Pretty much everyone agrees that we need to do something about illegal immigration. So, is the current bill the right answer?
Not even close!
The Senate is in the process of debating and amending the current immigration reform bill, so some of this info may become outdated depending on changes that occur daily. Since I have no control over that, I'm going to address the bill in its original form. I'd like to point out that this bill will likely go to a full vote in just a few days, so if you want your voice to be heard, call your Senators TODAY!
If you've read my previous blogs, you know where I'm coming from on the issue of illegal immigration. Now let's look at the specific bill in question. There are so many things wrong with this bill that it's actually hard to find a place to start!
What are they hiding? The original bill was seven hundred pages long. Does anyone actually know everything that's in there?? For example, Senator McCain has been going around touting the requirement of paying back-taxes in order to become legal. The problem is that that provision wasn't actually in there. It is now, but what does that say about this bloated bill and anyone's ability to understand it? And, if it's this long and complicated, why is the Senate trying to rush the bill through the process?
Few Americans actually like this bill. Though it's rare, the anger about this issue is on both sides of the political aisle. The only people who really want it to happen are the politicians and elites. And it's showing, especially in the conservative-leaning Republican party, where their small donations are down 40% because of this one issue.
Who gets in? Current law gives preference to legal immigrants who are highly skilled, educated, and proficient in English. The new bill would abolish that idea and simply rely on family ties.
Not just 12-20 million! If this bill goes through, you'll see a massive influx of now-legal immigrants due to the provision of allowing family members (parents, spouses, and children) in with the legalized immigrant. So, instead of allowing 12-20 million new people, we'll actually be inviting more like 40-50 million, maybe more. Keep in mind that with the total population of the US around 300 million, this would increase our population by at least 17% with one signature of the President. Also keep in mind that the vast majority of these new immigrants would be low-skilled, little-educated people. In my previous blog I showed how much of a drag illegal aliens have been on our economy so far. But, if they all suddenly become legal, it gets far, far worse. Households headed by illegal aliens represent a drain of $10 billion per year by consuming more government services (i.e. at taxpayer expense) than they pay in taxes at the Federal level alone. If they all suddenly became legal, this figure would triple! And where does it stop? In the words of Mark Steyn in the Chicago Sun-Times: "By the way, when I said "came to America," if you're visiting Toronto for a weekend break from Yemen or Belarus, don't be deterred by the fact that Canada is not technically in America. Why not just head down to Buffalo and apply for the old Z-1, too? After all, it's not such a stretch to regard every single person on the planet as a Z-1-in-waiting. This being America, pretty soon -- a court decision here, a court decision there -- the presumption of every school district and hospital and welfare administrator will be that they're obliged to treat everyone who walks in through the door as if they were a Z-1." What's that going to do to your health care costs? And what about the massive cultural shift that will inevitably take place with immigrants who have zero desire to assimilate and actually become an American?
How long have they really been here? This bill stipulates that if anyone can provide two documents showing they were in the country before January 1st of 2007, they're qualified for a Z-visa, which essentially says they can legally stay as long as they want (this is not citizenship, just legal permission to stay here). But, how hard is it going to be to come up with a couple sheets of paper with an old date? Anyone with a scanner and a printer could do it. If we don't even know who's here, or how many are here, how can we possibly determine who was here before a certain date? We can't. Anyone who can sneak in gets in. After the 1986 amnesty, Immigration and Naturalization Services found 398,000 cases of fraud. This time around we're granting amnesty to four times the number of people, and leaving the door open for applications for 12 full months! This bill is begging for fraud. You know, I wonder if terrorists would like to become American citizens so they could utilize our justice system for their legal defense...
Temporary?! The idea of a temporary worker program as a part of this bill is just silly. First of all, we've already got a functioning temporary worker program. Why do we need another one? And, it's because of this existing program that we know for a fact that 'temporary' workers almost always end up staying permanently. Hundreds of thousands of people from all over the world have benefitted from this program, staying well beyond their 'temporary' visa period. Basically, the government has had to make up reasons NOT to send people home until everyone gets a green card. Whether right or wrong, that's the way it is. There's even a group of Liberians who received 'temporary' status in 1991, and it keeps getting renewed every time it expires. In the context of immigration, 'temporary' actually means permanent.
They'll have to pay fines to stay. Not to my understanding - the fine and back taxes is only if they want to pursue a path to citizenship, but there's no requirement for that. They will simply receive legal status. So what's the incentive to become a citizen? Senator Jim DeMint (R-S.C.) also criticized the new Z visa that "rewards people who broke the law with permanent legal status, and puts them ahead of millions of law-abiding immigrants waiting to come to America. I don't care how you try to spin it, this is amnesty." Why buy the cow when you can get the milk for free? Besides, even though the bill isn't yet finished, the media and advocate groups are already complaining about how the $5,000 fine is going to be too tough for illegals to pay.
It's not amnesty. "The Bush-Senate Z-Amnesty plan is 100 percent amnesty," said Grassfire.org President Steve Elliott. "It immediately offers legal status to every illegal alien in this country, which by definition is amnesty. It creates a clear path to citizenship and illegals do not even have to 'touch back' to their home countries to stay in the U.S. indefinitely." That was from CNSNews.com on May 18th. Plain and simple: this bill is amnesty.
Rewarding those who break the law. David Limbaugh makes what I think is a very compelling argument on his blog, saying that 'amnesty' is actually understating the case, and this bill would essentially reward anyone who is willing to risk breaking the law to come here illegally. He likens the situation to how a thief is forced to give up his loot in an attempt to restore the victim as much as possible, but illegal aliens will instead be allowed to keep their 'loot'. What exactly is this loot? He goes on: "As reported in the Washington Times, the Heritage Foundation's Robert Rector calculates that during their lifetimes, they will likely receive '$2.5 trillion more in government services than they will pay in taxes.' Among those benefits are Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, SSI, public housing, subsidized college education and Social Security Disability Insurance.'" Who's paying for that $2.5 trillion dollars? You and me.
What's really going on here? As I mentioned in my last blog, this is about what the politicians want, not what Americans want. In the words of Thomas Sowell at National Review Online, "This is perfectly consistent for a bill that seeks above all to solve politicians’ problems, not the country’s." If you're like me, you've got to be throwing up your hands in frustration and asking why these politicians are trying to rush through such an atrocious bill. Rush Limbaugh proposes an interesting theory to answer that question: Washington knows it's running short on people - the fact is that the birth rate doesn't match the death rate here anymore. Politicians are looking at the baby boomers retiring and are desperate to get anything in place that will bring in more tax revenue, even if it's temporary. The problem with using amnesty to bring in more people is that the vast majority of illegals are not skilled or educated, and will be getting low-paying labor jobs. There's nothing wrong with that, but it doesn't generate much tax revenue (it's actually negative when you factor in the social services that will be drained out). US Commerce Secretary Carlos Gutierrez said in the USA Today that "the population aged 25-54 growing at 0.2% a year while the workforce is growing at 1.2% a year." And: "The reality is, we don't have enough people," said Gutierrez, adding that many of the United States' economic competitors, such as France, Germany, Japan and China, will be facing a similar demographic shift. "The big challenge of the 21st century is: who gets the people? Who gets the immigrants?" he said. "We don't appreciate today that these people are coming in for free."
Whoa...! Are you kidding me?! Talk about solving the wrong problem...instead of addressing illegal immigration, they're worried about how much tax revenue they get??
I was planning to post a great summary of the bill's worst attributes I came across with this blog, but this has already gotten longer than I originally anticipated. I'll try to follow up with that tomorrow.
There's my two cents.
No comments:
Post a Comment