Kill the bad DREAM now, as in right now

| | Comments (34) | TrackBacks (0)

Harry Reid is trying to push through the "DREAM" act in S 2205 while he thinks no one is looking.

This is a bad, bad bill. See the reasons below. Main reason, it is a front-door amnesty which will lead to immediate reward for illegal behavior while millions are waiting in line to enter the U.S. legally! It is an outrage. Because of chain migration it will result in a new flood of under-educated and unskilled immigrants when social services at every level of government are unable to provide adequate benefits to existing citizens.

We just received word that a group of U.S. senators' staffers are right now in a meeting with a contingent of illegal aliens pleading their case.

We also heard that the phone calls are largely against the "DREAM" act. Let's keep that momentum going!

CALL YOUR SENATORS NOW: Ask them to commit to voting "no" on cloture tomorrow on S 2205 in order to keep it from coming up for a vote in the full Senate.

DC Office of Senator John Warner
Washington, DC
202-224-2023

Midlothian Office of Sen. John Warner
Midlothian, VA
804-739-0247

D.C. Office of Sen. James Webb
Washington, DC
202-224-4024

Virginia Beach Office of Sen. James Webb
Virginia Beach, VA
757-518-1674

If you are in another state find your senator's contact info by clicking here.

Highlights:

  • S. 2205 would do what all amnesties do -- entice millions more people to become illegal aliens here. The word across the world would be that immigration crime pays.
  • The DREAM Act amnesty doesn't just offer U.S. citizenship to illegal alien teenagers, it also provides amnesty to the parents of most of them. Once the amnestied teens become citizens they can obtain an amnesty for their parents.
  • Plus, anybody who can claim to be under the age of 30 can also make a claim to have arrived before the age of 16 and make a move for the amnesty (plus all of their relaties through chain migration).
  • S. 2205 provides for no extra enforcement to help ensure that families around the world don't risk their teenagers' lives by forcing them to enter the U.S. illegally across the deserts. Passage of this amnesty likely would increase deaths of illegal aliens in the desert as more and more people attempt to get into the country in preparation for the next amnesty.
  • Many of the advocacy groups pushing the DREAM Act amnesty openly say it is intended as a way to break the barrier and then to push for several more amnesties and rewards for illegal aliens.
  • Many of these teenagers weren't brought to the United States illegally by their parents. Rather, many of them came on their own and found illegal shelter with legal immigrants who were from their country. Passing this amnesty will encourage millions more families to consider forcing their young teenagers into dangerous journeys to America to become illegal aliens and hope to get similar rewards.
  • If there is a compelling story for giving amnesty to any of these high school students, it should be told only after the rule of law has been restored, including a fully functioning entry/exit system at the border and mandatory verification of all new hires by all businesses, governments and non-profits.

More background info here and here.

0 TrackBacks

Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: Kill the bad DREAM now, as in right now.

TrackBack URL for this entry: http://novatownhall.com/mt/mt-tb.cgi/1425

34 Comments

jacob said:

For what it is worth I faxed, emailed and called both of my Senators. This nonsense is going to keep happening until the Republicans retake the senate. Which aint happening anytime soon.

Laura V said:

Thanks, I faxed, emialed and called too.

Jack said:

And I'll bet, Laura, that you and Jacob are not on the same side of this issue.

Laura's a wiseacre, got to give her that. Probably not so funny to the would-be immigrants who are following the rules, though.

zimzo said:

Hey Joe, have you ever asked any of the immigrants who are following the rules how they feel? Maybe they don't really care that some people who got through be other means will get amnesty since it really doesn't affect them and they will still be ahead of illegal immigrants on the citizenship tract. And have you ever thought that many of these legal immigrants really resent the anti-immigrant hysteria people like you are whipping up because they don't wear little signs that differentiate them from illegal immigrants. Has it occurred to you that the reason the Republican party has lost the Hispanic vote -- who are by definition legal -- is because they see the anti-immigrant hysteria as directed at them rather than because of deep concern for those who came here legally. I'd really love to hear from some actual legal immigrants about how they feel because I don't really believe you when you claim that they feel it's unfair and in fact it sounds a little patronizing for you to claim to speak for them.

Talk to some who are going through the legal process, Zimzo. Might shake you out of your ideology-induced torpor.

zimzo said:

I have talked to some who are going through the legal process. At least the people I have talked to believe that the immigration system is terrible for everyone and they don't think making it worse for others would make it any better for them. In fact the anti-immigrant hysteria being whipped up in this country worries them.

I didn't ask you whether you thought legal immigrants thought the immigration process was difficult. My question was whether you have asked any legal immigrants specifically if they think amnesty is "unfair." My guess is that you haven't and that you have no idea how they feel and that you don't really care how they feel despite your concern trolling.

No, they think it's unfair. Glad I could clear that up for you.

Had Enough said:

Anti-Immigrant! You still do not know the difference between Illegal Alien and Immigrant. An Immigrant enters the country Legally and properly. A Illegal Alien enters the country Against The Law over our borders without permission.

Spewing Anti-Immigrant bull to suit yourself as usual. No one here is Anti-Immigrant, I am Anti- Illegal Aliens, as are most on this blog.

zimzo said:

And how do you know they think it's unfair, Joe? How many legal immigrants are in your group because they think amnesty is unfair? Let me guess: zero?

zimzo,

My Dad, he is a legal immigrant to the U.S., and he thinks illegal immigrants are cheating the system and he resents that there is even talk of allowing those that are here illegally to become legal residents.

Oh, Had Enough, you are wrong about the definition of the word immigrant -- look it up. It only refers to someone that has come into a foreign country in order to take up residence there, generally as a permanent resident. It says nothing about the legal status of the person.

Had Enough said:

Amnesty is Unfair to the Citizens and the Legal Immigrants. Why should Illegals assume they are special, because they are not.

What bothers me more than the Illegals are the people who promote their lawlessness.

zimzo said:

Well, actually, Brian, your father's opinion is a minority view among legal immigrants:

http://news.newamericamedia.org/news/view_custom.html?custom_page_id=289

Laura V said:

I have to say that it is not clear that the majority of legal Hipanic residents and citizens feel that way. There is a good poll done by a conservative think tank that prooves Joe wrong and paints a pretty clear picture as to how the GOP is losing the Hispanic vote over thier handling of the immigration issue. Hispanics vary vastly in their opinions, but immigration seems to be the issue that a majority agrees upon. I also have close contacts with an organized group of Hispanic Republicans who would disagree strongly with Joe.

Certainly there are some who feel amnesty is unfair, but clearly not a majority.

Linda B said:

Z, you're so full of it. Our son-in-law had to go through the immigration process. Two of my friend's fiances are going through the process. A number of people I work with have gone through the process. And yes, there are some people in HSL that have gone through the process.

These folks are from a variety of backgrounds and some are very liberal politically. They are unanimous on one topic: Illegal immigration is wrong.

Well, I guess they'd all agree that legal immigration should be made easier, as well. But that doesn't mean a free pass for those who broke the law and came here illegally while they were following the rules and paying the fees.

Laura V said:

I don't think that anyone is advocating a free pass Linda, or at least not any to be taken seriously. The majority of Hispanic voters are in favor of comprehensive immigration reform that includes increased border security, increased quotas for legal entry, and some way to adjust status for the millions of undocumented currently living and working here, provided they have not broken criminal laws. The devil certainly is in those details with disagreement on how stiff the penalities should be to adjust status, if those folks would be given temp work permits, or the opportunity to get on the pathway to eventual citizenship.

Linda B said:

I am glad to hear that, Laura. And we probably agree on much in that regard.

However, unfortunately, at this moment in time, saying "let's let the federal government fix those things" does amount to a free pass. (Perhaps not the immigrants' fault, but the reality.) Some people are not willing to just sit back and see what happens while the folks on The Hill do nothing.

Jack said:

"The majority of Hispanic voters are in favor of comprehensive immigration reform that includes increased border security, increased quotas for legal entry, and some way to adjust status for the millions of undocumented currently living and working here, provided they have not broken criminal laws." -- Laura V

I can agree with all of that. The fact is, however, that unlawful aliens HAVE broken criminal laws. The punishment is deportation.

There is already a path to citizenship for unlawful aliens. Go home and get in line.

These surveys, I notice, are of legal immigrants. How about a survey of those who have been waiting in line for a few years, and have still not gotten in?

Here's an idea: let those who have been waiting in line auction off their place in line to those illegals who want amnesty. Then those who will be hurt by anmesty -- those waiting to immigrate legally -- will get some compensation from these law-breakers.

zimzo said:

It's a very peculiar idea to believe that amnesty "hurts" those who came here legally. It doesn't have any effect on them at all. Linda is right that most people who came here legally think the system is terrible and would like it to be easier but how do you go from that to believing that it should be bad for everyone else? Amnesty wouldn't make it worse for those who came here legally and as part of a comprehensive immigration reform bill it would make it better. The idea that those who came here legally begrudge those who didn't or would want to trade places with them is a minority view at best. The poll I posted a link to bears this out. Legal immigrants are much more worried by the climate of anti-immigrant hysteria that has been stirred up by groups like Help Save Loudoun as the poll also shows.

I think it's remarkable that you guys continue to presume to speak for legal immigrants when you haven't even asked them how they feel. Frankly, I don't think you really care how they feel and you don't really care how "unfair" it is.

Jack said:

"It's a very peculiar idea to believe that amnesty "hurts" those who came here legally."

You and your reading comprehension problems, zimzo. Try again:

"those who will be hurt by amnesty -- those WAITING TO immigrate legally."

The ones who are already here are not hurt by illegal immigration, at least no more than is anyone else whose jobs are being underbid by unlawful aliens. That is why it is silly to take a poll of those who have already immigrated legally. I want to see a poll of those still in line, and see what they think of those who sneak in illegally and then demand legal status.

zimzo said:

And have you asked people who are waiting in line to immigrate how they feel about amnesty? Even less likely, I'm sure.

Gee, I wonder what those waiting in line would prefer: waiting even longer while you tighten border security and try to deport all those who are already here either immediately or through attrition or a comprehensive immigration policy that makes immigration easier, sets more realistic quotas and grants amnesty to those who are here?

Do you honestly expect anyone to believe that you really care about how unfair amnesty is to people who don't even live here? Can't you guys be honest about anything?

Jack said:

"Gee, I wonder what those waiting in line would prefer: waiting even longer while you tighten border security and try to deport all those who are already here either immediately or through attrition or a comprehensive immigration policy that makes immigration easier, sets more realistic quotas and grants amnesty to those who are here?"

There's the problem, zimzo. Why do you think making legal immigration easier and setting more realistic quotas have to depend on granting amnesty to the lawbreakers? There is no reason we cannot simultaneously enlarge the quotas, secure the borders, and crack down on unlawful aliens and their employers. THAT would be comprehensive reform.

zimzo said:

But that just brings us back to the question of why you think it is so important to punish people, to disrupt the lives of people and their children who have been here for many years and small businessmen. The whole "fairness" argument is just a smokescreen to cover this strange need to ruin the lives of people whose effect on you is negligable.

Jack said:

Because if we do not enforce the laws, we will have more people breaking the law.

A pickpocket has little effect on me, either. Neither does a bookie or a loan shark. But their actions are illegal. Is it right to disrupt their lives and the lives of their children by sending them to jail? Yes. Those are the consequences of breaking the law. Unlawful aliens know that when they come here. That is a risk they choose to take. They and other types of criminals choose to take such risks every day. The difference is that the unlawful aliens can take their families with them when they go home. Other criminals do not have the option of taking their families to jail with them.

The small businessmen who have been hiring these unlawful aliens have put other, law-abiding small businessmen out of business. They should not only have their workers deported, they should be permanently ineligible for a business license, and I wouldn't object to a bit of jail time for them, either.

zimzo said:

How many businessmen hiring illegal immigrants have put law-abiding businessmen out of work? You have no idea. My guess: Not many if any.

And sorry people who come her to make a better life for their families are not anything like loan sharks or pickpockets, and their children certainly aren't. It's a ridiculous and specious comparison and you know it.

Jack said:

Your guess is as worthless as mine. So what? Those who have hired unlawful aliens have broken the law.

I'm sure petty thieves and loan sharks just want to make a better life for their families, too. How are the children of loan sharks and thieves any more culpable than those of unlawful aliens? Why punish the children of thieves and loan sharks by putting their parents in jail? Those children do not even have the option of staying with their parents. The children of unlawful aliens do.

Why do you have such a problem with enforcing the law?

zimzo said:

If your guess is worthless, why are you proposing disrupting so many lives and throwing people in jail based on your worthless guess?

Children of loan sharks and pickpockets are not forcibly removed from their homes, schools and friends and deported after being locked up in detention camps.

I'm not against enforcing laws, I'm against enforcing stupid laws especially when the enforcement of those laws would ruin so many lives not to mention our economy.

Jack said:

I am not. I am proposing sending people to jail and disrupting their lives for BREAKING THE LAW. That is what happens to criminals. Why is that so hard for you to understand?

Children of unlawful aliens are not forcibly removed from their homes, either. If they can afford the homes, they can continue to live there, just like the children of any other criminal that is put in jail. If they cannot afford the homes, then they will have to leave them, just like the children of any other criminal.

Anonymous said:

zimzo,
nice dodge on Jacks _simple_ question. Lets try again ...
"Why do you have such a problem with enforcing the law?"

Can you answer this?

zimzo said:

It's a misdemeanor, Jack, with a punishment that goes far beyond the punishment for other misdemeanors. And how interesting that conservatives are supposed to be all in favor of family values but they don't mind breaking up families of immigrants. Your compassion is touching.

I don't see how I dodged Jack's question. I don't believe in enforcing stupid laws, like, for example, Virginia's law against adultery. Do you think we should start enforcing that law?

Jack said:

What do YOU think is an appropriate punishment for being here illegally? Keep in mind that it needs to be sufficient to keep people from simply overstaying their visas.

I do not think that you dodged the question, but the answer to stupid laws is to change the law. However, no-one is proposing changing the punishment for being here illegally, either by coming here illegally or by overstaying one's visa. What they are proposing is amnesty for those who have broken the law, and a worthless promise that they will enforce the law in the future.

And yes, I do think we should start enforcing VA Code ยง 18.2-365: "Any person, being married, who voluntarily shall have sexual intercourse with any person not his or her spouse shall be guilty of adultery, punishable as a Class 4 misdemeanor."

Linda B said:

Zimzo said: "Amnesty wouldn't make it worse for those who came here legally and as part of a comprehensive immigration reform bill it would make it better. The idea that those who came here legally begrudge those who didn't or would want to trade places with them is a minority view at best."

I think I see the problem here, Z ... your generosity of spirit overrules your sense of fairness, while for some of us it is the other way around.

I don't know about you, but I hated it when I stayed up late studying to get an A on a test and then found out the guy next to me got an A because he cheated. Or when I go to great lengths to document my charitable giving so I can claim the proper amount on my taxes and then find out that someone else is claiming all sorts of bogus stuff and getting the same deducations. In neither case does the other person's good fortune affect me (hmm ... or does it?) but it bothers me nonetheless.

jacob said:

zimzo,
If the law is stupid then change it. That is the correct course of action. Ignoring a law, and not enforcing it only erodes our societies respect for the all the laws.

We are not a nation based upon a ethnicity like Germany, we are a nation of laws. We swear allegiance to a document (the constitution). The ideas and ideals behind the documents and laws that represent those ideas must respected or we as a nation will loose our identity.

Is that what you want?

jacob said:

Laura V,
Amnesty by definition is a free ride:
->Amnesty (from the Greek amnestia, oblivion) is an act of justice by which the supreme power in a state restores those who may have been guilty of any offence against it to the position of innocent persons. It includes more than pardon, inasmuch as it obliterates all legal remembrance of the offence.

There must be appropriate consequences or the law is meaningless. The current STATED consequence of the law is deportation.

Leave a comment


Type the characters you see in the picture above.

Old Dominion Blog Alliance

Technorati

Technorati search

» Blogs that link here

ECOSYSTEM