona and Southern California had been effectively abandoned by their Spanish Rulers in Mexico City.
They were at the mercy of Cheyenne and Navaho raiding and stealing their animals and their women and children.
The were begging for the gringos to send troops in and govern them fairly and protect them from the savages.
Freemont on a scientific exploration guided by Kit Carson and with four other men men arrived in Petaluma in Sonoma County where the Commandante promptly surrendered the Spanish garrison to them. That became called the Bear Flag Revolt still remembered on California's flag.
But they could pursue full citizenship — giving them the right to vote and access to government benefits — only after new measures are in place to prevent a future influx of illegal immigrants....
Or put another way:
It's a trap!!
@Col. Angus,
How did your grandparents get here?
Meanwhile Filipinos and other Asians will continue to wait years for visas, and every legal immigrant with mistakes in their paperwork will be proceeded against to the utmost, as usual.
It is not so much the immigration laws, as the unfairness in their enforcement.
And thus was born the permanent Dem majority.
Whenever I see the word bipartisan, I think...
Watch your ass! The thieves have a new angle!
The reality: politicians worried about their appeal to Hispanics will pass this, or something similar, claiming this is a one-time deal. The border won't be enforced, visa-overstayers won't be deported, there will be no serious enforcement of e-verify requirements, and workers will work under the counter just as much as they always have. Wages for low-skill occupations will continue to stagnate, and we'll either adopt generous "guest worker" programs that are effectively open immigration or else we'll see another amnesty in 2032.
It's like the women-in-the-military bit, and everyone who says, "I'd be fine with women in combat if they were held to the same physical standards, but I don't trust the government not to water down those standards."
What we'd need is a real enforcement mechanism -- some ability to sue the government for failing to follow the laws they enact. But you can't sue for these sorts of things. . .
Oh, and this is what I'd really like to see: you say it would be a hardship to be uprooted and sent back to Mexico, when you're so well integrated into the U.S.? Prove it -- with an English fluency test at the time of application, not an intention to take an English class later.
As a parent of a kid who may or may not be college material, I hate the direction our country is taking, in which the elites are perfectly happy to give all the low-skilled jobs to Mexicans to keep wages low.
John McCain and Lindsey Graham: Co-fathers of the new Republic of Northern Mexico.
It is not so much the immigration laws, as the unfairness in their enforcement.
Gotta agree with GH here.
Most recent immigrants who have told me about their experiences with I&N tell of how nasty I&N is to deal with. It's almost like they take revenge on the legal folks for all the illegal ones that get away.
That shouldn't be the face of America to our immigrant community.
I don't ever remember my mother ever complaining about I&N being dicks to her in the 50's.
Much in the way that sensible people object to the euphemism of "diversity" when all that is meant is "more blacks", "immigrants" is merely a code word for "Mexicans."
Valuable, educated, Asian would-be-immigrants, head to the back of the line while we import more gardeners and drywallers.
Hagar, I forgot the /sarc tag, I was being jocose.
But, yes, you're right.
As is tg.
Oh, and the bit about immigration from Mexico leveling off: not if they can come as fully-legal workers, paid the minimum wage with no fear of deportation. Add in the prospect of collecting welfare, or subsidized healthcare, and there's even more incentive.
The fix is in. Forget about it.
It's Chinatown.
"And if this “commission” doesn’t ever decide the border is secure, couldn’t that result in 11 million people being stranded in second-class legal limbo?
That’s a legitimate worry, according to Frank Sharry, the executive director of America’s Voice, a group advocating for immigration reform. But he tells me that on a conference call yesterday, Democratic Senators reassured immigration advocates that this commission won’t be constructed in a way that will hold up the process for too long.
As Sharry put it, Democrats realize that they can’t “allow the commission to have a real veto” over setting in motion the path to citizenship. He noted that Dems see the commission as “something that gives the Republicans a talking point” to claim they are prioritizing tough enforcement, giving themselves cover to back a process that “won’t stop people from getting citizenship.”
Obama could solve his government's car company's inventory problem. Every immigrant that gets the probationary green card also is issued a Chevy Volt with an owner's manual in Spanish.
Andelay, andelay, viva Volt!
It's the typical immigration kabuki theater, except now they are breaking the fourth wall and TELLING us it's theater.
It is not so much that the immigration laws are "unfair," whatever that is, as that they are disconnected from reality.
You can google the basic law, and it is not that hard to read, just 15-15 pages.
Thought experiment: Completely open immigration.
Why not just ditch the facade of immigration laws that we are clearly not willing to enforce.
Save the money on enforcement, reassign money to security, and take away the option for people to work illegally.
Would it be that much worse than we have now?
This would work if they wanted to obey the law.
Of the illegals that I know in service jobs (I say about 50 people) I would say about 75% of them don't want to be legal and on the books and pay taxes. In New York they can get everything they want without having to prove citzenship so why would they want to pay taxes?
But the above commenters are entirely right in that absent any intent and will to enforce whatever law is enacted, it is all meaningless theater.
I think the GOP could win over a large part of the "Hispanic community," by just hammering on the principle that the word "illegal" actually means, illegal, unlawful, criminal, and so forth. Really, it is not a "dogwhistle" for anything, just the bare-nekkid simple truth.
How about just smartening up and realizing that millions do not want to be citizens. They just want to come here and work, support their families and eventually go home. How about a work permit that allows someone in Mexico or where ever to pay a fee (surely less than they are paying to be smuggled here) and be allowed to come here and work? I know it makes us feel good to think everyone wants to be a citizen and some do but not everyone. Simple, raises money and does not go through the goat rope of having to jump dozens of hurtles.
One of the problems for illegals is that they've worked so hard to stay under the radar, and avoid documentation, is that now they will have to create a paper trail where none exists, in order to prove that they have in fact been here illegally for a sufficient period of time to qualify for amnesty.
The stick needs to be no documentation, no social services. Here's the legal path - take it.
We could hire the illegals to build the big f'in fence, and when they're done, they're legal.
It is hot down there and dusty, too. Those are jobs Americans just won't do.
Build it from stone, three times as high as the Great Wall just to show the Chinese that we can hire people to make things bigger and better than they did. I hear Mexicans are good stone masons.
Or not and deal with the reality that people will always migrate to where better opportunity exists.
Hopefully voter registration cards will be sufficient
would be required to go to the end of the waiting list
This would be meaningless unless something is done about the quota system. As it stands, due to the fact that only about 7% of each year's immigrants can come from Mexico), the line never moves much, and only grows longer for those that don't fall into one of several groups allowed to jump the line.
Immigration reform that doesn't remove the 7% quota rule won't be worth the paper it's printed on.
We should also demand that Mexico open its borders to American immigrants, allow them to buy land and treat them as equals before the law.
Of course the best thing for the Dems is that the racist zenophobes in the Tea Bagger house will not vote for anything that ever lets anyone in that does not look just like them. This has worked so well for them in the past I am sure it is considered a wonderful campaign tactic.
Tom said...
The stick needs to be no documentation, no social services. Here's the legal path - take it.
That might work but the liberals will never allow it. They don't even follow the laws that we have now. It will never happen.
Of course the best thing for the Dems is that the racist zenophobes in the Tea Bagger house will not vote for anything that ever lets anyone in that does not look just like them.
The party line! Echoed by an obedient factotum who imagines himself to be original!
Pragmatist,
I couldn't tell if you are actually a Democrat in favor of immigration or a parody of a brain dead liberal.
Then I saw that you spell "xenophobe" with a "z" and realized that you are a sincere, but retarded leftist. The most common variety apparently.
I think we'll be surprised just how few of the "11 million" actually go legit.
Who would have thought 50 years ago that the discrimination and bigotry bullshit would be a vast machine of awesome power that crushes everything in its path?
It works far better than the enemy of the people crap ever did!
Eric Hoffer: Every great cause begins as a movement, becomes a business, and eventually degenerates into a racket.
How many of the illegal aliens are actually Mexican and how many are Muslims who are using our porus southern border to infiltrate our country?
Generally, the only damage illegal Mexicans will do is to overload the welfare system and when possible vote the Democrats into office who support an expanded welfare state.
The Muslims are here to destroy our Western Civilization and to replace it with Islam and eventually Sharia law. Many of them are also illegals. This is the real danger of massive nonselective immigration.
Marginal Revolution has an interesting post about tying some Medicare & hospital treatment in Mexico to this.
... I would favor the extension of Medicare coverage to American citizens living in Mexico, at least with some safeguards against fraud or maybe even without. The U.S. medical establishment would not like that but I think Mexico would find it more than acceptable....
Or we could do this:
Please don’t come to Britain – it rains and the jobs are scarce and low-paid.
Ministers are considering launching a negative advertising campaign in Bulgaria and Romania to persuade potential immigrants to stay away from the UK.
The plan, which would focus on the downsides of British life, is one of a range of potential measures to stem immigration to Britain next year when curbs imposed on both country’s citizens living and working in the UK will expire.
-------------
We also have to tie in EITC reform. Who's been getting it that shouldn't have gotten it.
Pay it back, get your card.
What happened to the sponsor?
People who adopt internationally (used to) have to leave 3 years of tax returns at the embassy of the country.
This is better than the last amnesty plan.
And a hell of a lot better than the next one.
Pass a law, that designates one acceptance of a Mexican applicant for citizenship in the US, is equaled with one applicant for an American applicant for Mexican citizenship.
The sooner that we take over this country to the south, the better that the northern hemisphere will be with the southern one.
I’m going to make a prediction that any “immigration reform” proposal that is centered around what to do about the millions of people who have broken the current law is doomed to fail. Far better to create a proposal that (a) revamps what we want our immigration policy to be and (b) creates the infrastructure necessary to support and enforce that policy, including preventing more people from entering or staying here illegally. Once that is done, we can discuss what to do about those who violated the law that was in place.
Well, yes, the economy is bad now, but it will recover.
Yeah, I've been hearing about the recovery coming any day now - for almost six years.
This is better than the last amnesty plan.
And a hell of a lot better than the next one.
Thread winner by a TKO!
"Bipartisan usually means that a larger-than-usual deception is being carried out."
-George Carlin
How come the pols never make the connection that illegals are taking the summer jobs of American students? And the entry level jobs of other Americans?
What makes you think they don't make the connection? Don't you realize that is a FEATURE not a BUG for a great many of them on both sides of the isle?
Amnesty just lets Mexico (and other countries but mainly Mexico) off the hook for caring for its own people and shifts the burden to us.
There is no good excuse why people should have to flee Mexico for a better life here. Given the natural resources, Mexicans should be just as rich and happy as the rest of North America.
There is a good explanation however: decades and generations of corrupt big government.
Pay your back taxes...hmmmm let's see, worked for 10 at low wages...lessseeee that means you get Earned Income Tax Credits and Child Tax Credits...OK, your fine will be -27,489. Where do we send your check?
Also there will be hardship waivers for fines.
The economy will get better, but we might be looking at 7-9% institutionalized unemployment.
Could be higher, who knows?
Dear Bipartisan Amnesty Republicans,
You are being played. You will not get positive credit for this.
Democrats, and only Democrats, get credit for playing Lady Bountiful with other peoples' money.
That's their lane.
Republicans are supposed to be fiscally and constitutionally responsible.
That's your lane.
Stay in your lane.
Dear Bipartisan Amnesty Republicans,
Will you feel better about yourselves later in the week when King Barry is (briefly and without attribution) praising your progressive "bipartisan" impulses, and taking credit for them?
How about when you have to compromise your initial compromise in order to get the legislation passed that King Barry wants?
Also, there is no way they will be "back of the line."
They are already being given massively special treatment vs. legal immigrants. People who marry US citizens get reamed over several times. (Been there - done that.)
There will be no affidavits of support, sponsors, etc.
Those are racist.
Personally, I would make them all head home once last time to pick up their visas, and then return in a ceremonial "entering America legally" ceremony. We could have chartered buses and planes for this, so its not a hardship. Such a symbolic "legal bapitism" would be compelling.
I'm sorry, but you are a fool if you think much other than the benefits to immigrants and Democrats will actually materialize. There will be very little taxes collected and we will only end up with a more expensive immigration problem.
How many times do such laws have to turn out to be bait and switch (100%) before you stop falling for what they tell you it will do?
In the end, it will do nothing but transfer wealth and benefits from citizens to non-citizens just like every time before.
Another point of contention: the idea that Hispanics are going to vote for Republicans if they vote for amnesty (assuming that any R's get credit, which they won't anyway).
Hispanics mostly come from left-leaning countries anyway. They were brought up to believe that government is supposed to provide. The main reason Hispanics vote for democrats has NOTHING to do with amnesty; it's because they give them goodies.
It's really that simple.
This is an important first step for Democrats to appeal to one of their favorite groups. Underage Latina Prostitutes.
As Democratic Senator Bob Menendez would say: "Just think about my underage prostitute and vote yes to support our plan!"
How would back taxes be determined? Most illegals don't get w-2s and use as their social security number whatever nine numbers pop into their head. With the gov't unable to prove the amount earned and owed, they would likely get a free pass on taxes that should have been paid but weren't.
And our new class of citizens not only broke immigration laws, but tax laws and committed fraud in using ssnumbers.
If the GOP wants more citizens to vote for them, they need to import rich people. You can see how the Democrats plans to import the poor and scare away the rich is a winning strategy. And no voter ID required either.
" The main reason Hispanics vote for democrats has NOTHING to do with amnesty; it's because they give them goodies."
It's really that simple.
1/28/13, 3:25 PM
I Callahan, I'm wondering why did even more Asians than Hispanics vote Democratic? Do they want free stuff too?
@Inga: President Obama got fewer votes in 2012 than John McCain received in 2008, link so, it's hard to say who stayed home or switched parties.
Disgruntle all around.
As a general rule, the more ethnically diverse the society, the less inclined it is to support a welfare state. Because people are most likely to support welfare programs when the money goes to recipients who are "like us," immigration actually undermines the welfare state rather than reinforces it.
Something the GOP should consider.
@bagoh
"In the end, it will do nothing but transfer wealth and benefits from citizens to non-citizens just like every time before."
Smart for politicians, I guess, but the rest of us get screwed.
None of these ideas about confessing and paying back taxes, et al, will work...it is delusional to think otherwise. Any solution that works will have to be along the lines of "go and sin no more". And that is pointless if we cannot seal up our borders, both southern and northern.
I don't think we will truly secure our borders, so all this palaver is pointless.
" immigration actually undermines the welfare state rather than reinforces it."
One word: California
You know, when you put it like that, 8 people affecting directly 11 million people and indirectly all 360 million people and more when you consider Mexico too, I have to marvel, yes, here is democracy in action right before my wondering eyes in the very best of deliberative tradition, that is deliberate nationally until everybody's at each other throats, then bring up the subject again until everybody vomits, then bring up the subject again until everybody vomits and bring up the subject again until everybody vomits then cobble together eight people and pass something in darkness and out of sight of squabbling deliberation.
"pass something in darkness and out of sight"
It's a bulimicracy.
I Callahan, I'm wondering why did even more Asians than Hispanics vote Democratic? Do they want free stuff too?
Asian-Americans are concentrated in the blue states (and generally in the bluest parts of blue states). It would be surprising if they didn't mostly vote for Democrats. Asian-Americans used to favor Republicans back when Communism was still a concern and memories of FDR's Japanese internment camps was fresh. Today the most common political affiliation is "none".
I've been looking at the Yellowstone Caldera.
We & Mexico go poof, at this point, does it really matter?
"Keep, ancient land, your storied pomp and loud mariachis " cries she with silent lips. "Give me your tropical climate workers, your poor, your hiking masses yearning to breathe free of their own corrupted governments, the wretched refuse in want of education and possessing low technical skills. Send to me these, the homeless, drug war-tost seeking absolutely free healthcare and certain to vote socialist every time. I spread bridges across this placid river and pave the way.
I guess, Althouse, the majority of your commenters have decided that "stupidity" remains the best alternative!
Me included!
bagoh20 said...
"immigration actually undermines the welfare state rather than reinforces it."
One word: California
I realize this is a disputable point on the right. Many believe what Milton Friedman said, i.e., you can't simultaneously have loose immigration and a generous welfare state. The thinking is that welfare becomes a magnet and an anchor, and people will take advantage and costs will explode.
See http://www.ia-forum.org/Files/ForumReport%20Fall%202010%20Migration3.pdf [p. 43].
"Public opinion research in both the United States and Europe shows that most people become less supportive of welfare spending if they believe that it is primarily assisting members of other ethnic groups at the expense of their own."
In other words, I think Friedman failed to properly account for the dynamics of immigration and changing demographics. Sure, people are drawn to a place because of its attractions, which in addition to general economic opportunity can include a generous welfare state. But people change in response to immigration. Part of the reason the welfare state has been so durable in places like Sweden is the cohesive and homogenous national culture.
Congratulations, Rubio. You just smothered your 2016 candidacy in the crib.
Idiots.
The smart play would be for the Republicans to propose an expanded *legal* immigration plan that targeted Asia, Africa, and eastern Europe. Loudly proclaim belief in immigration but condemn the idea that Mexicans have a right to the lion's share of it. Do nothing to establish a "path to citizenship" for the illegals.
The rule of law- I remember when that mattered. WTF do we need law schools for anyway Althouse?
As a general rule, the more ethnically diverse the society, the less inclined it is to support a welfare state.
I know that IIya Somin likes to promote that claim on the Volokh Conspiracy every so often. I’ll ask you the same questions that he studiously avoids whenever it’s asked:
How many societies have reduced the size, scope and cost of their welfare state when they became less ethnically homogeneous?
How many societies have expanded the size, scope and cost and of their welfare state when they became more ethnically heterogeneous?
Unless the answer to the first question is greater than the answer to the question, that “general rule” is merely wishful thinking.
AJ, do you really expect the resident law school professor to explain the rule of law? Has she ever proferred an explanation of law? No, she hasn't and she never will, because when it comes right down to it, she doesn't know jack fucking shit about the law, except some examples of previous rulings of law that fit her law school protocol. What good will it do these students?
Bipartisan = gang rape of the constituency.
This time, it'll work for sure. I wonder if they'll just call it Amnesty II?
I know what's in it for the Dems. I wonder what the Repubs are thinking?
BDNYC,
That's all very nice in it's academic sterility, but living in California for over 30 years and knowing hundreds of immigrants comprising the majority of the people I know here, including in my own family, I can tell you that's bullshit blurred by the perspective of looking in from the outside.
Immigrants overwhelmingly favor the benefits of a welfare state, and while the attitude on a personal level is often conservative, when it comes down to voting for liberal welfare policies or a Republican talking restrictions and cuts, it's not even in a question. Even conservative immigrants think of others they know who could use a little help and soften when the question is put to them as a vote. This is the way many non-immigrants approach public policy as well: live conservatively, but vote liberally.
I talk to many immigrants every single day, and so I'm not relying on a study by someone who doesn't in order to know what they think.
THey have to pay a fine? THat will be a deal breaker right there.
If they don't pay the fine but stil try to work can we deport their asses?
The Law...from the perspective of a former "fed": it ain't what you think, nor what college professors think, it IS what bureaucrats think it is, period.
Stop them if you can afford to do so...good luck. How about that NLRB, eh? Wanna bet on how many rulings get turned over?
"The smart play would be for the Republicans to propose an expanded *legal* immigration plan that targeted Asia, Africa, and eastern Europe. Loudly proclaim belief in immigration but condemn the idea that Mexicans have a right to the lion's share of it. Do nothing to establish a "path to citizenship" for the illegals."
And yet nothing is ever proposed. Thus, I weakly support Amnesty, because its better than nothing.
THey have to pay a fine? THat will be a deal breaker right there.
I seem to recall that when Senator McCain tried his bipartisan immigration reform with the late Senator Kennedy one of the provisions was that anyone here illegally had to pay a fine plus back taxes and return to their country of origin. Senator McCain chided opponents who favored enforcement of the existing laws (including deportation) because he said that it was unrealistic to expect to deport 12 million people.
But apparently it’s realistic to expect them to leave voluntarily and drop a big pile of cash with the IRS on the way out.
I wouldn't mind if we had "hot panels" and we American got to pick which illegals stayed here.
Hot your in.
Not hot your out.
Also, they multiply like rabbits and should be required to have their tubes tied so we aren't paying for all the baby chimichangas.
This is why I couldn't bring myself to vote for McCain in '08. Like Graham, his answer to any issue is go back to DC, each across the aisle,and craft a "bipartisan" bill. Why bother to vote for the Republican party? What did we get? Dem Lite.
Should say "reach".
I also mean to say that I have cast my final vote for any Republican.
"Immigrants overwhelmingly favor the benefits of a welfare state, and while the attitude on a personal level is often conservative, when it comes down to voting for liberal welfare policies or a Republican talking restrictions and cuts, it's not even in a question. Even conservative immigrants think of others they know who could use a little help and soften when the question is put to them as a vote. This is the way many non-immigrants approach public policy as well: live conservatively, but vote liberally."
Bingreka!!
WTF - Does this mean that entering this country illegally is not criminal?
I would think that violation of immigration statutes is a criminal offense - but the lady who runs this blog is the only lawyer that I know to be lurking hereabouts.
When this law passes, and it surely will because the Republicans have none, the Mexican border will bring us more Democrat voters.
Remember when Republicans said that the first thing that had to be done was the completion of the border fence?
BDNYC, I suspect that the conflict between the academic conclusion and, well, California (and the UK, by the way, which is becoming radically less homogenous and apparently increasingly liberal with its welfare) is contained in this: most people become less supportive of welfare spending if they believe that it is primarily assisting members of other ethnic groups at the expense of their own
The types of people who are generally paying for our welfare state--middle class, typically married, typically white--are becoming less in favor of welfare, primarily because they perceive themselves as paying for things that don't benefit their own group. However, large numbers of people who consider welfare programs to benefit themselves or a group they closely identify with at little-to-no cost to themselves also vote and, at this point, seem to be winning the numbers.
When I was growing up in New Mexico, I used to know a lot of chicanos who disliked supporting recent Mexican immigrants via welfare. But because they were American-born, they didn't identify very heavily with recent immigrants. I'm not sure what happened to them, although I am guessing they are the ones who made Gary Johnson a popular two-time governor.
"I wonder what the Repubs are thinking?"
McCain was quoted on NPR this evening. He sounded almost panicky that OMG the Latinos didn't vote for us!!! as if passing this will make any difference. Got any principles, John? Thanks for making me regret my 2008 vote.
Also, the NPR piece went into some detail about all the rough, tough, onerous hurdles illegals would have to overcome to go stand at the back of the line! for citizenship. Never addressing what would happen if the illegals didn't take this law any more seriously than they take existing U.S. laws.
"Deja Vu" is a great song by CSN(&Y).
"One Two Three Four
If I had ever been here before
I would probably know just what to do
Don't you?
If I had ever been here before on another time around the wheel
I would probably know just how to deal
With all of you
And I feel
Like I've been here before
Feel
Like I've been here before
And you know it makes me wonder
What's going on under the ground, hmmm
Do you know? Don't you wonder?
What's going on down under you
We have all been here before, we have all been here before
We have all been here before, we have all been here before
We have all been here before, we have all been here before"
History repeats it's self, our betters have no problem selling out our birth rights. This will be just like Reagan's program, a promise of security, enforcement and amnesty. We got all amnesty and pretend enforcement. Secure the borders first, once secure just grant citizenship to all 14 million present illegals. Without strict enforcement first, we'll be having this same conversation in a decade, Deja Vu.
Mitchell the Bat: This illegal immigration problem would be fixed in two weeks if only they'd let me experiment with my prototype transporter beam.
My God, Mr. Bat, you've been reading my mind! I swear I've been going on about my teleporter solution to everyone in earshot for a while now. So who do we beam out first, and to where? I figure we could have a nice civil humane approach to the illegals themselves. Let 'em get their affairs in order, maybe help out with the moving expenses. Probably mostly decent folk, just doing what I'd've done, in their shoes.
But oh man, the lying-sack politicians and the serf-labor enthusiasts who've been hell-bent on screwing their own country and countrymen for lo this last half-century. What to do with them? Beam them to Antarctica? Central Congo? Or maybe just use the magic teleporter to keep them away from the sweet life in the centers of power, living amongst the working-class citizens and their kids whose lives they have so enriched with their holier-than-thou globo-rific morality that always seems to fatten their own purses?
Lovely fantasy, eh?
...after paying a fine and back taxes.
...only after new measures are in place to prevent a future influx of illegal immigrants....
...behind those who had already legally applied at the time of the law’s enactment.
Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha.
Yer killin' me, man.
Nobody knows nothin' unless it happened less than 2 weeks ago, and they saw it on a reality show.
But the fascinating thing about all this corruption, despite the hysterics about all those "bitter clingers", is the apparent confidence that all those bitter clingers (i.e. you and me) will go right on with our old school civic duty, fair-play attitudes, obeying the law, keeping civil society up and running with our chumpy traditional American honest ways, while the rest of "society" hustles along in self-interested corruption, doing as they please, only being law-abiding and code-respecting if it happens to be convenient for them that day.
Really? "We don't have to obey the law, but you do"? How long do people think chumps are gonna chump?
Me? I'm getting right tired of being a chump.
I’ll ask you the same questions that he studiously avoids whenever it’s asked:
He probably "studiously avoids" them because they aren't particularly relevant.
The claim is that support for the welfare state declines as the nation becomes less homogenous. You're leaping to the unsupported assumption that government programs that lose popular support shrink in size and that government programs that grow in size must enjoy popular support. Neither of those things is true.
So even if it was the case that the world is getting simultaneously more welfare-y and more heterogeneous, that would still not refute Somin's claim. To refute (or support) Somin's claim, you should compare *support* for the welfare state to varying levels of homogeneity.
And yet nothing is ever proposed. Thus, I weakly support Amnesty, because its better than nothing.
In what way, and for whom?
Thorley Winston: I know that IIya Somin likes to promote that claim on the Volokh Conspiracy every so often. I’ll ask you the same questions that he studiously avoids whenever it’s asked:
How many societies have reduced the size, scope and cost of their welfare state when they became less ethnically homogeneous?
How many societies have expanded the size, scope and cost and of their welfare state when they became more ethnically heterogeneous?
Somin is just another puerile glib libertardian who thinks his open-borders wet-dreams are gonna break the welfare state, man! In the short run, of course, that's nonsense - no matter how civilly divisive, in the short run the large, electorally significant immigrants now pouring into wealthier countries are going to keep voting themselves the treasury, facilitated by corrupt politicians who want to maintain power. (Nothing says "stupid party" like the phrase "natural conservative"!)
In the long run, Somin is right, but not in his intended libertarian unicorn utopia sense. When you break the bonds of civil society, you...break the bonds of civil society. Somin and his ilk think we're just going to get the pre-welfare state America back, eventually, if we just atomize the holy crap out of society, and reduce what was once a reasonably coherent American culture to a contract-based strip-mall. Yay!
Of course that isn't what's happening. What we'll get (are getting) is another bog-standard wealth-stratified caste society. Enjoy!
(IOW, I don't think we're in disagreement here, Thorley.)
How do they know or estimate there are 11 million? Do they have a list of names? Why are the media and people so gullible? This is just like the 20, 30, 0r 40 million people who supposedly did not have health care. who are they, where are they? Gives us names or stop using made up numbers.
I deleted my response to Strelnikov ... it no longer matters who you vote for...either way you get fucked. This whole immigration thing is bullshit as I said at the beginning here...nothing workable has been proposed because nothing workable is actually wanted.
Deja vu. Isn't this 1986 all over again?
I guess we really mean it this time!
So they are going to rewrite amnesty policies and call them reform? Check.
Why don't we drop the pretenses and just declare CanAmMex a new nation?
A sneaky way to annex our neighbors.
Too bad we didn't elect Romney or McCain, we could have avoided all this.
Oh wait.
...nothing workable has been proposed because nothing workable is actually wanted.
Bingo!!!
Thank God for the Libertarians though. They have a plan to save us from any bad effects of illegal immigration. As follows:
First, support open borders and amnesty - millions come in and vote Democrat.
Second, ?????
Third, welfare state is eliminated
Fourth: Immigration problem solved, everyone happy.
"Immigrants overwhelmingly favor the benefits of a welfare state"
I've lived and worked with "Immigrants" since I got out of college and I have yet to meet a Republican one - even the ones that drive BMW's and live in $1 million dollar (or more) homes.
America Without Borders. We ask the Mexicans to make their immigration laws a mirror of ours. (Down there for instance you have to carry your passport all the time and there is trouble if they find you are out without it. No more of that.) But anyhow my idea is that older people on SS go south where it's warm and cheaper in exchange for younger Mexicans coming here to work. The groups have all the same rights - e.g., voting, house purchase, pay taxes in one country only - whatever one has, the other has.
illegal aliens usually enter the U.S. legally and overstay. so the fence is not effective.
instead, enact policies that will discourage them from bringing over their children and dependents to the U.S., make it more expensive for them to live in the U.S., like eliminating free education for illegals in u.s. public schools.
if their children and spouse are still living in mexico, the workers have no choice but to return to mexico out of homesickness and missing his loved ones.
rcocean: "Thank God for the Libertarians though. They have a plan to save us from any bad effects of illegal immigration"
here's my immigration plan that got my libertarian friends approval.
1) First, eliminate access to free K-12 public school education for FUTURE illegal aliens.
2) No more automatic citizenship for children born in the U.S. to 2 non-American parents.
3) Once both are done, I would give legal residency and work permits for qualified "Dreamers" who are not recent arrivals. No limits will be placed on the types of jobs they can apply for.
4) Have a guest worker program with Mexico limited to agriculture sector and those who want to work as nannies/maids.
Post a Comment