Results 1 to 4 of 4

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jun 2013

    Exclusive–Palin: Holes in the Border as Big as the Holes in Their Amnesty Bill

    Exclusive–Palin: Holes in the Border as Big as the Holes in Their Amnesty Bill

    Email Article

    by Sarah Palin 23 Jun 2013

    Just like they did with Obamacare, some in Congress intend to “Pelosi” the amnesty bill. They’ll pass it in order to find out what’s in it. And just like the unpopular, unaffordable Obamacare disaster, this pandering, rewarding-the-rule-breakers, still-no-border-security, special-interests-ridden, 24-lb disaster of a bill is not supported by informed Americans.

    I am an ardent supporter of legal immigration. I’m proud that our country is so desirable that it has been a melting pot making a diverse people united as the most exceptional nation on earth for over two centuries. But I join every American with an ounce of common sense insisting that any discussion about immigration must center on a secure border. The amnesty bill before the Senate is completely toothless on border security.

    It's beyond disingenuous for anyone to claim that a vote for this bill is a vote for security. Look no further than the fact that Senator Rubio and amnesty supporters nixed Senator Thune’s amendment that required the feds to finally build part of a needed security fence before moving forward on the status of illegal immigrants who’ve already broken the law to be here. And if shooting down the border fence wasn't proof enough, they blew another chance by killing Senator Paul’s “Trust But Verify” amendment which required the completion of a fence in five years and required Congress to vote on whether the border is actually secure before furthering any immigration measures. And then they blew it yet again, nixing Senator Cornyn’s “Results” amendment, which also required border enforcement standards. Now the Senate’s pro-amnesty crowd is offering a fig leaf to security via the Corker-Hoeven Amendment, but this is really nothing more than empty promises. It’s amnesty right now and border security… eh, well, someday.
    If this bill was genuinely concerned with border security, it might include practical solutions for those states that live with the problem every single day. Pass-through grants could be given to border states to actually build a fence. The most responsive and responsible level of government is the most local, and since governors accept pass-throughs all the time, this is a workable solution. We could also free up more federal lands along the border to be privatized. The farmers and ranchers would have a clear incentive to keep their private property secure from the flow of illegal immigrants and/or other illegal activities trafficked across the border onto land they’d cultivate. There are plenty of other commonsense solutions, but this bill isn’t about fixing problems; it’s about amnesty at all costs.
    When every commonsense, concrete, and verifiable measure to secure the border is stripped away, despite politicians’ promises, what are we supposed to rely on to ensure that our currently unsecured border will be fixed in the future? If D.C. expects us to just sit back and “trust” them despite our permanent political class and Washington bureaucrats proving themselves so very untrustworthy, then I have a bridge to somewhere in Alaska to sell them. Our government is awash in one scandal after another involving blatant lies and violations of our basic liberties, and the leader of the pack ventures out on one road trip after another to avoid accountability.
    Just like they did for Obamacare, the permanent political class is sugaring this bill with one goody after another to entice certain senators to vote for it. Look no further than page 983 of the bill, which contains a special visa exemption for foreign seafood workers in the 49th state despite huge unemployment numbers in the American workforce. This is obviously a hidden favor designed to buy the votes of Alaska Senators Murkowski and Begich.
    And just like Obamacare, this amnesty bill fails on every level of economic sanity and sane reform. It offers no solutions. It will barely slow the flow of illegal immigration, which means we can expect millions and millions of new illegal aliens in coming years. Sort of what happened when we passed amnesty in 1986 without securing our borders first.
    According to the CBO, the bill won’t stop illegal immigration, but it will drive down wages for average hardworking Americans. These would be the same blue-collar working class voters of every ethnicity who chose to sit home in 2012 instead of turning out to vote in the swing states we needed to carry in order to stop Barack Obama’s promised “fundamental transformation” of America. I note this just as a helpful reminder to those who believe the hyperventilated new hype claiming that conservatives need to support this bill in order to win future elections. That’s 100% wrong. The crony capitalists in D.C. and their corporatist friends on Wall Street might think this amnesty boondoggle is a great idea, but the average American worker in our middle class who'll soon see lower wages is the one left out in the cold, along with those hard working immigrants who followed the rules and are working here legally.
    Passing this bill with an unsecured border and within a growing welfare state under Barack Obama is economic insanity. Have people already forgotten that our bankrupt government is running up massive unsustainable deficits every year? We can’t afford to pay the piper now, much less the trillions of dollars more in welfare and entitlements for the millions who are here illegally today that will be granted this bill’s benefits. According to the Heritage Foundation, the bill provides only a temporary delay in granting illegal immigrants eligibility for all U.S. welfare and entitlement programs. We’re looking at an explosion of costs in the very near future. There is no way to pay for the added untold millions of new enrollees in these growing government programs. Pass this, Congress, and Obama will have succeeded in fundamentally transforming America.
    Again, I am supportive of legal immigration and am as sympathetic as the next person to the aspirations of people who come here to work hard and live a better life than the poverty and unfree environments they left behind. So many are drawn here because we are an exceptional nation where freedom provides an equal opportunity for everyone to work hard and make something of themselves. But a key part of American exceptionalism is the rule of law. Border security is fundamental to the rule of law, as is incentivizing those who follow the legal path to citizenship instead of punishing them by promoting lawbreakers. This is non-negotiable.
    It’s time our lawmakers remember that we are a sovereign nation of laws. This bill ignores that, and ignores the will of the people. The continued porous border goes against what politicians assured us was in this mountain-high bill, and in typical D.C. style it flies in the face of what many politicians campaigned on. I heard their campaign promises. You heard them, too.
    It’s time for concerned Americans to flood our legislators’ phone lines with the input they need to hear from We the People. Join the mama grizzlies who are rearing up tirelessly to swat away false claims that amnesty is a good thing. Michelle Malkin rightly said the issue is not secure the border first, it’s “secure the border. Period.” Laura Ingraham and Ann Coulter have also offered superb warnings on amnesty’s economic impacts to the middle class.
    As the Senate moves to pass amnesty, the only bright spot in this travesty is the rallying revolution we can look forward to. For just as opposition to Obamacare became a rallying cry for the 2010 midterm elections, opposition to this fundamentally transforming amnesty bill will galvanize the grassroots in next year’s elections. And 2014 is just around the corner.

    PS there are 2789 comments on the article

  2. #2
    Super Moderator GeorgiaPeach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    It is good to hear Sarah Palin speak out about the flaws in the thinking and the legislation now being crafted in Washington for amnesty.
    Matthew 19:26
    But Jesus beheld them, and said unto them, With men this is impossible; but with God all things are possible.

    Join our efforts to Secure America's Borders and End Illegal Immigration by Joining ALIPAC's E-Mail Alerts network (CLICK HERE)

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Sen. Schumer’s stock on the rise

    By Alexander Bolton - 06/25/13 05:00 AM ET

    The expected passage of immigration reform this week will hand Sen. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) the biggest legislative triumph of his Senate career and bolster his case to someday become Democratic leader. [WATCH VIDEO]
    Schumer strenuously avoids speculation about his political future or talk about what will happen when Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) decides to step down.

    But there’s no doubt among his Senate Democratic colleagues and aides that Schumer wants to succeed Reid. The bipartisan passage of a landmark immigration bill will go a long way in addressing any lingering concerns about his ability to lead the Democratic caucus.“Everyone knows he is a great political strategist and a great communicator. Now they know he’s a consummate legislator,” said Jim Kessler, who worked for Schumer before becoming the senior vice president for policy at Third Way, a Democratic think tank.
    Schumer has had other significant legislative accomplishments in the upper chamber. He helped push $20 billion in funding for the victims of the 9/11 terrorist attacks through a GOP-controlled Senate; he added the college tuition tax credit to the 2009 stimulus package; and he secured funding for the cleanup of Hurricane Sandy last year.
    Kessler ranked passage of the immigration bill with Schumer’s biggest victory as a member of the House, the 1994 crime bill. Schumer made a name for himself as a legislator by passing a controversial ban on assault weapons despite the ambivalence of the then-chairman of the Judiciary Committee, Rep. Jack Brooks (D-Texas).
    Schumer minted his credentials as one of the nation’s sharpest political strategists by serving as chairman of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee during the Democratic takeover of the Senate in 2006. His reputation grew when he served another cycle in that role and helped expand the Democratic majority to 60 votes.
    The longtime knock on Schumer is that he is über-partisan — not the best trait for the leader of a chamber that traditionally relies on bipartisan compromise to get anything done. Some Republicans in the upper chamber, most notably, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (Ky.), are not fond of Schumer.
    Sen. John McCain (Ariz.), the chief Republican co-sponsor of the immigration bill, was initially leery of working with Schumer because of his partisan reputation. Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), another member of the Gang of Eight, had to persuade McCain that Schumer was sincere about moving a bipartisan bill.
    “He’s been often described in the past as a fierce partisan, a very political person by nature, but in this particular instance he has demonstrated real willingness to reach across the aisle and work with Republicans,” said Jim Manley, a former senior Senate Democratic leadership aide. “It’s impressive that Republicans in the Gang of Eight put aside their views of him as hyper-partisan to work on this proposal.”
    Schumer butted heads with Reid and Senate Democratic Whip Dick Durbin (Ill.) over the target vote count for final passage of the bill.
    At the outset of the floor debate, Schumer set the ambitious goal of passing it with 70 votes, while Reid and Durbin argued that negotiators should focus more on passing a strong bill with 60 votes. Schumer argued a strong bipartisan majority would put more pressure on the House to act; Reid urged him not to worry about what would happen in the House.
    Reid on Friday admitted Schumer’s strategy was the correct one.
    “No one — no one [of] 100 senators — no one other than the senator from New York thought we could get 70 votes,” he said on the Senate floor. “I doubted he could get 70 votes. He knows I doubted that. No one in this body thought we could get 68, 72 votes except him.”
    Reid says he plans to run for reelection in 2016. As long as he can fend off GOP opponents in the purple state of Nevada, Reid has the top Democratic job in the Senate for as long as he wants it, say Democratic aides. But he will have served eight years as Senate majority leader by the end of next year, when he turns 75 years old, and could change his mind on seeking a sixth term.
    Schumer would have been the favorite to take over Reid’s spot even without Senate passage of the immigration reform bill, but the anticipated win rounds out his leadership résumé.
    “He’s so overwhelmingly in position to win a leadership race,” said a former Democratic Senate chief of staff.
    The former aide said Schumer has enhanced his reputation for getting things done.
    “People just view him as a very powerful force,” said the source. “We may need a powerful force, if we lose the majority [in 2014]. We may need a powerful force, if we lose the presidency [in 2016].”
    Durbin is Schumer’s most likely rival to succeed Reid. He has also played a major role in putting the immigration reform bill together; he’s one of the bill’s co-authors, as a member of the Gang of Eight, and built political momentum for immigration reform as a longtime champion of the DREAM Act.
    Durbin faced down Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) in private negotiations over capping work visas, according to Senate sources, and gave the green light for a pivotal deal with Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) on H-1B visas.
    But Schumer was the one who reached out to Graham to put the Gang of Eight together, and he’s taken the lead throughout the negotiations.
    A victory on immigration would take the sting out of Schumer’s high-profile legislative disappointment earlier this year, when a bipartisan deal to expand background checks for gun sales collapsed.
    “I think it’s a significant accomplishment,” said former Sen. Byron Dorgan (D-N.D.), who once held the third-ranking spot in the Senate Democratic leadership. “There have been many attempts to pass immigration legislation. Obviously this has required a lot of patience with the group of eight legislators that Chuck put together.”
    Schumer invoked the memory of former Sen. Edward Kennedy (D-Mass.), the legendary Senate dealmaker, the day he and his colleagues unveiled their legislation.
    “He’s a worthy successor to Ted Kennedy, and that’s saying a lot,” Graham told The Wall Street Journal in an interview published Friday.
    Manley, who worked nearly 12 years as Kennedy’s press secretary, joked it might be a bit too early to put Schumer on that kind of pedestal.
    “There is only one Ted Kennedy. God broke the mold after he made Sen. Kennedy,” he quipped.

    Read more:

    God help us!!!!

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Immigration reform passes key Senate test in 67-27 vote on border measure

    By Alexander Bolton and Ramsey Cox - 06/24/13 08:29 PM ET

    The Senate voted 67-27 Monday to advance a border security amendment to bipartisan immigration legislation, building momentum for a final vote later this week.
    Fifteen of the “yes” votes were Republicans, suggesting supporters could hit the 70-vote threshold they hope to reach in the final vote. It is thought a big, bipartisan vote could put pressure in the GOP-held House, where immigration reform faces dimmer prospects.
    The Republicans who voted “yes” were Sens. John McCain (Ariz.), Lindsey Graham (S.C.), Marco Rubio (Fla.), Jeff Flake (Ariz.) — the four authors of the legislation — and Sens. Bob Corker (Tenn.), Lamar Alexander (Tenn.), Kelly Ayotte (N.H.), Jeff Chiesa (N.J.), Susan Collins (Maine), Orrin Hatch (Utah), Dean Heller (Nev.), Mark Kirk (Ill.), John Hoeven (N.D.), Lisa Murkowski (Alaska) and Roger Wicker (Miss.).
    Two Democrats, Sens. Mark Udall (Colo.) and Sherrod Brown (Ohio), missed the vote. If they’d been present, supporters would have won 69 votes on Monday.
    Proponents could reach more than 70 votes if they agree to further concessions, or if some Republican senators who missed Monday’s action vote “yes” on final passage.

    Sens. Johnny Isakson (Ga.) and Saxby Chambliss (Ga.) were absent Monday and are seen as swing votes. Chambliss and Isakson were early supporters of immigration reform legislation in 2007, and Chambliss is retiring at the end of this Congress. Senate GOP Leader Mitch McConnell (Ky.) and Sen. Rob Portman (Ohio) were among the notable Republican “no” votes, though it is possible Portman could vote “yes” in the final vote. Portman wants to speed up the implementation timeline for the employer verification program, which mandates that employers check the immigration status of hires.
    The amendment advanced Monday would boost security spending by $30 billion, and was intended to address persistent GOP concerns about a porous U.S.-Mexico border.
    Crafted by Corker and Hoeven, it authorizes increasing the number of border patrol agents by 20,000 and constructing 700 miles of fencing.


    It adds $38 billion in spending for security measures to the $8 billion previously included in the base bill. At a minimum, it requires the implementation of $4.5 billion worth of technology and equipment to achieve full surveillance of the border.

    McCain, the chief Republican sponsor of the broader bill who helped negotiate the deal with Corker and Hoeven, said it would ensure a 90 percent apprehension rate of illegal entrants along the Southern border.
    “The head of the border patrol has said unequivocally to me that if you get this technological equipment in, that he is confident that we will have 90 percent effective control of the border and 100 percent situational awareness,” he said. That argument failed to convince Mc
    Connell, who said the additional spending would not guarantee anything.
    “From the outset of this debate, I have been clear about the fact that in order for a reform bill to succeed, we would have to be able to prove to our constituents that the border would finally be secured. If we can’t guarantee that, anything else we do won’t be worth much.”
    Negotiators included the language hammered out with Corker and Hoeven in an amendment adding up to nearly 1,200 pages — prompting an outcry from conservative opponents.
    Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.), an outspoken critic, grumbled that many of his colleagues did not have enough time to read the legislation.
    “This is exactly what happened with ObamaCare,” he said on the Senate floor. “The majority rushed through a complex bill so there would be no time to understand what’s in it.”
    Corker argued his new language spans only 119 pages and that the remaining 1,100 pages comprises the original bill, which has been available for review since May.
    Corker said “five tangible triggers” in his proposal — which must be achieved in 10 years — would take power out of the hands of the Department of Homeland Security to waive border security provisions.
    “If you think border security is not OK under the status quo, vote for this amendment,” Corker said. “If you want to give full control to [Homeland Security Secretary] Janet Napolitano, don’t vote for this amendment.”
    Negotiators included language to cement the support of wavering Democrats, as well. Sen. Bernie Sanders (Vt.), a liberal independent who caucuses with Democrats, secured $1.5 billion over two years for a youth jobs program.
    Sen. Mark Begich (D-Alaska), who faces a tough reelection race next year, persuaded negotiators to include language to help the Alaskan seafood industry maintain a reliable pool of seasonal labor.
    But not all Democrats were thrilled about the changes. Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) criticized the amendment for suspending federal contracting regulations for the border security spending.
    “I am sure there are federal contracting firms high-fiving at the prospect of all of the spending demanded by some of our friends on the other side in this amendment,” Leahy said on the Senate floor.
    Republicans worry the Corker-Hoeven agreement represents the last chance to make significant changes to the legislation before a vote to end debate and move to final passage on Thursday.
    Fourteen Republican senators wrote a letter to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) on Monday protesting the “deeply disturbing” fast-tracking of the 1,000-plus-page immigration bill.
    A spokesman for Reid accused the GOP lawmakers of using the floor proceedings as an excuse to oppose the substance of the legislation.
    “This letter is nothing more than a transparent attempt to suppress the strong bipartisan support for immigration reform,” said Adam Jentleson,
    Reid’s spokesman.
    Reid plans to hold a vote to end debate on the legislation on Thursday. A final vote could take place on Thursday or Friday.
    — Published at 6:32 p.m. and last updated at 8:29 p.m.

    Read more:

    Call your Senators

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts