2006 March 28 Tuesday
US Senate Committee Votes For Massive Immigrant Amnesty

When it comes to immigration the US Senate feels contempt for the wishes of the public.

WASHINGTON, March 27 — With Republicans deeply divided, the Senate Judiciary Committee voted on Monday to legalize the nation's 11 million illegal immigrants and ultimately to grant them citizenship, provided that they hold jobs, pass criminal background checks, learn English and pay fines and back taxes.

The panel also voted to create a vast temporary worker program that would allow roughly 400,000 foreigners to come to the United States to work each year and would put them on a path to citizenship as well.

The legislation, which the committee sent to the full Senate on a 12-to-6 vote, represents the most sweeping effort by Congress in decades to grant legal status to illegal immigrants.

Those 12 votes for the amnesty represent 8 Democrats and 4 Republicans.

The Republicans who voted for the amnesty are making a huge mistake and not just for their nation (which is not their main concern). They are making a huge mistake for their party. The Iraq war has made Bush and the Republicans very unpopular and as conditions in Iraq continue to deterioate Iraq is going to become an even bigger problem for Republican electoral chances.

Immigration amnesties only increase the influx of immigrants, both legal and illegal. The Senators are not voting for a fix of the problem. They are voting to make the problem worse. This is how great nations decline. Big problems cease to become things to fix. Problems become things to deny and to worsen.

As polls show declining public support for the war Ronald Reagan's pollster forecasts continued public turning away from the Iraq war.

Polls have found that support for the war and expectations about its outcome have reached their lowest level since the invasion. A Pew Research Center poll this week found that 66 percent of respondents said the United States was losing ground in preventing a civil war in Iraq, a jump of 18 percent since January.

The Pew poll also found that 49 percent now believed that the United States would succeed in Iraq, compared with 60 percent last July. A CBS News poll completed two weeks ago found that a majority (54 percent) believed Iraq would never become a stable democracy.

Richard B. Wirthlin, who was the pollster for President Ronald Reagan, says he sees the beginning of a decisive turn in public opinion against the war. "It is hard for me to imagine any set of circumstances that would lead to an enhancement of the public support that we have seen," he said. "It is more likely to go down, and the question is how far and how fast."

This is a really bad time for the Republicans to take a stand on immigration that the overwhelming majority of their base opposes and which even the middle of the road voters oppose.

Over on Your Lying Eyes Ziel argues that Bush could save the Republican Party if he shifted toward an immigration restrictionist position and Ziel suggests some talking points:

  • The American people are the hardest working people in the world. Our brave young men and women in the armed forces should convince anyone that people who can withstand 9 humiliating weeks in boot camp and 9 excruciatingly hot and dangerous months in Iraq can and will do any job and do it well.
  • While we may be a nation of immigrants, we insist on assimilation into our society and acceptance of an 'American' identity. High levels of immigration do not allow our Hispanic brothers and sisters to assimilate as our ancestors did so well. We need to give our legal residents a fair chance to become full members of our community by stopping the unending flow of new immigrants.
  • The promise of America has always been a middle class life for all who work hard and play by the rules. But millions of undocumented workers make this impossible for many who have to compete with low wage workers for employment. We need to vastly reduce the number of illegal immigrants within our borders to keep the American dream alive.
  • We have seen a drop in the number of students graduating from college each year with science and engineering degrees. We cannot remain a great nation while our most important asset - the human capital of succeeding generations - declines. In order to ensure a rewarding career to those of our young people with the drive and determination to succeed in high-tech careers, we must limit the number of visas we grant to industry for hiring overseas workers.

The Republicans are going to become road kill due to immigration. The future of the Republican Party can be seen in Calfornia and it is grim. But the victory of the Democrats is not going to taste sweet. All the bad things that are happening due to immigration are going to get much worse. They are going to rule over the worsening social pathology.

Update: The Republican US Senators who voted for this amnesty travesty are: Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania, Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, Mike DeWine of Ohio and Sam Brownback of Kansas. Anyone reading this who lives in those states please vote against them the next time they are up for reelection. Also, convince someone to run against them in a primary. They have got to go.

Share |      By Randall Parker at 2006 March 28 08:12 PM  Immigration Politics


Comments
raj said at March 28, 2006 8:59 PM:

The House bill contains a provision for a wall to be constructed. If this is somehow enacted into law the law will almost assuredly be worth it. The L. American leaders understand this and are most offended by the possibility of a wall. Issues of amnesty and such are important but pale in comparison to this issues. I don't think the Republican Senators, in general, are smart enough to grasp this.

John S Bolton said at March 28, 2006 11:57 PM:

The senate judiciary committee has cynically appeased the mobscene of foreign criminals who are marching against our sovereignty. They are not stupid men; therefore they can be assumed to want the further hostilities which can be expected to flow from this appeasement. Power flows from conflicts of this kind; and these men can be assumed to be motivated by, and well-suited to contend for, power.
They would override the strongly-held views of perhaps 80 or more percent of the electorate against amnesty for foreign criminals running loose here. They do this, no matter how unpopular it could make them, because the main chance for enhancement of power is at stake.
Power comes from the growth of aggression between well-demarcated groups with irreconcilable differences. The upbuilding of this opportunity for greater aggression and conflict in society, is what these officials are after.
If it were not this way, they would go with the flow; as with the 80 or whatever percent of the voters it is, who want immigration law enforcement, border defense, and more restriction of immigration in general.

noone said at March 29, 2006 3:45 AM:

Raj,

The wall will be irrelevent as the next wave will enter legally via the "family reunification" daisy chain.

D Flinchum said at March 29, 2006 4:53 AM:

"the next wave will enter legally via the "family reunification" daisy chain."

To the tune of 30-35 million NEW immigrants over the next 10 years when combined with new "guest-workers", not counting the illegals already here AND the ones that will surely follow.

Robert Speirs said at March 29, 2006 7:43 AM:

The Democrats can't win by going tough on immigration. Their base won't let them. Bush is leaving room for a true "tough-on-illegals" stance by Congressional candidates in 2006 and a Presidential candidate in 2008 who can effectively distinguish himself from Bush. The Republican party will benefit immensely from the blundering on immigration by its "moderates". It will also marginalize McCain, another Bush goal. Sixty percent of the voters oppose "guestworker" programs and illegal immigration in general. Blacks are beginning to understand that illegals hurt them more than anyone. Result: the death of the majority hopes of the Democratic party for the foreseeable future.

Derek Copold said at March 29, 2006 2:28 PM:

Jeez, I didn't even think of family reunification until now.

Lord, is this going to be a disaster or what?

Jorge D.C. said at March 29, 2006 3:10 PM:

The Republican party will benefit immensely from the blundering on immigration by its "moderates". It will also marginalize McCain, another Bush goal...Result: the death of the majority hopes of the Democratic party for the foreseeable future.

Dream on.

The disemboweled California GOP is the model for the national party. Longterm minority status for Republicans nationwide is just over the horizon - just as minority status of whites is much closer than you are led to believe.

California, Texas, New York and Florida will probably be Democrat electoral locks starting in 2008 because of the demographic swamping of whites. Those are pesky facts on the ground. Republican candidates are going to soon face a chronic mathematical problem in the electoral college.

This new amnesty WILL PASS in some form or another. We argued on this board last year about the ramifications of strong action on a border fence. I posited that it would produce more chaos on both sides of the border. I said the illegals already in the USA would mobilize. We saw the tip of the iceberg this past weekend in Los Angeles. It is an obvious scheme to blackmail the US government. The message received is loud and clear: the illegals will riot. And congress will cave. In other words foreigners are making a bid for outright control of our borders and future demographics. And they are winning.

Here's the news: The Republican establishment is multiculturalist - besides being lovers of cheap labor. They are intellectually incapable of resisting the flood.

Therefore a clampdown on immigration will only come from a third party and they will never have the votes in congress.

The next 15 years are going to be a real eye-opener for conservative/traditionalist/nationalist whites in America.

The Ivy League has been rigged to produce 80% non-white, non-gentile elites. Combined with continued mass non-white immigration, a deconstruction of the white gentile power structure will naturally follow.

More socialism, more corruption, less transparency, massive white flight and even lower white birth rates are the most likely future of the USA. The new explicitly anti-white culture will thrive.

Dave said at March 29, 2006 4:14 PM:

If you don't like Democrats or GOP what can you do, isn't there anyone else? (sorry don't know much about US politics) I once looked at a list of parties in the US, it was very long even had some Monarchists on there, huh?

Randall Parker said at March 29, 2006 4:15 PM:

What will happen in a House-Senate conference committee to reconcile such hugely different immigration bills? Or will it not even get that far?

My fear: If the Republicans lose control of the House due to Iraq then the Democrats in the House and the majority of the Senate will vote through a massive amnesty.

I wonder what an amnesty could cost in a few years just from greater welfare benefits eligibility.

Randall Parker said at March 29, 2006 4:19 PM:

Derek,

Yes, family reunification would skyrocket.

Plus, fertility rates for the people who get amnesty would skyrocket. That is what happened last time.

One of the bad things I see locally due to Hispanic immigration are white middle class families spending $10,000 per year per kid to enroll their kids in private schools. The tuition of Santa Barbara private schools has gone way up due to increased demand as the Hispanics reached a percentage in local public schools large enough to send the whites running.

Jorge D.C. said at March 29, 2006 5:42 PM:

What will happen in a House-Senate conference committee to reconcile such hugely different immigration bills?

Speaker Hastert "signaled" tonight that the House Republicans would "compromise" i.e. a massive amnesty is coming.

Ask yourself why? Why does only one member of congress Tom Tancredo reflect the strong opinion of the majority of Americans? Yes other members have fallen in behind him of late but up until a year ago he was the lone voice in Washington D.C.

Discussed in the media today is the unprecedented disconnect between the elites and the people on the issue of immigration. The disconnect is unprecedented in American history. But why exactly?

Well what is not discussed is that America's elite has changed drastically in the past 30 years and is becoming more alienated religiously, culturally, ethnically and racially every year. You would expect the disconnect to grow wider.

I submit that the immigration policy we have been experiencing the past 40 years and of which we will get even larger heaping doses of in the years to come, is in accordance with the direct wishes of America's new elite which is composed of a Jewish majority.

The vast disconnect between congress and the people is greatly explained by the fact that nearly every congressman on the left and half the congressmen on the right are deeply indebted to the fundraising efforts of this tiny minority of Americans. And immigration is the most important issue for the Jewish lobby after aid to Israel.

It took extraordinary "funding" and effort to produce the 1965 Hart-Cellar Immigration Act. And make no mistake it has taken extraordinary "funding" and effort to produce longterm inaction on U.S. border enforcement especially after 9/11. And he who pays the piper calls the tune.

Wacky conspiracy talk? Check the fundraising stats. Check the record. Then check out how the Sierra Club has been paid to keep silent on the immigration issue by a single Jewish billionaire.

The new American elite are hostile to the founding stock of the nation and are electing a new people. It is a plan of action.

Derek Copold said at March 29, 2006 9:41 PM:

I posted this on another blog comments section. It bears repeating here:

If we legalize the illegal immigrants here, we are talking about between 12-20 million people, plus those who force their way in and phony up a pre-2005 presence. Under family reunification rules, we are automatically looking at doubling that number. Add to that the nearly half million "guest workers" we'll be bringing in every year, who'll be put "on the road to citizenship" with their families. And add on to this the one million people a year we now bring in. Finally, add on to all of this the continuing illegal immigration that we will face from those wanting to catch the next amnesty. All together, we are looking at adding the equivalent population of the state of California to our population in the next ten years or so. Pretty much all of these people (at least 80% or more) will have educations less than high school. Many will not speak English well. Hell, many don't even speak Spanish.

Now, can our national infrastructure, education system, health care system and law enforcement system really take this added strain? Schools are already falling apart and hospitals closing down. Our environment is stressed, and the wages for working class have plummeted. I'm sure many of you have magic bullet solutions to these problems, but even if they are the answer (and that's far from clear for any solution), can you guarantee that these solutions will be enacted? And if they aren't what will we be facing? More importantly, what will our kids be facing?

Bob Badour said at March 30, 2006 5:38 AM:

Randall,

You listed the republicans who voted for this amnesty. Elsewhere you posted that 80% of Americans oppose the amnesty and that the numbers do not break down along partisan lines.

I suggest you add a list of the democrats who voted for the amnesty with similar instructions to democrat readers.

Quequeg said at March 30, 2006 6:33 AM:

Yea, we need to get rid of incumbents in both parties who support unlimited immigration. Our marching orders should be to vote against any incumbent who votes for big increases in immigration.

If politicians knew that they could not get re-elected if they vote to increase immigration, then all such legislation would come to a halt.

Clearly, the answer is not in party politics, which would involve trying to get one of the 2 parties in power or a 3rd party in power. I think we need to recognize that there are good people in both parties, as well as bad people. The goal is just to weed out the bad people in both parties. It's kind of like "survival of the fittest." Eventually, we will evolve a better Congress.

I think this website is pretty interesting:
www.VOIDnow.org - Vote Out Incumbents for Democracy

D Flinchum said at March 30, 2006 6:38 AM:

"Now, can our national infrastructure, education system, health care system and law enforcement system really take this added strain?" Derek Copold

For starters, Derek, where will they live? Affordable housing has been in critically short supply for decades and the recent housing boom hasn't helped in the areas where these immigrants are most likely to settle. Will we now find ourselves taxed to build "cheap" housing for our newly legalized "cheap labor" neighbors?

Bob Badour said at March 30, 2006 2:15 PM:

Actually, the concept of a 'housing shortage' is the thin end of the wedge for socialism. First the socialists disrupt the market, then they point to the effects of the disruption to justify the state stepping in to force people into ghettos.

Terry said at March 30, 2006 2:38 PM:

12 million illegals. If granted amnesty they qualify to bring in their families from Mexico. At 1 wife and 1 kid (yeah right) thats 36 million. Current estimates for illegals on welfare is 37 billion dollars. 1/3 of prison population is illegals. With 36 million, what will this do to schools, welfare rolls? This is bigger disaster than Katrina. How much of money spent on illegals could have helped LEGAL citizen/victims of Katrina? If they ignore the laws, why should the 250 million LEGAL citizens obey laws? Lets all drive drunk, beat our wives and kids, rob banks, stop paying taxes. Why don't we? Because its illegal! This talk of amnesty is social chaos. I am so disgusted with the politicians.
Disgusted in California

Jorge D.C. said at March 30, 2006 7:17 PM:

Derek says:

More importantly, what will our kids be facing?

Forty years ago did the "greatest generation" ask themselves this question when they allowed the radical leftist cultural revolution to occur in America?

It is disheartening to think about the long term decline we as a nation seem to be in. The black literacy rate was sky high in the 1950s compared to today. Sen Pat Moynihan sounded the alarm about black illegitimacy 40 years ago when it reach the frightening level of 25% - about what the white rate is today. White and black illegitimacy rates now are something like 25% and 70% respectively.

Cultural marxism is ascendant in America today. We are conditioned to accept a continuing steady rate of decay and decline. White and Asian (actually anyone affluent) flight is a national pastime. It is considered perfectly normal that the neighborhood you grew up in a generation ago is today a dilapitated warzone.

We are constantly bombarded with news of our strong economy. Yet we go deeper into debt every minute and can't muster a trade surplus our major partners.

Seeing the Mexican flags flying in LA this past weekend has really shaken me up. All the theorizing about a mass La Raza Aztlan movement is looking like reality in the southwest.

Our congress is held hostage by various interest groups with no respect for the law apparently. It is amazing. I consider the Brit Hume Carl Cameron Fox News story a couple years ago about Israeli corp AmDocs possible backdoor tapping of every phone line in the country to be ominous. That incredible report was immediately spiked and flushed down the memory hole. The deafening silence from the rest of the "investigative reporter" community said it all.

At Harvard Professor Noel Ignatiev has laid the intellectual foundation for white genocide. And the mainstream media doesn't blink.

American institutions accept racial and ethnic struggle as normal human behavior - unless you're white. NAACP and La Raza representatives do primetime interviews without condemnation for the explicit racial underpinnings of the organization. Whites are demonized and fired for simply attending a racialist conference.

At least there are some others who recognize the warning signs. Check out the great article at NRO from Mark Krikorian today here is snip:

"Unlike Europe’s supine acquiescence to the demands of its antagonists, there remains a strong nationalist streak in the American public, and so there are stirrings of push-back, among politicians like Rep. Tom Tancredo, pundits such as Cal Thomas, and even private citizens.

If, however, we surrender to the illegal-alien will to power — by caving in to their demands for passage of the McCain-Kennedy amnesty — we would be following Europe into our own version of dhimmitude, wherein a decadent host civilization capitulates to the chauvinist assertions of outsiders."

Wolf-Dog said at March 30, 2006 11:49 PM:

If I understood the situation in South America correctly, in Mexico, Brazil, and many South American countries, a small white European elite is at least 95 % in control of everything over there. Some "revolutionary" parties are trying to overthrow the whites over there, but in reality, the power structure is 99 % in favor of the very exclusive white elites in South America. The caste system in Mexico makes the "capitalist" United States look like the Soviet Union.

Wherefore, I cannot free myself of the suspicion that the white European Mexican elite would like to send all their unemployed poor citizens to the United States, in order to prevent a leftist revolution that might overthrow them in Mexico. All those Mexican flags that were used in the mass demonstrations over there, might just mean "go for the easier target".

I would like to hear some comments about this theory.

In any case, the separation between the poor and the rich in Mexico would make the certified capitalism of the United States look like communism.

Dave said at March 31, 2006 9:34 AM:

I think the opposite is true Wolf-Dog, if many of the more hard working capitalistic Mexicans move out of Mexico and don't get to vote then Mexico will have less people voting for capitalism?

Could it not also be said that one reason Jewish Americans are so left-liberal is partly because most of the right-wing Jews go to live in Israel?


Jorge, I thought the 'greatest generation' refered to the people who fought WW2, weren't they extremely patriotic people? by comparison to the people who came next at least.

gcochran said at March 31, 2006 11:20 AM:


" The black literacy rate was sky high in the 1950s compared to today" - Untrue. In fact it was much worse than today. It is helpful to remember that every common belief about education is provably wrong.

Very few American Jews ever moved to Israel - something like 50,000 altogether, over half a century. American Jews were left-wing before there ever was a srare of Israel.


Derek Copold said at March 31, 2006 1:22 PM:

And while we're disabusing ourselves of mistaken conceptions, the Mexican PRI, which ruled Mexico, was about as leftist as a government could get without becoming Communist. Mexico had it's leftist revolution, and, in fact, they're about to elect another leftist president in July, which might or might not put a halt on the brief right-leaning counter revolution that's been going on for the past 12 years.

Jorge D.C. said at March 31, 2006 1:38 PM:

" The black literacy rate was sky high in the 1950s compared to today" - Untrue. In fact it was much worse than today.

The black literacy rate should be an easily ascertainable fact. But apparently the US Census stopped breaking down literacy rates by race in the 1940s. Therefore there are no definitive statistical sources apparently.

There is however an author named John Gatto who recently made this claim and it's bouncing around the internet:

“If more contemporary comparisons are sought, we need only compare the current black literacy rate in the United States (56 percent) with the rate in Jamaica (98.5 percent)—a figure considerably higher than the American white literacy rate (83 percent).”

The 56 percent claim would be very low. And coupled with older much higher stats it points to a steep decline. But I don't see any definitive sources for modern black literacy rates.

Jorge D.C. said at March 31, 2006 1:45 PM:

Wolf-Dog says:

Wherefore, I cannot free myself of the suspicion that the white European Mexican elite would like to send all their unemployed poor citizens to the United States, in order to prevent a leftist revolution that might overthrow them in Mexico. All those Mexican flags that were used in the mass demonstrations over there, might just mean "go for the easier target".

Yes this argument has finally reached the mainstream through Lou Dobbs and others. Check out his show or read the transcripts at CNN. It certainly behooves the Mex govt to export poverty especially their most desperate and potentially violent young men.

Jorge D.C. said at March 31, 2006 1:56 PM:

Dave says:

Jorge, I thought the 'greatest generation' refered to the people who fought WW2, weren't they extremely patriotic people?

That is correct. But they were unwilling or unable to prevent the demonization of white America as a whole. The moral authority of the founding stock of the nation was stripped away by radical leftists during the 1960s.

This attack has only increased in intensity. You will notice that there is an intellectual school of thought that says when referencing the Founders we must never forget that they owned slaves.

This is a key part of the plan to elect a new people in America.

gcochran said at March 31, 2006 2:08 PM:

Gatto is full of gavno. We have lots of data - NAEP for example. Circa 1940, blacks scored about seven years behind whites on academic tests. That gap narrowed - by 1975, they ran about four years behind. Hasn't changed much since.

The last time I had someone tell me about the lost golden age of education, I looked up the illiteracy rate - real illiteracy, where you can't write your name - of his county when he was a boy. It was 8%.

People like to misdefine illiteracy in order to achieve propaganda points. They should be stopped. While we're at it, _all_ liars should be stoppped.

D Flinchum said at April 1, 2006 5:47 AM:

"If I understood the situation in South America correctly, in Mexico, Brazil, and many South American countries, a small white European elite is at least 95 % in control of everything over there. "

The third richest person in the world is Mexican: Carlos Slim Helu, right behind Bill Gates and Warren Buffett. It looks as if the elite in the US are trying to make the US more like Mexico - a tiny few rich at the top, a huge poor working class and just enough middle class workers to service the elite and selected based upon their desire and willingness to do so.


Post a comment
Comments:
Name (not anon or anonymous):
Email Address:
URL:
Remember info?

      
 
Web parapundit.com
Go Read More Posts On ParaPundit
Site Traffic Info
The contents of this site are copyright ©