Thread: Grassley opposes amnesty

http://www.thehawkeye.com/daily/stories/ln5_0703.html

Grassley opposes amnesty

By AIMEE TABOR

atabor@thehawkeye.com

U.S. Sen. Charles Grassley says local legislation in Pennsylvania that cracks down on illegal immigrants shows some people don't want to tolerate the activity, but questioned the legality of the move.

Communities across the state are looking to impose their own illegal immigration laws after Congress hasn't moved on the issue.

In Hazleton, Pa., the city council approved the first reading of an ordinance that would make English the official language and also would punish businesses for hiring illegals and landlords for renting to them. Businesses found guilty would have their permits revoked and landlords would be fined $1,000.

Other municipalities in Pennsylvania have followed suit and have either adopted similar language or are considering it. In San Bernardino, Calif., a similar provision was supposed to come before voters, but it's unlikely it will make it on the ballot. A judge ruled there weren't enough signatures collected for it to appear.

Federal lawmakers are at a standstill on the issue. Both houses have approved legislation addressing the illegal immigration issue with the major difference being amnesty.

The Senate bill calls for amnesty, which Grassley, R–Iowa, said he opposes. In the 1980s, Grassley said he voted for amnesty when there were fewer illegal immigrants in the country. That move didn't seem to work because there are more illegal immigrants today, Grassley said.

During an interview last week, Grassley, who sits on the Senate Judiciary Committee that has addressed the immigration issue, said he understands the move by the local municipalities.

"I think people are clamoring that we need to do something, particularly the people who are against amnesty and against the illegal immigrants and don't want to be tolerant toward people being here illegally," Grassley said.

With illegal immigrants comprising 5 percent of the workforce and the unemployment rate low, Grassley acknowledged there obviously is a need for the workers. As for the city ordinance in Pennsylvania, Grassley questioned its legality.

"I wish I had a law degree and knew the law on this so I could find out if they could operate in this area," said Grassley, who famously points out that he is a farmer.

U.S. Sen. Tom Harkin, D–Iowa, voted in favor of the Senate bill because it strengthens border enforcement, cracks down on employers who hire illegal immigrants and creates a temporary work program that puts illegal immigrants on the path to legalization.

"It is time for us to find a constructive, positive way to bring people out of the shadows and into the sunlight," Harkin said. "It is in our national security interest to do so."

Grassley opposes amnesty

Does he or doesn't he? Sounds like he wants amnesty.

Grassley supports amensty. He perfers to call it "guest worker" program.

Ya....gotta look at each word.....or they try to pull a fast one.

It is simple....you embrace EARNED CITIZENSHIP, you support AMNESTY

You embrace a Guest Worker Program, you support AMNESTY

What is so hard to understand about what America's lower and middle class expects. We want a wall, we want BORDER SECURITY, we want work place enforcement, and we want those who aid and abet illegals (the Catholic Church) charged with a felony.

I wonder who was really behind & pushing Reagan for the '89 Amnesty?

BTW, isn't it curious that not one of these people mentions the already existing "guest worker program" that is currently being used?

BTW, isn't it curious that not one of these people mentions the already existing "guest worker program" that is currently being used?

There are currently three different guest worker programs (visas) being used, yet the politicians keep saying we need a guest worker program. What they're actuallys saying is, we need more legal immigration and a path to citizenship included in any guest worker programs we have.

Originally Posted by MW

BTW, isn't it curious that not one of these people mentions the already existing "guest worker program" that is currently being used?

There are currently three different guest worker programs (visas) being used, yet the politicians keep saying we need a guest worker program. What they're actuallys saying is, we need more legal immigration and a path to citizenship included in any guest worker programs we have.

I see this a little differently, MW. If "all" they wanted was more legal immigration then they would be pushing to improve the existing programs. They want much, much more and that includes social engineering of our population which cannot be done quickly just be increasing the working programs. They must have an open border policy to achieve this quickly.