Chuck Schumer: Illegals Who Came to US Before 2014 Should Be Eligible for Amnesty

by Tony Lee 9 Feb 2014, 3:28 PM PDT
breitbart.com

http://cdn.breitbart.com/mediaserver...itution-ap.jpg

Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) said Sunday that in addition to passing an amnesty bill this year that will only be implemented once President Barack Obama leaves office in 2017, Congress should also, in that bill, allow those who came to the country illegally as late as December 31, 2013 to be eligible for amnesty.

Appearing on NBC's Meet The Press with host David Gregory, Schumer, who co-wrote the Senate immigration bill that the Congressional Budget Office determined would lower the wages of working class Americans and has conceded that amnesty would have passed long ago were it not for the strength of the Tea Party, suggested that if Congress passes a bill that delays the implementation of new immigration laws, the cutoff date for amnesty should also be extended as well.

He said that Congress could also "simply move the date back from December 31st, 2011 to December 31st 2013" as to when the deadline would be "for people who could get even legalization or citizenship."

In the Senate's comprehensive immigration reform bill that passed last year with the help of Republican Senators like John McCain (R-AZ), Lindsey Graham (R-SC), and Marco Rubio (R-FL), illegal immigrants who came to the country as late as December 31, 2011 would be eligible for amnesty.

Agreeing wth Rep. Luis Gutierrez (D-IL), who has also previously said that this year would be the last chance for amnesty legislation, Schumer had a sense of urgency in proposing his "solution" in light of House Speaker John Boehner's (R-OH) comments last week that Republicans may not proceed on immigration until they can trust that President Barack Obama will not circumvent the new laws with various executive actions. Boehner's remarks came nearly a week after the House GOP leadership released its "immigration principles" that many Republicans found to be problematic.

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Governm...le-for-Amnesty

February 09, 2014, 12:08 pm A compromise on immigration reform?

By Mike Lillis


Hoping to break the impasse over immigration reform, Sen. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) on Sunday floated a compromise proposal that would delay the implementation of any changes beyond President Obama's tenure.
Republicans have long-been divided on the issue, but this year they're blaming their reluctance to act on a distrust in Obama to implement the law in good faith.


Democrats say that argument is simply an excuse to avoid highlighting GOP divisions in an election year. But Schumer said his proposal would alleviate the concerns about Obama's role, in any event."Many Republicans have said … they want to do immigration reform, but they don't trust the president to enforce the law, particularly the enforcement parts," Schumer said on NBC's "Meet the Press" program. "So there's a simple solution. Let's enact the law this year, but simply not let it actually start 'til 2017 – after President Obama's term is over."
Appearing on the same show, Sen. Rob Portman (R-Ohio), who voted against a Senate-passed immigration bill last summer, said he's open to Schumer's idea – but only if the bill also includes tougher enforcement measures.

"I think some Republicans would be interested in that, if we put in place the enforcement measures so that it would work," Portman said. "In other words, be sure the border is secure, [and] be sure that you have a workforce enforcement program that works."
Portman said the Republicans' concerns are based on their experience with the 1986 immigration reform law, "where we did provide legalization, but didn't do the enforcement."

"Three million people were legalized; another 6 million people came illegally," he said. "So I think that's what Republicans are looking for is enforcement first."

Obama has made comprehensive immigration reform a primary goal of his second term. The issue hopped a huge hurdle last summer when a comprehensive reform package passed the Senate with broad bipartisan support, and it appeared to be moving in the House this year after GOP leaders last month unveiled a set of "principles" outlining their goals.

But House conservatives pushed back hard, particularly on a provision that would allow illegal immigrants to remain in the country and work without a fear of deportation. Faced with that pressure, Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) on Thursday suggested he's in no hurry to consider any legislation, citing Obama as the source of his misgivings.

"The American people, including many of my members, don't trust that the reform that we're talking about will be implemented as it was intended to be," Boehner (R-Ohio) said.

Schumer characterized that argument as "false," noting that Obama has deported far more illegally immigrants than George W. Bush and other predecessors.

"But," he added, "you could actually have the law start in 2017 without doing much violence to it.
"So [it's] simple: Let's say to our Republican colleagues, 'You don't trust Obama? Enact the law now, but put it into effect in 2017,'" Schumer said. "And we can get something done [this year]."

--This report was originally published at 10:20 a.m. and last updated at 12:08 p.m.



Read more: http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefi...#ixzz2svawDdRz
Follow us: @thehill on Twitter | TheHill on Facebook


Again what part of illegal don't these people get??? Here go again Illegal is illegal nothing makes it legal...Criminals come here illegally that does not make them legal they are criminals and get no amensty!!!!!Caphesh, Comprande' Understand?????

February 09, 2014, 12:05 pm Ayotte to Boehner: Get over 'trust deficit'

By Megan R. Wilson

video at link below


GOP Sen. Kelly Ayotte (N.H.) on Sunday urged House Republicans to take up immigration reform, despite a “trust deficit” with President Obama.
“Here’s the deal: The status quo is totally unacceptable,” she said on CBS’s “Face the Nation” with Bob Schieffer.




“I think we should solve this. I think [Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio)] can find a way forward. Certainly, the bill that came out of the Senate was not perfect, but it was a good solution to a hard problem,” Ayotte continued. “I think it’s an important issue to solve – not only for the country, but for the Republican Party.”

She also expressed empathy with Boehner, who said on Thursday that immigration reform legislation couldn’t move until Obama regained the trust of Congress.


House Republican leadership released broad proposals for immigration reform last week, which Boehner said the caucus “by and large” supported, but said that a majority rejected 2014 as the year to advance legislation.


“There’s a trust deficit that the Speaker is facing right now and it’s related to ObamaCare and the disastrous rollout. Because, let’s think about it, immigration means doing a lot of complex things well,” Ayotte said. “And in addition to that, the administration keeps issuing executive orders to change the law, very frequently.”


Obama made Republicans furious in last month’s State of the Union address, when he promised to “sign executive orders and take executive actions and administrative actions that move the ball forward” if Congress failed to work with him on key issues.


Meanwhile, on another Sunday program, Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) called the GOP’s bluff on its trust issues with the president.
"Many Republicans have said … they want to do immigration reform, but they don't trust the president to enforce the law, particularly the enforcement parts," Schumer told host David Gregory and Republican counterpart Sen. Rob Portman (R-Ohio) on NBC's "Meet the Press.”


"So, there's a simple solution,” he continued, catching Portman off guard. “Let's enact the law this year, but simply not let it actually start 'til 2017 – after President Obama's term is over."


Portman, who voted against the Senate’s immigration overhaul last summer, left open the possibility to agreement on the proposal.


"I think some Republicans would be interested in that, if we put in place the enforcement measures so that it would work," Portman told Gregory. “In other words, be sure the border is secure, [and] be sure that you have a workforce enforcement program that works."

Read more: http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefi...#ixzz2svd40bYk
Follow us: @thehill on Twitter | TheHill on Facebook

Yep your right !!!!

Quote:

---

“Here’s the deal: The status quo is totally unacceptable,”

---

It is and you all need to be fired, then tried and convicted for working against the best interest of the American People!!!! No and's if's or buts!!!!!

By Mark Krikorian
February 10, 2014 5:50 PM
National Review

Chuck Schumer is the kind of senator who gives used-car salesmen a bad name. My colleague Jerry Kammer used a colloquy between Schumer and Senator Rob Portman last year on the Senate floor to illustrate the two lawmakers’ differing approaches to the immigration issue. Portman, whatever his views on the broader questions of immigration, wanted to make sure any new law would actually work, whereas Schumer’s focus was simply to get a legislative deal completed. He remains proud of his role in putting together the last-minute deal that allowed passage of the 1986 amnesty bill, despite the fact that it turned out to be a fiasco. Schumer’s approach to immigration enforcement, and policy in general, seems to be summed up by the immortal words of Dick Jones: “Who cares if it worked or not?“

Schumer’s latest gambit came Sunday, when he suggested on Meet the Press that House Republicans pass an amnesty for all illegal aliens who arrived before the end of last year (i.e., a month and a half ago), “but simply not let it actually start until 2017, after President Obama’s term is over.” This would supposedly address the lack of trust that Obama will faithfully execute the laws, which Speaker Boehner offered as the reason he was putting the brakes on his amnesty push.

Where to begin? First of all, most of us don’t trust Boehner any more than Obama. (And I don’t think anyone trusts Schumer.) Furthermore, why on Earth would House Republicans negotiate a deal with Harry Reid and Chuck Schumer when next year they might well be working with Jeff Sessions and Ted Cruz? Heck, even John Cornyn’s light-years better on immigration than any of the Democrats. (The jury’s still out on McConnell, assuming he’ll still be in the Senate next year.) And who says the next president will be any better regarding immigration? I mean, really — Hillary? Biden? Jeb? Christie? Rubio? Ryan?

In that vein, it’s important to understand that the amnesty/enforcement problem isn’t specific to Obama. It’s true that he is a faithless executive, whose public lies and brazen usurpation of congressional authority are without precedent in our history. Republican proponents of amnesty telling us to trust Obama should be ashamed of themselves.

But there are systemic reasons that enforcement has to be fully in place before starting any amnesty. The interest groups militating against immigration enforcement are extraordinarily strong and persistent: crony capitalists who demand no-strings-attached access to cheap foreign labor; post-American civil libertarians, both left and right, who reject the legitimacy of the nation-state; ethnic chauvinist groups who demand the arrival of ever-more people they can pretend to speak for. A deal that legalizes illegal aliens in exchange for a promise of future enforcement cannot succeed because even those pro-amnesty politicians who aren’t lying about their commitment to future enforcement will lose any incentive to follow through once the amnesty is in place. The result would be another 12 million illegal aliens and this same debate a decade or two from now.

That’s why the way forward starts with enforcement — not just bogus claims of “record” levels of deportations, but the full implementation of E-Verify and visa-tracking and a show of good faith from the executive by pursuing a zero-tolerance policy, now, toward all new border infiltrators and visa overstayers. Once all that’s up and running, and has survived the inevitable ACLU/Chamber of Commerce/AFL-CIO legal jihad against it, and we’ve seen several straight years of attrition in the illegal population, then we can negotiate a deal that includes amnesty for long-established, non-violent illegal aliens. If George Bush had understood that, and began such a program in 2001, the amnesty would be over by now and illegal immigration would be a mere nuisance. If Barack Obama had understood that, and began truly putting in place the necessary enforcement tools in 2009, we’d be well along the road to a solution.

Schumer is trying, yet again, to sell us a lemon. Time to walk away.

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner...mark-krikorian