Thread: Amnesty Senator Craig: Enforce our laws, but mass deportatio

Who, Senator Craig, is pushing for mass deportations? You are simply being your old disingenuous self--if we had "enforced our laws", few deportations would be necessary. If we enforced existing law now, there would be self-deportation. This argument is a red herring used by the pro-open borders lobby and they must be called on it!!!



Sen. Larry Craig: Enforce our laws, but mass deportations are too disruptive
- Idaho Statesman

Edition Date: 06/03/07


‘One thing is certain in this hungry world: no regulation or law should be allowed if it results in crops rotting in the fields for lack of harvesters." None other than Ronald Reagan uttered these words, three years before he was elected president of the United States.
For the last several years I have tried to bring this kind of common sense to the shaping of immigration policy. Still there is no shortage of opinions about the best way to address this issue of national importance, and certainly no shortage of criticism.

We can all agree that people must not be allowed to enter the United States illegally, and those who have done so must be held accountable. I have backed that belief with actions.

I voted for border fencing and helped pass the Byrd-Craig Amendment providing immediate funds to hire 500 new Border Patrol agents and establish 1,950 detention beds for illegal immigrants being held for criminal activity. I worked to bring a U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement fugitive operations unit to the Treasure Valley to round up criminal aliens fleeing the law.

Our laws must be enforced vigorously. The 1986 immigration law brought us to where we are today because it had no teeth.

The White House/Senate proposal now under debate does have teeth. Those here illegally would not get "amnesty," — there is no free pass for transgressions. They will pay fines, must learn English and meet many stiff requirements to qualify for temporary legal status. To apply for a green card, they must wait some eight years until the current backlog is cleared — no jumping ahead of those who followed the rules. And none of these reforms will commence until certain border and internal security standards are met.

Mass deportation of all illegal immigrants is not a realistic or feasible solution. Proponents of this idea overlook the economic disruption, massive costs and potential violations of civil liberties (of citizen and immigrant alike) in law enforcement searching door-to-door for illegal immigrants, and shipping them around the globe.

Some illegal immigrants may come from Mexico, or Central America, but they also come from Canada, Russia, Saudi Arabia, and scores of other countries. In the absence of a maple leaf, it can be tough to pick out a Canadian. You simply can't identify illegal immigrants by the way they look, the language they speak, or their line of work.

It is no overstatement to say that our nation's economy — current and future — is at stake in this debate. Most analysts believe that a nation must maintain a birthrate of 2 or 2.1 children per childbearing woman to keep its population from shrinking. A shrinking population is an economic disaster, because not enough people will be born to fill jobs or pay taxes to support government programs — unless a country allows controlled immigration. This happened to Japan, Russia and much of western Europe. The United States' birthrate is 2.1 — right at that tipping point.

The bill the Senate is debating attempts to keep the crops from rotting and our economy growing, all while maintaining the unique character of America. It would shift our immigration laws to focus on skills instead of family ties in figuring out who should get in. Its merit-based system rewards education, hard work, learning English — behaviors that promote assimilation into American culture.

Another thing we can all agree on in this debate — the status quo does not work. I am working to solve this problem, because I believe that's what the people of Idaho elected me to do — to solve problems instead of ignore them.

Larry Craig, Republican, is a United States senator from Idaho.

http://www.idahostatesman.com/readersop ... 86846.html

Does the senate really believe that our crops will rot in the fields if we get rid of illegals? Have they never heard of automation? There is very little that cannot be picked by machines today. The large farmers might have to give up some of the profits to do and smaller farmers might have to get some aid but this is good for the country. We would develop skilled jobs for mechanics and electronics people who would be needed to keep the machine running. but we would not need to pay hospital costs for the unskilled labor coming in illegally. Also cannot congress see that once the illegals are declared legal they will not be don't these jobs but moving to one to higher paid jobs. How stupid can Congress be or think that American people are.

Politics
Idaho Sen. Larry Craig Denies Allegations of Same-Sex Affairs


By Jill Kuraitis, 10-17-06

Mike Rogers, who calls himself "the nation’s leading gay activist blogger" has just finished a nationally-broadcast interview on the Ed Schultz Radio Show in which he alleges that Idaho Republican Senator Larry Craig has engaged in same-sex sexual activity.

Senator Craig’s office flatly rejected the claims. "The Senator says this story is absolutely ridiculous – almost laughable," said press secretary Sid Smith. “It has no basis in fact.â€

It would shift our immigration laws to focus on skills instead of family ties in figuring out who should get in. Its merit-based system rewards education, hard work, learning English — behaviors that promote assimilation into American culture.

This bullsh*t won't work. Once LaRaza and their ilk start raising hell all the mexicans will be allowed in regardless of qualifications. We'll be looking at 100 million of them.

Originally Posted by pjr40

It would shift our immigration laws to focus on skills instead of family ties in figuring out who should get in. Its merit-based system rewards education, hard work, learning English — behaviors that promote assimilation into American culture.

This bullsh*t won't work. Once LaRaza and their ilk start raising hell all the mexicans will be allowed in regardless of qualifications. We'll be looking at 100 million of them.

Thanks, I threw that in to this:

[quote]Senator Craig;

In the Idaho Statesman on 6/03/07 you wrote in favor of the Senate amnesty bill (yes, it is amnesty – a small fine while granting eligibility for welfare and Social Security and EITC does not change that.)

You mention they “must learn English.â€

Our laws must be enforced vigorously. The 1986 immigration law brought us to where we are today because it had no teeth.

Senator.......where is your verification that our LAWS HAVE NO TEETH?

Where is YOUR PROOF?

When have we ENFORCED THE LAWS?

Where are the FACTS?

It's unprofessional to make a statement without information to back up one claims.

Oh, Larry, Larry, Larry! You talk out of both sides of your mouth. Yes, you voted for the fence bill, but you intend to make it null and void when you
vote yes on this shamnesty bill. You hyprocrite! And if you're worried about the birth rate in this country, don't be. The ones who are already little citizens here will be sure to fill in the gap.

Larry, you need to take a pill!

Hmmm, apparently, good ole Larry got caught up in a DRUGS & SEX W/PAGES scandal in 1982
{he denied it BEFORE his name was ever released

I wonder, if this is true concerning these "escapades" --- are the powers that be are holding it over his head to keep him on the AMNESTY bandwagon?

A shrinking population is an economic disaster, because not enough people will be born to fill jobs or pay taxes to support government programs.

He let the cat out of the bag with that statement. This is all about keeping government programs funded?

The easy fix for that is to cut the government programs. Besides, it has been proven that the people he wants to let stay, would be a drain on government programs, with each illegal alien, costing more than they contribute. Imagine if there were 12-20 million fewer, low-income people living in our conntry. Millions fewer people on our highways (lower gas prices). No overcrowding of our schools, less strain on our hospitals, fewer Americans killed on our highways and in our homes, 30% fewer prisoners. The list goes on and on.