Bill Bolling on Immigration Enforcement

| | Comments (7) | TrackBacks (0)

While Eileen at VB Dems has discovered some supposed nefariousness with our Attorney General's immigration enforcement initiatives (and rediscovered her special love for Ken Stolle in the process), today's RTD contains this reassuring column from Lt. Gov. Bill Bolling:

While Congress fails to act, states are forced to do what we can to address the issue on the state level. While the primary responsibility for immigration rests with the federal government, there are things we can do in Virginia to help address this problem.

We can require the governor to enter into a Memorandum of Understanding with the Immigration and Customs Enforcement Agency (ICE) to allow state and local law-enforcement agencies to enforce civil immigration laws. This would enable our state and local police to arrest and detain illegals when they encounter them, rather than releasing them.

We can make sure that illegals in Virginia are not receiving the benefits of citizenship. While we have already acted to take most of these benefits away, we still allow the children of illegal immigrants living in Virginia to pay in-state tuition at our colleges and universities. That should be stopped.

And finally, we can pass our own laws holding Virginia employers accountable for knowingly hiring illegal workers or knowingly failing to confirm their immigration status prior to hiring them.

Read all of that. Local and state legislation will be the next major front in the culture war during the next several months.

0 TrackBacks

Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: Bill Bolling on Immigration Enforcement.

TrackBack URL for this entry:


Had Enough said:

The Virginia House has passed many laws aimed at illegals which would have also taken all benefits they receive but the State Senate always shot them down.

Missionary (South America)kaine should be watched closely. He spoke spanish in his speech after he was sworn in. He also uses that bad word "compassion." He is not to be trusted when it comes to illegals.

I don't trust any of them who all of a sudden want to do something about the problem.

Tired of the Same Old BS said:

You may find the column reassuring but I find it ironic and troubling that someone so concerned with the rule of law demonstrates so little understanding of it, and someone who says he's looking for new ideas can only serve up the tired canards of national anti-immigration groups.

There are several errors on points of law in Bolling's column. Here are just three:

1) Bolling advocates against the rule of law and for a violation of the separation of powers doctrine in our Virginia constitution when he says "we" can require the Governor to enter into an MOU with ICE. I assume he means that the legislature can tell the excecutive what to do. Wrong. That's part of our three independent branches of government, and our checks and balances.

2) Moreover, the Governor only has the authority under federal law to agree to have state law enforcement and corrections agencies enter into agreements with ICE. He has no power to authorize or compel local law enforcement agencies to do so.

3) Federal law has restricted public benefits to certain qualified legal aliens since, at least, 1996, and state law has mirrored the federal law for three years. There is no evidence that undocumented immigrants in Virginia are getting the "benefits of citizenship," whatever Bolling means by that. There is also absolutely NO evidence that a single child of an "illegal immigrant" is receiving in-state tuition at a public college. Whether they should can and should be debated reasonably, but the fact is that, under our current law, undocumented immigrants can't be "domiciled" here and cannot, therefore, receive in-state tuition.

Add to these errors the facts that Bolling's warmed over "plan" for border security ignores: 1) 40% or more of the 12 million immigrants here without authorization are not Latino and like many others didn't come across our southern border; 2) many of the 12 million did not cross the border illegally but are here because they overstayed their work, tourist, student or other visas; and 3) the only two terrorists captured crossing any border with bomb-making materials and the intent to harm us were caught on the Canadian border.

These and other flaws in his analysis and his proposed solutions reveal a need for Bolling to continue his search for new "ideas" before he can be a credible force for positive change on this issue.

Jack said:

1) I think he meant "We the People." Bolling is not in the legislature.

2) Can the local governments enter into agreements with ICE w/o state say-so?

3) "undocumented immigrants"? Most of them have documents -- FORGED, ILLEGAL documents. They are not "undocumented," they are ILLEGAL.

Now, yes, Bolling does "ignore"...

1) ...the "fact" (where did you get this?) that "40% or more...are not Latino" because it DOESN'T MATTER. I don't care what their nationality is, and neither does Bolling. Why do you?

2) they got here. That doesn't matter either.

3) ...which border they were crossing.

None of that matters because Bolling is NOT talking about a "plan for border security." The states cannot control their borders with other states. He's talking about what we can do about the illegal immigrants who are here.

Tired of the Same Old BS said:

Actually, Bolling is the President of the Senate and can cast a deciding vote if the Senate is tied. He is an officer of the legislature, and, since he has a legislative package each year, I think it is fair to assume that he meant the legislature, not "we the people."

My point about the make up of those in the US without documents is that Bolling's focus on fencing the Mexican border is a costly endeavor that will not address the security of our Canadian border or solve the problem of the majority of immigrants without documents who came here legally and remain without authority. We need an immigration system that functions so that it doesn't create either scofflaws or vigilantes. Our current system is ridiculously bureaucratic, doesn't make us more secure and does not meet the real need America has for foreign labor.

We need real solutions not tired mantras designed to appeal to the lowest common denominator among us.

Jack said:

OK, so he want to secure the southern border first. Since far more are coming across our southern border than our northern one, that makes perfect sense.

Bolling's third, fourth, and fifth points all deal with those illegal immigrants that are here, no matter how they got here.

I really don't see what your problem is. Take Bollings five points (go to the link and read the whole thing) one-by-one, and try to tell us why you disagree with them.

So you're saying we need an "immigration system" that lets everyone in. I'd like to see some examples of other countries where that type of system is working.

Sean Tubbs said:

Bolling talks about his article on Charlottesville radio station here. You can listen to the podcast by clicking on my name above.

Leave a comment

Type the characters you see in the picture above.

Old Dominion Blog Alliance


Technorati search

» Blogs that link here