Immigration Bill fails crucial vote

[24champ]

And Bush has an egg on his face in the process...



By JULIE HIRSCHFELD DAVIS, Associated Press Writer 5 minutes ago

WASHINGTON - A broad immigration bill to legalize millions of people in the U.S. unlawfully failed a crucial test vote in the Senate Thursday, a stunning setback that could spell its defeat for the year.
ADVERTISEMENT

The vote was 45-50 against limiting debate on the bill, 15 short of the 60 that the bill's supporters needed to prevail. Most Republicans voted to block Democrats' efforts to bring the bill to a final vote.

The legislation, which had been endorsed by
President Bush, would tighten borders, institute a new system to prevent employers from hiring undocumented workers in addition to giving up to 12 million illegal immigrants a pathway to legal status.

Conceived by an improbable coalition that nicknamed the deal a "grand bargain," the measure exposed deep rifts within both parties and is loathed by most GOP conservatives.

Senate Majority Harry Reid (news, bio, voting record), D-Nev., who had made no secret of his distaste for parts of the bill, said earlier he would move on to other matters if the immigration measure's supporters didn't get 60 votes Thursday night.

The defeat set off a bitter round of partisan recriminations, with Democrats and Republicans each accusing the other of killing it.

Most Republicans voted against ending debate, saying they needed more time to make the bill tougher with tighter border security measures and a more arduous legalization process for unlawful immigrants.

All but a handful of Democrats supported the move, but they, too, were holding their noses at provisions of the bill. Many of them argued it makes second-class citizens of a new crop of temporary workers and rips apart families by prioritizing employability over blood ties in future immigration.

Still, they had argued that the measure, on balance, was worth advancing.

"We can all find different aspects of this legislation that we differ with," said Sen. Edward M. Kennedy of Massachusetts, the leading Democratic architect of the bill.

Reid, who had made no secret of his distaste for parts of the bill, quickly pulled it from the floor and moved on to other business, costing the measure perhaps its best chance at enactment.

He insisted that the immigration bill is not dead for the year. "I, even though disappointed, look forward to passing this bill," Reid said.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070608/ap_on_go_co/immigration_congress

[Spider]

I thought it would pass ........... wonder what they will come up with next if anything

[spdirty]

great news!

[TailgateNut]

Good, now they'll have time to reconsider the actual effects of millions of criminals getting an American version of AMNESTY! More time to think, and more time for a barrage of mail.

[RkyMtnThunder]

Bill failed? No tears from me

[Spider]

I am curious as to what the amnesty part is ?

[24champ]

great news!

Indeed despite how "un-American" we are about the issue.^5

[TailgateNut]

I am curious as to what the amnesty part is ?

What would you like to call it: "Turning a blind Eye"? "Imunity from procecution"? "Unearned reward"? "Jumping in line"? What???

[Spider]

What would you like to call it: "Turning a blind Eye"? "Imunity from procecution"? "Unearned reward"? "Jumping in line"? What???

from what I read , they can be here 2 years , go back home for a year , come back again,and so on , pay 5,000 dollars and in 13 years become citizens , if anything I would cal it exploitation ......... But not amnesty .........But I havent seen anything better to date to address illegal immigration........

[RMT]

if it isn't amnesty, then why the support from LULAC and La Raza, and vitriol from mexico over the possibility of its defeat?

and why were so many people south of the border lining up to get into the U.S. if it passed?

[Hartley]

from what I read , they can be here 2 years , go back home for a year , come back again,and so on , pay 5,000 dollars and in 13 years become citizens , if anything I would cal it exploitation ......... But not amnesty .........But I havent seen anything better to date to address illegal immigration........

You do realize that they only have to go through that process if they want to become citizens, right? As soon as that bill is signed they would essentially become legal reguardless of citizenship. You could say that the bill makes citizenship irrelevant, i mean why leave the country, pay 5 grand and then get back in line if you dont have to right?

[epicSocialism4tw]

This is the defining social issue of our time. Its ramifications are immense for this generation and for several subsequent generations.

[TailgateNut]

from what I read , they can be here 2 years , go back home for a year , come back again,and so on , pay 5,000 dollars and in 13 years become citizens , if anything I would cal it exploitation ......... But not amnesty .........But I havent seen anything better to date to address illegal immigration........


I know I've heard it a thousand times: "they just want abetter life". Right, and so do thousands who have waited while making their way through the legal process.
Sorry Spidey, I'm on the other side of THAT FENCE! Pardon the Pun!

[atomicbloke]

Great new in terms of illegal immigration. they will no longer drain the american system.

Terrible for legal immigrants. Now watch as thousands of high-skilled foreigners i.e. university professors, scientists and engineers at NASA and other national labs, doctors in under represented areas, nurses, entrepreuners (think founders of Google, Yahoo, Sun , etc) will begin a mass exodus. Ironiclly, they h ave been educated in America's top universities on government scholarships i.e. on taxpayers money. Now they will use their tax payer funded education to make another country stronger and pay taxes and create jobs in those countries. Ironically, countries like France, Canada, Germany, Australia stand to gain the most from this.

It's great that the senate was bold to take this tough stance against illegal immigration. The fallacy was to club all immigrants under the same bill. In effect, some criminal who jumped the border and someone who had a PhD from MIT and was a scientist at NASA was grouped into one category.

[spdirty]

Indeed despite how "un-American" we are about the issue.^5

I don't know, maybe we do have a say as to what those bastards in Washington do.

[TailgateNut]

Great new in terms of illegal immigration. they will no longer drain the american system.

Terrible for legal immigrants. Now watch as thousands of high-skilled foreigners i.e. university professors, scientists and engineers at NASA and other national labs, doctors in under represented areas, nurses, entrepreuners (think founders of Google, Yahoo, Sun , etc) will begin a mass exodus. Ironiclly, they h ave been educated in America's top universities on government scholarships i.e. on taxpayers money. Now they will use their tax payer funded education to make another country stronger and pay taxes and create jobs in those countries. Ironically, countries like France, Canada, Germany, Australia stand to gain the most from this.

It's great that the senate was bold to take this tough stance against illegal immigration. The fallacy was to club all immigrants under the same bill. In effect, some criminal who jumped the border and someone who had a PhD from MIT and was a scientist at NASA was grouped into one category.


WTF have you been sniffin' tonight?

[cutthemdown]

It's not dead yet though, but i hope it gets dead. We need real immigration reform not a white flag amnesty. Bush talks about doing things right and not giving up but on this issue he is really blowing it.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

great news!

Yep. :yep:

[Spider]

You do realize that they only have to go through that process if they want to become citizens, right? As soon as that bill is signed they would essentially become legal reguardless of citizenship, i mean why leave the country, pay 5 grand and then get back in line if you dont have to right?

no i didnt get that understanding , not with the tougher laws on companies hiring .......... they a have to get documentation .........

[Spider]

I know I've heard it a thousand times: "they just want abetter life". Right, and so do thousands who have waited while making their way through the legal process.
Sorry Spidey, I'm on the other side of THAT FENCE! Pardon the Pun!

;D pun pardon ........ but I am still in the middle on this

[TailgateNut]

It's not dead yet though, but i hope it gets dead. We need real immigration reform not a white flag amnesty. Bush talks about doing things right and not giving up but on this issue he is really blowing it.


..as if he hasn't ****ed up enough, he wants to insure our future is just as bad as the present....but he'll be able to say "mission accomplished" without it being a lie. A true separation of the have's and have not's.....
...just erase middle class america completely.....

...but there are many more who have their hands in this "amnesty proposal" and I hope all of them pay dearly for their support and their votes on this issue. I know I wont forget and forgive!

[spdirty]

from what I read , they can be here 2 years , go back home for a year , come back again,and so on , pay 5,000 dollars and in 13 years become citizens , if anything I would cal it exploitation ......... But not amnesty

tell me what percentage of the 30 million illegals will do this? The key is that if the bill were ever to be signed into law they would become legal.


But I havent seen anything better to date to address illegal immigration

I have, though it hasn't been introduced into the senate. Its called enforce the laws we already have, refund the fence that was defunded by your president,:D and expand that fence to include the entire border. Until that has been done, I don't want to hear the words guest worker program.

[24champ]

Yep. :yep:

Wow even LABF is onboard.;D

[24champ]

It's not dead yet though, but i hope it gets dead. We need real immigration reform not a white flag amnesty. Bush talks about doing things right and not giving up but on this issue he is really blowing it.

Right on target, I am worried they will attach a bunch of pork to buy off votes to get it through. As long as the voters keep the pressure on those in Washington, there shouldn't be a revival of this bill.

[Spider]

tell me what percentage of the 30 million illegals will do this? The key is that if the bill were ever to be signed into law they would become legal.




I have, though it hasn't been introduced into the senate. Its called enforce the laws we already have, refund the fence that was defunded by your president,:D and expand that fence to include the entire border. Until that has been done, I don't want to hear the words guest worker program.

I know ......and I do agree we need to enforce the laws we have , but I just cant condemn the illegals ..........

[TailgateNut]

no i didnt get that understanding , not with the tougher laws on companies hiring .......... they a have to get documentation .........



Here's the "meat" of the bill: "since ya'll are already here, ya might as well stay, 'cause we're to ignorant to do anything about it.........."

[Spider]

Here's the "meat" of the bill: "since ya'll are already here, ya might as well stay, 'cause we're to ignorant to do anything about it.........."

I see . I guess it is amnesty then ........I will concede that point to you .....

[atomicbloke]

WTF have you been sniffin' tonight?

What do you mean?

[spdirty]

Wow even LABF is onboard.;D

yeah LABF is 100% correct on this issue...man I need to take a shower now.ugh!~

[24champ]

yeah LABF is 100% correct on this issue...man I need to take a shower now.ugh!~

Might have to call HAZMAT to get checked.;D

[Hartley]

Here's the "meat" of the bill: "since ya'll are already here, ya might as well stay, 'cause we're to ignorant to do anything about it.........."

Dont forget the bill also states that it will grant citizenship to 400,000 people who line up at the boarder each year then after.

Then try multiplying that 400,000 by 5 family members as well, thats 2,000,000 "congratz your a citizen" stamps each year.

[TailgateNut]

What do you mean?

Do you actually believe that legal immigrants will now leave the country? Especially those who are well educated and are enjoying the fruits of the labors, for lack of better terms.
Do You?

We have a Project mgr in our company who immigrated from Venezuela. He has followed all of the laws to live and work here. He is an extremely intelligent person, and I can guarantee the last thing on his mind is to leave the US. He has had to jump through many "hoops" to continue on the legal path, but it can be done. I have written several letters on his behalf to further his progress to become a citizen.

On the other hand, I would not lift a finger for someone who has broken the law to come here, regardless of their "sob-story".

[spdirty]

Might have to call HAZMAT to get checked.;D

eh, I can't do this...FU(K IT.

AMNESTY FOR ALL!!!!

[TailgateNut]

Dont forget the bill also states that it will grant citizenship to 400,000 people who line up at the boarder each year then after.

Then try multiplying that 400,000 by 5 family members as well, thats 2,000,000 "congratz your a citizen" stamps each year.


...and don't forget the addition of more "anchor babies".....

It's as if our half of the US population is clueless as to the long term effects of a mass migration.

[spdirty]

...and don't forget the addition of more "anchor babies".....

It's as if our half of the US population is clueless as to the long term effects of a mass migration.

as well as the fact that it would more than likely break all of our entitlement programs.

[TailgateNut]

as well as the fact that it would more than likely break all of our entitlement programs.


...are there really people out there who believe things will magically change if we were to grant amnesty to millions of illegal immigrants. They will still suck on the gigantic american teet. overwhelming our educational system, abusing our medical system, sending billions of dollars out of the country and contributing to the eventual disapearance of our natural resources which are allready bering depleted due to our current population of 300 million +++.

It's as if we all had a case of "head up the ass syndrome"!

[spdirty]

yep

[atomicbloke]

Do you actually believe that legal immigrants will now leave the country? Especially those who are well educated and are enjoying the fruits of the labors, for lack of better terms.
Do You?

We have a Project mgr in our company who immigrated from Venezuela. He has followed all of the laws to live and work here. He is an extremely intelligent person, and I can guarantee the last thing on his mind is to leave the US. He has had to jump through many "hoops" to continue on the legal path, but it can be done. I have written several letters on his behalf to further his progress to become a citizen.

On the other hand, I would not lift a finger for someone who has broken the law to come here, regardless of their "sob-story".

You obviously did not read the bill completely. Legal immigrants have to wait 6-7 years to get permanent residency and then 5-6 years to get citizenship. Until then they can't vote and pay higher taxes. So that's 13 years for which their status is in limbo. And in those 13 years, if they change jobs, the counter reverts back to zero. The intelligent Venezuelan project manager in your firm cannot leave your firm even if he gets a better job because of this. The new bill had a clause to rectify this and make life easier for him, you and future such cases. It should have been a separate bill by itself but the senate included it with the bill for illegal immigrants.

In future, potential foreign intelligent project managers in your firm will save themselves a lot of grief by choosing to go to a country with more sensible immigration laws for highly educated and skilled foreigners. I have personally seen several such people leave for Europe, Canada, Australia and New Zealand. There, they can become citizens in 3-4 years.

[ant1999e]

...are there really people out there who believe things will magically change if we were to grant amnesty to millions of illegal immigrants. They will still suck on the gigantic american teet. overwhelming our educational system, abusing our medical system, sending billions of dollars out of the country and contributing to the eventual disapearance of our natural resources which are allready bering depleted due to our current population of 300 million +++.

It's as if we all had a case of "head up the ass syndrome"!

Fo sho it won't. What about this.
1. Secure the border.
2.Work Visas (no welfare and they pay taxes plus a annual work visa fee and must learn english)
3. Operation Smackdown- If they don't have a updated visa (they all won't) or no job, deport them behind the beautiful security fence(See 1)
4. If they are convicted of commiting a felony, send them to immigrant prison work camps to due their time and then deport them.(Free labor)
5. Convicted of 3 mistamenors, deport them.
6. No citizenship. They are guest workers. All they do is work. No voting

If you don't think 1. it will be impossible to deport over 20 million people your crazy. (How do you tell between legal and illegal?)
and 2. that if you could remove 20 million people from the working class without it causing a drastic negative effect on our economy you're as wacked out as LABF.:crazy:

[Spider]

yeah LABF is 100% correct on this issue...man I need to take a shower now.ugh!~

I want ot be on you and the others side on this issue , I really do , but for some reason it just doesnt feel right ....Though I do agree something has to be done .....I am not an open boarder person ........I still think building a multi nation seaport in Mexico under US labor laws is the answer .....

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

yeah LABF is 100% correct on this issue...

How many times have you had to grudgingly admit this recently?

I've lost count. ;)

[Spider]

I have given this issue alot of thought ........ some say it is corruption ...... We got corruption here , take a look at Paris Hilton for example , Texas cop was killed by the courts in houston , William Jefferson , Foley , so it isnt so much the corruption ........ it isnt revenue , Mexico has more oil then we do and is still on the + of importing , meaning they export more then they use ...........
So that leaves me with this problem ......Mexico has more billionaires then we do, not to mention millionaires , that leads me to believe the commons have no collective bargaining power , the commons of Mexico need a leg to stand on , power to get the wages and the labor structure we have here ...... get more Jobs etc ......... in my view that would do more to stop people from coming here then a fence or a wall ............

[24champ]

How many times have you had to grudgingly admit this recently?

I've lost count. ;)

You can't count up to ONE?:wave:

[atomicbloke]

I have given this issue alot of thought ........ some say it is corruption ...... We got corruption here , take a look at Paris Hilton for example , Texas cop was killed by the courts in houston , William Jefferson , Foley , so it isnt so much the corruption ........ it isnt revenue , Mexico has more oil then we do and is still on the + of importing , meaning they export more then they use ...........
So that leaves me with this problem ......Mexico has more billionaires then we do, not to mention millionaires , that leads me to believe the commons have no collective bargaining power , the commons of Mexico need a leg to stand on , power to get the wages and the labor structure we have here ...... get more Jobs etc ......... in my view that would do more to stop people from coming here then a fence or a wall ............

Thanks for stating the obvious.

You do realize that America has no power to change the socio-economic structure in Mexico.

America however does have the power to protect their own socio-economic structure by preventing illegal immigration.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

You can't count up to ONE?:wave:

Gee, I dunno - it seems like there's been more than one issue the bush backers have come to admit I was right about. :wiggle:

[epicSocialism4tw]

It's as if we all had a case of "head up the ass syndrome"!

You just described the state of American politics. Most of our citizens are more concerned with what is on McDonalds' dollar menu or the local football team's roster than what happens when situations like the immigration issue present themselves.

[broncocalijohn]

Do you actually believe that legal immigrants will now leave the country? Especially those who are well educated and are enjoying the fruits of the labors, for lack of better terms.
Do You?

We have a Project mgr in our company who immigrated from Venezuela. He has followed all of the laws to live and work here. He is an extremely intelligent person, and I can guarantee the last thing on his mind is to leave the US. He has had to jump through many "hoops" to continue on the legal path, but it can be done. I have written several letters on his behalf to further his progress to become a citizen.

On the other hand, I would not lift a finger for someone who has broken the law to come here, regardless of their "sob-story".

Why would anybody for Venezuela want to go back. If they do, they would be considered rich and lose whatever they worked for. On the subject of the thread, TG this happened. Rich, Big business Republicans and liberal democrats that are puppets of some of the labor unions went against the citizens of this country. Kennedy and McCain can go have an Irish cocktail and cry about not getting there way. Now, get that damn fence built that was promised.

[spdirty]

How many times have you had to grudgingly admit this recently?

I've lost count. ;)

lets see...1...uhhh, 1......, uhhh...1!:thumbsup:

[spdirty]

I have given this issue alot of thought ........ some say it is corruption ...... We got corruption here , take a look at Paris Hilton for example , Texas cop was killed by the courts in houston , William Jefferson , Foley , so it isnt so much the corruption ........ it isnt revenue , Mexico has more oil then we do and is still on the + of importing , meaning they export more then they use ...........
So that leaves me with this problem ......Mexico has more billionaires then we do, not to mention millionaires , that leads me to believe the commons have no collective bargaining power , the commons of Mexico need a leg to stand on , power to get the wages and the labor structure we have here ...... get more Jobs etc ......... in my view that would do more to stop people from coming here then a fence or a wall ............

well, you wanna invade Mexico and do a regime change?:~ohyah!:

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

lets see...1...uhhh, 1......, uhhh...1!:thumbsup:

I dunno, bud.

Seems like a lot of folks around here who used to back GeeDubya are singin' a whole 'nother tune these days, if you know what I mean. :wiggle:

:D

[spdirty]

I dunno, bud.

Seems like a lot of folks around here who used to back GeeDubya are singin' a whole 'nother tune these days, if you know what I mean. :wiggle:

:D

Well, its like what Tancredo said in the last debate when asked what Bush's biggest mistake was. "He ran as a conservative and he governed as a liberal."

Conservatives didnt turn on him, he turned on conservatives.

[Rohirrim]

Good news. Now let's build a double fence, put in some cameras, and put the national guard on the border. After that, we actually build the online employer citizenship verification system mandated in 1986 and go after employers who hire illegal immigrants until the ones who are left self deport. Then, we change the Constitution to say, "All children born to citizens of the United States are automatically citizens of the United States."

[Rascal]

Unfortunately I've been too busy to really look into it and see what the bill was about.

[Bob]

Great new in terms of illegal immigration. they will no longer drain the american system.

Terrible for legal immigrants. Now watch as thousands of high-skilled foreigners i.e. university professors, scientists and engineers at NASA and other national labs, doctors in under represented areas, nurses, entrepreuners (think founders of Google, Yahoo, Sun , etc) will begin a mass exodus. Ironiclly, they h ave been educated in America's top universities on government scholarships i.e. on taxpayers money. Now they will use their tax payer funded education to make another country stronger and pay taxes and create jobs in those countries. Ironically, countries like France, Canada, Germany, Australia stand to gain the most from this.

It's great that the senate was bold to take this tough stance against illegal immigration. The fallacy was to club all immigrants under the same bill. In effect, some criminal who jumped the border and someone who had a PhD from MIT and was a scientist at NASA was grouped into one category.

They just need to make decent laws instaed of srewing over the American people. First close the border to the degree that one can -- Second deal with ID's and employers, third, make it possible and faster for people to come over legally.

[Play2win]

If BUSH had his way, not only would he spend all the National Reserve on the war in Iraq, plus out-source all the jobs he could, but, also, would flood the country with a whole bunch of Legal-Illegals that would take jobs for half of what honest American Citizens would.

He wants to attack the american worker on all fronts... and steal every last one of their jobs...

[Stormontheplains]

all the farmers are bitching out here due to lack of illegals to hire. Those beef plant raids really scared the hell out of alot of them.

[spdirty]

all the farmers are b****ing out here due to lack of illegals to hire. Those beef plant raids really scared the hell out of alot of them.

good...now that you take the illegal element out, make them play by the rules, let the free economy work, and they will have to raise their wages.

[spdirty]

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/why_the_senate_immigration_bill_failed

Why the Senate Immigration Bill Failed


Friday, June 08, 2007

<SCRIPT language=JavaScript src="http://ads.rasmussenreports.com/adx.js" type=text/javascript></SCRIPT><SCRIPT language=JavaScript type=text/javascript> <!-- if (!document.phpAds_used) document.phpAds_used = ','; phpAds_random = new String (Math.random()); phpAds_random = phpAds_random.substring(2,11); document.write ("<" + "script language='JavaScript' type='text/javascript' src=""); document.write ("http://ads.rasmussenreports.com/adjs.php?n=" + phpAds_random); document.write ("&what=zone:41"); document.write ("&exclude=" + document.phpAds_used); if (document.referrer) document.write ("&referer=" + escape(document.referrer)); document.write (""><" + "/script>"); //--> </SCRIPT><SCRIPT language=JavaScript src="http://ads.rasmussenreports.com/adjs.php?n=729909152&what=zone:41&exclude=,&referer=http%3A//hotair.com/" type=text/javascript></SCRIPT><SCRIPT type=text/javascript><!-- google_ad_client = "pub-0440278245983055"; google_ad_width = 300; google_ad_height = 250; google_ad_format = "300x250_as"; google_ad_type = "image"; google_ad_channel = ""; google_color_border = "990066"; google_color_bg = "FFF5F6"; google_color_link = "0000CC"; google_color_text = "6F6F6F"; google_color_url = "008000";//--></SCRIPT><SCRIPT src="http://pagead2.googlesyndication.com/pagead/show_ads.js" type=text/javascript></SCRIPT>Elite newspapers and countless bloggers are writing their own explanations of why the compromise immigration legislation failed last night. Most of the write-ups discuss legislative tactics, an amendment offered by Senator Byron Dorgan (http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/why_the_senate_immigration_bill_failed#) (D), or some particular provision of the bill dealing with amnesty or guest workers.


The reality is much simpler and has nothing to do with legislative tactics. The immigration bill failed because a broad cross-section of the American people are opposed to it. Republicans, Democrats, and unaffiliated voters are opposed. Men are opposed. So are women. The young don’t like it; neither do the no-longer-young. White Americans are opposed. Americans of color are opposed.

The last Rasmussen Reports national telephone poll found that just 23% of Americans supported the legislation (http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/support_for_senate_immigration_bill_falls_49_prefe r_no_bill_at_all). When a bill has less popular support than the War in Iraq, it deserves to be defeated.

There is no mystery to why the public opposed the bill. In the minds of most Americans, immigration means reducing illegal immigration and enforcing the border. Only 16% believed the Senate bill would accomplish that goal (http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/just_16_believe_senate_bill_will_reduce_illegal_im migration).

It wasn’t amnesty or guest-worker programs or paths to citizenship that doomed the bill. Each of those provisions made it more difficult for some segments of the population to accept. However, most voters were willing to accept them as part of a true compromise that accomplished the primary goal of reducing illegal immigration.

The key to winning voter support was to accomplish that primary goal.
The Senators missed that point and that’s where the mystery resides in analyzing why this bill failed. It’s not unusual for political leaders to be out of touch with their constituents, but rarely this out of touch. How could something this unpopular with voters get so close to passage in a legislative body that is supposed to represent them?

From the beginning, the Senate approached the issue with top priority of addressing the legal status of the illegal aliens. They addressed concerns about guest-worker programs and questions about whether family or skill level should be more important when determining who could enter the country.

All of those are important questions, but they are not the most important question. Rasmussen Reports polling found that 72% of Americans believe it’s Very Important to reduce illegal immigration (http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/just_26_favor_senate_immigration_plan)and enforce the borders. Just 29% said it was Very Important to legalize the status of those illegally living in the country today.

After ignoring the main point that voters were hoping to address, Senators should not have been shocked at the public reaction. But they were.
With all the polling data in the world today, how could they have failed to see this coming? While Rasmussen Reports was the only public polling firm to directly ask about support or opposition to the Senate bill, other polling data such as a recent CBS News/New York Times survey provided plenty of warning signs (http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/ny_times_cbs_poll_finds_that_69_believe_illegal_im migrants_should_be_prosecuted). Besides, the nation’s politicians purchase plenty of private polling data that should have given them a hint.

We live in a world where most Americans believe that most Members of Congress will sell their vote for cash or a campaign contribution (http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/poll_56_believe_most_congressmen_willing_to_sell_t heir_vote). Only 16% believe the legislators’ votes are not for sale. By a nearly 5-to-1 margin, voters believe that Members of Congress are more interested in their own careers and agenda rather than the public good.

In that environment, the only way for political leaders to prove they are serious about enforcing the border and reducing illegal immigration will be to do it. That’s the next logical step in the immigration debate.

There are plenty of steps that could be taken quickly with solid voter support. Some may require new laws while others may simply require enforcement of the existing laws. But, voters aren’t concerned about the specifics—they’ll support serious efforts to reduce illegal immigration. This could include imposing employer sanctions, building a barrier, adding more border patrol agents, supporting local law enforcement efforts, and more.
Once the government actually enforces the border, then the debate can begin on all other aspects of immigration reform (http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/why_the_senate_immigration_bill_failed#). Then, the same politicians who were stunned by their misreading of the public on this bill will probably be stunned to learn something else—most Americans actually do favor a welcoming and open immigration policy (http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/politicians_missed_key_point_on_immigration_debate ).

The United States is a nation of immigrants. It is also a nation of laws. Voters want to honor both aspects of the national heritage. And, like good parents trying to instill values in their children, voters want their elected representatives to do the same.


Rasmussen Reports is an electronic publishing firm specializing in the collection, publication, and distribution of public opinion polling information.
The Rasmussen Reports ElectionEdge™ (http://www.rasmussenreports.com/premium_service_description) Premium Service for Election 2008 offers the most comprehensive public opinion coverage ever provided for a Presidential election.

Rasmussen Reports’ Election 2006 (http://www.rasmussenreports.com/2006/Election%20Polls%202006.htm) coverage has been praised for its accuracy and reliability. Michael Barone, Senior Writer for U.S. News & World Report and co-author of The Almanac of American Politics, mentions, “One clear lesson from the Republican victory of 2004 and the Democratic victory of 2006 is that the best place to look for polls that are spot on is RasmussenReports.com." And University of Virginia Professor Larry Sabato states, “In election campaigns, I’ve learned to look for the Rasmussen results. In my experience, they are right on the money. There is no question Rasmussen produces some of the most accurate and reliable polls in the country today.”

Rasmussen Reports was also the nation's most accurate polling firm during the 2004 Presidential election and the only one to project both Bush and Kerry's vote total within half a percentage point of the actual outcome.
During both Election 2004 and Election 2006, RasmussenReports.com was the top-ranked public opinion research site on the web. We had twice as many visitors as our nearest competitor and nearly as many as all competitors combined.

Scott Rasmussen, president of Rasmussen Reports, has been an independent pollster for more than a decade.

[broncocalijohn]

all the farmers are b****ing out here due to lack of illegals to hire. Those beef plant raids really scared the hell out of alot of them.


BS! Once the raids were over, the citizens that lost their job to begin with, came back. They didnt have these illegals a few years ago so who were their employees then? Excuses they use.

[Bronco Bob]

all the farmers are b****ing out here due to lack of illegals to hire. Those beef plant raids really scared the hell out of alot of them.

Gee, now maybe the farmers can hire American citizens to do the work.
Nah, that would never work, then they'd have to pay them a decent
living wage. Easier to pay slave wages and then complain no one
wants to do the work but illegals anyway.

[Stormontheplains]

BS! Once the raids were over, the citizens that lost their job to begin with, came back. They didnt have these illegals a few years ago so who were their employees then? Excuses they use.

They have always had illegals, dont know what the hell your talking about. As far as wages, they have had to up the pay and get americans. Big farmers havent paid anyone good for 30 years, about time they had to shell out some money

[TailgateNut]

BS! They didnt have these illegals a few years ago so who were their employees then? Excuses they use.


WHAT? Did the illegals just come over the border last year? That's news to me.

[Spider]

Gee, now maybe the farmers can hire American citizens to do the work.
Nah, that would never work, then they'd have to pay them a decent
living wage. Easier to pay slave wages and then complain no one
wants to do the work but illegals anyway.

as someone who grew up on a farm , I tell you this , it is damn hard work , when I was 12 I was picking peppers or bucking 90 pound bails of hay ....... carrying 5 gallon buckets full of water , feed .........and that was light chores ........shucking corn is bad ass work

[Bronco Bob]

as someone who grew up on a farm , I tell you this , it is damn hard work , when I was 12 I was picking peppers or bucking 90 pound bails of hay ....... carrying 5 gallon buckets full of water , feed .........and that was light chores ........shucking corn is bad ass work

Not sure what that has to do with paying someone a decent wage.
Are you saying Americans are too lazy and soft to do the work
no matter what they are paid?

[Rohirrim]

According to Bear Stearns Research (2005), illegals fill 8% of employment positions in the U.S. That 8% represents Americans who were replaced, mostly in the construction industry. Anybody who thinks that illegals are only taking new jobs that were specifically created for them is living in dreamland. 8% represents a hell of a lot of unemployed Americans.

[TailgateNut]

Not sure what that has to do with paying someone a decent wage.
Are you saying Americans are too lazy and soft to do the work
no matter what they are paid?


Playing the devils advocate: We have pampered our children to the point were they seem to be "above" hard work for limited pay.

My motto has always been " hard work builds character". It's good for the soul when you stand back and look at what you accomplished.


BTW: Roh, you hit the nail, square on the head once again. The numbers don't lie!

[W*GS]

According to Bear Stearns Research (2005), illegals fill 8% of employment positions in the U.S. That 8% represents Americans who were replaced, mostly in the construction industry. Anybody who thinks that illegals are only taking new jobs that were specifically created for them is living in dreamland. 8% represents a hell of a lot of unemployed Americans.

Take it for what it's worth, but the national unemployment rate is about 4.5% - quite low, and below the Clinton-era average.

How is it possible that plenty of Americans are working, and yet so many have had their jobs "taken" by Mexicans?

[broncocalijohn]

WHAT? Did the illegals just come over the border last year? That's news to me.

You think all of them were across the country in places like North Carolina doing Tobacco crops a few years ago? Yes, they have been on the West for many years but not plants like Tysons in the midwest. Those were citizen jobs until they got rid of them for cheap wages. My Dad used to pick Apples in Washington as a teenager. That was years ago but the influx of illegals farther from the West has been happening in more recent years. Places like Georgia finally got what I have witnessed in California in recent years. Our fruit and veggies wont go up much over a year if they paid wages to citizens. Fruit pickers now make a decent hourly (as I was told) based on how fast they work.

[Rohirrim]

Take it for what it's worth, but the national unemployment rate is about 4.5% - quite low, and below the Clinton-era average.

How is it possible that plenty of Americans are working, and yet so many have had their jobs "taken" by Mexicans?

The simple answer to that question is another question. Who supplied the 4.5% number? There is also the hidden number that we never discuss: Underemployment. That's the number we use when we have a construction worker who loses his $18 per hour job and then takes a job at Walmart for $8 per hour. Poof! He's off the unemployment list. Or how about the guy whose UI runs out? Poof. He's off the list too.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

The simple answer to that question is another question. Who supplied the 4.5% number? There is also the hidden number that we never discuss: Underemployment. That's the number we use when we have a construction worker who loses his $18 per hour job and then takes a job at Walmart for $8 per hour. Poof! He's off the unemployment list. Or how about the guy whose UI runs out? Poof. He's off the list too.

Yep.

That's how W*GS and other apologists for the Bush/Norquist economic agenda make the numbers look better than the reality.

[TailgateNut]

You think all of them were across the country in places like North Carolina doing Tobacco crops a few years ago? Yes, they have been on the West for many years but not plants like Tysons in the midwest. Those were citizen jobs until they got rid of them for cheap wages. My Dad used to pick Apples in Washington as a teenager. That was years ago but the influx of illegals farther from the West has been happening in more recent years. Places like Georgia finally got what I have witnessed in California in recent years. Our fruit and veggies wont go up much over a year if they paid wages to citizens. Fruit pickers now make a decent hourly (as I was told) based on how fast they work.


In fact they were on the east coast over a decade ago. Stop living in your bubble and think this is only an issue for California and the western states.
The only thing that has changed are the sheer numbers!

[W*GS]

Yep.

That's how W*GS and other apologists for the Bush/Norquist economic agenda make the numbers look better than the reality.

It's the same number, calculated in the same way, as during Clinton's watch. It's from the BLS, which, unless you're claiming that it's been infiltrated by neocon agents, is more or less unassailable as a political football.

But, you've never let the facts get in the way of a smear and cheap shot. As I've noted numerous times before, take away character assassination, and you're an empty shell.

[W*GS]

The simple answer to that question is another question. Who supplied the 4.5% number?

BLS. See

http://www.bls.gov

There is also the hidden number that we never discuss: Underemployment. That's the number we use when we have a construction worker who loses his $18 per hour job and then takes a job at Walmart for $8 per hour. Poof! He's off the unemployment list. Or how about the guy whose UI runs out? Poof. He's off the list too.

So find some statistics. Prove your case that Mexicans are taking our jobs.

Is perhaps yours at risk?

[Bronco_Beerslug]

So find some statistics. Prove your case that Mexicans are taking our jobs.
Is perhaps yours at risk?Are you purposely being an idiot for some reason asking a most stupid question?

[W*GS]

I never accept what the nativists say without some proof.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

I never accept what the nativists say without some proof.Ah, so you're in denial of the present world and all it's "little quirks", I see.

[Rohirrim]

BLS. See

http://www.bls.gov



So find some statistics. Prove your case that Mexicans are taking our jobs.

Is perhaps yours at risk?

Although I realize in advance that trying to educate morons is a thankless task, here ya go, anarchy boy:

http://www.bearstearns.com/bscportal/pdfs/underground.pdf

Explain that away, Grover.

[W*GS]

Although I realize in advance that trying to educate morons is a thankless task, here ya go, anarchy boy:

http://www.bearstearns.com/bscportal/pdfs/underground.pdf

Explain that away, Grover.

Doesn't say Mexicans are taking our jobs, or, that more Americans are unemployed or underemployed because of Mexicans. I didn't read it thoroughly - if it states the above somewhere, provide a quote. It does say, however:

[...]we believe the effects will be more balanced as this invisible work force provides aid to the demographic problems of social security.

It's not just icky capitalists who benefit from illegals - your cherished entitlement programs absolutely depend on them for their continued existence. Or, do you want to break the social contract, and screw today's workers out of the SS birthright?

[Spider]

Not sure what that has to do with paying someone a decent wage.
Are you saying Americans are too lazy and soft to do the work
no matter what they are paid?

basically , I dont see you out doing it , oil patch is another one , 12.00 an hour to scrape mud off of Rig Mats 100 degree weather or -20 , yep dont see many whites doing it .........I could go on and on , hell my Brother in Law is a supervisor @ KN energy , he cant keep people Hours are too hard .......

[Rohirrim]

Doesn't say Mexicans are taking our jobs, or, that more Americans are unemployed or underemployed because of Mexicans. I didn't read it thoroughly - if it states the above somewhere, provide a quote. It does say, however:

[...]we believe the effects will be more balanced as this invisible work force provides aid to the demographic problems of social security.

It's not just icky capitalists who benefit from illegals - your cherished entitlement programs absolutely depend on them for their continued existence. Or, do you want to break the social contract, and screw today's workers out of the SS birthright?

Nice cherry picking. I knew you could do it. :welcome:

[Play2win]

basically , I dont see you out doing it , oil patch is another one , 12.00 an hour to scrape mud off of Rig Mats 100 degree weather or -20 , yep dont see many whites doing it .........I could go on and on , hell my Brother in Law is a supervisor @ KN energy , he cant keep people Hours are too hard .......

Why the f*ck do you think that so many young kids in their 20's were FLOCKING up to Alaska (or Seattle to get to Alaska) in the early 90's to get out in the fishing boats or into the canneries.

To make sh!tloads of $$$...

That is hard work, but one could make lots of money. (certain) Young kids will always want to tackle the hard jobs if they can make the good money. Some of these companies need to start paying a fair market wage...


Rags-to-Riches stories used to be about hard, honest work and perseverance...

Now, its just about some people are real good at bullsh!tting people out of their money.

[bendog]

I agree we're addicted to cheap labor, but with 5% unemployment, illegal immigrants aren't taking our jobs. They're keeping wages from rising, but that's different than taking our jobs.

I go places in the Miss. Delta where there's 20% unemployment for young men. They don't want jobs. They could move to where there's a lack of workers, but they haven't bothered to learn the skills, or even communicate, to be hired.

And that's one reason why I think this bill was better than no bill. We need these people, and our laws, and lack of them, were drawn by politicians and employers to get them to provide cheap labor. Calling them "criminals" is sort of a joke, imo. I sped on my way to work. Everyone drives 45 in 30 mph zones here. It's just sort of expected. The illegal aliens should be required to become Americans, though.

[Rohirrim]

I think if you read thoroughly the Bear Stearns article posted above, you'll change your mind.

[Rohirrim]

Calling illegals "criminals" is a joke?

Meatpacking raids: A victim's storyPosted: Wednesday, December 13 at 02:09 pm CT by Bob Sullivan

Theresa Sanchez was expecting a $5,400 tax refund when she opened a letter from the IRS in January 2003. Instead, she got a bill demanding payment of taxes on $120,000 in undeclared wages. Someone using her name and Social Security number had earned the money through a series of jobs dating back to 1996 and had not paid any taxes on the income, the letter said.

Sanchez complained to the agency and to the Federal Trade Commission that her identity had been stolen, and was being used by someone to gain employment. Nonetheless, more than two years later, in April 2005, a woman walked into the Swift & Co. meatpacking plant in Greeley, Colo., and used Theresa Sanchez's name and Social Security number to get a job.

VIDEO: Watch MSNBC.com's Bob Sullivan discuss the raids on MSNBC television.


The woman’s employment ruse became public knowledge Tuesday when authorities raided Swift & Co. plants in six states and arrested approximately 1,300 illegal immigrants suspected of buying or stealing other people’s identities to secure U.S. jobs.

The suspect accused of illegally using Sanchez’s identity is identified only as Jane Doe in an affidavit filed by authorities Tuesday in Weld County, Colo., district court.

Attempts to find the real Sanchez, who lives in Texas, were unsuccessful. Neither Immigrations and Customs Enforcement officials nor the Federal Trade Commission would provide additional details about her or her case.

But MSNBC.com was able to piece together part of her decade-long identity theft ordeal from details provided in the affidavit.

Sanchez told investigators that she suspects her ex-husband gave the information to an imposter about 10 years ago.

It's not clear why that person – and apparently many others – was able to use Sanchez's personal information to obtain employment – and, in some cases, pay taxes -- even after she alerted federal agencies nearly four years ago that the data was being used for employment fraud.

Government doesn't warn consumers

And over the entire 10-year span, federal agencies like the IRS and the Social Security Administration could have detected suspicious use of her Social Security number, since they were collecting taxes from multiple jobs at multiple locations. But it is not the policy of either agency to warn consumers that their number might have been been stolen.

It happens often. Each year, 8 million to 9 million people pay taxes using the wrong number – some are mere clerical errors, but many are undocumented workers skirting the system by supplying a fake number and another name. In the Swift case, the imposter took on Sanchez’s identity, using her real name and Social Security number in a ruse designed to trick even the newest employment verification system, called Basic Pilot.

“The government has known since at least August 2005 that the current Basic Pilot program cannot successfully detect identity theft and would likely permit an unauthorized worker to be improperly verified,” U.S. District Judge Mary Lou Robinson wrote in her order denying an injunction filed by Swift to stop the raids.

“Some Social Security numbers are widely used at multiple locations, over 200 workplaces for some numbers,” she wrote.

The size of the problem is obviously massive. ICE officials said about 30 percent of Swift’s workforce had filed I-9 employment forms with questionable information. There’s no reason to suspect the Swift is unique in its industry.

Total number of victims unclear

And Sanchez apparently was just one of hundreds of victims in the Swift case. It is not clear how many IDs were used to obtain employment at the plants, but a fascinating compilation of Colorado-based cases on the Greeley Tribune's Web site gives some indication of the scope.

It's not clear what prompted ICE officials to put a sudden end to their ordeal with the largest work-site enforcement action ever taken.

But there were some hints at Wednesday's press conference. Homeland Security Director Michael Chertoff complained that his agency is legally barred from communication with the Social Security Administration about Social Security numbers that are used twice.

“The law does not allow Social Security to refer cases to us when the Social Security number is used at multiple locations,” he said. “A better solution requires congressional Action. …We urge Congress to act.”

If it does, it won’t be soon enough for Sanchez, who has no way of knowing whether her data was sold or shared with any other undocumented workers.

Federal Trade Commission chairman Deborah Platt Majoras said Wednesday that her agency is reaching out to Swift-related imposter victims, but there is still no way for Sanchez and the other victims to know if anyone else is using their personal information.

Chertoff said one Swift-related ID theft victims had been arrested in Texas because his imposter had committed crimes. Other had multiple loans and credit cards taken out in their names, and had their credit ruined.

“There is a persistent hardship which follows this crime,” he said.

Very persistent, as Sanchez’s decade-long ordeal demonstrates.

[bendog]

I think if you read thoroughly the Bear Stearns article posted above, you'll change your mind.

I read it, but the entire premise is faulty. We have full employment. Growers in Calif aren't getting their harvests in because they can't find pickers. Those are facts. The article doesn't support what you attempt to say it says. You are either misreading or misstating.

As for criminals, sure illegal aliens rape kill steal etc. I don't, nor do most illegal aliens.

[Rohirrim]

I read it, but the entire premise is faulty. We have full employment. Growers in Calif aren't getting their harvests in because they can't find pickers. Those are facts. The article doesn't support what you attempt to say it says. You are either misreading or misstating.

As for criminals, sure illegal aliens rape kill steal etc. I don't, nor do most illegal aliens.

Yep. The paper says that the estimate of how many illegally cross our border each year is 3,000,000. The U.S. economy creates approx. 200,000 jobs per year. They're not taking jobs from Americans. Right.

Who said anything about rape kill steal? Only you. What I mentioned was identity theft. How many illegal aliens engage in that?

[Rascal]

Anybody watch the Lou Dobbs thing the other night? Pretty much summed up what I thought about it. POS.

[Rascal]

Looks like my senator got things straight.

I urge you all to contact your senator/house rep and tell them your thoughts.


June 8, 2007

(WASHINGTON, D.C.) – U.S. Senator Tom Coburn, M.D. (R-OK) today commented on the Senate’s failure to reach passage of the Senate immigration bill (S. 1348).

“The failure of this amnesty bill is a victory for fairness, and the rule of law. Though there were good provisions in the bill, such as a merit-based immigration system, the overall bill would have been harmful to our nation and would have done nothing to solve our problems with illegal immigration. It is my hope the Senate will work together to produce a bill that protects our nation by first securing our borders and enforcing our laws.”

Dr. Coburn offered an amendment to the immigration bill (Amendment No. 1311) that required Congress to secure our borders and enforce existing immigration laws before any provisions in S. 1348 could be implemented. The Senate rejected the Coburn amendment by a vote of 42-54.

[Rascal]

The more I read about Coburn the happier I become that he is my senator. This was a recent statement he made:

(WASHINGTON, D.C.) – U.S. Senator Tom Coburn, M.D. (R-OK) released the following statement after voting against the 2007 emergency supplemental spending bill, which added $17 billion in new spending that had nothing to do with the war.

“I believe it is immoral for Congress to use our troops as political cover for new spending that has nothing to do with our military needs,” Dr. Coburn said. “Members of Congress are expecting everyone in America to sacrifice but us. We are asking our soldiers to risk their lives every day in defense of our freedom. By borrowing money to pay for special interest projects and other unrelated items in this bill, we are asking the next generation to sacrifice. When will it be our turn to sacrifice? When will it be time for members of Congress to say no to special interest constituencies and our own short-term desire to get re-elected?”

“I’m also disappointed President Bush surrendered to Congress’ insatiable desire to spend money we don’t have. By backing down to Congress’ big spenders, he sent a message that for the next two years the White House will not be a last line of defense against reckless spending," Dr. Coburn said.

[Rascal]

(WASHINGTON, D.C.) – U.S. Senators Tom Coburn, M.D. (R-OK) and Jim DeMint (R-SC) today said the Senate’s Water Resources Development Act (WRDA) is another setback for real earmark reform and transparent government. After voting against a motion to proceed to consideration of the WRDA bill, DeMint and Coburn announced they would force another vote on earmark disclosure reform next week.

“Just after the most recent elections, U.S. Senator Robert Byrd, (D-WV) and U.S. Representative David Obey (D-WI), chairman of the respective Senate and House Appropriations Committees, promised the American people that Congress will ‘place a moratorium on all earmarks until a reformed process is put in place,’” Dr. Coburn said. “A reformed process is not in place, yet Congress believes it has the right to continue business-as-usual pork-barrel spending. Sooner or later, repeatedly breaking promises has consequences for the party in control, just as it did for Republicans who believed we could build a ‘governing majority’ by appropriating pork for ourselves.”

“The Senate voted unanimously for earmark reform but the majority party has repeatedly blocked attempts to enact that reform as an enforceable rule. This bill contains hundreds of new earmarks that were not properly disclosed. Had these new rules been in place, the Senate would not even be able to consider this pork-laden bill,” DeMint said.

* The rule passed by the Senate, which is not yet law, requires the names of the sponsors of each earmark to be included in the committee report on the Internet in a searchable format within 48 hours. The report was not made available in a searchable format. Moreover, the Majority party failed to comply with the 48-hour requirement, leaving senators little time to identify egregious spending in the bill.
* The rule also requires the letters from individual senators certifying that they have no financial interest in their earmarks to be posted on the committee’s web site. The letters have not been added to the committee’s web site.

"The WRDA bill violates the rule we all agreed to in January, and it shows why we need to enact a Senate-wide rule that can be enforced. It is the only way to ensure that every committee chairman fully discloses the earmarks in the bills. It is the only way to avoid a piecemeal approach and to stop business as usual in Washington," said Senator DeMint.

“It is shameful that senators believe they should provide funding for their pet projects before providing funding for our troops,” Dr. Coburn added, noting that he questioned why Congress should make WRDA projects such as beach nourishment in San Diego and a new visitors center in Louisiana a priority.

“Congress has no business building a new visitors center in Louisiana when Hurricane Katrina victims are still in temporary housing,” Dr. Coburn said. “I’m also disappointed this bill calls for beach nourishment in San Diego when cities like Sacramento are at risk of catastrophic flooding because surrounding levees need repair.”

[Rohirrim]

It amazes me just how hard our government will work against the will of the American people if the lobbyists from agriculture, hotel, construction, meat packing, etc. just keep paying them off. I particularly liked it when Diane Feinstein was so pissed off that amnesty didn't pass that she declared that everybody who was opposed to the bill was a racist. She must be getting some fat lobby checks. Then there's Bush who announced that when he gets home from Albania, or wherever, he'll go ahead and shove the amnesty bill through.

Just 26% Favor Senate Immigration Plan
Wednesday, May 23, 2007

Initial public reaction to the immigration proposal being debated in the Senate is decidedly negative.

A Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey conducted Monday and Tuesday night shows that just 26% of American voters favor passage of the legislation. Forty-eight percent (48%) are opposed while 26% are not sure. The bi-partisan agreement among influential Senators and the White House has been met with bi-partisan opposition among the public. The measure is opposed by 47% of Republicans, 51% of Democrats, and 46% of those not affiliated with either major party.

The enforcement side of the debate is clearly where the public passion lies on the issue. Seventy-two percent (72%) of voters say it is Very Important for “the government to improve its enforcement of the borders and reduce illegal immigration.” That view is held by 89% of Republicans, 65% of Democrats, and 63% of unaffiliated voters.

Advocates of “comprehensive” reform have taken to arguing that those who want an enforcement-only policy must explain how they would deal with the 12 million illegal aliens already living in the country. The public reaction to that question appears to be “Why?” Only 29% of voters say it is Very Important for “the government to legalize the status of illegal aliens already in the United States.”

Thirty-eight percent (38%) of Democrats believe that legalization is Very Important. Just 22% of Republicans and 27% of unaffiliated voters share that view.

Still, 65% of voters would be willing to support a compromise including a “very long path to citizenship” provided that “the proposal required the aliens to pay fines and learn English” and that the compromise “would truly reduce the number of illegal aliens entering the country.” The proposal, specifically described as a compromise, was said to include “strict employer penalties for hiring illegal aliens, building a barrier along the Mexican border and other steps to significantly reduce the number of illegal aliens entering the United States.”

The willingness of voters to accept compromise and allow a path to citizenship suggests both pragmatism and a strong desire to do what it takes to reduce the ongoing flow of illegal immigration. The challenge for proponents of the legislation is to convince voters that they are serious about enforcement and that the proposal will truly work. Until that can be accomplished, public opposition to immigration reform is likely to remain very high. In an era where voters overwhelmingly believe that members of Congress are more interested in their careers than the public good, that will be a difficult goal to achieve.

These survey results are consistent with other recent polling data showing that most Americans favor an enforcement-only reform bill. Support drops when a “path to citizenship” is added to the mix. President Bush’s Job Approval ratings dip every time comprehensive immigration reform tops the news.

In our question measuring support for the Senate bill, Rasmussen Reports did not describe the details of the proposed legislation. We asked survey respondents how closely they have followed news stories about “an immigration reform agreement reached by the Bush Administration and a bi-partisan group of Senators.” Seventy-eight percent (78%) said they were following the story Somewhat or Very Closely. We then asked respondents if they favored or opposed “the immigration reform proposal agreed to last week.”

[Garcia Bronco]

(WASHINGTON, D.C.) – U.S. Senators Tom Coburn, M.D. (R-OK) and Jim DeMint (R-SC) today said the Senate’s Water Resources Development Act (WRDA) is another setback for real earmark reform and transparent government. After voting against a motion to proceed to consideration of the WRDA bill, DeMint and Coburn announced they would force another vote on earmark disclosure reform next week.

“Just after the most recent elections, U.S. Senator Robert Byrd, (D-WV) and U.S. Representative David Obey (D-WI), chairman of the respective Senate and House Appropriations Committees, promised the American people that Congress will ‘place a moratorium on all earmarks until a reformed process is put in place,’” Dr. Coburn said. “A reformed process is not in place, yet Congress believes it has the right to continue business-as-usual pork-barrel spending. Sooner or later, repeatedly breaking promises has consequences for the party in control, just as it did for Republicans who believed we could build a ‘governing majority’ by appropriating pork for ourselves.”

“The Senate voted unanimously for earmark reform but the majority party has repeatedly blocked attempts to enact that reform as an enforceable rule. This bill contains hundreds of new earmarks that were not properly disclosed. Had these new rules been in place, the Senate would not even be able to consider this pork-laden bill,” DeMint said.

* The rule passed by the Senate, which is not yet law, requires the names of the sponsors of each earmark to be included in the committee report on the Internet in a searchable format within 48 hours. The report was not made available in a searchable format. Moreover, the Majority party failed to comply with the 48-hour requirement, leaving senators little time to identify egregious spending in the bill.
* The rule also requires the letters from individual senators certifying that they have no financial interest in their earmarks to be posted on the committee’s web site. The letters have not been added to the committee’s web site.

"The WRDA bill violates the rule we all agreed to in January, and it shows why we need to enact a Senate-wide rule that can be enforced. It is the only way to ensure that every committee chairman fully discloses the earmarks in the bills. It is the only way to avoid a piecemeal approach and to stop business as usual in Washington," said Senator DeMint.

“It is shameful that senators believe they should provide funding for their pet projects before providing funding for our troops,” Dr. Coburn added, noting that he questioned why Congress should make WRDA projects such as beach nourishment in San Diego and a new visitors center in Louisiana a priority.

“Congress has no business building a new visitors center in Louisiana when Hurricane Katrina victims are still in temporary housing,” Dr. Coburn said. “I’m also disappointed this bill calls for beach nourishment in San Diego when cities like Sacramento are at risk of catastrophic flooding because surrounding levees need repair.”

I have said this time and again recently..the problem in this country ain't the President...it's congress.

[Stormontheplains]

I have a friend who works at one of our senators remote offices, and he told me Tyson, National Beef, and Excel, are threatening to pull out if they dont support the bill. That would kill our economy here, but freaking beef plants should not have that kind of stroke. I know they wouldn't pull out, but just the mafia mentality is a joke. We need reps with balls

[broncocalijohn]

BLS. See

http://www.bls.gov



So find some statistics. Prove your case that Mexicans are taking our jobs.

Is perhaps yours at risk?


You're sounding more and more like a few conservative think tanks pushed by Wall Street Journal. Look Wigs, as a real conservative (me , not you), you are so off base. People that were air conditioning experts making $18 an hour 15 to 20 years ago still make that amount if they are lucky. Ask someone in effected areas in this field. Mexicans have taken over. You see a white or black drywaller in these areas? NOPE! How many citizen teenagers working the fast food place? Not many at all. When I worked at Del Taco 20 years ago, we had 50 50 percent. I go to the same place and I dont even think the manager is a citizen. Wigs, you dont need personal proof for this fact. You are paying for the illegals more ways then job losses.

[Rascal]

I have a friend who works at one of our senators remote offices, and he told me Tyson, National Beef, and Excel, are threatening to pull out if they dont support the bill. That would kill our economy here, but freaking beef plants should not have that kind of stroke. I know they wouldn't pull out, but just the mafia mentality is a joke. We need reps with balls

Tyson can **** itself.

It's easy to deal with this, put tariffs on goods that come from countries with no (or not enforced) labor laws. I still think we should put tariffs on goods that come from India/China.

[bendog]

Tyson can **** itself.

It's easy to deal with this, put tariffs on goods that come from countries with no (or not enforced) labor laws. I still think we should put tariffs on goods that come from India/China.

That I agree with, but there's no support for the notion that Americans are not being hired, esp when we just had a recession where unemployment didn't go 8% if even that. Now THERE IS a taking of jobs when, for example, a contractor can get an illegal immigrant brick layer at a fraction of the wages for a US guy. But there is NO indication that more Americans are unemployed because of illegal immigration. It appears they are taking different jobs, and those new jobs may well be in service type stuff paying less than stuff like bricklaying. It MIGHT be that if we curtailed the social net, enforced vagrancy/loitering laws AND stopped wage reducing policies, more Americans might choose to seek employment.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Why the f*ck do you think that so many young kids in their 20's were FLOCKING up to Alaska (or Seattle to get to Alaska) in the early 90's to get out in the fishing boats or into the canneries.

To make sh!tloads of $$$...

That is hard work, but one could make lots of money. (certain) Young kids will always want to tackle the hard jobs if they can make the good money. Some of these companies need to start paying a fair market wage...


Rags-to-Riches stories used to be about hard, honest work and perseverance...

Now, its just about some people are real good at bullsh!tting people out of their money.

Bingo. :thumbsup:

[24champ]

Here is an interesting read on this Immigration bill and racism.






June 11, 2007 7:00 AM

R.I.P.
Immigration-bill autopsy.

By John Derbyshire

Well, all right, the beast is not definitively dead yet. Given the unswerving determination of our president — a quality I have admired, under different circumstances — we may see another effort at “comprehensive immigration reform” before the 110th Congress packs its bags in January ’09.


Even if the president can’t be deterred, though, the congressfolk can. They’ve been getting an earful from their constituents. I don’t know what they’ve been hearing, but it can’t be too different from what all the radio and TV talk-show hosts say they have been hearing: “Enforce the law!”

This past couple of weeks has been wonderfully educative. Tens of millions of Americans now understand the core issue here, which is, that we have all the laws we need on all the topics in this bill (we already have, for instance, five different temporary-worker programs, with a sixth visa category for the families of these temporary workers), that our current problems arise from the failure of the executive to enforce these current laws, and that until the executive shows some sincere intent to enforce current laws, there is little point in passing new ones. Repeat: sincere intent — not the clumsy propaganda show of these past few months.

We can reasonably hope, therefore, that we have heard the last of “comprehensive immigration reform” for a while. Personally, I’m going to relax, sit back, and indulge myself in some stress-free contemplation of a few random immigration topics.

Killer Acronyms. There are a couple of killer four-letter acronyms that haven’t shown up much in the recent discussions, but which really should be on everybody’s mind when talking immigration.

Here they are: (1) EOIR, (2) AILA.

EOIR is the Executive Office of Immigration Review. It is a branch of the Justice Department, containing 54 immigration courts scattered around the nation, with over 200 judges on the rolls. It also includes the eleven-member Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA).

The key thing to understand here is that it is very hard to deport an immigrant, even an illegal immigrant, who does not want to be deported.

You will sometimes read encouraging numbers for deportations. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) boasts of 186,600 deportations for fiscal year 2006. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), quoted in the May 1 New York Times here, gave a higher number: 221,664 “over the last year.” Perhaps DHS and ICE are using different metrics, or perhaps this is illustration #92,142,863 of our government’s left hand not knowing what its right hand is doing, but either number is comforting at a first glance.

What those deportation numbers don’t tell you is that they cover mainly people who were willing to be deported, or who didn’t put up much of a legal fight. For any deportee who does want to put up a legal fight, the EOIR and BIA bureaucracies are there to help him. Behind them stand the federal circuit courts, to which an immigrant can appeal if all else fails. It takes years, of course; and, as Michelle Malkin has noted somewhere, it ain’t over until the immigrant wins.

The second killer acronym is “AILA.” That is the American Immigration Lawyers Association. You’ve probably never heard of AILA, but they are a mighty force in the land, probably more responsible for shaping the future demographics of the U.S.A. than any other body of people — certainly more responsible than our elected representatives, most of whom probably believe that “demographics” is a synonym for “racism.”

Do EOIR and AILA talk to each other? Oh yeah. They are in fact, as the Chinese say, “as close as lips and teeth.” Try reading through a few of these PDF files, for example. A cozy relationship? I would say.

Devil’s Advocate. With a contentious issue like immigration, it’s always a good idea to take one of the opposition’s stronger points and see if you can argue for it — set aside your own convictions for a moment and play devil’s advocate.

Take the Bu****e slogan about “jobs Americans won’t do,” for example. Many people think this whole notion of “jobs Americans won’t do” was exploded after the ICE raids on the Swift meat-packing company in Colorado earlier this year. Illegal-immigrant workers were removed, and within days the plant was being flooded with job applications from citizens.

Is that always going to be the case, though? Meat-packing work isn’t that unpleasant. There are plenty of more arduous jobs. In front-end agriculture, especially — and most especially in parts of the country where it can get really hot outdoors — there is grueling work that, I can easily imagine, it might be hard to get citizens to do. (Victor Davis Hanson, a farmer himself, writes convincingly about this in Mexifornia.)

The stock answer here is an appeal to pure economic theory. “There are no such things as shortages, only clearing prices,” etc. There is some wage level at which you or I would put in ten-hour days stooped over under a hot sun (says the theory); there is some wage level at which Warren Buffett could be persuaded to gut hogs.

I don’t know about that. We are a very advanced nation, and our citizens have high expectations of life. They also, of course, have a welfare state to help them if things get rough. I’m not, in any case, a big fan of abstract economic theories.

I hate to say it, but I think the Bu****es have a point here. There probably are some jobs Americans won’t do at any wage level anyone is actually willing to offer.

I would still say: Well, then, let those jobs go hang. If you can’t, for love or money, find any citizens or legal residents to pick your apples, at wage levels not so high that consumers refuse to buy the apples, well, let the apples rot. That’s hard on you, I understand. You’ll have to find some other way to make a living. That happens to people, though — it’s happened to me a couple of times. And the U.S.A. won’t fold for want of apples.

(What in fact will happen is that someone will come up with a reliable apple-picking machine. That’s no consolation to you. You went out of business waiting for this gadget to attain mass production… Unless you just opened your orchards to the public, advertised as a “pick your own fruit” venture, which is what most of the fruit farms in my county seem to have done.)

On Hating Mexicans. Linda Chavez put el gato among las palomas the other day by dismissing opponents of the Senate immigration bill as people who “don’t like Mexicans.”

I’ll confess I don’t know much about Mexicans myself. I’d like to be able to say that some of my best friends are Mexican, but it’s not true. Not only do I not have any Mexicans among my friends, I don’t have any among my neighbors or colleagues, either. I simply don’t know any Mexicans. My data on Mexicans is all secondhand. Fred Reed speaks well of them, and I’ve generally found Fred to be a reliable observer of humanity, except when he’s giving me verbal noogies.

I do think, though, that Linda and Fred should pause to consider the possibility that there are people who do like Mexicans, and also people like me who have no opinion about Mexicans in the grand collectivity at all, but who, in both cases, think it’s a really bad idea to let the 40 percent of Mexicans who want to come live here, come live here. That would be 43 million people. Ask yourselves, Linda, Fred:

Does the U.S.A. need another 43 million people? One-seventh of our current population?

If it does, would it be a good idea to take them all from one place?

A place right next door to us? With…

...A historical claim on our territory?

Then ask yourself if a person who poses these questions out loud must ipso facto be a person who “hates Mexicans.”

Surely it is possible to be a person who does not hate Mexicans, yet who at the same time believes that Mexican immigration to the U.S.A. should be held down to some level well below what it currently is.

Is Hispanic the New Black? Linda’s piece did, though, at least bring the r-word into the discussion. In some offline conversations I’ve been having, and on some websites I’ll leave you to search out by yourself, the opinion has been expressed that some portion of America’s white elites welcome Hispanic immigration as a way of sticking it to American blacks. That portion, it is suggested, would prefer to have its lawns mowed by small, polite, brown people, rather than large, surly black ones, even if the price is the same in both cases.

I think there is something in that, but more than I have yet heard discussed.

Here’s a story. Saturday night, around 11 P.M., I was in Manhattan, walking with my daughter from Lincoln Center (where we had just seen the ABT’s new production of The Sleeping Beauty) to Penn Station for our ride back out to the burbs. At Columbus Circle we were followed for a while by one of the new pedicabs that are now allowed to ply for business in the city.

This pedicab seated two, so my daughter and I were prospective customers. The proprietor of the thing was a young black guy. Three or four times he called out to us, in a very friendly way, to take advantage of the service he was offering. He seemed like a cheerful and enterprising young man. He was on a loser with us though, as my daughter still finds it thrilling to just walk the streets of the city, and wanted to go on doing so. Off we walked, leaving him behind.

A hundred yards ahead I looked back. There he still was at the Circle, trying to get someone to ride in his pedicab. It shouldn’t have been difficult; the streets were pretty crowded; yet when at last I lost sight of him, he still hadn’t got a customer.

He’d got me noticing pedicabs, though. There seemed to be quite a lot of them, mostly occupied, mostly with young white guys pedaling. It occurred to me to wonder whether it’s harder for a black pedicabbie (?) to pick up passengers than for a white one. Not because people are scared to be pedaled by a black man — this was midtown Manhattan, for heaven’s sake, on a busy spring evening — but because white Americans just aren’t comfortable in such an obvious service relationship with a black American doing muscle work on their behalf.

Similarly, there are probably a lot of black American women who wouldn’t mind working as maids in prosperous white households, as used to be commonplace. I’m willing to bet, though, that there are large numbers of white people who would much rather not have a black maid. Not, again, because they fear a black maid would harm them, or be lazy or dishonest, but just because they would not feel comfortable in a master-servant relationship with a black person, after all the guilt-trip propaganda of the past 40 years.

What’s more, I think I’m one of those white people. Another story: Back in 1990 or 1991, living in London, I was walking across the interior space of Victoria Station, a major rail terminus. There was a shoeshine stand there in the middle of the concourse, operated by a lone black man who looked as if he could use some business. My shoes needed shining, I had five minutes to spare, so I negotiated a price, mounted his chair, and he started polishing.

And I started sweating. I felt really uncomfortable. It was irrational, I know, but I’m telling how it was. I got looks from people walking by, too — not friendly looks. See that black guy toiling away at the white man’s feet! Those were the looks — or, just as revealing, if in a different way, that was how I imagined them. I suspect that shoeshine guy didn’t get much business.

The shoeshine parlor at Manhattan’s Penn Station, which I visit frequently, is staffed entirely by Hispanics. As the current catch-phrase goes: I’m just sayin’.

http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=Y2IzY2JhMTQwMzE3MjYxZjVjNjM5NmNlMzE1N2ViZTI=

[Rascal]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19165186/

****ing Democrats. Can't believe they are trying to push this bill through. Sure glad we voted these guys in.

[TailgateNut]

I have said this time and again recently..the problem in this country ain't the President...it's congress.


You are up for an award! Just have to run to the local trophy shop and find one that fits the bills.

The President IS THE ****ING PROBLEM, and people who still support him are also guilty!

[epicSocialism4tw]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19165186/

****ing Democrats. Can't believe they are trying to push this bill through. Sure glad we voted these guys in.

Keep pressuring your senators and congressmen. If you havent done it yet, call them up and tell them where you stand on this issue. Tell them that this issue will win or lose your vote and mean it when you say it. Be willing to go to a meeting. Be willing to actually become a part of the political process. Even if it means that you cant watch the Broncos that night.

[TailgateNut]

Keep pressuring your senators and congressmen. If you havent done it yet, call them up and tell them where you stand on this issue. Tell them that this issue will win or lose your vote and mean it when you say it. Be willing to go to a meeting. Be willing to actually become a part of the political process. Even if it means that you cant watch the Broncos that night.

......... that last sacrifice is too much. I can accomplish getting the message to my reps without missing a game.

[bendog]

What's interesting about this issue is that business appears to favor the bill, bu they haven't mounted an effective lobby outside a few states, like Ariz., where McCain and Kyl actually helped draft the bill, much to the annoyance of grass roots groups like the minutemen. The business tie in prolly explains bushii's "enthusiasm." Lott intially favored it, but I think he was annoyed the gop wasn't allowed to tweak it more to give individual gop politicians more cover.

[Rascal]

I still can't believe that the democrats are supporting this...if this passes they deserve full blame and whoever does vote for it will not be getting my vote for president. Guaranteed.

[Garcia Bronco]

What's interesting about this issue is that business appears to favor the bill, bu they haven't mounted an effective lobby outside a few states, like Ariz., where McCain and Kyl actually helped draft the bill, much to the annoyance of grass roots groups like the minutemen. The business tie in prolly explains bushii's "enthusiasm." Lott intially favored it, but I think he was annoyed the gop wasn't allowed to tweak it more to give individual gop politicians more cover.

I think Bush draws his support and perspective from not only business for this bill, but from his time as Governor of Texas.

[Garcia Bronco]

I still can't believe that the democrats are supporting this...if this passes they deserve full blame and whoever does vote for it will not be getting my vote for president. Guaranteed.

Amen

[bendog]

I'm sort of in the majority on this. I really don't have a dog in the fight. (Michael VIck!)

I just haven't heard a rational explanation of what else to do with the 12 million or so now here, who have jobs, while we don't have 12 million people looking for jobs. Plus, I've witnessed illegal workers being exploited by bosses and criminals. If we are going to have foreign workers, it needs to be above board.

[Rascal]

I like Ron Paul's immigration plan, as well as his NAFTA, WTO, stance as well.

[Garcia Bronco]

I'm sort of in the majority on this. I really don't have a dog in the fight. (Michael VIck!)

I just haven't heard a rational explanation of what else to do with the 12 million or so now here, who have jobs, while we don't have 12 million people looking for jobs. Plus, I've witnessed illegal workers being exploited by bosses and criminals. If we are going to have foreign workers, it needs to be above board.

and that's how the President is looking at it. What do you do with 12 million illegals? Murder them? Jail them? Deport them?

I think you begin the task of deporting them by increasing INS busts and a complete loss of property.

[24champ]

and that's how the President is looking at it. What do you do with 12 million illegals? Murder them? Jail them? Deport them?

I think you begin the task of deporting them by increasing INS busts and a complete loss of property.

Well you certainly don't grant them legal status or reward them otherwise.

[Garcia Bronco]

Well you certainly don't grant them legal status or reward them otherwise.

this is out there because it's an easy solution compared to the alternatives.

[bendog]

and that's how the President is looking at it. What do you do with 12 million illegals? Murder them? Jail them? Deport them?

I think you begin the task of deporting them by increasing INS busts and a complete loss of property.

But then, isn't the "plan" to bring in new foreign workers to replace those deported? The workers have to come from somewhere, and there aren't 12 million americans wanting jobs.

It seems to me that there are two valid criticisms of the current scheme.

1. foreign workers, and especailly those here illegally, don't get paid as much. So, they tend to depress wages across the board, and worse, if an employer can get rid of an American making 25bucks an hour, the jobs the displaced Americans get will be lower paying than the one's lost. That Bushii supports this scheme pisses me off more than amnesty, btw.

2. The illegal workers broke the law getting here. I admit that bugs me. But, as point 1 is trying to say, the law's a joke. It's like the war on drugs in tthat sense. Or the kid getting 10 years for a bj from a girl 3 years younger. The entire economic scheme of the bushii presidency and the federal reserve (and under Clinton too) is dependent upon suppressing wages. But, say we deport them. I have no problem with that, aside from the practical ones like what to do with an illegal alien who has children who are US citizens. We CAN'T deport the kids! That's illegal too. And then, who fills the jobs?

[Stormontheplains]

For Illegals here now--Register and pay fine, or get the boot.

$3000 fine, 3 year temp visa, must return home for 1 year then be granted another 3 year visa. If child is born while on visa it will not be considered U.S. citizen. Citizenship granted only after 10 years without legal problems, taxes payed on 10 years, and passing the GED in English.

Business's that hire Illegals or expired visa, $20k and a IRS audit for past indiscretions.

Farmers-- No fine, but will lose use of government loans and subsidies for one year per occurrence up to 3, and then 10 year ban from USDA programs

[Stormontheplains]

one other thing, If caught a second time crossing the border illegally, criminal will be shipped to england. This will lengthen the swim to get to the U.S.

[bendog]

Just curious, but what's the rationale for making the guys go back for a year after the first 3 years? I'm not criticizing the rationale fo making the "pay back" for being here illegally.

I'm also curious is the 20K fine on employers "per employee?" Practically speaking, that would cause a lot of small biz guys to go broke, and it would hardly damage some huge corporation if it were just a 20K fine.

[Stormontheplains]

Typically per the ones I know, It takes 3 years of working in the US to save enough money to by housing, land, or whatever their goal is in Mexico.

On the 20k fine, Yes it would kill small business, but they have a choice on who they hire, and hopefully realize it would shut them down, the IRS audit was specifically for big business. Maybe it would be better for the IRS and OSHA to audit the big business. one other thing, that big fine would put americans back in the construction, electrical jobs

[24champ]

For Illegals here now--Register and pay fine, or get the boot.

$3000 fine, 3 year temp visa, must return home for 1 year then be granted another 3 year visa. If child is born while on visa it will not be considered U.S. citizen. Citizenship granted only after 10 years without legal problems, taxes payed on 10 years, and passing the GED in English.

Business's that hire Illegals or expired visa, $20k and a IRS audit for past indiscretions.

Farmers-- No fine, but will lose use of government loans and subsidies for one year per occurrence up to 3, and then 10 year ban from USDA programs

Do you really think Congress is going to enforce the fact that you have to pay a fine? I doubt they will considering they aren't taking this immigration problem seriously.

[bendog]

Do you really think Congress is going to enforce the fact that you have to pay a fine? I doubt they will considering they aren't taking this immigration problem seriously.

It's not so much the will of congress as the practicality and willingness to fund INS. I would assume a worker only gets documention to be legally hired if he pays the fine, and a biz would not hire an undocumented worker because of the fines it would face. BUT, what about counterfit documents? INS would literally have to get biz payrolls, and compare those to their own list to ferrett out counterfits and duplicated documents.

[yavoon]

But then, isn't the "plan" to bring in new foreign workers to replace those deported? The workers have to come from somewhere, and there aren't 12 million americans wanting jobs.

It seems to me that there are two valid criticisms of the current scheme.

1. foreign workers, and especailly those here illegally, don't get paid as much. So, they tend to depress wages across the board, and worse, if an employer can get rid of an American making 25bucks an hour, the jobs the displaced Americans get will be lower paying than the one's lost. That Bushii supports this scheme pisses me off more than amnesty, btw.

2. The illegal workers broke the law getting here. I admit that bugs me. But, as point 1 is trying to say, the law's a joke. It's like the war on drugs in tthat sense. Or the kid getting 10 years for a bj from a girl 3 years younger. The entire economic scheme of the bushii presidency and the federal reserve (and under Clinton too) is dependent upon suppressing wages. But, say we deport them. I have no problem with that, aside from the practical ones like what to do with an illegal alien who has children who are US citizens. We CAN'T deport the kids! That's illegal too. And then, who fills the jobs?

there aren't 12 million available jobs at minimum wage. and no the workers dont have to come from anywhere. this always astounds me, u realize that the low skilled ppl get kicked in the teeth often enough, that when it looks like supply and demand would favor them that u think u HAVE TO dump illegals on their job market? how is that fair?

besides low skilled labor shortages are generally great for labor saving innovation, we should be welcoming an economy in which low skilled people are desired and have some power to dictate things and not saying "well obviously we have to keep them poor by dumping millions of ppl into their market."

[Rascal]

I saw a stat that under Bush's and the Dem's (can't believe they are thrown together) there will be 60 million "illegals" by 2020. There is no way our system can bring that huge influx in.

[mosca]

I just haven't heard a rational explanation of what else to do with the 12 million or so now here, who have jobs, while we don't have 12 million people looking for jobs.
:rofl: We don't? What country are you living in?

[24champ]

I saw a stat that under Bush's and the Dem's (can't believe they are thrown together) there will be 60 million "illegals" by 2020. There is no way our system can bring that huge influx in.


What is more alarming is that we have caught Iranians crossing the border...what is upsetting to me is that GWB presidency is basically on terrorism and he has not closed up the border to prevent terrorists from walking right over here. It's wide freaking open.

[ant1999e]

As long as we have a ****ty welfare system that let's people live off it, most of the low skill non-workers that have been robbed of a job by the illegal immigrants will continue to sit on their asses and collect welfare. If you really want to work, you can with or without the illegals doing the jobs they do. The real criminals in this whole situation are the fat cat businesses who take advantage of these hard working people.

[Bronco Bob]

What is more alarming is that we have caught Iranians crossing the border...what is upsetting to me is that GWB presidency is basically on terrorism and he has not closed up the border to prevent terrorists from walking right over here. It's wide freaking open.


Seems more like W's only concern is Iraq and terrorism is just an excuse
to justify Iraq.

[24champ]

Seems more like W's only concern is Iraq and terrorism is just an excuse
to justify Iraq.

It's a legitimate concern, I wish he would place the same level of concern that he has on Iraq to the border problems but his presidency rides on Iraq and not the Border....yet.

[epicSocialism4tw]

As long as we have a ****ty welfare system that let's people live off it, most of the low skill non-workers that have been robbed of a job by the illegal immigrants will continue to sit on their asses and collect welfare. If you really want to work, you can with or without the illegals doing the jobs they do. The real criminals in this whole situation are the fat cat businesses who take advantage of these hard working people.

Yes. This is the key.

We hear rhetoric about "the Mexicans" and people are easily caught up in cultural differences. "The Mexicans" who have immigrated here in recent history easily assimilate to American culture. If the proper avenues are followed, there is plenty of room for them here.

But, what you wont hear in the news is how the real problem is with the businesses that lobby for extremely cheap labor. These companies will pay nothing for manual labor (sometimes even skilled labor or lower level management jobs) and will sometimes even neglect to pay a worker for weeks, only to say "oh well...too bad Jose...go find another job."

The problem is with these industries, and the problem will not be taken care of until our crappy government addresses it.

[24champ]

By DAVID ESPO, AP Special Correspondent 38 minutes ago

WASHINGTON - His party divided and his polls sagging,
President Bush prodded rebellious Senate Republicans to help resurrect legislation that could provide eventual citizenship for millions of illegal immigrants.
ADVERTISEMENT

"It's a highly emotional issue," said Bush after a session Tuesday in which several lawmakers bluntly told him their constituents do not trust the government to secure the nation's borders or weed out illegal workers at job sites.

To alleviate the concerns, the president said he was receptive to an emergency spending bill as a way to emphasize his administration's commitment to accelerated enforcement. One congressional official put the price tag at up to $15 billion.

"I don't think he changed any minds," conceded Sen. Mel Martinez (news, bio, voting record), R-Fla., a supporter of the legislation. But Martinez added that the president's appearance had helped nudge "people on the fence" to be more favorably inclined.

One Republican widely viewed as a potential convert, Sen. Bob Corker (news, bio, voting record) of Tennessee, said he was not yet persuaded. "At the end of the day, I've got to be able to sit down and know myself that we are going to secure our border," he said. "Today, I do not feel that way."

Bush's trip to the Capitol marked only the second time since he became president that he attended the weekly closed-door senators lunch, a gesture that underscored the importance he places on passage of comprehensive immigration legislation.

Despite the president's commitment, many conservatives in his own party have criticized the measure as an amnesty for millions of lawbreakers. Additionally, job approval ratings in the 30-percent range make it difficult for the president to bend even Republican lawmakers to his will.

Compounding the challenge is a stream of statements from Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (news, bio, voting record), D-Nev., that it is up to Bush and the Republicans to produce enough votes to revive a measure that was sidetracked on the Senate floor last week. "We'll move on to immigration when they have their own act together," he told reporters during the day.

"Fourteen percent of the Republicans supporting the president's bill won't do the trick," he said, referring to the fact that only seven GOP senators supported a move to free the bill from limbo last week.

Several participants in the Republican meeting described the session as friendly and rancor-free, and said Bush had even made a joke at one point when addressing Sen. Jeff Sessions (news, bio, voting record), the Alabama Republican who is one of the bill's fiercest critics.

One senator quoted Bush as telling Sessions: "Don't worry, I'll still go to your fundraiser. We disagree about this, but we are friends."

Sessions was among the senators to question the president, pointing to polls showing widespread opposition to the legislation. Bush responded that there are other polls that show support, according to participants. They spoke on condition of anonymity, citing confidentiality rules covering the closed-door meeting.

These officials said numerous senators told Bush the public lacks confidence that the government would carry out the enforcement measures in the bill.

One, Sen. Saxby Chambliss (news, bio, voting record), R-Ga., told Bush that he and fellow Georgia Republican Johnny Isakson (news, bio, voting record) had sent the president a letter outlining the concerns.

"The message from a majority of Georgians is that they have no trust that the United States government will enforce the laws contained in this new legislation and secure the border first," it said.

"This lack of trust is rooted in the mistakes made in 1986, and the continued chaos surrounding our immigration laws. Understandably, the lack of credibility the federal government has on this issue gives merit to the skepticism of many about future immigration reform."

The letter asked Bush to support a spending bill to secure the border before other elements of the immigration measure go into effect. It did not specify how much money would be needed, but one congressional official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said the advance costs could reach $10 billion to $15 billion.

"The administration should request the emergency funds, and the Senate should vote to provide them before resuming debate on the broader immigration measure," Chambliss said in an interview.

Apart from the additional funds, Republican and Democratic supporters of the bill hoped to complete work on an agreement that could free it for final passage by month's end.

Discussions center on a plan to allow votes on about a dozen Republican-sponsored amendments as well as several proposals by Democrats. In exchange, GOP holdouts would then support a move to end debate and advance the bill to a final vote.

Among the amendments was one by Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison (news, bio, voting record), R-Texas, to require all illegal immigrant household heads to return to their countries of origin before obtaining legal status. Under the legislation, only those seeking green cards — permanent legal residency — would be required to return home first.

After an early evening negotiating session between Republican and Democratic senators, Sen. Lindsey Graham (news, bio, voting record), R-S.C., said the group is trying to craft an amendment to assure Americans that the bill will include ample funding for tighter border security and tougher workplace enforcement. The plan could involve "pre-funding" the effort with billions of dollars eventually to be repaid through fines and fees, he said, or through a more traditional supplemental spending bill, such as those recently used to pay for the
Iraq war.

Graham said the bipartisan negotiators also are looking at harsher penalties for immigrants who overstay their visas or re-enter the country illegally. "If you had mandatory jail time" for such offenses, he said, "I think it would create a deterrent."

Another possible amendment, Graham said, would ban employers from participating in a new temporary worker program if they repeatedly break the law by hiring illegal workers.

"I'm looking for ways to break the cycle of skepticism" among those who feel a new immigration law would be as poorly enforced as the 1986 law, he said.

The administration pushed back against Republican critics of the bill later Tuesday. In a letter to nine conservative senators who bitterly oppose the measure,
Homeland Security Secretary
Michael Chertoff said the administration has committed manpower and money to improving border security and enforcement, and needs the immigration bill to step up its efforts.

"Failure to act on this legislation will deny the country the safety and security provided by these enhanced enforcement measures," Chertoff wrote.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070613/ap_on_go_pr_wh/bush_immigration

I like the Bold part, and will Chertoff please STFU?

[bendog]

:rofl: We don't? What country are you living in?

Apparantly not the same fantasy land you are "living in."

hint, if you're gonna go for sarcasm, have a frigging clue about what you're discussing.

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.nr0.htm

THE EMPLOYMENT SITUATION: MAY 2007

Nonfarm payroll employment increased by 157,000 in May, and the unemployment
rate was unchanged at 4.5 percent, the Bureau of Labor Statistics of the U.S.
Department of Labor reported today. Health care and food services added jobs,
while employment declined in manufacturing. Average hourly earnings rose by
6 cents, or 0.3 percent, over the month.

Unemployment (Household Survey Data)

The number of unemployed persons (6.8 million) and the unemployment rate
(4.5 percent) were unchanged in May. The jobless rate has ranged from 4.4 to
4.6 percent since September 2006. Over the month, the jobless rates for the
major worker groups--adult men (4.0 percent), adult women (3.8 percent), teen-
agers (15.7 percent), whites (3.9 percent), blacks (8.5 percent), and Hispanics
(5.8 percent)--showed little or no change. The unemployment rate for Asians was
2.9 percent, not seasonally adjusted. (See tables A-1, A-2, and A-3.)

Total Employment and the Labor Force (Household Survey Data)

In May, total employment was about unchanged at 145.9 million, and the em-
ployment-population ratio held at 63.0 percent. The civilian labor force also
was about unchanged at 152.8 million, and the labor force participation rate
remained at 66.0 percent. Both the employment-population ratio and labor force
participation rate were down by 0.4 percentage point from December. (See table
A-1.)

The number of persons who worked part time for economic reasons, at 4.5
million, was little changed in May but was up by 332,000 over the year. This
category includes persons who indicated that they would like to work full time
but were working part time because their hours had been cut back or because they
were unable to find full-time jobs. (See table A-5.)

Persons Not in the Labor Force (Household Survey Data)

In May, 1.4 million persons (not seasonally adjusted) were marginally attached
to the labor force, about the same as a year earlier. These individuals wanted and
were available to work and had looked for a job sometime during the prior 12 months.
They were not counted as unemployed because they had not searched for work in the
4 weeks preceding the survey. Among the marginally attached, there were 368,000
discouraged workers in May, about the same as a year earlier. Discouraged workers
were not currently looking for work specifically because they believed no jobs were
available for them. The remaining 1.0 million persons marginally attached to the
labor force in May had not searched for work in the 4 weeks preceding the survey for
reasons such as school attendance and family responsibilities. (See table A-13.)

[bendog]

I can't believe it, I'm agreeing with Llama. LOL

[alkemical]

Teachers from Mexico to Help Fill Positions in Utah School Districts (http://www.ksl.com/?nid=148&sid=1333827)


Tonya Papanikolas Reporting

Several Utah school districts have just hired a total of 12 new teachers from Mexico. The State Office of Education has been working on the plan for almost a year. This is part of an agreement Governor Huntsman made with Mexico when he visited there a couple years ago.

School districts say they're happy about it. The teachers will be filling positions that districts can't seem to staff right now. At the same time, the teachers will help a growing population of Hispanic students in the state. School districts are having a harder and harder time finding elementary school teachers, science and math teachers.



Human Resources Director for Granite School District Mike Fraser says, "Right now, as we speak, we still have 30 elementary positions to fill."

But the Granite District has just filled three of those spots with teachers from Mexico. "We think it's going to be very exciting," Fraser says. "These are very qualified teaching candidates who are proficient in English."

The Granite district was one of four school districts in Utah to send employees to Mexico where they interviewed over 50 teachers that the Mexican Consulate had pre-screened. Other districts include Salt Lake, Tooele County and Davis County. "Each school district selected three teaching candidates to bring back to Salt Lake City," Fraser says.



Most of the 12 teachers will speak English in the classroom with the exception of those hired for dual immersion programs. The Granite District says the teachers will be a great help to Spanish-speaking students and their parents, who often feel left out of their child's education. "They're very intimidated to come to the school, show up at parent-teacher consultation because of that language barrier," Fraser explains.

Mark Peterson with the Utah Office of Education says, "If the teacher happens to be teaching math or science or whatever, if they speak Spanish, it's a bonus."

The three teachers Granite hired all have at least six years of experience and one has her MBA. The state says it's glad to have that kind of quality from anywhere. Peterson says, "At the moment, Utah can use highly qualified teachers wherever we can get them from, which is why the districts are out recruiting out of state, and this is just a little further out of state than normal."

The teachers will arrive in early August. They'll make a salary of around $35,000, compared to about $12,000 in Mexico. The state is helping the teachers get a temporary work visa which would allow them to stay here up to three years.

[bendog]

They can't find teachers? Where are all those little BYU girls going?

[Stormontheplains]

[QUOTE=angryllama;1614869]Yes. This is the key.

We hear rhetoric about "the Mexicans" and people are easily caught up in cultural differences. "The Mexicans" who have immigrated here in recent history easily assimilate to American culture. If the proper avenues are followed, there is plenty of room for them here.

The easy assimilate to American culture my ass. The is not a effort anymore to speak English, educate themselves or their children, and throwing sinco de mayo parades assimilates you to American culture. The Mexican culture is being rammed down my throat. My child wanted me to tell him about the great mexican army, I said, the one that lost to 400 americans

[mosca]

Apparantly not the same fantasy land you are "living in."

hint, if you're gonna go for sarcasm, have a frigging clue about what you're discussing.

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.nr0.htm

THE EMPLOYMENT SITUATION: MAY 2007 (snip)
Let's see - your posted data lists 6.8 million people officially labelled as "unemployed", an additional 4.5 million working part-time for economic reasons : because their hours had been cut back or because they
were unable to find full-time jobs. Add in the 1.4 million people who were "marginally attached" to the work force, had looked for work in the previous 12 months, but were not counted as officially "unemployed" because they hadn't searched for work in the 4 weeks prior to the survey. Add these totals together and you get 12.7 million people seeking work, according the the official government figures. I'd say the actual number seeking work is even higher, as you figure in the people who do have full time jobs that pay substantially lower than what they'd like (see the collapse of the manufacturing base, lower median wages adjusted for inflation compared to the 1970s, etc.) and are actively looking for new jobs, but aren't counted as "unemployed" due to this fact.

Yet you claim that this country doesn't have 12 million people looking for jobs.

[TailgateNut]

Let's see - your posted data lists 6.8 million people officially labelled as "unemployed", an additional 4.5 million working part-time for economic reasons : because their hours had been cut back or because they
were unable to find full-time jobs. Add in the 1.4 million people who were "marginally attached" to the work force, had looked for work in the previous 12 months, but were not counted as officially "unemployed" because they hadn't searched for work in the 4 weeks prior to the survey. Add these totals together and you get 12.7 million people seeking work, according the the official government figures. I'd say the actual number seeking work is even higher, as you figure in the people who do have full time jobs that pay substantially lower than what they'd like (see the collapse of the manufacturing base, lower median wages adjusted for inflation compared to the 1970s, etc.) and are actively looking for new jobs, but aren't counted as "unemployed" due to this fact.

Yet you claim that this country doesn't have 12 million people looking for jobs.


Don't forget the "force" which is currently "milking" our welfare and social service system. It doesn't take a brain surgeon to pick lettuce or pull the guts out of a slaughtered pig. Put them to work and it'll be like killin' two birds with one stone.

I understand some of them have legit disabilities, but some are just using the system.

I think we CAN replace the illegal work force. If we run out of citizens, then expedite the visas for those who have stood in line awaiting legal avenues, but in no way should we reward those who have broken the law and are demanding rights!

[Stormontheplains]

The biggest gripes I have, and see on a daily basis are these.

1.) WIC is abused horribly, They will swap kids in line to get more food, and I can only imagine what that cost us taxpayers.
2.) Reduced Lunches and after school programs
3.) Renting trailers instead of owning homes, here they are 71% of the school population and only have 18% home ownership.
4.) Para Teachers, we have 130 in our school district, and most barley speak English
5.) In-State tuition for illegals, give me a damn break.
6.) Medical-- Having 4 to 8 kids on welfare isn't cheap, but happily paid for by the taxpayers. Rubbers are outlawed in Mexico.

[TheDave]

Teachers from Mexico to Help Fill Positions in Utah School Districts (http://www.ksl.com/?nid=148&sid=1333827)


The teachers will arrive in early August. They'll make a salary of around $35,000, compared to about $12,000 in Mexico. The state is helping the teachers get a temporary work visa which would allow them to stay here up to three years.

6 years experience and a masters should pay between $39,000 and $43,000 depending on what district they teach in. The lowest pay for a bachelors and 6 years experience is $36,000. Looks to me the State may of just found a way to lower teacher salaries...

[bendog]

http://www.heraldextra.com/content/view/170953/

[Stormontheplains]

I forgot something, here they have the Mexican-American center where one can learn all the benefits available through the US government. They teach them about WIC, Welfare, and everything else important to someone who needs a free ride.

[24champ]

They can't find teachers? Where are all those little BYU girls going?

Getting better pay elsewhere. I'm not positive of the statistics but a lot of times the pay isn't all that great.

[bendog]

mosca, congratulations, you have proven you cannot read, but you can add irrelevant numbers. Did you go to school in Utah?

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t08.htm

[TheDave]

Getting better pay elsewhere. I'm not positive of the statistics but a lot of times the pay isn't all that great.


Relatively it's pretty pathetic... Then again when you only work about 8.5 months a year it's hard to complain.

[mosca]

mosca, congratulations, you have proven you cannot read, but you can add irrelevant numbers. Did you go to school in Utah?

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t08.htm
So the numbers (which you posted, by the way) showing that there are over 12 million people seeking jobs are somehow "irrelevant"? Nice dismissal of the facts.

[ant1999e]

So the numbers (which you posted, by the way) showing that there are over 12 million people seeking jobs are somehow "irrelevant"? Nice dismissal of the facts.

Seeking jobs? Yeah right.LOL

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

http://www.bartcop.com/wall-dig-hola.jpg

[mosca]

Seeking jobs? Yeah right.LOL
As if Americans suddenly don't seek jobs anymore. I guess it's just not the "American way" anymore. Ok, whatever. The facts posted by Bendog earlier contradict you.

[24champ]

http://www.bartcop.com/wall-dig-hola.jpg

McCain is missing, unless he is buried in another ditch somewhere.

[Meck77]

Meanwhile white guys are quoting $85/hr for landscaping work in Steamboat. I'm not kidding.

I wish I knew where all the hard working legal Americans were at. They sure aren't up here. Everyone is too busy partying.

[cutthemdown]

Der Stealin Our Jobs!!!!!!!!!!

[spdirty]

Once again, Ann nails it.

http://www.anncoulter.com/cgi-local/welcome.cgi


NO DRUG SMUGGLER LEFT BEHIND!
June 13, 2007


President Bush was so buoyed by the warm reception he was given in Albania that he immediately gave all 3 million Albanians American citizenship, provided they learn Spanish. The offer was withdrawn when Bush found out most Albanians haven't broken any U.S. laws.

Bush keeps claiming he's dying to enforce the border, but he just can't do it unless we immediately grant amnesty to 12 million illegal aliens. I wonder if that worked on Laura Bush:

Laura: George, it's time you quit drinking.
George: OK, honey, let's discuss it over cocktails.

How about Bush enforce the border and then we'll discuss his amnesty plan?

He assures us that granting amnesty to millions of illegal immigrants already here won't inspire millions more to run across the border because ... he's going to put infrared lights at the border!

Well, that's a relief. What precisely will infrared lights do again? This is worse than those fake cameras they sell at hardware stores to make it look like you have cameras outside your house. We still need something or someone — say, a wall or a Border Patrol agent — to stop the Mexicans illegally crossing the border as we watch them on the infrared cameras.

Bush won't build a wall and he keeps prosecuting law enforcement officers who stop illegal border crossers. But trust him: He'll get right on that border enforcement business as soon as we grant amnesty to 12 million illegal aliens.

Ignacio Ramos and Jose Alonso Compean are normally the sort of Mexican-Americans Bush would tear up at while promoting amnesty for illegal aliens. Both served in the military and are taxpaying, law-abiding citizens. They've been risking their lives as Border Patrol agents for years.

Ramos was nominated for Border Patrol Agent of the Year in 2005. His nomination received a major setback when the Bush administration decided to put him in prison instead. Ramos and Compean are now serving more than 10 years apiece in solitary confinement for chasing a drug-running illegal alien back to Mexico.

Bush's pal, U.S. Attorney Johnny Sutton, gave immunity to a Mexican drug dealer hauling a million dollars worth of drugs across the border so that the drug dealer could testify against two Border Patrol agents who shot him in the buttocks.

The border patrol agents were presumed guilty of an unlawful shooting because they neglected to fill out the proper paperwork. For busting a cap in the butt of a drug courier crossing the border illegally — who was so mortally wounded that he proceeded to scamper back to Mexico — they were supposed to spend five hours filling out paperwork. This is what the Bush administration means when it talks about a "cover-up." As U.S. prosecutor Debra Kanof said, "You have to report any discharge of a firearm."

Intriguingly, Kanof also says: "The Border Patrol pursuit policy prohibits the pursuit of someone." (Hence, the oft-heard warning of the border agent in hot pursuit, "Stop or I'll ... do absolutely nothing!") Can we apply this rule to meter maids and tax collectors? At least now border agents will be able to watch the illegal aliens they can't pursue on infrared cameras!

But wait — that's not all! The Border Patrol agents also exceeded the speed limit. "In order to exceed the speed limit," Kanof said, "you have to get supervisor approval, and they did not." It's just so hard to fill out a written request to exceed the speed limit when you're off-roading at 65 mph. There's a whispering campaign suggesting that Ramos and Compean failed to use their turn signal.

As I understand it, you're also supposed to not cross the border illegally from Mexico with a van full of drugs. But the Bush administration has no interest in enforcing those laws. Ninety-eight percent of illegal aliens captured crossing the border illegally are not prosecuted. Those drugs are doing the job American drugs just won't do!

The Bush administration pulls out the big guns only for serious violations like a Border Patrol officer not filling out paperwork.

In addition to giving the illegal alien drug smuggler full immunity to testify against U.S. Border Patrol agents, the government gave him taxpayer-funded medical care for his buttocks wound, an unconditional border-crossing card, the right to sue the U.S. for "civil rights" violations, and a GAP gift card. The drug runner is also on the short-list to replace Attorney General Alberto Gonzales.

He's now suing the U.S. for $5 million, but the Bush administration is hoping to bargain him down to $10 million.

That border-crossing card came in handy when the winged illegal alien brought in another load of drugs a short eight months later — for which he has still not been charged, nearly two years later. Who does he think he is? Rep. William Jefferson?

Bush's pal Sutton keeps defending his decision to prosecute Border Patrol agents for paperwork violations, rather than an illegal alien for drug trafficking, on the grounds that the drug dealer has not been charged with any crimes. Let's see, whose job is it to charge that Mexican drug runner with a crime? Why, I believe that would be Johnny Sutton!

Maybe Sutton was too busy prosecuting another Mexican-American law enforcement officer for trying to stop illegal aliens from crossing our border. Deputy Sheriff Gilmer Hernandez shot at the tires of a van full of illegal aliens, inadvertently wounding one of the aliens. Sutton prosecuted Hernandez. The government proceeded to give the illegal aliens green cards and $100,000 each.

I didn't realize "living in the shadows" meant in the shadows of palm trees around the pools at taxpayer-funded houses.

Illegal aliens might want to rethink Bush's amnesty plan. The only Hispanics Bush seems to prosecute are the ones who are law-abiding U.S. citizens.

COPYRIGHT 2007 ANN COULTER
DISTRIBUTED BY UNIVERSAL PRESS SYNDICATE
4520 Main Street, Kansas City, MO 64111

[Spider]

what a day , spent all day yesterday in Junction Texas , had to bust ass to Houston , got there , none in the pipe yard spoke English , but they worked hard , then trailer brake cams up , had to get it fixed , went to workshop behind the Key Truckstop exit 785 , they couldnt speak English, but they worked their asses off , didnt have the right parts , but they twisted , welded , cut and made it all work , and check this out , they didnt over charge me , and once they started , they stayed with it .........

[24champ]

SPDirty I have to say it is odd to see Conservatives go after Bush in the manner they are and it's only going to get worse for the President if he keeps being arrogant about this bill.

[cutthemdown]

SPDirty I have to say it is odd to see Conservatives go after Bush in the manner they are and it's only going to get worse for the President if he keeps being arrogant about this bill.

One reason is because with election coming up no one wants to seem like a Bu****e. It's sound politics right now to oppose Bush.

[24champ]

One reason is because with election coming up no one wants to seem like a Bu****e. It's sound politics right now to oppose Bush.

You may be right, but I think it is more of the people outside Washington are really fed up with the politicians. There is anger on both sides of the aisle.

[Rascal]

Ouch...I can't stand Coulter but that was a pretty damning article.

[TailgateNut]

what a day , spent all day yesterday in Junction Texas , had to bust ass to Houston , got there , none in the pipe yard spoke English , but they worked hard , then trailer brake cams up , had to get it fixed , went to workshop behind the Key Truckstop exit 785 , they couldnt speak English, but they worked their asses off , didnt have the right parts , but they twisted , welded , cut and made it all work , and check this out , they didnt over charge me , and once they started , they stayed with it .........

Did you check their papers???

[24champ]

Folks, time to call your represenatives again, this bill is being revived. Cannot allow this bill to be passed unless the border is closed up. Period.

[epicSocialism4tw]

Folks, time to call your represenatives again, this bill is being revived. Cannot allow this bill to be passed unless the border is closed up. Period.

You know, it is astounding that our government so blatantly ignores the wishes of its constituents these days. Democracy is done, folks. I guess the real question is over how long it has been buried beneath our feet.

[Stormontheplains]

You know, it is astounding that our government so blatantly ignores the wishes of its constituents these days. Democracy is done, folks. I guess the real question is over how long it has been buried beneath our feet.

It is time to take it back, my question is how? Will it be email and phone call driven? You would think the prior election would have sent the message to listen but no. Immigration should go to a national vote!!!!!! It should read 1.) amnesty and build a wall 2.) send them all home and build a wall.

[24champ]

Time to take it back by booting people out of office. Some politicians both Democrats and Republicans have campaigned that they are hard on illegal immigration.

[Rascal]

Dear Mr. Rascal,

Thank you for contacting me about the problem of illegal immigration in our country. It is extremely important to me that I hear the opinions and concerns of Oklahomans, especially on such a pressing issue.

As you know, a bi-partisan group of senators reached a compromise with President Bush on a comprehensive reform bill (S. 1348), which was debated by the Senate and ultimately failed to receive enough support for a final vote for passage. Please be assured, I was opposed to this bill and I am glad the legislation did not succeed.

First, I am disappointed in the way Senate leadership handled this immigration bill. It was released in the middle of the night, merely days before debate began, bypassing the Senate Judiciary Committee and preventing senators from taking the time necessary to scrutinize such lengthy, divisive legislation. Furthermore, debate time was extremely limited and very few amendments to the bill were allowed consideration.

Although there were good provisions in the bill, such as a merit-based legal immigration system, the overall bill would have been harmful to our nation and would have done nothing to solve our problems with illegal immigration. I previously outlined fundamental principles that would guide my votes during immigration reform. I support legislation that secures our borders and enforces existing law, but does not contain an amnesty provision of any kind. Unfortunately, S. 1348 offered amnesty to 12 million illegal immigrants and did little to secure our porous borders.

During the debate, I offered an amendment to require that existing border security and immigration laws be enforced, and the enforcement be certified by Congress, before any provisions in the new bill could take effect. The American people expect their laws to be upheld, but have lost faith in Congress and the federal government to defend our nation from illegal immigration. Unfortunately, my amendment was not agreed to, and in the end, I could not support the existing legislation.

It is likely the Senate will consider immigration reform legislation again in the near future. Please know my position on the issue has not changed, and I will continue actively working for reform that protects our borders and upholds our rule of law.

Again, thank you for continuing to contact me on this issue. Best wishes.

Sincerely,

Tom Coburn, M.D.

United States Senator

[spdirty]

Good letter Rascal...seems like Coburn is one of the good guys.

[spdirty]

what a day , spent all day yesterday in Junction Texas , had to bust ass to Houston , got there , none in the pipe yard spoke English , but they worked hard , then trailer brake cams up , had to get it fixed , went to workshop behind the Key Truckstop exit 785 , they couldnt speak English, but they worked their asses off , didnt have the right parts , but they twisted , welded , cut and made it all work , and check this out , they didnt over charge me , and once they started , they stayed with it .........

Oh I don't deny that they don't work hard. Ive spent plenty of time in housing developments where now with rare exception all I see working there are hispanics, and they are out there in 90 degree heat working their asses off with jeans and long sleeve shirts. They have helped me out a number of times, whether I was an idiot and didnt have the right tools, or if I needed help pulling a mailbox or sign out or digging a hole, Ive been helped many times, and they help out just to help out. I just wish that they were working legally and I could verbally communicate with them without having to learn Spanish.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Did he really address you as "Mr. Rascal?"

j/k

:D

[epicSocialism4tw]

Okay, here's an update....

Evidently, these guys are trying to revive the bill, and are doing so by providing the following changes:

Bush initiated changes: Immediate 4.4 billion dollar allocation to secure the border/enforce laws at the work site. As far as I can tell from what I've read, this would be the prioroty element of the bill.

Apparently, the main points of contention are revolving around amnesty.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

http://www.bartcop.com/gonzo-no-confidunce.gif

[Spider]

Oh I don't deny that they don't work hard. Ive spent plenty of time in housing developments where now with rare exception all I see working there are hispanics, and they are out there in 90 degree heat working their asses off with jeans and long sleeve shirts. They have helped me out a number of times, whether I was an idiot and didnt have the right tools, or if I needed help pulling a mailbox or sign out or digging a hole, Ive been helped many times, and they help out just to help out. I just wish that they were working legally and I could verbally communicate with them without having to learn Spanish.

;D I agree the whole non speaking English thing sucks , But if they pass that work ethic down to their Kids , that can only strengthen America .......Did you check their papers
I came right out and asked the ones that could speak a little english .......... No sense in beating around the Bush ..........

[alkemical]

This is the best picture you've ever posted LABF.


http://www.bartcop.com/gonzo-no-confidunce.gif

[alkemical]

If our dollar is our "stock" in the worldplace, then if people are moving away from the dollar, is that a vote of no confidence?

[TailgateNut]

http://www.bartcop.com/gonzo-no-confidunce.gif

You could just substituted "liar/liars" and it still would be true.

[c_lazy_r]

All of you that are opposed to this bill...

How do we round up the 12 (I think it is higher) million folks that are here now?

You can't profile...

They are proficient at being low key and evasive...

They have nothing to lose...

What do you do when you catch the mom and she has kids? What if they are home loans/car loans? Banks are gonna get hurt along with the companies that employ these guys.

Any practical thoughts? It will be much tougher than you would like to believe. BTW, I'm kinda on the fence on the whole thing. Just seems like it's easy to say "no" to the amnesty thing but, realistically, trying to deport them all would be extremely difficult.

[bendog]

I think support is pretty evenly divided. Even amongst the gop (which includes me, nominally) those opposing the bill are only 10% up.

http://www.abcnews.go.com/US/PollVault/story?id=3240208&page=1

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/25/us/25poll.html?ex=1337745600&en=ac69d307847180bf&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss

[epicSocialism4tw]

All of you that are opposed to this bill...

How do we round up the 12 (I think it is higher) million folks that are here now?

You can't profile...

They are proficient at being low key and evasive...

They have nothing to lose...

What do you do when you catch the mom and she has kids? What if they are home loans/car loans? Banks are gonna get hurt along with the companies that employ these guys.

Any practical thoughts? It will be much tougher than you would like to believe. BTW, I'm kinda on the fence on the whole thing. Just seems like it's easy to say "no" to the amnesty thing but, realistically, trying to deport them all would be extremely difficult.


Rounding them up would be impossible, but you dont have to round them up if you go after their employers. The immigrants will just go away if they dont have jobs, or they will try to become legal citizens.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

What do you do when you catch the mom and she has kids? What if they are home loans/car loans? Banks are gonna get hurt along with the companies that employ these guys.



Can an illegal immigrant get a bank loan?

As for the companies that hire illegals, getting hurt is the natural consequence of breaking the law.

[El Minion]

Can an illegal immigrant get a bank loan?

As for the companies that hire illegals, getting hurt is the natural consequence of breaking the law.

Banks and financial institutions don't care who you are as long as your credit is good. Just like how small and large companies can get loans, all foreigners get a Federal Tax ID # and use that instead of a social security # to apply for a loan or establish credit. Then they become just like every American and get into debt.

Yes those companies that use illegal immigrants will be hurt, as will there customers, us.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Banks and financial institutions don't care who you are as long as your credit is good. Just like how small and large companies can get loans, all foreigners get a Federal Tax ID # and use that instead of a social security # to apply for a loan or establish credit. Then they become just like every American and get into debt.

They can get a bank loan without having an account?

Most banks require proper ID and proof of citizenship to open an account.

Yes those companies that use illegal immigrants will be hurt, as will there customers, us.

Depends on the company and how the transition is handled.

Whenever possible, it should be handled in such a way that companies have to assume the economic burdens, e.g., the cost of paying better wages, providing benefits, etc., without passing any costs along to the consumer.

http://www.bartcop.com/immigration-charge.jpg

[El Minion]

They can get a bank loan without having an account?

Most banks require proper ID and proof of citizenship to open an account.

Again, banks and financial institutions don't care who you are as long as your money is good. IIRC, with a FIN and proper passport or other proper ID from a foreigners origin, they should be able to open an account and start credit worthiness here. I read about it a couple years ago, you just need to know how do it and what forms are needed, the FIN is key though. I don't think Mel Gibson needs to go back to Australia every time to cash a check.

Depends on the company and how the transition is handled.

Whenever possible, it should be handled in such a way that companies have to assume the economic burdens, e.g., the cost of paying better wages, providing benefits, etc., without passing any costs along to the consumer.

http://www.bartcop.com/immigration-charge.jpg

Yes that would be ideal, but not the reality. Wages would have to be bid up to attract new employees now in a artificially constricted labor market, or certain services and markets would just disappear. (I remember cutting my parents lawn now I just hire someone to do it, wish such a service existed then :rofl: ) Or the remaining employees would be forced to take up the slack. In the long run the consumer always pays for it.


Related article (http://www.slate.com/id/2168060/):
-------------------

<font size="3"><strong>everyday economics</strong></font><br clear="all"><span class="clsLarger">One-Fifth of an American</span><br><span class="clsSmall"><font color="gray">How much is an immigrant's life worth, exactly?</font></span><br>By Steven E. Landsburg<br><span class="clsSmaller"><font color="#CC0000">Updated <font color="#CC0000">Tuesday, June 12, 2007, at 2:38 PM ET</font></font></span><br clear="all"><!--After Date--><br clear="all"><p><div style="clear:both"></div>How do you justify a border fence? Why is it OK to consign millions of unskilled Mexicans to lives of desperate poverty? I'm told it's because Americans should care more about their countrymen than about a bunch of foreigners. OK, but how <em>much</em> more? Surely there's some limit; virtually nobody thinks, for example, that Americans should be allowed to hunt Mexicans for sport. So, exactly how much are you willing to hurt a foreigner to help an American? Is a foreigner's well-being worth three-quarters as much as an American's, or half as much, or one-quarter as much? </p><p>(I'm grateful to the anonymous proprietor of the <a target="_blank" href="http://notsneaky.blogspot.com/">YouNotSneaky blog</a> for raising this question, though my analysis is not the same as his.)</p><p>Let's do the math: When we admit an unskilled Mexican immigrant, his wage typically rises from about $2 an hour to $9 an hour—call it a $7-per-hour gain. To justify keeping him out, we'll have to weigh that gain against the harm he does to Americans.</p><p>Right away, our calculation runs into a problem, because on balance immigrants <em>don't</em> harm Americans; virtually all economists agree that immigration makes us richer, not poorer. Every immigrant is a potential trading partner, a potential employee, and a potential customer. He bids down wages, but that's a two-edged sword: It's bad for his fellow workers, but it's good for employers and good for consumers. </p><p>In the very short run, most of the gains go to employers, and a substantial fraction of those gains probably go to people named Walton. In the somewhat longer run, all that excess profit gets competed away and shows up in the form of lower prices for consumer goods. At that point, even the workers who took pay cuts can come out ahead: If your wage falls by 10 percent while prices fall by 20 percent, you're a winner. </p><p><em>But let's ignore all that</em>. In order to make the best possible anti-immigrant case, let's <em>ignore all the benefits of immigration</em> and focus strictly on the costs to American workers, i.e., falling wages. </p><p>Since we're talking about a single immigrant, wages fall infinitesimally—but you've got to multiply that infinitesimal drop by millions of American workers. A high- end estimate is that 100 million Americans experience wage drops of about $.00000003 per hour. Multiply that out and you have a $3 per hour loss. (Note to econ-geeks: I assumed a wage rate of $10 an hour and an elasticity of wages with respect to labor of 0.3.) This estimate comes from the labor-economics literature, and it really applies only in the very short run, because in the long run, falling wages attract new businesses, which partly bid wages right back up again. <em>But let's ignore all that, too</em>, and assume a worst-case scenario, where the short-run effects are somehow never ameliorated.</p><p>Bottom line: When the immigrant crosses the border, Americans lose $3, and the immigrant gains $7. To oppose that, you'd have to count an immigrant as less than three-sevenths of an American. </p><p>But wait! It's worse than that. The $7 gain went to a $2-an-hour immigrant. The $3 loss came from $10-an-hour Americans. And we usually think of a dollar as more valuable in the hands of the desperately poor. The most conservative standard assumption is that the value of an extra dollar is inversely proportional to your income, so an extra dollar is worth five times as much to a $2-an-hour Mexican as it is to a $10-an-hour American. The immigrant's second dollar is worth a little less, and the third a little less than that. </p><p><a name="back2168062"><a href="#2168062" id="caption" label="Caption" type="xhtml">Accounting for all that</a></a>, it turns out that the immigrant's $7 gain is worth about five times the American's $3 loss. In other words, to justify keeping the immigrant out, you'd have to say he's worth less than one-fifth of an American citizen.</p><p>By contrast, there was a time when the U.S. Constitution counted a black slave as <em>three</em>-fifths of a full-fledged citizen. Alabama Gov. Bob Riley has recently apologized for the ravages of slavery. How long till politicians apologize for the ravages of our restrictive immigration policies?</p><br clear="all"><hr><a name="#2168062"><h3>sidebar</h3></a><p>Return to <a href="#back2168062">article</a></p><p>Here's the math, for those who like this sort of thing. If the utility from an extra dollar is inversely proportional to your income, we can assume that utility is given by the log of income. If N Americans earning $10 an hour lose $e an hour each, the utility loss is N Log(10) - N Log(10-e). If Ne = $3 per hour (as in the column) and if N is large, this expression is approximately 3/10. For the immigrant, the utility gain is Log(9)-Log(2), or approximately 1.5, which is five times as much.</p><em>Steven E. Landsburg is the author, most recently, of</em> <a target="_blank" href="http://www.landsburg.com/">More Sex Is Safer Sex: The Unconventional Wisdom of Economics</a><em>. You can e-mail him at <a target="_blank" href="mailto:armchair@troi.cc.rochester.edu">armchair@troi.cc.rochester.edu</a></em><em>.</em><br><br><font face="Arial, Helvetica, Geneva" size="2">Article URL: <a href="http://www.slate.com/id/2168060/" target="_blank">http://www.slate.com/id/2168060/</a></font><script language="JavaScript1.1" src="/revsci/dm_client.js"></script><script language="JavaScript">rs = PStax; DM_addToLoc("thisNode", rs); DM_tag();</script><noscript><img src="http://pix01.revsci.net/J05531/a3/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/noscript.gif" /></noscript><div style='mso-element:footer;tab-stops:right 3.5in; border:none;border-top:solid windowtext .5pt;padding:1.0pt 0in 0in 0in' id='f2'><!-- Copyright information --><p class='MsoFooter' style='tab-stops:right 7.2in'>Copyright 2007 Washingtonpost.Newsweek Interactive Co. LLC</p></div></body></html>

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Again, banks and financial institutions don't care who you are as long as your money is good. IIRC, with a FIN and proper passport or other proper ID from a foreigners origin, they should be able to open an account and start credit worthiness here. I read about it a couple years ago, you just need to know how do it and what forms are needed, the FIN is key though. I don't think Mel Gibson needs to go back to Australia every time to cash a check.

By this logic, if I have an account in a Swiss bank, I should be able to just emmigrate to Switzerland with no regard for that country's immigration laws.

Doesn't quite wash, huh?


Yes that would be ideal, but not the reality. Wages would have to be bid up to attract new employees now in a artificially constricted labor market, or certain services and markets would just disappear. (I remember cutting my parents lawn now I just hire someone to do it, wish such a service existed then :rofl: ) Or the remaining employees would be forced to take up the slack. In the long run the consumer always pays for it.


It depends on the individual business and its bottom line. Lots of businesses and industries could pay a living wage + benefits and still do just fine.

[TailgateNut]

Rounding them up would be impossible, but you dont have to round them up if you go after their employers. The immigrants will just go away if they dont have jobs, or they will try to become legal citizens.


...or they will resort to other means of income...........oh, I forgot....they already break the law! They illegally cross our borders (what would happen to us if we did?) they smuggle drugs into our country (what would happen to us?) they don't pay their taxes (what would happen to us?) they steal identities (what would happen to us?) the are involved in "human trafficing" (what would happen to us?)


...Do you think a judge would just slap us with a $5000 fine. I doubt it!


I'll volunteer to become part of the "citizens' posse".

[TailgateNut]

Banks and financial institutions don't care who you are as long as your credit is good. Just like how small and large companies can get loans, all foreigners get a Federal Tax ID # and use that instead of a social security # to apply for a loan or establish credit. Then they become just like every American and get into debt.

Yes those companies that use illegal immigrants will be hurt, as will there customers, us.

.....and when they default on their loans, they just disappear into the foggy world of illegal immigration......then they "pop up" in another state, with another name and fake SSN to start another cycle of FRAUD.

...."there customers, us" err "their customers,us".....a typical response. I'm willing to pay to rid this country of these FRAUDS.


THE HIDDEN COSTS OF ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION GREATLY OUTWAY THE BENEFITS!

[Traveler]

What are everyone's thoughts for/against amnesty? Why is it good/bad for America?

[mosca]

"In the very short run, most of the gains go to employers, and a substantial fraction of those gains probably go to people named Walton. In the somewhat longer run, all that excess profit gets competed away and shows up in the form of lower prices for consumer goods. At that point, even the workers who took pay cuts can come out ahead: If your wage falls by 10 percent while prices fall by 20 percent, you're a winner."
If you're talking about falling prices on mostly worthless junk bought from Wal-mart, unhealthy processed foodstuffs, and other garbage stuff that consumers are well... consuming, sure. That's not a good enough trade-off to me personally.

Last I checked, prices on more important and sometimes necessary things such as housing, insurance, transportation, gasoline, food that's actually healthy, etc. have been rising over the years.

[Spider]

What are everyone's thoughts for/against amnesty? Why is it good/bad for America?

good , that many more paying into the system ....... This is still the land of plenty ..........come to find out when a illegal first crosses over it is civil crime not a criminal , second time it is a criminal offense , But to be brutally honest here , we need more of these people with their work ethic instead of the I deserve it , I want it now ethic ..........
one thing these undocumented workers should teach us is this , if you think the world owes you a living , get out and hustle to collect it ..........

[Spider]

If you're talking about falling prices on mostly worthless junk bought from Wal-mart, unhealthy processed foodstuffs, and other garbage stuff that consumers are well... consuming, sure. That's not a good enough trade-off to me personally. agreed , you exchange quality for price .......

Last I checked, prices on more important and sometimes necessary things such as housing, insurance, transportation, gasoline, food that's actually healthy, etc. have been rising over the years.

it sure is and health care cost is going up ..........prescriptions ....

[El Minion]

By this logic, if I have an account in a Swiss bank, I should be able to just emmigrate to Switzerland with no regard for that country's immigration laws.

Doesn't quite wash, huh?

Since when is law logical (http://www.orangemane.com/BB/showthread.php?t=52431). Plus they're two different issues, a nations banking regulations and its own immigration policy. May or may not overlap depending on the circumstances.


It depends on the individual business and its bottom line. Lots of businesses and industries could pay a living wage + benefits and still do just fine.

The point is, ladies and gentleman, that 'greed' -- for lack of a better word -- is good. Greed is right. Greed works. Greed clarifies, cuts through, and captures the essence of the evolutionary spirit. Greed, in all of its forms -- greed for life, for money, for love, knowledge -- has marked the upward surge of mankind. - Gordon Gekko

[El Minion]

.....and when they default on their loans, they just disappear into the foggy world of illegal immigration......then they "pop up" in another state, with another name and fake SSN to start another cycle of FRAUD.

...."there customers, us" err "their customers,us".....a typical response. I'm willing to pay to rid this country of these FRAUDS.


THE HIDDEN COSTS OF ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION GREATLY OUTWAY THE BENEFITS!

Yes there up to no good, be afraid, bery afriad. Yikes!

[El Minion]

If you're talking about falling prices on mostly worthless junk bought from Wal-mart, unhealthy processed foodstuffs, and other garbage stuff that consumers are well... consuming, sure. That's not a good enough trade-off to me personally.

Last I checked, prices on more important and sometimes necessary things such as housing, insurance, transportation, gasoline, food that's actually healthy, etc. have been rising over the years.


Did you ever consider that they may have increased faster without (il)legal immigration. Or is all (il)legal immigration always bad to your ears, as it is to many members prejudices on this board.

[epicSocialism4tw]

Illegal immigration is more than just a cultural issue. Its a HUGE economic issue.

[Rascal]

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/06/15/bloggers.bush/index.html

Conservative bloggers in full revolt over immigration
POSTED: 7:22 p.m. EDT, June 15, 2007
By Peter Hamby
CNN Washington Bureau
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Different conservative blogs have different pet issues -- government transparency, federal judges, Fred Thompson, to name a few.

But no issue in recent memory has united conservative bloggers like the debate over immigration. Their frustration has culminated in a full-scale revolt against the Bush administration and a Senate bill that activists say does little to solve the country's border security problems.

President Bush's pledge to support $4.4 billion in additional border security funds has breathed new life into the bill, but the drumbeat against the legislation shows no signs of quieting. (Watch how senators revived the immigration bill )

It's increasingly clear from Web postings and interviews with top conservative bloggers that the immigration bill has done serious damage to the president's credibility among the conservative netroots, the grassroots bloggers on the Web.

Erick Erickson, managing editor of the popular conservative blog RedState.com, says he receives between 800 and 900 e-mails a day from readers, most of whom are "enraged" by the White House's immigration efforts.

"Of all the issues the president has picked to make his hill to die on, he has picked the one that has divided his base," said Erickson, who lives in Macon, Georgia. "I am shocked by the anger and outrage out there ... You've got war against the president within the Republican party."

When details of an immigration compromise were announced this spring, conservative bloggers were immediately incensed. Michelle Malkin labeled it "a White House betrayal."

Another popular blogger, Hugh Hewitt, called the bill a "fiasco" and wrote: "this push for this bill is a disaster, Mr. President."

Bloggers: Secure the border first
Conservative bloggers make various arguments against the bill. Some say the bill grants amnesty to illegal immigrants who have already broken the law. Others say normalizing millions of new workers would depress wages and harm American workers.

Most conservative bloggers see border enforcement as the priority, an issue they say the president can enforce on his own without having to push a bill through Congress.

According to several top conservative bloggers, Bush simply has a credibility problem when it comes to border security.

"The administration has not done anything to fix the border or the visa program," said Ed Morrissey, the Minnesota-based founder of the blog Captain's Quarters. "It's a huge gap in national security. It's been six years past 9/11 and the administration has done nothing to fix either one."

Many bloggers said they are disappointed the president has pushed so hard for the immigration bill while letting the war and other issues conservatives care about fall by the wayside.

"The White House will go out and zealously promote Harriet Miers [the former White House counsel who Bush unsuccessfully nominated for the Supreme Court], defend [Attorney General] Alberto Gonzales, promote this bill, but will not take a firm stand on the war," said Erickson. "I know people who are boiling with rage that the president has been beating up his own side over this bill but won't take the bully pulpit to beat up Democrats over the war."

Bush did little to help his relationship with bloggers on May 29, when he told a crowd in Glynco, Georgia, that critics of the immigration bill "don't want to do what's right for America."

Kathryn Jean Lopez at the National Review asked, "Is the White House just not paying attention?"

The blog Ace of Spades HQ called Bush "incompetent" and "embarrassingly dimwitted" and urged him to retire.

Blogs and anti-immigration organizations used the Web to tap into the growing discontent over the immigration bill, using the Internet to organize phone and fax campaigns to urge senators to vote against the bill. It was a plugged-in show of force that would have been beyond comprehension a decade ago.

"The support for this issue has always been there, but the Internet is the platform the issue has needed to become a force in American politics," said David All, a Republican online strategist based in Washington.

Blogosphere ready for round two
When the bill was stymied by a procedural vote on June 7, the blogs claimed victory. A straw poll of conservative bloggers conducted by the Web site Right Wing News showed that 96 percent of bloggers surveyed were "pleased that the Senate immigration bill did not pass."

Now that the bill is back for a second round in the Senate, Bush could have a difficult time making new friends online beyond a relative handful of the bill's supporters.

"It will be very difficult for him to recover with conservative bloggers," said Robert Bluey, director of the Center for Media & Public Policy at the Heritage Foundation. "When Bush is on to his next issue, I'm not sure if bloggers are going to be there to back him up."

Which begs the question -- is Bush a lame duck among bloggers?

Said Morrissey: "I think that they are going to continue to support him on the war on terror. As for the rest of it, they are looking for ways to reshape the party agenda going into the next election. That's a nice way of saying they are going to consider him irrelevant."

[Bronco Bob]

For me the priorities should be:

1. Secure the borders. Put enough agents on the borders to significantly
reduce the amount of illegals coming into the country.

2. Crack down on businesses hiring illegals.

3. Eliminate the anchor baby law. You are only a citizen when you are
born here if your parents are US citizens first.

4. Cut off aid to illegals, no welfare, free schooling, free medical care.
If someone gets sick, threat them and send the bill to Mexico
with trade sanctions if they don't pay up.

5. Begin a systematic effort to return illegals to their home country.
Sure it isn't going to be done in a day but eventually if the other
measures above are taken eventually the numbers will be reduced.
And many will leave on their own anyway once the jobs and benefits
dry up.

Amnesty should be way down on any list, if even there in the first place.

[mosca]

Did you ever consider that they may have increased faster without (il)legal immigration. Or is all (il)legal immigration always bad to your ears, as it is to many members prejudices on this board.
Yes, the prices of important things I listed aren't directly tied to immigration... they are rising for a multitude of reasons. All I'm trying to say is, don't dangle the cheap price of junk walmart crap in front of my nose as bait and then say "If you get rid of illegals, the price of this is gonna rise!". I couldn't care less. That's an insult to peoples' intelligence. I try not to buy a lot of that stuff and I'm more concerned with the rise in price of the stuff I need, not mostly useless consumer junk.

[epicSocialism4tw]

For me the priorities should be:
1. Secure the borders. Put enough agents on the borders to significantly
reduce the amount of illegals coming into the country.
2. Crack down on businesses hiring illegals.
3. Eliminate the anchor baby law. You are only a citizen when you are
born here if your parents are US citizens first.
4. Cut off aid to illegals, no welfare, free schooling, free medical care.
If someone gets sick, threat them and send the bill to Mexico
with trade sanctions if they don't pay up.
5. Begin a systematic effort to return illegals to their home country.
Sure it isn't going to be done in a day but eventually if the other
measures above are taken eventually the numbers will be reduced.
And many will leave on their own anyway once the jobs and benefits
dry up.
Amnesty should be way down on any list, if even there in the first place.

The first thing to be done should, without a doubt, be to bring the clamps down on the industries who are saturated with illegal workers. This is the practical step that will cause a natural cascade. If you cant pay your rent, you go back to Mexico.

There does need to be an effort made to bring these people in legally, but I dont think that general amnesty is the way to do it. There has to be a real effort made to assimilate the people. To make them Americans. It is necessary to require practical mastery of English as admission for the head of the household, and demonstration of the knowledge of both culturally and historically important things for Americans. This stuff is important so that you dont walk out in the street in front of oncoming traffic or drive a vehicle that wouldnt pass inspection 30 mph in a 45 mph zone. You have to assimilate, not to enforce your culture on the country that you are immigrating to.

[Spider]

For me the priorities should be:


4. Cut off aid to illegals, no welfare, free schooling, free medical care.
If someone gets sick, threat them and send the bill to Mexico
with trade sanctions if they don't pay up.

5. Begin a systematic effort to return illegals to their home country.
Sure it isn't going to be done in a day but eventually if the other
measures above are taken eventually the numbers will be reduced.
And many will leave on their own anyway once the jobs and benefits
dry up.

Amnesty should be way down on any list, if even there in the first place.
These 2 , I dont agree with , I say make them documented , let them pay taxes let them have the same we do , yes we have to secure the boarder , but those that are here , document them , let them work and pay taxes ....
I have 6 kids , 1 job one could argue , I am just as big of a drain on the school system as undocumented workers .......
returning people ...... the cost of transportation alone is staggering , not to mention feeding them while in custody . bnetter off giving them documentation and letting them pay the same taxes we enjoy paying so much ;D

[cutthemdown]

These 2 , I dont agree with , I say make them documented , let them pay taxes let them have the same we do , yes we have to secure the boarder , but those that are here , document them , let them work and pay taxes ....
I have 6 kids , 1 job one could argue , I am just as big of a drain on the school system as undocumented workers .......
returning people ...... the cost of transportation alone is staggering , not to mention feeding them while in custody . bnetter off giving them documentation and letting them pay the same taxes we enjoy paying so much ;D

single people get discriminated against worst then any other group.

[Spider]

single people get discriminated against worst then any other group.

Yes they are in more ways then 1 ....... specially when it comes to work and child care .......

[c_lazy_r]

The first thing to be done should, without a doubt, be to bring the clamps down on the industries who are saturated with illegal workers. This is the practical step that will cause a natural cascade. If you cant pay your rent, you go back to Mexico.

I think the employers are getting targeted a little unfairly here. If someone applies for a job with me and has a SS card and drivers license, how much more due diligence should I be required to do?

If business owners are to be held responsible, why not the people that rent homes or apartments to illegals? The banks that give them car loans and mortgages?

When does it start to infringe on our rights? Kinda reminds me of the 9/11 issue and airport security. I can hear it now "for your safety and security and the good of the country, you will now be required to give up your rights of privacy...blah, blah, blah" The sad part is that we will all follow like little sheep.

Tough lines to draw...

[alkemical]

Well if they make illegals, legal. I think....other things should be reconsidered for legalization issues. Like seatbelt laws, etc.

[TailgateNut]

I think the employers are getting targeted a little unfairly here. If someone applies for a job with me and has a SS card and drivers license, how much more due diligence should I be required to do?

If business owners are to be held responsible, why not the people that rent homes or apartments to illegals? The banks that give them car loans and mortgages?

When does it start to infringe on our rights? Kinda reminds me of the 9/11 issue and airport security. I can hear it now "for your safety and security and the good of the country, you will now be required to give up your rights of privacy...blah, blah, blah" The sad part is that we will all follow like little sheep.

Tough lines to draw...


No, they are not to tough. Do you think that it is fair in todays "dog eat dog" market that one employer may have the upper hand at the "bid table" because he uses illegal immigrant labor, and is able, due to that sole reason, to underbid all of those employers who use legal citizen employees.

Verification of eligibility and residency requirement need to be simplified, and then start the verification process throughout the various industries. Give the businesses x amount of weeks to complete that task, and then start levying fine for non-compliance and any illegal new hires.

Pretty damn simple IMO!

[TailgateNut]

Hey Spider: How would you feel if the truck driver "market" were flooded with illegal immigrant drivers, which in turn would drive down the available wages for you and other legal citizens.
Would you still carry the cross for them?

[Spider]

Hey Spider: How would you feel if the truck driver "market" were flooded with illegal immigrant drivers, which in turn would drive down the available wages for you and other legal citizens.
Would you still carry the cross for them?

Thats the thing , if they get DOT certified aka Documented , then they wont lower wages ........But if Bush allows`His plan to go through without the drivers living here , then there is a problem , but my Problem isnt with them , it is with our government , but then I also expect Mexico to open up to American Drivers

[TailgateNut]

Thats the thing , if they get DOT certified aka Documented , then they wont lower wages ........But if Bush allows`His plan to go through without the drivers living here , then there is a problem , but my Problem isnt with them , it is with our government , but then I also expect Mexico to open up to American Drivers

You twisted my question with your answer.

REPEAT:"How would you feel if the truck driver "market" were flooded with illegal immigrant drivers" (with fake documents, just like they infiltrate the rest of the industries/ trades)

[Spider]

You twisted my question with your answer.

REPEAT:"How would you feel if the truck driver "market" were flooded with illegal immigrant drivers" (with fake documents, just like they infiltrate the rest of the industries/ trades)

Fake documents ? pretty hard to do , see when you hire on with a company , you have to go a FBI background check , every day you are inbetween Jobs is examined , your taxes , credit history ( fear of stealing or wrecking for insurance or fraud)Driving Record , and health are all examined ........ Now the biggest fear is Bush allowing these guys to come to America while still being employed in Mexico , where they dont have to follow the same rules .......

[c_lazy_r]

You twisted my question with your answer.

REPEAT:"How would you feel if the truck driver "market" were flooded with illegal immigrant drivers" (with fake documents, just like they infiltrate the rest of the industries/ trades)

You don't think there are illegal truck drivers now?

[Spider]

You don't think there are illegal truck drivers now?

Define Illegal

[Traveler]

The first thing to be done should, without a doubt, be to bring the clamps down on the industries who are saturated with illegal workers. This is the practical step that will cause a natural cascade. If you cant pay your rent, you go back to Mexico.

But wouldn't that trigger serious repercussions in the housing and agriculture markets?

I'm all for going after the employers for hiring undocumented workers. But only after giving those that are already here a chance to become legal citizens.

Maybe even going as far as to have the companies caught hiring/using the undocumented workers (knowingly or unknowingly) and use the fines for to pay the fines assessed to the undocumented in their quest to become US citizens.

It would create less of a shock to those specific industries, as well as our pocketbooks.

[c_lazy_r]

No, they are not to tough. Do you think that it is fair in todays "dog eat dog" market that one employer may have the upper hand at the "bid table" because he uses illegal immigrant labor, and is able, due to that sole reason, to underbid all of those employers who use legal citizen employees.

Verification of eligibility and residency requirement need to be simplified, and then start the verification process throughout the various industries. Give the businesses x amount of weeks to complete that task, and then start levying fine for non-compliance and any illegal new hires.

Pretty damn simple IMO!

My point is that the fraud (illegal documentation, etc) will just get more complex as they (the illegals) find a way around the system and, ultimately, the only way to stop it will be a wholesale invasion of our (US citizens) privacy via detailed personal information ("verification of eligibility & residency requirement", as you termed it) in a database somewhere that the government can use at it's questionable discretion.

To me, it is extreme hypocrisy that the IRS will issue a tax ID number to an illegal so that they can buy a home and then another branch of our government is supposedly trying to find these people and send them back to their country.

It would be far "damn" simpler to change the banking laws to eliminate loans to illegals and make it impossible to cash a check.

If you really wanted to make it difficult for illegals to stay in the US, simply require a valid US drivers license to register a car. There a multitudes of things that could be done without us having to give up another valuable freedom. If the government really wanted to stop the illegals, they could...IMO.

[c_lazy_r]

Define Illegal



I am talking about illegal aliens.

Kinda off the subject but I saw a quote the other day that was cool...

"Calling illegal aliens undocumented immigrants is like calling drug dealers unlicensed pharmacists"

[Traveler]

My point is that the fraud (illegal documentation, etc) will just get more complex as they (the illegals) find a way around the system and, ultimately, the only way to stop it will be a wholesale invasion of our (US citizens) privacy via detailed personal information ("verification of eligibility & residency requirement", as you termed it) in a database somewhere that the government can use at it's questionable discretion.

To me, it is extreme hypocrisy that the IRS will issue a tax ID number to an illegal so that they can buy a home and then another branch of our government is supposedly trying to find these people and send them back to their country.

It would be far "damn" simpler to change the banking laws to eliminate loans to illegals and make it impossible to cash a check.

If you really wanted to make it difficult for illegals to stay in the US, simply require a valid US drivers license to register a car. There a multitudes of things that could be done without us having to give up another valuable freedom. If the government really wanted to stop the illegals, they could...IMO.


Sounds like a great idea, but doesn't this bring the database issue back into play?

[Rascal]

What's the issue with requiring national ID's and having a database?

[TailgateNut]

Fake documents ? pretty hard to do , see when you hire on with a company , you have to go a FBI background check , every day you are inbetween Jobs is examined , your taxes , credit history ( fear of stealing or wrecking for insurance or fraud)Driving Record , and health are all examined ........ Now the biggest fear is Bush allowing these guys to come to America while still being employed in Mexico , where they dont have to follow the same rules .......


Bull f-ing ****. We just had a big stink here in Colorado last year when it became clear that someone at DMV had "sold" CDL's for $$$ not because they passed the test, not because they had the proper documents, just for the mighty $$$.

[TailgateNut]

What's the issue with requiring national ID's and having a database?


I have no issue if it is used to weed out the Illegals, the border jumpers and those who have overstayed their welcome (visa).

[TailgateNut]

Sounds like a great idea, but doesn't this bring the database issue back into play?

And???

[Traveler]

And???

And, you slowly give up on one right after another until you have none at all.

It's not rocket science!;)

[TailgateNut]

My point is that the fraud (illegal documentation, etc) will just get more complex as they (the illegals) find a way around the system and, ultimately, the only way to stop it will be a wholesale invasion of our (US citizens) privacy via detailed personal information ("verification of eligibility & residency requirement", as you termed it) in a database somewhere that the government can use at it's questionable discretion.

To me, it is extreme hypocrisy that the IRS will issue a tax ID number to an illegal so that they can buy a home and then another branch of our government is supposedly trying to find these people and send them back to their country.

It would be far "damn" simpler to change the banking laws to eliminate loans to illegals and make it impossible to cash a check.

If you really wanted to make it difficult for illegals to stay in the US, simply require a valid US drivers license to register a car. There a multitudes of things that could be done without us having to give up another valuable freedom. If the government really wanted to stop the illegals, they could...IMO.


The frigging IRS cares about one thing, and one thing only: COLLECTION OF TAXES.

I don't see any issue with requiring a national ID card which should be required to conduct any goverment regulated business. Local, State and Federal.
Any document required for employment, licensing and benefits should not be issued w/o verification of said ID card!

[alkemical]

I have an idea -

Why don't we just get rid of the borders, give everyone a north american ID & currency and call it a day.

[TailgateNut]

And, you slowly give up on one right after another until you have none at all.

It's not rocket science!;)


Having an ID card is not giving up any rights.

I carry an ID in my wallet as we speak. It's logged in a database.

So what is the difference if we have one issued nationally rather than locally?

[TailgateNut]

I have an idea -

Why don't we just get rid of the borders, give everyone a north american ID & currency and call it a day.

Hash is harmful to constructive thought processing!LOL

[alkemical]

Hash is harmful to constructive thought processing!LOL

http://www.spp.gov

[Traveler]

Having an ID card is not giving up any rights.

I carry an ID in my wallet as we speak. It's logged in a database.

So what is the difference if we have one issued nationally rather than locally?

As c-lazy_r stated above, it could allow a govenrment, especially one such as this, a wholesale invasion of our (US citizens) privacy via detailed personal information ("verification of eligibility & residency requirement", as you termed it) in a database somewhere that the government can use at it's questionable discretion.

[Garcia Bronco]

Having an ID card is not giving up any rights.

I carry an ID in my wallet as we speak. It's logged in a database.

So what is the difference if we have one issued nationally rather than locally?

I don't get he objection to a national ID either.

[c_lazy_r]

Sounds like a great idea, but doesn't this bring the database issue back into play?

I didn't word that very well...

I mean a state issued license. For example, if you live in AZ, you must have an AZ drivers license.

[c_lazy_r]

[QUOTE=TailgateNut;1620377]The frigging IRS cares about one thing, and one thing only: COLLECTION OF TAXES. QUOTE]

Does that make it OK for them to facilitate an illegal transaction?

If so, where do they draw the line??

[TailgateNut]

http://www.spp.gov

"President Bush, Prime Minister Harper and President Fox have identified emergency management; influenza pandemics, including avian influenza; energy security; and safe and secure gateways (border security and facilitation) as key priorities for the SPP


Looks like this memo isn't worth the paper it was printed on.

Our borders still resemble a sieve,
Mr. TB didn't have a problem crossing over
and Mexico hasn't done squat to keep their riff raff in Mexico!

[c_lazy_r]

The frigging IRS cares about one thing, and one thing only: COLLECTION OF TAXES.

I don't see any issue with requiring a national ID card which should be required to conduct any goverment regulated business. Local, State and Federal.
Any document required for employment, licensing and benefits should not be issued w/o verification of said ID card!

Why would you want the federal government to have control over a national ID?

Maybe because they so efficiently run scores of other programs?? Eh...probably not.

Man, I have serious issues with giving my full confidence and trust to the politicians that run this country. Am I paranoid? Probably, but I don't think I will change my mind. I am a big fan of less government (primarily federal) interference in our daily lives.

Below is part of the Preamble to the Bill of Rights...

THE Conventions of a number of the States having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added: And as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government, will best insure the beneficent ends of its institution...


Remember, the people that wrote this had personally witnessed a federal government having too much power and the abuses that can result.

[Hotrod]

I have an idea -

Why don't we just get rid of the borders, give everyone a north american ID & currency and call it a day.

They are already working on it.

[TailgateNut]

As c-lazy_r stated above, it could allow a govenrment, especially one such as this, a wholesale invasion of our (US citizens) privacy via detailed personal information ("verification of eligibility & residency requirement", as you termed it) in a database somewhere that the government can use at it's questionable discretion.


I still don't get what you have to hide?

I'm talking. ID # (which can be used to cross reference work eligibility/ SSN) DOB, Place of Birth, Nationality/ citizenship, local address, Hgt, Wgt., eye color, hair color and a mug shot!

It doesn't have to include touchy things like: sexual orientation, religion, etc...

[TailgateNut]

Why would you want the federal government to have control over a national ID?

Maybe because they so efficiently run scores of other programs?? Eh...probably not.

Man, I have serious issues with giving my full confidence and trust to the politicians that run this country. Am I paranoid? Probably, but I don't think I will change my mind. I am a big fan of less government (primarily federal) interference in our daily lives.

Below is part of the Preamble to the Bill of Rights...

THE Conventions of a number of the States having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added: And as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government, will best insure the beneficent ends of its institution...


Remember, the people that wrote this had personally witnessed a federal government having too much power and the abuses that can result.


What part of ID card do you boneheads not understand? If you currently are a legal citizen you "most likely" have a SSN/card and a Drivers license. This is no different except it is controlled through one centrally controlled office, but issued through local offices. It would remove the questionable issuance of cards/ licenses which have been exposed the last few years. It would also help prevent ID theft and fraud.
Get with times!

[c_lazy_r]

I don't get he objection to a national ID either.

Would it be drivers license, too? If so, new federal DMV? If not, now we have 2 ID's...why?

Who would have access to the database? Local cops? Highway patrol? Schools? Airlines? Gun dealers?

What information is stored in the database? Tax info? Health history? Police record? Driving record? Marital status?

Honestly, can't you see the potential for privacy issues here? Can't you see how it might start innocently and gradually become more and more invasive?

Yea, I'm probably paranoid but I like having a little privacy.

[c_lazy_r]

What part of ID card do you boneheads not understand? If you currently are a legal citizen you "most likely" have a SSN/card and a Drivers license. This is no different except it is controlled through one centrally controlled office, but issued through local offices. It would remove the questionable issuance of cards/ licenses which have been exposed the last few years. It would also help prevent ID theft and fraud.
Get with times!

Let me ask a simple question...

If you are suggesting that we would maintain our state issued drivers license, why in the f**k would we need a national ID?

An illegal alien cannot legally get a valid drivers license. So what purpose would a national ID serve? Fakes are going to exist for them too. The questionable issuance would still exist, as well.

What's the purpose?

[Traveler]

I still don't get what you have to hide?

I'm talking. ID # (which can be used to cross reference work eligibility/ SSN) DOB, Place of Birth, Nationality/ citizenship, local address, Hgt, Wgt., eye color, hair color and a mug shot!

It doesn't have to include touchy things like: sexual orientation, religion, etc...

Nothing to hide. But you answered you own question.

Now imagine all that info in one central database and some out of control government or agency now having access to all that information to use against you for whatever their agenda might be. They now have the means to track or target you in any number of ways.

They might already have it! But if they don't, why are you willing to provide them further access to you personal information? May not be a problem for you. But it bothers the hell out of me.

[c_lazy_r]

What part of ID card do you boneheads not understand? If you currently are a legal citizen you "most likely" have a SSN/card and a Drivers license. This is no different except it is controlled through one centrally controlled office, but issued through local offices. It would remove the questionable issuance of cards/ licenses which have been exposed the last few years. It would also help prevent ID theft and fraud.
Get with times!



What times?

[c_lazy_r]

Nothing to hide. But you answered you own question.

Now imagine all that info in one central database and some out of control government or agency now having access to all that information to use against you for whatever their agenda might be. They now have the means to track or target you in any number of ways.

They might already have it! But if they don't, why are you willing to provide them further access to you personal information? May not be a problem for you. But it bothers the hell out of me.


Exactly.

[Spider]

Hey guys Truckers already have a federal license , Government , state issued ........ we truckers already have a National ID

[TailgateNut]

Let me ask a simple question...

If you are suggesting that we would maintain our state issued drivers license, why in the **** would we need a national ID?

An illegal alien cannot legally get a valid drivers license. So what purpose would a national ID serve? Fakes are going to exist for them too. The questionable issuance would still exist, as well.

What's the purpose?

1.No need for dual documentation!
2. Bawahhahahah, (an illegal cannot "legally get a drivers license" is a good concept, which BTW is far from reality)
3. what purpose, it would "weed out" the fakes and the Illegals.

[Spider]

I can be in Maine and in a matter of Seconds , they can pull up my DAQ , and all my info off of my CDL ........

[Traveler]

What part of ID card do you boneheads not understand? If you currently are a legal citizen you "most likely" have a SSN/card and a Drivers license. This is no different except it is controlled through one centrally controlled office, but issued through local offices. It would remove the questionable issuance of cards/ licenses which have been exposed the last few years. It would also help prevent ID theft and fraud.
Get with times!

And what part of privacy rights does your bonehead not understand?

[Spider]

Hell I got a Radio Chip in my License Plate , Pre pass in the cab , DOT knows where my rig is , I use old tricks into duping DOT and running extra miles .....

[Traveler]

Hell I got a Radio Chip in my License Plate , Pre pass in the cab , DOT knows where my rig is , I use old tricks into duping DOT and running extra miles .....

Bad boy! Bad boy!

[Spider]

Bad boy! Bad boy!

;D just like my Paper work ...... the font office cringes when I walk in ...... But Like i told them , if I do it right , then they will expect me to do it right all the time ;D

[c_lazy_r]

Hell I got a Radio Chip in my License Plate , Pre pass in the cab , DOT knows where my rig is , I use old tricks into duping DOT and running extra miles .....

Now don't lie...it's impossible for the feds to be duped according to Tailgate.

[c_lazy_r]

1.No need for dual documentation!
2. Bawahhahahah, (an illegal cannot "legally get a drivers license" is a good concept, which BTW is far from reality)
3. what purpose, it would "weed out" the fakes and the Illegals.

You lost me on that one (or three).

[TailgateNut]

Nothing to hide. But you answered you own question.

Now imagine all that info in one central database and some out of control government or agency now having access to all that information to use against you for whatever their agenda might be. They now have the means to track or target you in any number of ways.

They might already have it! But if they don't, why are you willing to provide them further access to you personal information? May not be a problem for you. But it bothers the hell out of me.

Good Grief! They, as you so eloquently put it, already have access to this info.

Maybe you'll change your mind when someone steals your identity and uses/ abuses it for a few years before it comes back to haunt you in more than one way. A centralized ID sytem could definately monitor strange activities, wheras a state controlled ID program monitors only the activities within it's borders.
So if Traveler has a licence in state A, and someone in state B steals his identity, no one will know unless the IRS finds out that either A or B is not paying income tax and decides to contact one of you, or if he decides to get credit in your name and defrauds on the loan, you once again "deal with it".

Hey there's only one TGN, one face matches, one fingerprint matches, one retinal scan matches.....etc. If it is controlled by one office, it makes it a bit harder for the criminals and illegals to beat the system.

[TailgateNut]

And what part of privacy rights does your bonehead not understand?

Which "NEW/ ADDL." PRIVACY are you surrendering?

[Spider]

Now don't lie...it's impossible for the feds to be duped according to Tailgate.

well it is , you have to watch the roads , I will use colorado as an example .. I come in south on I 25 , hit the Ft Collins scale , if I show up in Monument or Limon to quickly , I am busted , or heading North into Colorado on 287 and the Lamar scales and I show up in Limon to quickly .........I wont tell you how it is done , but it can be ;D

[TailgateNut]

Now don't lie...it's impossible for the feds to be duped according to Tailgate.

No you #$%^&*&^, our system is so GD antiquated it only takes a computer, printer and laminating equipment to "issue/produce" fakes. Hence the need for the New and improved version.

Here in Colorado the ****ing Illegals drive down to some little shop, pay their $$$s and voila, all of a sudden, they have a SS card and a drivers License bearing their or someone elses name.

Then you have the little meth heads who steal you identity to feed their addiction. All of this is "childs play" because of people who are afraid of the big bad goverment stealing info.

[c_lazy_r]

Good Grief! They, as you so eloquently put it, already have access to this info.

Maybe you'll change your mind when someone steals your identity and uses/ abuses it for a few years before it comes back to haunt you in more than one way. A centralized ID sytem could definately monitor strange activities, wheras a state controlled ID program monitors only the activities within it's borders.So if Traveler has a licence in state A, and someone in state B steals his identity, no one will know unless the IRS finds out that either A or B is not paying income tax and decides to contact one of you, or if he decides to get credit in your name and defrauds on the loan, you once again "deal with it".

Hey there's only one TGN, one face matches, one fingerprint matches, one retinal scan matches.....etc. If it is controlled by one office, it makes it a bit harder for the criminals and illegals to beat the system.


What sort of "strange activities" are they monitoring?

[c_lazy_r]

No you #$%^&*&^, our system is so GD antiquated it only takes a computer, printer and laminating equipment to "issue/produce" fakes. Hence the need for the New and improved version.

Here in Colorado the ****ing Illegals drive down to some little shop, pay their $$$s and voila, all of a sudden, they have a SS card and a drivers License bearing their or someone elses name.

Then you have the little meth heads who steal you identity to feed their addiction. All of this is "childs play" because of people who are afraid of the big bad goverment stealing info.

I know full well how the process works and I can assure you that it will continue with your new and improved version. It's obtuse to think otherwise.

[TailgateNut]

I know full well how the process works and I can assure you that it will continue with your new and improved version. It's obtuse to think otherwise.

So for you it's ok, as long as it doesn't affect your cushy little life. I'm positive if someone were to steal your itentity and **** your life up for a few years, you'ld change your attitude. Continue living under that rock!

[Traveler]

Good Grief! They, as you so eloquently put it, already have access to this info.

Maybe you'll change your mind when someone steals your identity and uses/ abuses it for a few years before it comes back to haunt you in more than one way. A centralized ID sytem could definately monitor strange activities, wheras a state controlled ID program monitors only the activities within it's borders.
So if Traveler has a licence in state A, and someone in state B steals his identity, no one will know unless the IRS finds out that either A or B is not paying income tax and decides to contact one of you, or if he decides to get credit in your name and defrauds on the loan, you once again "deal with it".

Hey there's only one TGN, one face matches, one fingerprint matches, one retinal scan matches.....etc. If it is controlled by one office, it makes it a bit harder for the criminals and illegals to beat the system.


Me thinks you rail against this so much because something like what you mention above happened to you personally. True?

My identity has been stolen, but I'm vigilant enough to monitor my personal information so it wasn't a problem for me.

The question then becomes, what sense does it then make for all my info to be stored/located in one central location? Where's the added value?

Seems more to me like a one-stop for any criminal, company, government agency or whomever to target/track me and obtain all my info without having to work that hard acquiring it different sources or locations.

[TailgateNut]

What sort of "strange activities" are they monitoring?


Say Joe blow has a job in Washington state and also has a job in SC. In one location he's a married chap with one child paying his taxes, whereas in the other location he's a married chap "claiming 8 dependents" and paying next to nothing on his $50k salary.
In your perfect world the "real Joe" gets a letter from the IRS stating that he owes back taxes and fines in excess of 40K.
In "my world" the 1st month dual locations are logged for the same individual, things are verified, saving the "real Joe" from dealing with a "real nightmare".
...and the "fake Joe is rounded up and incarcerated or deported.

[TailgateNut]

Me thinks you rail against this so much because something like what you mention above happened to you personally. True?

My identity has been stolen, but I'm vigilant enough to monitor my personal information so it wasn't a problem for me.

The question then becomes, what sense does it then make for all my info to be stored/located in one central location? Where's the added value?

Seems more to me like a one-stop for any criminal, company, government agency or whomever to target/track me and obtain all my info without having to work that hard acquiring it different sources or locations.


No, it hasn't happened to me personally, and I for one would rather it not happen due to lax oversight.

I do monitor my credit constantly, but reality is what it is, and it doesn't take much to ruin a persons life.