Thread: South Dakota Senators Johnson, Thune cautious on immigration reform

This story is a few days old; hope it's not a duplicate. Thune opposed the 2007 amnesty; please call him and Johnson and ask them to oppose Schumer's and Rubio's amnesty scheme:

***

argusleader.com

Johnson, Thune cautious on immigration reform

Senators want more information
Jan 30, 2013

WASHINGTON — The United States must overhaul its broken immigration policies, Sens. John Thune and Tim Johnson said Wednesday, but the lawmakers are unwilling to throw their support behind a plan proposed in Washington this week until more details are released.

A bipartisan group of senators Monday unveiled a broad outline for comprehensive reform of U.S. immigration policy. President Obama also laid out his basic points for an immigration overhaul a day later.

Despite some differences, both plans allow a path to citizenship for the estimated 11 million immigrants living illegally in the United States.

Thune, a Republican, and Johnson, a Democrat, told reporters on separate conference calls that the existing immigration policies in place are broken and must be fixed. But while the South Dakotans said the Senate framework is a good first step, they were reluctant to support the plan.

“The devil is in the details and we’re waiting for legislation to be drafted,” Johnson said. “I’m hopeful that some kind of comprehensive legislation is possible.”

Thune said the Senate outline has elements he supports, such as skill-based, merit-based immigration and workplace verification. Still, he said the major sticking point probably will be how to deal with the millions of Americans who are in the country illegally.

“It strikes me that we have to maintain, in as much as we are a nation of immigrants, we are a nation of laws,” Thune said. “They have to go back and get in line and do this the way everybody else does.

Otherwise you create disincentives for those who play by the rules and come here legally.”

Republican Rep. Kristi Noem said she would review immigration proposals introduced in the House, but any plan must “include meaningful reforms that work well for our agriculture producers.”

The Senate draft would place agricultural workers on a separate path to U.S. citizenship “because of the role they play in ensuring Americans have safe and secure agricultural products to sell and consume.”

The reform also proposed a program to help find agricultural workers when American labor is not available. A similar proposal to help farmers, ranchers and growers has been introduced by the Agricultural Workforce Coalition, a group of agricultural and nursery groups.

In the United States, there are about 1.1 million hired workers for crops and livestock — with about half of them believed to be in the country illegally, according to one estimate from the Agriculture Department. The Agricultural Workforce Coalition puts the number at 1 million to 1.5 million, with 60 percent to 70 percent of them here illegally.

Thune and Johnson each expressed reservations about the separate path being proposed for those in agriculture, the top industry in South Dakota.

“The path to citizenship should not be divided up by category as far as I’m concerned,” Johnson said. Thune questioned whether it was “the correct way to proceed.”

Agriculture long has been dependent upon immigrants to fill crop picking and other duties that cannot be filled with American labor. Without these workers, the concern is that billions of dollars of crops could go unpicked and rot in the fields.

“It’s hard to find a reliable, legal work supply when things like fruits and vegetables are coming off,” said Scott VanderWal, president of the South Dakota Farm Bureau, who farms with several family members near Volga. “We’re not saying a broad amnesty program is the way to go. Our concern is to get a stable, reliable, legal work force, and right now we don’t have that.”

The American Farm Bureau Federation, the country’s largest farm group, earlier this month spoke out at the group’s annual meeting in Nashville in support of a new immigration law. Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack also has talked about the need for comprehensive reform.

Elizabeth Smith, an associate professor of political science at the University of South Dakota, said she was surprised that Thune and Johnson, who often come down on different sides of the political spectrum, each had reservations about the separate pathway being proposed for agricultural workers.

In the past few years in South Dakota and across the Midwest, Smith noted there has been a strong flow of immigrants from Central America to work in meatpacking plants and to do field work. The influx of workers has changed the fabric of some communities, prompting concern from local residents.

“There are an impassioned minority that are concerned about immigration, about Mexican workers where there are heavy concentrations,” Smith said. “It could be that the senators are sensitive to that.”

The lawmakers also could be reluctant to back the accelerated plan for agriculture because much of South Dakota’s crops are harvested mechanically, reducing the need of human labor used in states such as California to individually pick fruits and vegetables.

http://www.argusleader.com/article/2...ration-reform-

It is anoying how the politicians keep repeating their little slogans over and over. We do not need to "overhaul" our "broken immigration policies." The policies are not broken they are not enforced. It is the US Congress that needs an "overhaul."

Don't let the enemy control the language. Pollsters know that the words you use determine how people preceive an issue and therefore influences how they react to (support or oppose) an issue.

So let us tell everyone, over and over again: "Citizens of foreign countries have broken into our home, eat our food (take jobs) sleep in our bed (take up residence here) and refuse to leave."

Supporting amnesty for illegal immigrants is: "unfair, immoral, and destructive." Don't let the open borders lobby have the moral highground with their stories of poor Jose who only wants to feed his family. Where is the pity for American cirtizens who are forced to compete with foreigners who should not be here in the first place? Don't these real Americans have famlies that they are struggling to feed and support? What about the healthcare overload caused by illegal aliens that jeopardizes quality medical treatment for our poor and elderly? Food stamps, etc.

We need to repeat anecdotes about the hardships caused to US citizens because of illegal immigration.

Although the arguments for enforcement of the law are valid and logical, they have little influence the undecided, confused, low information voter. Emoton obliterates logic. Win the argument by appeals to peoples emotions. You will find this approach is much more effective. Think about it, and work like hell, give money till it hurts then work and give some more.

Read the book, Words that Work, by Frank Luntz.

Welcome csarbww! Glad to have you here