Thread: NumbersUSA: Protest the New Guitierrez/Flake Amnesty Bill

Protest the new Gutierrez / Flake amnesty bill!

This new Phone Call Request has been posted in your Action Buffet based on your answers to the Interest Survey.

You can find this Phone Call Request by proceeding to
http://www.numbersusa.com/phones?ID=7597

Representatives Luis Gutierrez (D-IL) and Jeff Flake (R-AZ) have introduced an AMNESTY bill in the House. Let's respond with a firestorm of phone calls!

Honestly, your collective reaction to the introduction of the Gutierrez/Flake amnesty bill in the U.S. House of Representatives will have great influence on whether national political leaders try to force this through.

We need to do this primarily with phones at this point.

We need the phones in all 435 offices of U.S. Representatives to be ringing off the hook in vehement opposition to what is being proposed by Rep. Gutierrez (D-IL) and Rep. Flake (R-AZ).

What is in the new amnesty bill?

Rosemary Jenks, NumbersUSA Director of Government Relations, wrote the following based on what Rep. Flake and Rep. Gutierrez have been telling the media is in their bill. The actual text of the bill has not yet been released. When it is, our NumbersUSA legislative team will quickly provide analysis on our website: www.numbersusa.com




UNDER GUTIERREZ/FLAKE:





Every illegal alien who could produce marginally plausible

“evidence” that he/she had been illegally present in the United

States since June 1, 2006, would get amnesty and be put on the

path to US citizenship.





In exchange for the highest honor our country has to bestow,

the illegal alien would have to pay $2,000, pass a criminal record

check, pay at least some of any income taxes he/she had chosen

not to pay while working illegally, and learn some English. The

already overburdened and error-prone U.S. Citizenship and

Immigration Services (USCIS) would be responsible for ensuring

that applicants meet these criteria and for handing out temporary

visas and work permits to 12-plus million illegal aliens.





After the no-longer‐illegal aliens had been in temporary status

for six years, USCIS would issue green cards to those who had

learned passable English and, in the case of some heads of

household, had traveled outside the United States (to any other

country, not necessarily their own) for a short time. Single heads

of household, children, the elderly, business owners, and those in

the military would be exempt from the travel requirement. (Any

criminals and terrorists whose fingerprints were not yet on file with

the FBI would then h ave official documents in whateve name they

chose to provide USCIS during the first phase of the amnesty.)





Lest any illegals be left out of the general amnesty, the

bill includes two others for which they could qualify: the AgJOBS

amnesty for those claiming to have performed agricultural work in

the United States (the fraud rate for a similar amnesty in 1986 is

estimated at 70% and resulted in at least one of the 1993 World

Trade Center bombers getting a green card, which he used to fly

to Afghanistan for terrorist training) and the DREAM Act amnesty for

those who received a US taxpayer-funded high school diploma or an equivalent.





To ensure a constant flow of cheap labor into the United

States, the bill would create a worker importation program for an

additional 400,000 foreign “guest” workers each year, all of whom

would be given the choice to stay permanently, as long as they

weren’t caught c ommitting a crime or terrorist act before they applied. DHS would have to certify that it is capable of verifying

workers’ legal status before this new program could take effect.





As a bone to lawmakers who believe that the laws they pass should actually be enforced, the bill would mandate that all employers eventually verify the legal status of their workforce and it would increase penalties for those who fail to do so. It would also authorize an increase in the number of border enforcement personnel and in enforcement technology.


Finally, as icing on this rich enforcement cake, the bill would create a “North American security perimeter” that would establish Mexico as our first—and only—line of defense against any security threat from the south.

You should have no problem finding a reason why you feel strongly about opposing any of these points in the bill.

http://www.numbersusa.com

NumbersUSA - relies upon individuals like you to reach its goal of an environmentally sustainable and economically just America.

yes (head down in shame) we have durbin, obama & blogo and yes we also have gutierrez.... if America needed an enema, this is where it would be administered.

Finally, as icing on this rich enforcement cake, the bill would create a “North American security perimeter” that would establish Mexico as our first—and only—line of defense against any security threat from the south.

So that is WHY Bush kept promising MIGRANTS "immigration reform"!
THAT SHOULD NOT EVEN BE CONSIDERED! THIS IS AMERICA. THIS IS OUR COUNTRY!

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

yes (head down in shame) we have durbin, obama & blogo and yes we also have gutierrez.... if America needed an enema, this is where it would be administered.

I know back in the old days they used to consider Il ect the heartland...now it's the other end and this state is the perfect place to start the "procedure". It's a shameful thing to admit your from Il. anymore.......far cry from the "Land of Lincoln" days.

Originally Posted by Lone_Patriot

yes (head down in shame) we have durbin, obama & blogo and yes we also have gutierrez.... if America needed an enema, this is where it would be administered.

Oh but you sure did give me a laugh!

Thanx!! Enema's on it's way, LONE. Large or our special HORSE SIZE - what's you're preference?

Don't protest the bill, just protest PAYING for it, Corporations need to pay for it. See more info here:
http://www.alipac.us/modules.php?name=F ... highlight=

Lone_Patriot wrote:

yes (head down in shame) we have durbin, obama & blogo and yes we also have gutierrez.... if America needed an enema, this is where it would be administered.

Bowman wrote:

Don't protest the bill, just protest PAYING for it, Corporations need to pay for it. See more info here:
http://www.alipac.us/modules.php?name=F ... highlight=

Great point! I'm going to add it to my talking points--I'd forgotten about that!

Bowman wrote:

I think the best way to stop amnesty is not to oppose the amnesty itself, but to oppose paying for it. Amnesty will raise government spending at all levels by at least $100 billion a year. Combined with current spending on illegals the total annual cost for amnesty is $200 billion a year.

Call your reps and say since the US Chamber of Commerce is such a big amnesty supporter, then taxes need to be raised on Corporations by $200 billion to pay for it. A majority of this tax increase would go to the states to pay for their costs associated with amnesty. I think Democrats would be most receptive to this idea.

Just be sure to tell them no way in hell you will pay for amnesty.