2007 June 14 Thursday
Senate Immigration Amnesty Alive Again

Banana Republicans continue to work with their Democratic Party counterparts to turn America into a Banana Republic. The monster has been brought back from the dead.

Senators Harry Reid, the Democratic majority leader from Nevada, and Mitch McConnell, the Republican minority leader from Kentucky, agreed on a timetable for the bill and for a limited number of amendments to be offered.

The agreement, coming after President Bush’s pledge earlier today to provide $4.4 billion for border security, revives a bill that had stalled in the Senate and was all but given up for dead.

“We met this evening with several of the senators involved in the immigration bill negotiations,” Mr. Reid and Mr. McConnell said in a statement. “Based on that discussion, the immigration bill will return to the Senate floor after completion of the energy bill.”

We need to stop this stupidity. Contact your Senators and tell them no to amnesty and demand real immigration law enforcement.

By contrast, The states are closer to the will of the American people and the states are adopting measures aimed against illegal immigrants.

Through mid-April, legislators in all 50 states had introduced a record 1,169 bills dealing with illegal immigrants – more than twice the number put forward in all of 2006. Eighteen states had enacted 57 of those bills as of April 19, two-thirds of the number of immigration laws adopted by states last year, according to a report by the National Conference of State Legislatures (NCSL) in Washington.

"I would not be surprised to see an increase above this year's historic level [of state legislation] if there's no [federal] reform," says Sheri Steisel, an immigration policy expert at NCSL. "Clearly, in areas of employer documentation, education, and healthcare we'll see even more activity next year."

Cities take action, too

Cities, counties, and towns are grappling with illegal immigration as well.

"More than 90 cities or counties have proposed, passed, or rejected laws prohibiting landlords from leasing to illegal immigrants, penalizing businesses that employ undocumented workers, or training local police to enforce federal immigration laws," said Dennis Zine, a board member of the National League of Cities and the chair of its Immigration Task Force, in testimony before a US House Judiciary subcommittee in May.

We need to politically organize to defeat amnesty-supporting Senators in primaries and general elections. We need to do the same in House elections.

Update: The links above are more connected to each other than you might have guessed. Over at The Corner a reader writes to Rich Lowry and proposes a theory: the impetus behind the immigration amnesty comes from business fears that state and local governments will cut down on the supply of cheap illegal immigrant labor.

Chertoff and Kyl both seem to have answered that question recently, Kyl in his Wall Street Journal interview and Chertoff on Fox News yesterday: because businesses are starting to worry about efforts to enforce immigration laws at the local level. One state in the vanguard of that effort is Kyl's (and McCain's) home state of Arizona, where the legislature has passed numerous laws (usually vetoed) on the issue, and where the public voted for Prop 200 back in 2004.

To me that says something far more ominous than that Congress is being disingenuous or naïve on the matter. Far from simple being empty promises, this amnesty bill is actually a blatant attempt to head off any attempts at enforcement at all.

Think about that. The Democrats then are the party of big business, not the Republicans. The Democrats more clearly represent the interests of capital over that of labor!

Mickey Kaus comments:

It also means the current immigration debate isn't as important as obsessive bloggers have been making it seem. It's more important! And it's not important to the GOPs so much as the Dems--because it means business is acting now to avoid what it perceives as a coming labor shortage in which it will have to substantially raise wages at the bottom, altering the economic contours of the economy in favor of unskilled workers and their families. You wouldn't think that--whatever Republicans do--a Democrat like Harry Reid would really want to move a bill that would prevent such a dramatic, progressive shift, would you? ...

Big money owns both the political parties. We need to get them back.

Update II: Thanks to "tommy" for putting the term "Banana Republicans" into my head. The term works. I suggest other bloggers pick up on it when talking about amnesty and North American Union supporting Republicans.

Share |      By Randall Parker at 2007 June 14 07:36 PM  Immigration Elites Versus Masses

Dennis said at June 14, 2007 8:27 PM:

Passage of this bill, combined with legal challenges to local and state level laws (arguing that they usurp federal authority over immigration) will be the death knell of any opposition to open borders.

tommy said at June 14, 2007 9:08 PM:

Hey, not problem. The term works well, what with John "Bananas" McCain leading the charge to transform America into another Banana Republic.

John S Bolton said at June 14, 2007 11:31 PM:

Again we get the sly moves to evade an alert public,
which show a lack of ability to defend the provisions
that would unleash an unprecedented wave of new aggression through the welfare establishment.
This is all a lot like the wrangle over crime some years ago.
The elites said nothing can be done except throw money amd rehabilitation at the problem,
the public refused rehabilitation as a solution rather than a worsening of the problem,
saying enforcement only.
Political and academic elites had only smears in the place where sensible arguments should have been:
racism, nazism, psychological conditions, police state imminence, gulags for minorities, etc.
The people never budged, but just kept insisting enforcement only,
until the elites gave in and put millions into prison and so on.
The power-seekers will always try for as much freedom-for-aggression as can be gotten away with
in the here and now. They will always lie and smear.
The situation with mass immigration of undesirables is essentially the same as with the giant crime wave
which rose to an amazing peak a little after the arrival of the amnestied illegals in the early 90's.

John S Bolton said at June 14, 2007 11:54 PM:

The left says this is all about money, as if we could get rich by banana republic-anizing America.
It is all about power-seeking and prestige competition, with nihilistic malice.
In Europe, it was once the fashion of rulers to surround themselves in their high-built
luxury accomodations, with a large number of
Court Dwarves.
Like the stunted rulers of that era in Europe, today's rich and powerful
yearn to surround themselves with a backdrop of little people, through the mass immigration
of the littlest people they can get away with bringing in on a large scale.
This is how the rumpelstiltskins of today can make themselves look tall.
Mcmansions must have their
entourage of Court Dwarves, in order that the disorganizers of consumption,
who have succeeded to the role of the previous times' organizers of production,
may look tall or superior in some way.

italo said at June 15, 2007 5:06 AM:



Hal K said at June 15, 2007 9:32 AM:

I'm going to the March for America tomorrow in DC. They meet near the Capitol building at 12:00 and then march to the Washington Monument, where there will be a rally from 1:00 to 5:00.

Mark said at June 15, 2007 4:31 PM:

The letter to Lowry was mine, and I'd add that I think it's a partial reason. The other part is that this effort is an attempt to "lock in the gains" from growth in the illegal population by minting new citizens who are also voters. We're already hearing that Congress can't piss off the "growing Latino vote" - all of 7% of the voting population. What happens when they're 15%? or 20%? Once the illegals are turned into voters the influence of citizens wanting to reduce legal and illegal immigration will rapidly approach zero.

That's why the Senate is willing to anger so many voters - because they know that once it's done there is no going back.

One prediction I would make is that the 8 year path from Z visa to citizen will get much, much shorter by the time the bill reaches conference, so they can enter the voting population even faster.

What, you think Bush wouldn't sign it?

RJ Vaupel said at June 15, 2007 11:16 PM:

I can't believe how many Americans are blind and can't see that what President Bush is doing with the S 1348 is fixing the immigration problems that this country has been suffering for years. The bill is not an amnesty bill as many of you are calling it over and over. Amnesty is forgiveness for past offenses. The bill that Bush is supporting is not forgiving the wrongdoers; the bill imposes several fines, starting with $1500 per undocumented immigrant and each member of his family to obtain the visa Z. All the proceeds of this visa will go to secure the border. We are talking about billions here. Do the math. Then after 5 years they can opt to apply for the permanent residence, but they will have to pay another fine of $5,000 each. After that, they would be scheduled to return to their country of origin to receive the green card. Once they receive the green card, they would have to wait another 5 years to apply for citizenship. This bill also makes the undocumented immigrants to pay not only present and future taxes, but also past taxes. They also will have to learn English and they have to prove that they have a stable job in the US. All these immigrants will come out of the shadows and those who don't qualify meaning that don't have a stable job or for other reason would have to go back. The visa z holders will receive a biometric card as the only way of identification and there will be a reliable system to verify eligibility to work. After these immigrants receive the biometric card, employers who keep hiring anyone who is not authorized to work will be sanctioned with fines that can go up to $50,000. This bill is correcting the mistakes of the 1986 Reagan's amnesty (That one was an amnesty). Some naives argue that they can solve the immigration problem by deporting the millions of undocumented immigrants like Eisenhower did with his "operation wetbacks" I'm not kidding that was the official name of the soviet model mass deportation that Eisenhower did not only with undocumented immigrants, but also with American citizens that had Mexican looks and last names. He actually deported 80,000 people and about 500,000 left the country voluntarily because of fear. The problem is that even if anyone is so crazy to try a mass deportation, it will be impossible to accomplish due to the number now is more than 20 million people. 20 million people who are contributing to the economy of this country. Even if some of them are using welfare. Hispanics themselves are projected to have $992 billion in purchasing power by 2009 at an 8.2 percent growth rate. Even without a fair tax, that is a lot of money in sales taxes. Also, immigrants are the only way to solve the mess of social security. I bet many of you are baby boomers and the rate of working people per retiree is going down dramatically and you need immigrants to alleviate that problem. Also the construction industry, the hospitality sector named hotels and restaurants, and many other sectors need the labor that immigrants are providing to this country. Is not about cheap labor, they are being paid very well, not only because they have the best work ethics, but also because other Americans don't want to do the jobs they are taking. Guess what.. they are pushing us up in the ladder of success as other immigrants have done it in the past.

John S Bolton said at June 16, 2007 12:02 AM:

Contributing to the gross totals of the economy, but not to the per capita ones, it might be noted, to be honest.
Illegals are the low end sector of the foreign-born here, legalize them by the millions and the aggression
on the net taxpayer must rise massively.
Loyalty is owed to the citizenry, including the net taxpayers thereof, but not to foreign criminals.
More than a million foreigners are deported each year, so mass deportation is not just an old practice,
but a current one.
What is needed is only to increase the level closer to 2 million per year, and ensure that these are permanent or long-lasting deportations;
it is not suggested that ten million or more be deported permanently in less than one year.
Per capita income would rise if those at half the average level were removed,
and the percentage of residents here on net public subsidy would decline,
in unprecedented degree.
If people are loyal to America, to its principles, customs and particulars, they will also be loyal to
the class of net taxpayers of our citizenry, who sustain all this.
The others have foreign loyalties, and must not be trusted.

tommy said at June 16, 2007 4:12 AM:

RJ Vaupel,

How much is Juan "Bananas" McAmnesty paying you to write this laughable drivel? I've noticed people popping out of the woodwork in this last day or so leaving comments on blogs discussing the immigration issue that sound suspiciously similar to your own. You couldn't do much worse than to try and sell your tiresome amnesty rhetoric on this particular blog. However, I compliment you on hitting all the usual talking points.

Correctly the mistakes of the 1986 amnesty? Too funny!

In fact, we had a guy who sounds kind of like you pop up on am Ace of Spaces thread discussing Tancredo last night:

Tom Tancredo is an idiot and so are those who believe this bill is amnesty. We have to promote a solution to this problem, if you do not like this bill, come up with a realistic solution, deporting and rounding-up people is no one of them. I like Rudy's ideas on this issue, but I am still voting for McCain!! -- TOM SMITH


My good friend Hollowpoint, I love the Mariachi idea, however you are yet to offer a realistic solution to this problem. You see, this reminds me of the Democrats who blast the war, but never offer alternatives. By the way... VIVA MCCAIN!!! ...is it OK to be a young Hispanic republican? -- TOM SMITH

Bob Badour said at June 16, 2007 7:54 AM:
Guess what.. they are pushing us up in the ladder of success as other immigrants have done it in the past.

Bullshit. Do you have even a single statistic to support your absurd nonsense?

Randall Parker said at June 16, 2007 9:27 AM:

You can also see other comments by RJ Vaupel in an older post of mine. I'm not sure if that's his real name. He could be a Hispanic pretending to be of Indian extraction. I know others who post under false ethnicities in order to avoid accusations of ethnic interest in their arguments.

As for RJ Vaupel's supposed ladder of success: The Hispanics of New Mexico have been here for hundreds of years and are an economic failure. So RJ Vaupel's argument is just wishful thinking which is at odds with the empirical evidence. Also, the other post which Vaupel is posting in above shows the academic achievement of 1st, 2nd, 3rd, and 4th generation Hispanics. They do not improve after the 2nd generation and the 2nd generation performance is pitiful.

La Griffe Du Lion's Smart Fraction Theory (and see Smart Fraction Theory II predicts that US per capita income will drop even for smarter people as the dummies become a larger fraction of the population. That is why we need to deport all the illegal aliens and end all low IQ immigration.

A good place to get started into a survey of what we know about IQ and the wealth of nations is Jason Malloy's review A World of Difference: Richard Lynn Maps World Intelligence of Lynn's ace Differences in Intelligence: An Evolutionary Analysis.

RJ Vaupel said at June 16, 2007 10:15 AM:

The worst blind is the one who doesn't want to see. Hate and fear are blocking your eyes and ears and controling your mouths when you speak and your fingers when you type your responses. There is not point to keep arguing with people who would never accept the true. If there are coincidences with other comments in other blogs it is because we are speaking with the true as President George W Bush is. Hello, this bill is strongly supported by the President of the United States, an excellent conservative leader. He may know something don't you think?

birch barlow said at June 16, 2007 11:51 AM:

Bush is an "excellent conservative leader?" What laughable nonsense. Bush is a huge big spender. He has made statements on race that are more appropriate for La Raza "The Race" and the left-wing NAACP than any kind of conservative, or even moderate. Fawning over Latin American peasants with 5th grade educations is anything but conservative. Bush seems to have a very "noble savage" type viewpoint with regards to poor people, especially if they are Latino. Bush is ignorant, stubborn, utterly lacking in intellectual curiosity, and is thoroughly soaked in every form of political correctness.

Bob Badour said at June 16, 2007 12:05 PM:

RJ Vaupel,

There is not point to keep arguing with people who would never accept the true.

Are you familiar with the concept of projection? I suggest you examine Randall's post a little more closely:

The Hispanics of New Mexico have been here for hundreds of years and are an economic failure.

His post actually has links. And the links actually point to real valid statistics. And those real valid statistics expose your nonsense for a complete fraud.

I agree with you, though, RJ: Arguing with anyone like you truly is pointless.

Randall Parker said at June 16, 2007 12:27 PM:

RJ Vaupel,

The most talented people in America do not go into government. They can make more in Silicon Valley or in investment banking or other industries. Why go to Washington DC? Bush could never rise to the level of a Fortune 500 CEO or lead a venture capital start-up to success. He's second rate.

To argue that Bush might know something we don't know is absurd. Time and again he's proven that what he believes is wrong. He did this with the Iraq invasion. He did this with the Palestinian elections which have brought Muslim fundamentalists to power. He nominated second rate minds like Harriet Miers to sit on the Supreme Court.

I point you to facts. You just make assertions based on your faith in what you want to be true. Try empirical evidence for a change. But you'll have to give up your wishes and be willing to look at the ugly truth.

Your Image Here said at June 18, 2007 3:17 AM:

''RJ Vaupel'' is comic in the unintentional way.
His comments read like a ''Nigerian Scam EMail'':
Money quote; ''I point you to facts. You just make assertions based on your faith in what you want to be true. Try empirical evidence for a change. But you'll have to give up your wishes and be willing to look at the ugly truth''.
I could'nt make that up if I tried!!!
But Please continue with comedy. Comedy are funny!!!
I know why he think we are foolish, the President are very foolish. MR. Vaupel think we are fooled by argument.
I'm not sending any money to Nigeria and I'm not fooled by YOUR scam either!!!

''RJ Vaupel'', I'm not laughing with you, I'm laughing at you...

RJ Vaupel said at June 18, 2007 6:23 PM:

I promised myself not to get into these blogs anymore, but it is too tempting not to do so. Hey "Your Image", you are laughing at Randall, not at me. He was the one who posted that comment. One more question. How many people are in the president? I guess you said "the president are very foolish"? I bet all the bloggers are laughing at you smart guy. Guess what?, there is a real smart guy I met lately. His name is Randall E Parker, sorry he is Dr Randall E Parker, nothing to do with a computer C++ programer who thinks he is the smarter guy in the world because he can write non sense on his blogs and some object oriented programs too. Dr Parker is one of the signatories along with many other intellectuals of this compelling letter: http://www.independent.org/newsroom/article.asp?id=1727 look the fool also knows how to paste links (neither have time nor will for a hyperlink)

RJ Vaupel said at June 18, 2007 9:43 PM:

OK To be compassionate to guys like "your image" who may not know how to copy and paste. here is the Hyperlink:

Open Letter on immigration

If you guys want more facts, please go to the bottom of the website and look for the references.

Now I know you will say that you are smarter than all of these economists and other social scientist from the most prestigious universities. If you want to believe that is your problem, not mine

John S Bolton said at June 21, 2007 11:49 PM:

None of which allow for the cost of immigrants' children's public education to be counted.
Just invest in people? Well, no, we don't want to, especially not with borrowed money, which strangely enough,
doesn't get counted towards the estimations of the net public subsidy of immigrants.

anon77 said at May 27, 2011 5:13 AM:

leticia olalia morales of 15501 pasadena ave #8 tustin ca 92780 submitted fake documents and paid 5000 dollars to obtain a US tourist visa. she also submitted fake employment records to obtain a work visa. she is now applying for citizenship.

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

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