“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.”— The Continental Congress, July 4, 1776
“The task of statesmanship has always been the re-definition of these rights in terms of a changing and growing social order.”
— Franklin D. Roosevelt (Commonwealth Club Address, 1932)
“Roosevelt was wrong! The principles laid down in the Declaration of Independence are the principles of individual liberty. Our unalienable rights, given to us by God are given to us as individuals. Our rights do not come from society or the government, and they cannot be redefined by politicians. The nature of these rights carries with it the implication of individual responsibility, without which we surrender them.”
— Perri Nelson, November 6, 2008
Blogs for Borders Video Blogburst - 061207
Published Tue, Jun 12 2007 3:08 PM
Amnesty Zombies?
Uncounted Beans?
And 100% Preventable!
Vote for us at RealClearPolitics
March For America is this weekend! Are you going? If not, why not? Along with the big 'do' in DC there are events in several states.
As we said in the "Emergency Burst" the horrifically bad S. 1348 isn't dead yet, please help put it out of our misery!
Noe Aleman headed to jail on Monday, whatever help you can offer is deeply appreciated.
Technorati Tags: illegal immigration, amnesty zombies, republicans, democrats, uncounted beans, crime statistics, hispanic, fbi, mexico, rape, drunk driving, 100% preventable
Comments (0) | Trackbacks (0)
Amnesty or Not?
Published Tue, Jun 12 2007 12:18 PM
Technorati Tags: Immigration
I've finished a preliminary reading of the Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act of 2007. I will probably read it several more times to be sure I have a full understanding of it. Lots of this bill appears good on the surface, but there are parts of it that I absolutely loath, just as there are parts of the current law that I absolutely loath.
When you hear someone say, or when you read that our immigration law is a horrible, unenforceable mess, you're hearing the truth. There are provisions in current immigration law that effectively discourage enforcement, except under extraordinary circumstances. Those provisions are carried forward in the new law.
There's been a lot of outrage at various cases where States have established laws that prohibit their police from even asking about the immigration status of people arrested or detained. Well my friends, it's the federal immigration law that effectively makes the States do things like this, with strict provisions on how non-federal enforcement can interact with immigration law, and active discouragement of any activity that might reduce the need for federal agents.
Sure, there are provisions that allow for the training of State and local police in the enforcement of immigration law, but they're convoluted and full of restrictions and conditions. The new bill does nothing to improve that except require that the Department of Homeland Security work with the States where practical.
President Bush, and several prominent politicians have denied that the Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act of 2007 is an amnesty bill. Before we get into that, let's look at the meaning of the word. From the Britannica Concise Encyclopedia at Answers.com:
amnesty
In criminal law, a sovereign act of oblivion or forgetfulness (from Greek amnestia, "forgetfulness") granted by a government, especially to a group of persons who are guilty of (usually political) crimes in the past. It is often conditional upon the group's return to obedience and duty within a prescribed period. See also pardon.
Note that the definition provided here indicates that amnesty can be conditional upon a return to obedience and duty within a prescribed period.
So I ask you this question: Would a bill that requires someone to pay a fine and stay out of trouble in exchange for having their status altered from illegal to legal qualify as an amnesty bill by that definition?
Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act of 2007 (Placed on Calendar in Senate)
`SEC. 245B. ACCESS TO EARNED ADJUSTMENT.
`(a) Adjustment of Status-
`(1) PRINCIPAL ALIENS- Notwithstanding any other provision of law, including section 244(h) of this Act, the Secretary of Homeland Security shall adjust to the status of an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence, an alien who satisfies the following requirements:
`(A) APPLICATION- The alien shall file an application establishing eligibility for adjustment of status and pay the fine required under subsection (m) and any additional amounts owed under that subsection.
`(B) CONTINUOUS PHYSICAL PRESENCE-
`(i) IN GENERAL- The alien shall establish that the alien--
`(I) was physically present in the United States on or before the date that is 5 years before April 5, 2006;
`(II) was not legally present in the United States on April 5, 2006, under any classification set forth in section 101(a)(15); and
`(III) did not depart from the United States during the 5-year period ending on April 5, 2006, except for brief, casual, and innocent departures.
`(ii) LEGALLY PRESENT- For purposes of this subparagraph, an alien who has violated any conditions of his or her visa shall be considered not to be legally present in the United States.
There's a lot more to it, but the gist of this is if someone who has lived in the U.S. under an illegal status for five years applies and pays a fine then they will have their status changed from illegal to alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence.
That my friends is amnesty. The status of an illegal immigrant can be changed to "lawfully admitted" if they follow this procedure. In other words their crime will be erased.
That is amnesty.
Update: It may be splitting hairs to call this amnesty, since there's a fine to be paid, but since the fine effectively erases the illegal status, I stand behind the claim.
Sadly, after reading this thing, I can understand why "comprehensive" reform is necessary. Existing law is so convoluted and difficult to read that amending it to give it any teeth requires a "comprehensive" solution. Unfortunately this bill doesn't do much to clarify the law, but it does weaken it in several key areas while strengthening it in areas that aren't likely to mean much.
This bill is just plain unworkable. It needs to be scrapped and a new start made. Karl pointed out to me that a better approach would be to address this in focused phases to get real reform done. Maybe we could actually see that happen if it goes down in defeat. We can only hope.
Comments (0) | Trackbacks (0)
Blogs Against Nancy Pelosi
