taxes

Gang of Eight's immigration bill neglects enforcement, favors amnesty: Rich Lowry

Congress is boring. It can't even make new false promises.

On border security, it keeps making the same assurances. The Gang of Eight immigration bill, which could well be the signature legislative accomplishment of President Barack Obama's second term, travels in the well-worn ruts of past immigration promises. The Gang of Eight is offering this basic deal: "We will pretend to enforce the law, if you pretend to believe us."

The Gang of Eight bill purports to create an exit-entry visa system that Congress has been mandating since 1996. Back then, only the most cynical of observers would have believed that 17 years later, Congress would seek to pass a new amnesty for roughly 11 million illegal immigrants partly in exchange for the very same entry-exit system. But in the immigration debate, cynicism always pays.

In 2006, Congress passed a law calling for about 700 miles of double-layer fencing on the border. We've built about 36 miles, or a good, solid 5 percent. At this rate, we'll have all the double fencing in another 130 years. The rest of the mileage is various forms of inferior fencing, in keeping with a loophole Congress passed the very next year giving the Department of Homeland Security discretion in how it would go about building the fence.

Executive discretion is where border enforcement goes to die, and as it happens, the Gang of Eight enforcement provisions are entirely at the mercy of the executive. The secretary of homeland security merely submits a plan to do the things the executive branch has been mandated to do, but failed to do in the past. Who decides whether it is working? The secretary of homeland security.

This is so self-evidently ridiculous, even the Gang of Eight apparently realizes it needs to make some gesture toward toughening the bill. For his part, Florida Sen. Marco Rubio is doing the best Hamlet since John Gielgud. He is refusing to say whether he will vote "yes" on his own Gang of Eight bill after spending months drafting, defending and helping shepherd it to the floor. He has supposedly discovered that the enforcement provisions are inadequate, although he has done countless interviews insisting the bill contains the "toughest immigration-enforcement measures in the history of the United States."

Another basic problem in the architecture of the bill is that the amnesty comes before anything else, giving the Obama administration, ethnic interest groups and the business lobby every incentive to resist any enforcement measures after they pass.

Rubio is loath to admit that the amnesty comes first, although in a recent interview on Univision, he indeed admitted it: "First comes the legalization. Then come the measures to secure the border. And then comes the process of permanent residence." In a subsequent interview, he said he was inartful, which in Washington is a synonym for "frank." When he's speaking more artfully, he is careful to blur the difference between the initial amnesty and the process of getting a green card to give the misimpression that enforcement has to happen before anything else does.

Not that he'll use the word "amnesty." A hallmark of Republican supporters of the Gang of Eight bill is stating their earnest opposition to amnesty at the same time they support amnesty. They call the status quo a "de facto" amnesty, but refuse to make the basic concession to logic that codifying the "de facto" amnesty makes it a "de jure" amnesty. They readily call the 1986 immigration reform "amnesty," even though the essential features of the Gang of Eight bill -- legalization with a few symbolic hoops for the newly legal immigrants -- are exactly the same.

The Gang of Eight bill is powered, in large part, by pretense and word games. If this bill passes, and then a decade or so from now we need another amnesty, the road map to passage will be easy: Congress can promise to follow up on the Gang of Eight's enforcement measures -- yet again.

Source: Boehner Says No to Immigration Bill Without House GOP Support

House Speaker John Boehner appears to have put to rest rumors that he may break what is informally called the “Hastert Rule,” an unwritten guideline that a majority of the majority party should be needed to bring a bill to the House floor, in order to pass a version of amnesty like the “Gang of Eight” bill currently moving through the Senate.

A source with direct knowledge of these matters told Breitbart News that Boehner has decided to abide by the Hastert Rule in regards to immigration reform. “No immigration bill will be brought to the floor for a vote without a majority of the Republican conference in support,” the source told Breitbart News on Monday.

Around Washington, conservatives have worried that Boehner may back down from conservative principles on immigration and support the Gang of Eight bill. They fear he may rush the bill to the floor if the Senate passes it and try to move it through the House with a majority of Democratic votes.

Even though those rumors continue to fly, signs now indicate that Boehner will not break the Hastert Rule and will only bring a bill to the floor with the support of the majority of Republicans.

Reports from Ryan Lizza at The New Yorker and David Drucker at the Washington Examiner appear to support the idea that Boehner will not break with Republicans. It did take Rep. Steve King (R-IA) banding together more than 50 of his colleagues to call for a special GOP conference meeting on the topic, at which they expressed their dissatisfaction with the Senate bill and their hope that Boehner will stick to the Hastert Rule.

In addition to King’s efforts, conservative groups have circulated letters around Washington calling on the conference to formally codify the Hastert Rule into the House GOP conference rules so that it must be followed, instead of just being a guideline.

 

 


 

Boxer Amendment: Redirect Border Funds for Immigrant Health Care

Sen. Barbara Boxer is planning an amendment to the Senate's immigration bill which would redirect funds committed to border security to reimburse state and local governments providing health care to newly legalized immigrants. Boxer plans to take $250 million, and likely much more, out of border security and use it to underwrite uninsured immigrants health care costs.

Supporters of the Senate bill have stressed repeatedly that newly legalized immigrants wouldn't be eligible for federal welfare benefits. In almost half the states, however, they would be eligible for state and local government assistance. The legalization in the Senate bill would put a strain on already stretched government budgets.

Boxer's amendment funds this assistance by using fees paid by illegal immigrants applying for legalization. Under the Senate bill currently, that money is earmarked for border security. The amendment is an admission that the rush to legalization will put a strain on taxpayers. It is also an admission that border security isn't a big priority for many of those supporting this bill.

Boxer is also seeking to allow newly legalized immigrants to access federal welfare benefits sooner. Currently, it could take up to 15 years for immigrants to access the full range of federal assistance programs. Boxer would like to reduce that by 5 years.

 

 

 

Special Delivery: A Trojan horse

Michelle Bachmann spells it out for anyone laboring under the illusion that there is no way an amnesty bill will actually pass.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2013/06/13/bachmann_ruling_class_will_pass_a_trojan_horse_immigration_bill_in_house.html
 

Bachmann: "Ruling Class" Will Pass A "Trojan Horse" Immigration Bill In House

"Don't count on the House stopping this bill," retiring Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn) warns about the immigration reform proposal in the Senate. "Because this is what's going to happen: The Senate is going to pass a very bad bill. The House will pass what will sound like a pretty good bill. But I’m just here to tell you, it's a Trojan horse."

"It will be a Trojan horse bill that says 'we're here to secure the borders.' So all the Republicans will vote for this bill -- for securing the border. Those bills will go to what's called a conference committee," Bachmann told World Net Daily.

"The good guts of the Trojan horse bill will be pulled out. The very bad amnesty provisions will be put in the bill. The bill will go to the House floor and it won’t be Republicans that pass it. It will be Nancy Pelosi leading all the House Democrats to vote for it. And just enough Republicans, probably committee chairs and subcommittee chairs will be voting for the bill, and you'll have amnesty and it will all be done in six weeks," she said.

Hear Bachmann explain her idea.

 

 

 


 

Missing the boat

Oregon Republicans seem to have missed a key lesson of the 2012 election, and are embarking on a symbolic campaign that will succeed only in further alienating Latino voters.

When Republicans fared worse than expected at the polls last November here and nationally, some soul-searching rhetoric from within the party suggested the GOP needed to reach out more effectively to Latino voters who rejected their message. A bipartisan immigration reform effort is still working its way through Congress despite vocal opposition from some in the GOP.

A key element of that reform bill would provide a path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants already in this country.

Oregon Republicans, meanwhile, continue to oppose measures designed to allow those immigrants to better contribute to the state's economy. GOP lawmakers opposed two such bills that ultimately passed the Legislature and will become law.

One permits the children of parents who brought them here illegally to pay in-state tuition at public universities as long as they live in Oregon and graduated from high school here. The other will allow undocumented residents to obtain a permit to drive legally in Oregon.

After the driving permit bill passed and Gov. John Kitzhaber signed it, Republican Reps. Sal Esquivel of Medford and Kim Thatcher of Keizer launched a referendum to overturn the law — despite the fact that the state's 14 GOP senators split evenly on the bill on final passage.

If the two, aided by the group Oregonians for Immigration Reform, can gather more than 58,000 signatures from registered voters within 90 days of the Legislature's adjournment, the referendum will appear on the November 2014 ballot. The new law, scheduled to take effect Jan. 1, would be put on hold until after the vote.

Supporters of the new driving permit law argue it will make the state's roads safer by encouraging undocumented residents to purchase insurance and have their driving skills tested. Opponents say residents who came here illegally should not be rewarded with driving privileges.

Despite the bipartisan support for the bill in the Legislature, the Oregon Republican Party has endorsed the referendum campaign, warning of voter fraud and "subversive terrorist acts," in the words of GOP Chairwoman Suzanne Gallagher — although the driving permits may not be used to vote, board a plane or purchase a firearm.

We're not convinced the driving law will do what its backers say it will, but it's unlikely to do any real damage — except to the image of the state's Republicans among Latino voters.

 

ORP Endorses Referendum Against Oregon Driver Privilege Card for illegal aliens

All Oregonians who believe in the rule of law should be outraged by the recent passage of Senate Bill 833, providing a 4-year Oregon Driver Privilege Card for illegal aliens. Oregon Democratic Senators and Representatives voted unanimously in favor. Governor Kitzhaber signed SB833 into law at a May Day Rally on the Capitol steps.

Representatives Kim Thatcher (R-Keizer) and Sal Esquivel (R-Medford), and Oregonians for Immigration Reform Vice-President Richard LaMountain have filed a Referendum.

If Protect Oregon Driver Licenses successfully collects 58,142 valid signatures within 90 days of the close of the 2013 legislative session, voters will decide whether granting Driver Privilege Cards to illegal aliens is a good or bad idea. The following facts are compelling:

Public Safety - The salient tool necessary for subversive terrorist acts is a valid state driver license. No wonder the 911 Commission recommended states secure driver licenses.

Voter Integrity - According to current Oregon law, non-citizens can easily vote in local and state elections. If Secretary of State Kate Brown is successful in passing Universal Voter Registration, illegal aliens will vote.

Taxpayer Cost - OFIR estimates that the annual cost to Oregon taxpayers for government services to illegal aliens, after any income tax revenue from them, is $1 Billion.

The Oregon Republican Party Platform supports enforcement of immigration laws and the security of US borders. Giving Driver Privilege Cards to individuals in our country illegally is in contradiction with this.

Time is short! If you are interested in signing the referendum allowing voters the opportunity to decide if this law is right for Oregon, you may print out a single line signature sheet at www.ProtectOregonDL.org.

If you wish to learn more about and support this important cause and even help gather signatures, please visit  www.ProtectOregonDL.org

If you have questions, please call 503.435.0141.

http://www.oregonrepublicanparty.org/node/3535
 

 

Bruce Broussard and U-Choose Education Forum present: Illegal Immigration

Alert date: 
2013-05-31
Alert body: 

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Monday June 3, 2013

FOR MORE INFORMATION, CONTACT:

Debra Mervyn: debrauchoose@gmail.com

 

Sunday, June 16th, 4:00 PM, Channel 11

Bruce Broussard and U-Choose Education Forum present:

Illegal Immigration

Are the new state laws good for Oregon and its citizens?

Should illegal immigrants be given Oregon Drivers Licenses?

How do illegal immigrants impact jobs in Oregon?

Is in-state tuition for illegal immigrants fiscally sound policy when budget short-falls in our higher education system are cutting deeply?

We can do something to counter this new legislation.

Referendum to Voters- Protect Oregon Driver Licenses- www.protectoregondl.org

Bruce Broussard has been a leading and provocative conservative voice in Oregon for over thirty five years. His TV show, Oregon Voters’ Digest focuses on the social and political issues that are important to all the people living in the Pacific Northwest. Bruce will interview two experts on the impact of illegal workers on the nation and on Oregon.

 

  • Jim Ludwick, founder of Oregonians for Immigration Reform(OFIR) , and
  • Cynthia Kendoll, OFIR current president,

They will discuss instate tuition (House Bill 2787), drivers licenses for illegal immigrants (Senate Bill 833), and a referendum being launched by OFIR to enable Oregonians to vote on these very important issues.

Oregon Voters Digest shows are repeated on Tuesdays at 12:00 Noon on Channel 23, and Fridays at 8:00 on Channel 22. Later they will be posted on Oregon Voters Digest’s U-Tube site.

DHS confirms cheaper to deport every illegal alien than allowing them to stay

On December 3, Department of Homeland Security Assistant Secretary for Legislative Affairs, Nelson Peacock, responding to request from several U.S. Senators, including Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX), wrote: “Our conservative estimate suggests that ICE would require a budget of more than $135 billion to apprehend, detain and remove the nation’s entire illegal immigrant population.”

In July 2010, the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR) released the results of a study which examined the costs of illegal immigration at the federal, state and local levels. The study found that U.S. state and local governments shell out $84.2 billion annually in various services (law enforcement, schools, social services, etc.), with California taxpayers alone, spending $21 billion on illegal aliens every year.

The same study found that $29 billion is spent every year in federal funds on illegal aliens.

So, while it would cost a one-time fee of about $135 billion to deport every single illegal alien in the country, it is actually a bargain considering the fact that it already costs us $113 billion annually to keep them here.

In other words, the mass deportation would pay for itself in a little over a year. Incidentally, in 2007, the DHS estimated the cost of deporting all illegal aliens to be approximately $94 billion.

Gov. Kitzhaber signs tuition bill allowing in-state tuition for immigrant students

Gov. John Kitzhaber signed into law today a bill allowing in-state tuition for immigrant students without documents.

“This bill will help them get their shot at the American dream,” he said to legislators, advocates and students packed into his ceremonial office at the Capitol.

He described the students, whose parents brought them illegally to the United States when they were young, as “exactly the kind of young people we want in our system of public education and universities.”

For House Bill 2787, it was the end of a decade-long journey. Similar bills cleared the Senate in 2003 and 2011, but both died in the House without reaching a vote.

Students would qualify if they graduated from high school or its equivalent in Oregon, attended Oregon schools three years prior to graduation and U.S. schools for five years, and show their intent to obtain legal status or citizenship in the United States.

Senate President Peter Courtney, D-Salem, is the chief Senate sponsor of the law and was the first to introduce such legislation in 2003. He did so at the request of Laura Lanka, then the principal of Woodburn High School.

In her original 2002 email, which Courtney read aloud, she wrote, “What a bill like this would do is allow our college-ready students, regardless of their immigration status, the opportunity to get an education.”

Lanka, who is retired and now lives in Washington state, was present at the ceremony.

State university officials said they expect the number of qualifying students to be limited, given that they still are ineligible for state and federal financial aid.

They estimate only 38 additional students in the coming two-year cycle, and 80 students in the 2015-17 cycle. The net gain in tuition was estimated at just under $350,000 in the next cycle, and $1.5 million in 2015-17, assuming that none pay out-of-state tuition at rates three or four times in-state rates.

Oregon joins 12 other states with similar laws, including California and Washington. Two others have acted by other means.

Democratic majorities in both chambers resulting from the Nov. 6 election made passage likely. Five Republicans joined all 34 Democrats for it in the House, and three Republicans joined all 16 Democrats for it in the Senate.

The minority Republicans in the House sponsored a substitute that would have limited eligibility to those participating in a delayed-deportation program created last year by President Barack Obama. Participants are eligible for work permits. But the House defeated the proposed substitute on a party-line vote.

Kitzhaber took no public stance on a similar bill in 2011. But he said during his budget presentation on Nov. 30 he would sign such a bill, and held a news conference on it Feb. 11 with business leaders.

Oregon’s major business groups joined the Oregon Student Association and immigrant-rights groups in backing the bill. Oregonians for Immigration Reform, which is critical of federal immigration policy, opposed it.

Opponents have already said a legal challenge is likely. Gabriela Morrongiello, a sophomore at Oregon State University who is from California — and who is president of the conservative Young Americans for Freedom chapter — stated there would be a challenge in her testimony to a House committee on Feb. 13.

California’s law was upheld in 2010 by that state’s highest court, and in 2011, the U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear an appeal.

If Oregon’s law is challenged, the case would go directly to the state Supreme Court, which has the authority to appoint someone to sort out disputes on facts before the justices hear oral arguments.

Pages

Subscribe to RSS - taxes