The Senate was actively debating and amending the amnesty bill today. Michelle Malkin is a prominent political analyst that has been doing some running commentary as things happen. Go check out her blog at http://michellemalkin.com/index.htm. It's very interesting to see the actual statements being made about huge issues included in this bill. Take special note of how many (and what types of) criminals would be allowed to get a Z-visa if the bill goes through without being amended. Malkin refers to this bill as the "shamnesty" bill. I like that, so I'm going to borrow the term. :)
Some items of note in the last couple days include...
- Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (Dem, NV) referred to current illegal aliens as "undocumented Americans" WHAT?!
- An amendment from Sen. Cornyn (Rep, TX), which would ban felons ("gang members, terrorists, and other criminals") from obtaining a Z-visa, failed. Bond (Rep) voted in favor of this amendment, but McCaskill (Dem) voted against it.
- A watered-down amendment from Sen. Kennedy (Dem, MA), which would allow significant loopholes for many types of criminals to obtain a Z-visa, passed. Bond voted against this amendment, but McCaskill voted in favor of it.
I also wanted to underscore a couple of very important points again. Most reasonable people, I think, would be in favor of allowing a potential path to citizenship for illegal aliens if they paid a fine (and back taxes) and returned to their country of origin to apply for a Z-visa. This is what you keep hearing about in the media, but this is not the reality of the current shamnesty bill. These conditions are only in effect if the illegal alien wants citizenship. According to this shamnesty bill, citizenship is NOT a requirement, just an OPTION. The truth is that this shamnesty bill will grant legal status to illegal aliens already here. Once they get that, why get citizenship? There's no incentive, and in fact, the fines and return trip home are a huge disincentive!
So, let me sum up what this 700-page shamnesty bill will NOT do:
- require illegals to pay fines
- require payments of back taxes
- require a return trip to the country of origin
- require any kind of assimilation or education about American history, or English proficiency
- require citizenship
Here's what this bill WILL do:
- grant amnesty to at least 40-50 million people
- give illegal aliens free legal representation
- give illegal aliens tuition assistance
- convert immigration enforcement agencies into Z-visa distribution networks
- increase the illegal-alien-drag on American taxpayers from $10 billion each year to almost $30 billion
Some Numbers You Should Know:
3-to-1:
The public outcry coming from the clear majority of the American public is resounding, as a USA Today poll yesterday shows - Americans oppose this shamnesty bill 3 to 1!
$2.6 Trillion:
This is how much YOU, the American taxpayer, will pay (at least!) if this bill goes through.
26/50/49:
Only 26% of people polled in a Rasmussen poll today are in favor of the shamnesty bill, and 50% are fully opposed. 49% say they'd rather change nothing than see this shamnesty bill go through.
51:
The idiots in the Senate are threatening the security and economy of the United States, as well as ignoring the obvious overwhelming opposition coming from their own constituents. If nothing else illustrates this staggering departure from duty and common sense, look at the amendment from Cornyn - its purpose was "[T]o establish a permanent bar for gang members, terrorists, and other criminals". It would have barred the following people from obtaining Z-visas and legal status: (1) absconders (i.e., aliens already ordered deported); (2) aliens deemed inadmissible or deportable as security risks (e.g., terrorists); (3) aliens who fail to register as sex offenders; (4) aliens convicted of certain firearms offenses; (5) aliens convicted of domestic violence, stalking, crimes against children, or violation of protection orders; (6) alien gang members; and (7) aliens convicted of at least three DUIs. 51 Senators voted against that, including McCaskill! Explain to me how a "nay" vote can be justified on that amendment! I think I'm going to have to call McCaskill and ask her...
The only thing we can do is turn up the heat even more - call them, e-mail them, write them, fax them, and do it all over again!
There's my two cents.
No comments:
Post a Comment