Thread: *** GUTIERREZ/FLAKE AMNESTY is Unveiled!!!!!

Bttt

Now that I'm finally off I can start dissecting this thing without a cotton ball for a brain! PhredE.....once again; WOW! Amazing work! A question/point as I read what you've gleaned from this:

Originally Posted by PhredE

The one "good" provision:

Pg 147 State and Local Enforcement of Federal Immigration Laws

(a) Amended Section 287(g) - provides for Federal reimbursement
to State/Local agencies for training

Formally allows reimbursement to State/Local agencies seeking 287(g)
immigration enforcement training by DHS.

Am I mistaken or won't the above be nullified by this:

Pg 151

Sec 215 Law Enforcement Authority of States and Political
Subdivisions and Transfer to Federal Custody

(1) Determination of immigration status is delegated to
DHS (Feds, and not allowed by State/Local officials) and

(2) Requires DHS to inform State/Local officials whether or
not DHS intends to take custody of offender - providing an
approximate timeline for custody transfer.
:

[How is this much different or effective than at present?]
[This also implicitly silences State/Local authorities from
inquiring about immigration status too]

Section also followed up by 'Authorizations are appropriated
such sums as may be necessary to carry out this section'

This puts us right back where we were as far as enforcement. The authority is left to the Feds who can't/won't handle it otherwise we wouldn't be in this situation in the first place. Whether or not DHS intends to take custody of offender? They'll reimburse for 287(g) but then most likely DHS won't take custody of them.....this whole Bill needs to be relegated to the outhouse!

cva: Hi there!

Thanks for the kind words - although, to be honest, I'm probably better at reading, than summarizing. So, what you are reading are things I summarize 'on-the-fly' as I go and usually in quite a hurry to boot.

I don't really know that answer to the question you pose, but will say:

a). You are asking the right question(s) and are obviously reading with a critical eye [as everyone should be doing!]
and,
b). There are inconsistencies (like the one you identified) throughout the parts that I have covered in detail so far.

There are painful levels of detail which are not necessary - simply enforcing current law is simpler, and probably cheaper to do in most cases anyway. When I see unnecessarily complex levels of detail my ire is raised. There is a reason this is written like it is, and it probably is not a good reason at that! (Be suspicious)

Oh, thanks for helping with the reading too (much appreciated)

SOSADFORUS wrote:

Oh thats to cute April and so are your little runners, you have been searching the web for some real cuties, I am jealous!!

Thanks SOSAD, no need to be jealous you have collected a whole army of very cute smileys!

You know, what bugs me about this bill, is that neither Flake nor Gutierrez
are lawyers, or even have a legal background (as best as I can tell by scanning through their bios on their web sites). And, ok, it's a fair point to note that Immigration lawyers and lobbyists probably did the drafting of the bill, but... I really wonder if these guys even know (or care) what is in this awful bill - somehow, I doubt it.

Gutierrez:
http://luisgutierrez.house.gov/display2 ... &type=News

Flake:
http://flake.house.gov/Biography/

Some may find this amusing:

... In this role, Jeff worked to promote a conservative philosophy of less government, more freedom, and individual responsibility.

bttt

I think the House gained about 25 or so democrats this last election. So its going to be very very close. If we can stop it in the house we win, if it passes the house in go's to the senate. That will be very hard to stop. I give us 60-40% if they wait another month, in 40-60 if it happens in the next 2 weeks.


The way it appears right now we barely win by maybe 1-5 votes. In we shot the North American union down for good. At least we can hope, because this is being done other ways to.

They're going down in FLAMES.

Why not take a few minutes to appreciate the BLUNDER these nitwits pulled with this OTHER THAN IMMIGRATION BILL that they so stupidly created?

PhredE wrote:

A couple more potential angles to work:

1. Ask them how much this will cost - not rhetorically, but honestly - has the Congressperson/Senator - researched this, or what have the PACs and think-tanks in DC published?

The fact is that unless you are honest about the NUMBER of people who are here illegally, you cannot give an honest appraisal of the projected costs. The only thing that can be said for sure is that with the very low-ball number that has been used (~12 million), any cost estimate is going to be an underestimate. There's every reason to believe that the true number is closer to 40 million or more, based on such reports as the "Border Violence" report put out by Congress last summer that stated that between 4 and 10 million people crossed our border IN 2005 ALONE.

Up to 39 co now.