http://www.opinioneditorials.com/guestc ... 60605.html

June 05, 2006


Republicans Sing From Democrat's Hymnal On Immigration
Joe Bell

The Senate recently passed S.2611, the “Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act.” The House already passed its own bill and the two chambers will try to craft a single piece of legislation. The first step in the process should be to shred the Senate bill, which is a slab of hogwash that would take America’s illegal immigration problems and make them worse while exacerbating the nation’s legal immigration situation as well. Twenty-two Republicans shamed themselves by voting “Yes” on the fraud.

Here is how the Senate bill would damage legal immigration. The Heritage Foundation calculates that if S.2611 becomes law it will be the most dramatic change in immigration policy in 80 years, permitting “an estimated 103 million persons to legally immigrate to the U.S. over the next 20 years – fully one-third of the current population of the United States.”

A reasonable person might ask, “America is a nation of immigrants. Why not open the door even more?”

Stuart Anderson, who served as staff director for the Senate Immigration Subcommittee and worked from 2001 to 2003 as Commissioner at the Immigration and Naturalization Service, recently assessed the challenges posed by America’s legal immigration policy. In a study he co-authored, “Legal Immigrants: Waiting Forever,” released in May, Anderson informs the backlog of legal immigrants waiting to embrace the American Dream is long. He writes those who play by the rules “are likely to wait many years to become a lawful permanent resident, whether they are sponsored by an employer or a family member. …those seeking to become citizens must also endure long processing delays in the quest for naturalization.”

Add to the current backlog the reality that regulations are subject to periodic change and you have a tangle of troubles that will only worsen by increasing the level of legal immigration. Congress should not add more people to the overcrowded existing channel. Anderson said an individual in the Skilled Workers and Professionals category will wait five years or more for a green card.

“For those sponsoring family members for immigration in certain categories forward progress has stopped on waiting lists for the past year,” Anderson writes. “Siblings of U.S. citizens can expect to wait 11 to 12 years from today before immigrating to America (22 years from the Philippines.)”

Instead of further clogging an already congested pipeline of legal immigrants with more than 100 million additional persons, Congress should impose at least a partial moratorium on legal immigration until the backlog is successfully addressed.

Speaking on the Senate floor, Senator Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., exposed how S.2611 makes the illegal immigration situation worse. The H2-C guest worker program the bill creates is not temporary. Sessions said in one part of the bill a temporary guest worker visa program task force is created but then we find “the provision that actually transforms these so-called temporary workers into legal, permanent residents.”

Citing flaws in the agricultural worker component of the bill, Sessions said an illegal immigrant who worked 150 workdays over two years in the agriculture sector would receive a blue card and be permitted to live permanently in the United States.

He explained, “Because current law defines an agricultural ‘workday’ as 1 hour of work per day – the bill language restates that definition on page 397 – an alien who has worked for as little as 150 hours – there are 168 hours in a week – in agriculture over the last 2 years will qualify for a blue card.”

Sessions said, a blue card holder cannot be fired except for just cause “unlike an American citizen worker who is likely under an employment at will agreement with the agriculture employer. Because blue card aliens are not limited to working in agriculture this employment requirement will follow the alien at their second and third jobs as well.”

The bill provides free legal counsel to illegal aliens seeking amnesty.

“Not only will AgJOBS give amnesty to 1.5 million illegal aliens it would have the American taxpayer pay the legal bills of those illegal aliens,” Sessions warned. “We should not be rewarding illegal aliens who break our laws with free legal counsel and a direct path to citizenship.”

Incredibly, S.2611 permits illegal immigrant college students to qualify for the lower in-state tuition without offering out-of-state citizen students the same rate.

Continuing to expose the fraudulent legislation, Sessions said illegal immigrants in the U.S. for more than 5 years and those who had been in the country for 2 to 5 years would qualify for amnesty even if they did not reside in the country continuously. The bill offers amnesty to those who lived in America, left and then returned, thus, breaking immigration laws multiple times.

This is the bill Senator Ted Kennedy, D-Mass., said offers “undocumented immigrants” a chance only if they “pay the stiff fines … pay their taxes.”

The “stiff” fine amounts to $2,000 and paying taxes. That’s not much of a fine and people are supposed to pay taxes – taxation is not punishment.

Sessions points out the individual will not have to pay all back taxes but only taxes for three out of five years and they can choose which years they want to pay their taxes. No doubt American workers would like to pick those years they can pay taxes.

The Senate bill is an insult to every individual who has come to America, and who is waiting to come, legally. It is an affront to American taxpayers who will pay for this swindle, which will increase spending, according to a Congressional Budget Office report, by $38 billion between 2007 and 2016 (mandatory spending would rise by $13 billion over that period and discretionary spending would rise by $25 billion.)

The greatest dishonor regarding this legislation rests on the shoulders of those Republicans who are playing the issue for political gain, not considering illegal immigration a serious policy issue that profoundly impacts American sovereignty and security. Ed Gillespie, who chaired the Republican National Committee during the 2004 election cycle, wrote an oped for the Wall Street Journal’s OpinionJournal, which discredits him and those who accept his position. Gillespie said a guest worker program would “build greater Republican majorities” and focusing solely on border security would “risk the party’s majority status.”

Heaven forbid that Republicans would jeopardize “the party’s majority status” by advancing and defending an agenda that is good for America.

Gillespie encourages Republicans to “demonstrate that we are a party that believes in freedom, economic growth and the rule of law by supporting immigration policies that not only secure our borders but are also pro-freedom and pro-growth.”

Republicans used to believe freedom must be tempered by law and that rights must be connected to responsibilities. Apparently, for some Republicans, that is not so anymore. Party-building now takes precedence over promoting just policies. One expects such things from Democrats, who have placed their electoral future ahead of defending U.S. interests at home and abroad. Now that some Republicans are placing party politics ahead of policy one can almost envision a future where a voice calls out, “Please welcome the new Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi.” Should that come to pass Republicans can blame themselves for abandoning prudent policies in favor of ensuring “the party’s majority status.” Those Republicans who support bills like S.2611 do not deserve to lead. Neither do Democrats. Are the two parties blending into one amorphous blob that is so saturated with the desire to win that elected officials, regardless of party affiliation, have no agenda besides remaining in office? That is a danger voters should be increasingly aware of.


###

Joseph Bell has hosted a radio talk show and is a former editorial writer/columnist for several Connecticut newspapers. A former liberal Democrat, Bell has not been on the conservative side of the aisle for very long. He voted for Clinton/Gore in 1992. Abandoning the convictions that he had held and defended through adolescence and into adulthood was not easy. Sincere soul-searching and a commitment to distinguish fact from fiction compelled him to accept that liberal ideology was bankrupt.

jbellopedresponse@hotmail.com