After the intense battle over the Bush-Kennedy Senate amnesty bill this spring, both parties came away battered and bruised. President Bush’s job approval ratings continued to plummet, while the only people in Washington less popular with the public were the Democratic congressional leadership.

http://www.fairus.org/site/PageServer?pagename=research_sept07nl01

In his ruling, Judge Munley essentially told local communities that until such time as the federal government acts to enforce the immigration laws of this country, local communities are powerless to act to protect themselves from the adverse consequences of the federal government’s failures.


http://www.fairus.org/site/PageServer?pagename=research_sept07nl02

WASHINGTON - Republican presidential hopeful Rudy Giuliani said illegal immigration is not a crime, prompting rival Mitt Romney to accuse him of not taking the problem seriously. The two have clashed for weeks over illegal immigration, an issue that inflames GOP conservatives who influence primary elections. The irony is that both candidates have in the past taken more liberal stands on the issue.


http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070908/ap_on_el_pr/giuliani_immigration_6

"...Hispanic activists openly yearn for the day when immigrants rise up and retake the American Southwest, more than 150 years after the U.S. annexed it."

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070907/ap_on_re_us/immigration_conspiracy_theory_1

"By default, our present policy is to import poor people. This imposes strains on local schools, public services and health care. From 2000 to 2006, 41 percent of the increase in people without health insurance occurred among Hispanics. Paradoxically, many Hispanics are advancing quite rapidly. But assimilation -- which should be our goal -- will be frustrated if we keep adding to the pool of poor. Newcomers will compete with earlier arrivals. In my view, though some economists disagree, competition from low-skilled Hispanics also hurts low-skilled blacks."


http://numbersusa.com/news?ID=8744

"A higher percentage of Carolinians than ever opposes efforts to allow illegal immigrants to stay in the United States and work their way toward citizenship, a Charlotte Observer/WCNC News Carolinas Poll shows."


http://www.charlotte.com/politics/story/268630.html

"In the first place we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in good faith becomes an American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man because of creed, or birthplace, or origin. But this is predicated upon the man's becoming in very fact an American, and nothing but an American...

There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American, but something else also, isn't an American at all. We have room for but one flag, the American flag, and this excludes the red flag, which symbolizes all wars against liberty and civilization, just as much as it excludes any foreign flag of a nation to which we are hostile...We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language...and we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a loyalty to the American people."

--Theodore Roosevelt, 1919

"Even by Mexico's standards, Calderon's blatant hypocrisy is breathtaking. Calderon told the Washington Post more than a year ago that he believes laws are not a relative concept, nor subject to a personal concept of justice. Calderon declared a big difference between himself and his rival for the Mexican presidency, Manuel Lopez Obrador, was this: 'I believe in the rule of law.' Obviously he does not believe in the rule of U.S. law on U.S. soil."

"Calderon can't have it both ways. He cannot fail his citizens at home and then act as the Great Imperialist Protector of his citizens who are driven by poverty and corruption to enter the United States illegally. The United States provides Mexico with an annual surplus of $65 billion in trade, an estimated $25 billion in remittances from Mexican citizens living and working here illegally, and at least another $25 billion generated by the illegal drug trade across our southern border."

http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/09/04/Dobbs.Sept5/index.html

"Why does the United States remain at risk six years after the mass murder and mass destruction of the September 11, 2001 attacks on our country by al-Qaeda terrorists? The only clear answer to that question is that interests that benefit from maintaining our borders open to a largely unrestricted flow of foreigners into and out of our country have effectively deterred measures that would close major loopholes that perpetuate our continuing vulnerability."


http://www.fairus.org/site/DocServer/2007_911Report.pdf?docID=1641

"All the 2008 Democratic presidential contenders at a debate broadcast in Spanish on Univision, the country's largest Spanish-language television network, said they would push quickly once in the White House for a comprehensive overhaul of immigration laws.

Most of the candidates condemned what they said were Republican efforts to demonize illegal immigrants and use the issue of immigration to divide Americans."

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070910/pl_nm/usa_politics_democrats_dc_1

This link will take you to a list of the immigration bills that our 110th Congress will be considering. Remember, these bills only deal with one issue.
Its no wonder nothing gets done.

http://numbersusa.com/interests/legislation_proposed110.html

Since 1990 this country has accepted an average of one million legal immigrants, per year. I know of no other country that even comes close.

http://www.numbersusa.com/overpopulation/immtrad.html

To all of those who followed the proper procedures, waited your turn, and entered this country legally: WELCOME.

To those who think they are above such things:
GO HOME.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070912/ap_on_go_ot/census_demographics_1

"Remittances are second only to oil sales as a source of foreign income for Mexico, and because they usually go directly from workers to families at the low end of the economic scale, a slowdown could become a pressing issue for Mexican officials, said Aaron Terrazas, the report's author."

http://numbersusa.com/news?ID=8774

Senate Poised to Debate DREAM Act

This week, there have been increasing reports from the Hill that Senator Dick Durbin (D-IL) intends to offer the DREAM Act as an amendment to the FY08 Department of Defense Authorization Bill (H.R.1585). Debate of this legislation and the Durbin Amendment is expected NEXT WEEK! Yesterday, Senator Jeff Sessions (R-AL) held a press conference alerting the Capitol press corps to the growing possibility that the DREAM Act would be resurrected. Calling the bill "amnesty," he said, "We may be headed for another immigration battle."

The DREAM Act does two things: (1) it grants amnesty to illegal aliens who entered the country before the age of 16 and have met certain educational requirements and (2) it reverses current law to allow states to provide in-state tuition to illegal aliens while charging non-resident U.S. citizens out-of-state tuition.

The DREAM Act creates a three-tiered system to grant amnesty to illegal aliens who arrived in the U.S. before the age of 16.

Illegal aliens who are over 12 and are enrolled in primary or secondary school are eligible for a stay of removal.
Illegal aliens who have obtained a high school diploma or a GED, or have simply been admitted to an institution of higher education, are eligible for conditional lawful permanent resident status (conditional LPR status). There is NO CAP ON THE NUMBER OF ALIENS who may receive conditional LPR status, there is NO AGE LIMIT, and such status MAY BE EXTENDED INDEFINITELY.
Illegal aliens who have already obtained conditional LPR status under the act and have also completed at least 2 years of a degree program or 2 years in the military are eligible for legal permanent resident status (LPR status).
Supporters of the DREAM Act insist that the legislation is not an amnesty and that it is only intended to help children. However, the details of the bill clearly prove that their claims are false! Even if the children only entered with their illegal alien parents, those illegal alien parents are rewarded when their children become eligible to receive a U.S. education paid for by taxpayer dollars and are then granted amnesty.

*I have no link for this as it was sent, in an email, by a friend in Washington

I know a girl who went to Chicago on a 3 month visa to work for 'camp America',she really loves America,and asked the Authorities if she could have an extension to her visa.Immigration said,'no problem',I think she returns home at the end of the month,this girl is in her third year of training to be a sports physio,and when her studies are complete she's gonna aply for a green card,why dont other people do it this way.

I know a girl who went to Chicago on a 3 month visa to work for 'camp America',she really loves America,and asked the Authorities if she could have an extension to her visa.Immigration said,'no problem',I think she returns home at the end of the month,this girl is in her third year of training to be a sports physio,and when her studies are complete she's gonna aply for a green card,why dont other people do it this way.


Thousands do. Some feel they are above any such requirements. Then again, the wait for a green card can be very long. Some graduating students are unable to get the required H1B to stay here after they finish school. As a result they "overstay" their student visa, and become illegal.

Hmm right.Its a complex issue,with an extremely difficult decision to be made about the 12 million illegals already there,it seems impractable to deport them all.

Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., a leading immigration policy critic, said Wednesday that amendments planned for upcoming legislation could put more than 4 million illegal immigrants on a path to citizenship.

That is about one-third of the estimated 12 million illegal immigrants who would have benefited from the comprehensive immigration overhaul bill (S 1639) he helped kill earlier this year, Sessions said.

Sessions warned colleagues in a letter that legislation (S 774) labeled the DREAM Act that would allow states to provide college benefits to illegal immigrants could be offered as an amendment to the fiscal 2008 Defense appropriations bill (HR 3222) later this month. The measure could benefit 1.3 million illegal immigrants.

More alarming to Sessions was that Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., plans to offer an amendment to the five-year farm bill that could come to the floor in October that could legalize 1.5 million farm workers. The Congressional Budget Office estimated they would bring another 1.8 million relatives into the country with them.

"To people who voted against the comprehensive package, they really should not vote for this," Sessions said. "It's one third of the total number and has less demands on the people who are here illegally."

The reason for Sessions' alarm was a July 25 colloquy in which Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., assured Feinstein of a vote on the so-called AgJobs measure, which she introduced earlier this year as a freestanding bill (S 340). "I will do everything I can to make sure it is part of the farm bill," Reid said.

Sessions said Feinstein is negotiating a potential compromise with the ranking Republican on the Agriculture Committee, Sen. Saxby Chambliss of Georgia.

"It could blow up on the floor and cause a big fuss," Sessions said. "We need to focus on the legitimate labor needs of the United States. But our focus should not be on how to serve people who are in the country illegally."


http://numbersusa.com

Even tho some yanks will find it difficult to swallow,the only solution to the 12 million already there,is to legalise them,that said,this shouldnt happen until the borders are secured,which may be never.

Even tho some yanks will find it difficult to swallow,the only solution to the 12 million already there,is to legalise them,that said,this shouldnt happen until the borders are secured,which may be never.


No, the solution is to remove the source(s) of their employment. With that done, they will leave, without the need of deportation.
Without the stigma of a forced deportation, they will be free to apply for a proper visa, and enter the country legally. As they should have in the first place.

I suspect we're approaching a time when mere birth in the U.S. will not suffice for citizenship. So many illegals come across the border already pregnant firmly believing that once they give birth nobody will send them back. While that may be currently true, it is a practice that also needs to change. There needs to be a new definition of citizenship, one not based soley on place of birth.

No, the solution is to remove the source(s) of their employment. With that done, they will leave, without the need of deportation.
Without the stigma of a forced deportation, they will be free to apply for a proper visa, and enter the country legally. As they should have in the first place.Employers mightnt agree with ya tho

I suspect we're approaching a time when mere birth in the U.S. will not suffice for citizenship. So many illegals come across the border already pregnant firmly believing that once they give birth nobody will send them back. While that may be currently true, it is a practice that also needs to change. There needs to be a new definition of citizenship, one not based soley on place of birth.


A number of countries determine citizenship solely on the citizenship of the parents. Place of birth is immaterial. France is one which requires children born of foreign national, on French soil, to request nationalization, upon coming of age.

Employers mightnt agree with ya tho


Yeah, there are a number of them breaking that law already. By allowing it our politicians are sending the message that only certain laws need be obeyed. Thats going to bite them on the ass sooner or later.

Yeah,to me over here there dosent seem to be the political will in the US to sort this.The Democrats seem to attract the immigrant vote,the Republicans seem to be attracted to cheap labour,I see the debate has died away again.

Yeah,to me over here there dosent seem to be the political will in the US to sort this.The Democrats seem to attract the immigrant vote,the Republicans seem to be attracted to cheap labour,I see the debate has died away again.


No, the debate has not died away, its just not being reported. There are more immigration bills, being considered by Congress, than there were before. The politicians have broken down all the elements of the defeated measure, and are attaching them to other bills. Trying to get them passed piece meal, rather than as a package.

http://numbersusa.com/interests/legislation_proposed110.html

A Sleeper Amnesty: Time to Wake Up from the DREAM Act

Just three months after the Senate immigration bill met its well-deserved end, amnesty advocates in the U.S. Congress resumed their efforts. Recently, Senator Richard Durbin (D–IL) announced on the Senate floor his intention to offer the Development, Relief, and EduSpamcation for Alien Minors (DREAM) Act as an amendSpamment to the defense authorization bill.

http://www.heritage.org/Research/Immigration/bg2069.cfm

Paul,

We can't deport all twelve million estimated illegal aliens in this country but that should not mean we do not deport as many as we can. We can't catch all the thieves in this country either but that does not mean the police do not attempt to apprehend as many of them as they can. We can either look at the number of illegal aliens in this country and throw up our hands in dismay, doing nothing, or we can try to correct the situation to the greatest degree possible.

Ok Frogger,but America likes to look at things business like.How much would it cost to deport these people.That said,there isnt any point until you guys secure your borders first,north and south.

On Wednesday, the United Food and Commercial Workers Union filed a class action lawsuit in federal court in Amarillo, Texas, aimed at stopping U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) from carrying out enforcement actions against employers who hire illegal aliens. According to the complaint filed in the case, the class action arises from raids conducted at six Swift and Company meat packing facilities in December of 2006. During the raids, the Union alleges that ICE detained not only numerous illegal aliens—274 of whom were charged with identity theft—but also several citizens and lawful permanent residents who were present in the plant at the time. These individuals claim that their temporary detentions exceeded the powers of ICE under federal statute and violated their Fourth and Fifth Amendment rights. (Union Complaint, September 12, 2007).

The complaint asks for an injunction barring ICE from carrying out workplace enforcement actions during which citizens and lawful permanent residents might be detained. But a favorable decision would likely halt all workplace raids by ICE, which would be unable to lock down a workplace until the legal status of all employees present could be verified. This result appears to be the goal of the Union. In its press release announcing the suit, the Union stated that it hopes to have the court "enjoin the government from illegally arresting and detaining workers including"—but not limited to—"U.S. citizens and legal residents while at their workplace." According to Union president Joseph Hanson, "What happened to the Swift workers and the workers in other plants is absolutely an outrage to me." (Houston Chronicle, September 11, 2007)

ICE Spokesman Tim Counts said Tuesday that the persons seized in the six raids were afforded full due process rights and that the claims in the Union complaint are baseless. He further indicated that ICE would vigorously defend the suit. (Dallas Morning News, September 12, 2007) In July 2007, ICE conducted a second raid of the Swift plants and made an additional 20 arrests. Among those arrested was a Union representative who was charged with recruiting and harboring illegal immigrants. (KCAN-TV, September 12, 2007)

From:
http://fairus.org


The really sad part is they will find a Federal Judge who agrees with them. It's a sad, sad day when judges will not allow the enforcement of laws.

Big business dosent let a little thing like the law of the land get in the way of making money.
Thats why I have my doubts if it will ever be sorted out satisfactorily

So Paul, will Ireland follow the British lead?

British Prime Minister Announces that Skilled Immigrant Workers Must Learn English

Speaking before the Trade Unions Congress on Monday, British Prime Minister Gordon Brown announced plans to tighten immigration rules for migrant workers entering the United Kingdom beginning in 2008. As part of a broader plan to create 500,000 jobs for British workers, Brown announced that his government would now require skilled immigrant workers (such as computer programmers) to learn English before coming to Britain. Britain already has an English requirement for what it calls high-skilled workers, such as physicians. The new rule requires that workers in both skilled and high-skilled categories—all of whom are eligible to settle permanently in Britain—must either pass an internationally recognized English test or prove that they have learned English from a recognized institution before they are permitted to enter the country. According to a government source, of the 96,000 skilled migrant workers who had entered Britain in the previous year, 35,000 would have been inadmissible under the new English-language rule. (The Times, September 10, 2007)

Home Secretary Jaqui Smith, commenting on the new rules, stated, "Those who we welcome into the U.K. to work and settle here need to understand our traditions and feel that they are part of our shared national culture. They need to integrate into our country, learn English and use our language." (Reuters, September 9, 2007) The Director General of British Chamber of Commerce, David Frost, however, came out against the new rules. "Of course language skills are important but I would be concerned if this meant that those who want to work and help our economy grow are kept out of the country and take their skills and talent elsewhere." The Minister for Overseas Affairs for India also chimed in, indicating that it would review the rule and, if warranted, have its Commonwealth Embassy—or High Commission—present a complaint to the British government. (Times Now TV, September 13, 2007)

The Prime Minister also announced a review to determine whether the English language requirement should be extended to non-skilled workers, who are not permitted to settle in Britain. The new rule would only apply to workers coming from outside of the European Union and goes into effect concurrently with the government's revised point-based immigration system in 2008. (Reuters)

Hmm,I dont live in the Republic anymore so I dont keep up to spec with everything,I will check it out.
The only thing Id say is that Ive never seen an emigrant yet who couldnt speak the lingo,even if heavily accented and I couldnt understand them.The thing with Ireland is,there isnt any Chinatowns-Italian quarters that like,the new arrivals dont herd.
As for UK,I would have thought it was compulsary for any countrys immigrants to speak the language these days.

The senators noted below voted NO on the Comprehensive Amnesty in June, but have not yet pledged to vote NO on the DREAM Act amnesty.

Alabama: Shelby
Alaska: Murkowski, Stevens
Arkansas: Pryor
Colorado: Allard
Georgia: Chambliss, Isakson
Idaho: Crapo
Indiana: Bayh
Iowa: Grassley, Harkin
Kansas: Brownback,Roberts
Kentucky: McConnell
Louisiana: Landrieu
Maine: Collins
Michigan: Stabenow
Minnesota: Coleman
Mississippi: Cochran
Missouri: Bond, McCaskill
Montana: Baucus, Tester
Nebraska: Nelson (Ben)
Nevada: Ensign
New Hampshire: Sununu
New Mexico: Bingaman, Domenici
North Carolina: Burr, Dole
North Dakota: Dorgan
Ohio: Brown, Voinovich
Oklahoma: Coburn
Oregon: Smith
South Carolina: DeMint
South Dakota: *Johnson, Thune
Tennessee: Alexander, Corker
Texas: Cornyn, Hutchison
Utah: Hatch
Vermont: Sanders
Virginia: Warner, Webb
West Virginia: Byrd, Rockefeller
Wyoming: Enzi, Barrasso

* Did not vote in June

During consideration of the Department of Defense authorization bill (H.R. 1585) this week, open-borders senators may attempt to attach three proposals that, when taken together, would give amnesty to millions of illegal aliens and dramatically increase the importation of foreign workers at a time 10 million Americans are looking for jobs and can't find employment. The floor vote on the amendment containing the DREAM Act amnesty (SA 2237) may occur as early as Wednesday, September 19.

http://numbersusa.com

Ok Frogger,but America likes to look at things business like.How much would it cost to deport these people.That said,there isnt any point until you guys secure your borders first,north and south.

First of all, it's estimated that the 12-15 million illegals in this country cost us about $2.2 trillion per year.

Someone has finally fixed an approximate taxpayer cost of between 12 million and 15 million illegal aliens residing in the U.S.

A new study by the Heritage Foundation's Robert Rector found a household headed by an individual without a high school education, including about two-thirds of illegal aliens, costs U.S. taxpayers more than $32,000 in federal, state and local benefits. That same family contributes an average of $9,000 a year in taxes, resulting in a net tax burden of $22,449 each year.

Over the course of the household's lifetime that tax burden translates to $1.1 million.

If the lower figure of 12 million illegal aliens is used for estimation purposes, the total tax burden translates to $2.2 trillion. --WorldNet Daily (http://wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=55135)

To deport them.... $94 billion.

“Stop the madness! DEPORT,” one of many like-minded comments in a previous post on illegal immigration, is an opinion that has always lacked a price tag. Another figure — the estimated 12 million foreigners in the United States right now without permission — hinted that it would not be cheap. And others doubted whether it was even possible.

So it fell to Senator Susan M. Collins, Republican of Maine, to try popping the question on Thursday.

During a hearing with Julie L. Myers, chief of Immigrations and Customs Enforcement, she asked, “Could you give us some idea of what the cost of trying to locate, detain and deport all of the 12 million people who are here illegally would be?”

Lo and behold, an answer shot back with ease: “Our agency has estimated that it would cost at least $94 billion.”

She emphasized that it was a “very rough” estimate, not taking into account the likely deterrent effects of a nationwide hunt for evey illegal immigrant. Many may choose to return home on their own and avoid the average month-long stay in a holding cell.

In fact, detaining the illegal immigrants would be one of the most significant costs of the round-up, according to a spokesman for the agency who did the math for CNN:

He said the amount was calculated by multiplying the estimated 12 million people by the average cost of detaining people for a day: $97. That was multiplied by the average length of detention: 32 days.

ICE officials also considered transportation costs, which average $1,000 per person.

But that amount can vary widely, the spokesman said. Some deportees are simply driven by bus across the border, while others must take charter planes to distant countries, he said.

Finally, the department looked at personnel costs, bringing the total to roughly $94 billion. --NYT (http://thelede.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/09/13/estimate-for-deporting-illegal-immigrants-94-billion/)

Of course, that $94 billion figure doesn't take into account the fact that, if enforcement were done right, only a very few of the illegals would actually need to be deported. Employer sanctions and withdrawing of benefits would take care of at least half of them, if not more. If we started a mass deportation program, I think it's safe to say that most illegals would return home on their own, rather than opt for 32 days in a holding cell before being sent back anyway.

And then there's that old "Homeland security" bugaboo. By allowing these unknown people into our country, we risk additional terrorist activity. No way to calculate that cost...

Cheap at half the price. DEPORT 'EM! :mad:

A touchy subject Fran.
Well Im not sure where you got your figures but it dosent eliminate the lack of political will to enforce or come up with effective laws for combating illegal Immigration.
Your figures show these make the US a net loss,tho I wonder how much profit they make big business in profits.

The DREAM Act: Illinois' senior senator backs in-state tuition for illegal aliens from neighboring countries but not American citizens from neighboring states. Do we need more incentives for illegal immigration?

Durbin's "DREAM Act" (for the Development, Relief and Education for Alien Minors) is actually a recurring nightmare, a bad idea that died as part of "comprehensive" immigration reform but which the assistant majority leader has stealthily attached to, of all things, a defense spending bill.

But this is amnesty by any other name. It gives aliens who entered this country before the age of 16, and who have successfully evaded the law for five years, conditional green-card status that can later be converted to a regular green card. Then it can be used to seek green cards for the parents who brought their child here illegally.

That this amounts to back-door amnesty is borne out by the legislation's lack of an upper age limit for an illegal alien to apply. Any alien of any age can simply queue up at the nearest Customs and Immigration office and declare that he or she was here illegally before reaching 16. No documentation or proof is required.

It also allows illegal aliens to receive in-state tuition rates at public universities, discriminating against legal foreign students and children of U.S. citizens from other states. When she supported similar legislation as part of the failed comprehensive immigration reform package, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said: "Our country does not benefit by depriving young people of an education." Does that include the children of U.S. citizens?

True, children of illegal aliens didn't get a vote when their parents chose to enter the U.S. illegally. But our country does not benefit when its laws are ignored or its citizens are denied the same benefits available to those who have sneaked past the Border Patrol.

Durbin's legislation repeals a 1996 law that bars any state from offering in-state tuition rates to illegal aliens who have gotten by a Border Patrol agent unless the children of that agent are also offered the same opportunity. After all, should illegal aliens in a state get preference over, say, the children of 9/11 victims?

Title 8, Chapter 14, Sec. 1623 clearly states that "an alien who is not lawfully present in the United States shall not be eligible on the basis of residence within a state . . . for any post-secondary education benefit unless a citizen or national is eligible for such a benefit." Durbin's legislation speaks only of benefiting "alien minors."

Ten states (California, Illinois, Kansas, Nebraska, New Mexico, New York, Oklahoma, Utah, Texas and Washington) have their own versions of DREAM. The financial benefits of these programs to illegal aliens are as great as the penalty imposed on U.S. citizens.

As Kris Kobach, visiting fellow at the Heritage Foundation, points out, a student from Missouri attending the University of Kansas with not so much as a parking ticket is charged three times the tuition as an illegal alien whose very presence is a violation of federal criminal law. Durbin wants to extend this justice nationwide.

Break this nation's laws, don't get caught, and U.S. taxpayers struggling to send their own kids to college, many taking out loans, will subsidize your kid's education as he takes up the spot that might have gone to the child of a veteran from, say, Operation Iraqi Freedom, who can't afford it because he or she was born in, say, Illinois.

Americans are beginning to wonder what benefits accrue to being a U.S. citizen when illegal aliens and their offspring are treated better than law-abiding citizens. So are we.


http://numbersusa.com

This just shows to what extreams this fool will go to in order to get this crap passed. Hope its not enough. All it will take is for one of these bills to pass, then its"Katie bar the door", anything goes then.

Sen. Richard J. Durbin, trying to win support to pass his proposal to give legal status to illegal aliens who go to college or join the military, said yesterday he has dropped from his plan a mandate for in-state tuition rates and is promising to impose an age limit to cut the number of people who would be eligible.

http://washingtontimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070920/NATION/109200094/1001

KANSAS CITY, Missouri (Reuters) - A routine city hall appointment threatens to turn Kansas City into a new front in the U.S. debate over illegal immigration, even though the closest Mexico border crossing is hundreds of miles (kilometers) away.


http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070926/ts_nm/immigration_minuteman_dc_1

The Hill : September 25 , 2007 -- by Jessica Holzer

The immigration battle may reignite this week over Senate legislation that would allow hundreds of thousands of illegal immigrants who arrived in the U.S. as children to achieve legal status after attending college or enlisting in the military.

Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), the majority whip, wants to offer the legislation, dubbed the DREAM Act, as an amendment to the defense authorization bill, which the Senate could vote on this week.

But the Illinois Democrat has yet to strike a deal with Republicans, who may block the amendment from consideration, and he faces intense competition from Senate colleagues fighting to attach other provisions to the defense bill.

Although procedural obstacles could bottle up the amendment, the possibility of a vote has spurred groups on both sides of the immigration debate to ratchet up their lobbying efforts, three months after sweeping immigration reform collapsed in the Senate.

NumbersUSA, which was instrumental in sinking the earlier Senate legislation, has alerted its 550,000-strong activist network to the prospect of a vote on the DREAM Act and on Thursday it flooded lawmakers with more than 260,000 faxes opposing the legislation, according to a spokeswoman for the group, Caroline Espinosa.

Meanwhile, the roster of Hispanic, civil rights, church and labor groups that have been pushing for a relaxation of the immigration laws are supporting the legislation. They are joined by new allies, such as the National Education Association and the American Council on Education, that believe the legislation will help keep talented students in school. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce, however, is not throwing its weight behind the DREAM Act because it doesn't do enough to help businesses, the group's director of immigration policy, Angelo Amador, said.

Durbin's legislation would allow only those illegal immigrants under the age of 30 who came to the U.S. at least five years before the date of enactment to apply for permanent residency. Also, candidates must display "good moral character" and have completed two years of college or military service.

Because it would allow undocumented immigrants to join the military, Durbin contends that the defense authorization is an appropriate vehicle for the legislation. Spokesmen for the Defense Department have voiced support for the DREAM Act, arguing that it would help the military meet its recruiting goals.

Proponents portray the DREAM Act as a targeted measure that would give a limited group of high-achieving immigrants a chance at legal status, while critics say it will lead to untold cases of fraud and encourage more illegal immigration.

"It's narrower, yes, but it's still an amnesty," Espinosa said. "If you seek to reward illegal immigration, you'll only encourage more of it."

To persuade his Republican colleagues to allow a vote on his amendment, Durbin added the maximum-age provision and stripped out language that would allow states leeway on granting undocumented immigrants in-state tuition.

Last week, the Illinois Democrat said he has gone as far as he is willing to go. "To some people, there aren't enough concessions to make. They're never going to support it," he said.

Supporters of the DREAM Act note that the legislation was adopted unanimously as an amendment to the immigration legislation that passed the Senate in the last Congress and was also included in the Senate's broader immigration bill earlier this year.

However, critics contend that the current legislation faces a tougher environment due to the earlier legislation's failure. Mark Krikorian, the executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies, a think tank that supports tighter controls on immigration, believes that the majority whip will have a hard time wooing Republicans and moderate Democrats who otherwise might have supported narrowly tailored immigration relief. Positions have hardened on the issue, he said: "I think it's a more difficult sell for Dick Durbin than it would have been had they not tackled broader legislation."

DHS Lawsuit Against Illinois Sends Clear Message to
Local Governments to Quit Interfering in Immigration Enforcement
FAIR Applauds Administration for Decisive Step to Stop
Employment of Illegal Aliens

Washington DC - The Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR) today applauded the decision by the Department of Homeland Security for filing suit against the State of Illinois and its attempt to thwart enforcement of federal immigration laws. A state law, approved by the legislature and signed by Gov. Rod Blagojevich, would bar employers in Illinois from using a federal database to verify the work eligibility of prospective employees. In recent years, Illinois has repeatedly instituted policies aimed at shielding illegal aliens.

Responding to overwhelming public sentiment in favor of enforcement of immigration laws, especially in the workplace, the Bush Administration has begun notifying employers when workers' Social Security numbers do not match information in the government's database. In an effort to assist employers who wish to comply with laws against hiring illegal aliens, the federal government has been encouraging them to utilize a database that allows them to verify Social Security numbers.

"Easy access to jobs in this country has long been the magnet that has drawn millions of illegal aliens here. As much, or perhaps even more, than securing the borders, preventing illegal aliens from finding jobs is the key to reversing mass illegal immigration," noted Dan Stein, president of FAIR. "In taking steps to bar employers from using the Social Security Administration's database to verify work eligibility until that database is virtually error free, is nothing more than a blatant attempt by state officials to further undermine immigration law enforcement. Perfection does not exist in this world, and we cannot expect it to be the standard for employment verification."

The policy that Illinois is attempting to thwart includes generous provisions to allow individuals to correct errors in the database that might be found during the verification process. "The state's effort is not about preventing errors, it is a politically motivated effort to prevent employers from identifying illegal aliens and complying with federal law," charged Stein. "The suit by DHS to block implementation of state's transparent effort to impede immigration enforcement in the workplace is the appropriate response to Illinois officials and a signal to other local governments that the federal government is serious about cracking down on businesses that hire illegal aliens."

The federal suit also addresses serious constitutional issues by asserting the federal government's right to enforce immigration laws everywhere in the country, even in jurisdictions that have made themselves de facto or formal sanctuaries for illegal aliens. "No state or local government can be permitted to stand in the way of the federal government's unassailable right to carry out immigration enforcement. Federal law allows local governments to assist in immigration enforcement, but there is no opt-out provision that allows them to prevent immigration laws from being enforced. Employers in Illinois must be permitted to comply with the same laws as employers in the other 49 states," concluded Stein.


http://fairus.org

Wow! For the first time I can remember I find myself in complete agreement with Fran. Way to go, girl.

I really don't have a problem with offering citizenship to people who have served in our military. They have placed their lives in harm's way for our country and I can see rewarding them for that.

As for the rest, deport them and fine and/or jail anyone who knowingly employs them.

First of all, it's estimated that the 12-15 million illegals in this country cost us about $2.2 trillion per year.

Per year? Unlikely. Your own source states that the figures are:

"Over the course of the household's lifetime that tax burden translates to $1.1 million."

The two trillion figure would be for the whole country over the course of a household's lifetime...however long that's supposed to be in years is left a mystery.


To deport them.... $94 billion.

No idea how they calculated that figure which is obviously an estimate.

I'll be up front and say I don't consider World Net Daily to be a very reputable source. They are extremely biased and have no qualms about presenting data in misleading ways.

Wow! For the first time I can remember I find myself in complete agreement with Fran. Way to go, girl.

I really don't have a problem with offering citizenship to people who have served in our military. They have placed their lives in harm's way for our country and I can see rewarding them for that.

As for the rest, deport them and fine and/or jail anyone who knowingly employs them.
Agreed.

Associated Press

RENO, Nev. — Federal agents raided 11 McDonald's restaurants in northern Nevada and made dozens of arrests Thursday as part of an investigation into illegal immigration.

U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents made at least 56 arrests in Reno, Sparks and Fernley after raids at the restaurants and a franchise corporate headquarters in Reno, agency spokesman Richard Rocha said.

"They are people suspected of being in the country illegally. As far as I know, they were all McDonald's employees," he told The Associated Press.

The investigation began five months ago and was sparked by an identity theft complaint, Rocha said. A local law enforcement agency then gave ICE information that illegal immigrants were working at specific McDonald's restaurants, he said.

Luther Mack, who owns at least some of the restaurants that were raided, insisted that his businesses require employees to provide documentation.

"As an employer, I do not knowingly hire or employ undocumented or unauthorized workers," Mack said in a statement.

A spokeswoman for McDonald's Corp., based in Oak Brook, Ill., said the company would issue a statement.

The raids drew immediate criticism from Reno Mayor Bob Cashell and activists, who estimated the number of arrests to be closer to 100.

The mayor, area Hispanic leaders and members of the American Civil Liberties Union called a news conference in front of the federal courthouse late Thursday.

"We don't approve of the Gestapo methods ICE is using," said Gilbert Cortez, a Latino leader who urged Hispanic workers to stay home from work in protest Friday.

Cashell, a Republican and former lieutenant governor, said that if identity theft was involved, that was wrong, and that he opposed a protest that would keep workers at home on Friday.

He said he would contact Nevada's congressional delegation and ask the city council to look into the raids. He said that he opposes illegal immigration, as well as immunity for illegal immigrants, but that "there has to be a better way to do this."

"Think of some of the people who were arrested and picked up; they have children. They don't know where their mama or their daddy is. That's not right."

ICE was working with Washoe County social services to help provide care for children, Rocha said. The detainees were allowed to telephone their family during the processing, he said.

The workers arrested were being processed Thursday night and will be transferred to an unidentified local detention center to await deportation proceedings, Rocha said.

The ICE has made several raids in recent months, including large ones at meatpacker Swift & Co., poultry plant Crider Inc. and leather factory Michael Bianco Inc.

Social service advocates said arrests in March at the Michael Bianco factory in New Bedford, Mass., created a humanitarian crisis, with some children left with no one to care for them.

Wish these illegals would think about their children, before they break the law. Our courts lock up criminals with children, every day. These people are no different.

Wow! For the first time I can remember I find myself in complete agreement with Fran. Way to go, girl.

I (as usual) am in complete agreement with her also.

But what the populace in this country seems incapable of understanding --especially those people on the Right-- is that the politicians in Washington have no intention whatsoever of stopping the practice of Mexican illegals entering this country.

Why?

Because the politician's wealthy cronies who own huge businesses here WANT and NEED these people to keep coming across in huge numbers, as a source of cheap labor.

Period.

BOTH Parties use it as a political football, but NEITHER side intends to do anything substantive about it.

NOTHING.

If they ever HAD any such intention, they would have DONE something already. They could halt it in a very short time, if they wanted to.

But the Washington political crowd does not WANT to............they, collectively, simply want to APPEAR as if they are worried and concerned about it.

Illegal Mexicans being here is something that will be with us forever.

If they ever HAD any such intention, they would have DONE something already. They could halt it in a very short time, if they wanted to.

i agree,,, this is a problem that could of been licked in a heart beat....

I agree with you, Freethinker. Neither the business community nor the political community wish to see the problem of illegal aliens solved. It benefits both communities to have lots of illegals around. The business community gets cheap labor and the pollitical community gets votes.
It seems it is only the American public that wants these illegals sent home.

Some groups keep trying to define the problem as one of being mean or unfair to illegal aliens as if ICE was the villain rather than recognizing the fact that these people are here illegally and are breaking our laws by the mere fact of their being here.

I would much rather pay higher prices for certain commodities if it meant that the jobs were going to legal citizens or to people with legal green cards. I will vote against any politician who supports the illegal aliens.

USA Today : September 27 , 2007 -- by Emily Bazar

Illegal immigrants living in states and cities that have adopted strict immigration policies are packing up and moving back to their home countries or to neighboring states.

The exodus has been fueled by a wave of laws targeting illegal immigrants in Oklahoma, Arizona, Colorado, Georgia and elsewhere. Many were passed after congressional efforts to overhaul the immigration system collapsed in June.

Immigrants say the laws have raised fears of workplace raids and deportation.

"People now are really frightened and scared because they don't know what's going to happen," says Juliana Stout, an editor at the newspaper El Nacional de Oklahoma. "They're selling houses. They're leaving the country."

Supporters of the laws cheer the departure of illegal immigrants and say the laws are working as intended.

Oklahoma state Rep. Randy Terrill, Republican author of his state's law, says the flight proves it is working. "That was the intended purpose," he says. "It would be just fine with me if we exported all illegal aliens to the surrounding states."

Most provisions of an Oklahoma law take effect in November. Among other things, it cuts off benefits such as welfare and college financial aid.

There's no hard demographic data on the trend, partly because it's hard to track people who are in the USA illegally. But school officials, real estate agents and church leaders say the movement is unmistakable.

In Tulsa, schools have seen a drop in Hispanic enrollment.

About 60% of Kendall-Whittier Elementary School's 950 students are Hispanic, Principal Judy Feary says. Since an enrollment report Sept. 10, she says, 14 have left. Four more said last week that they would move.

Three weeks ago, one couple dropped their three children at school, then returned after lunch with their belongings packed in an SUV and trailer. Feary says they took the kids and said they were moving back to Mexico. "They were afraid and cited the immigration law," she says.

Marshall Elementary, where enrollment is 60% Hispanic, has lost about 10 students this year to the immigration law, Principal Kayla Robinson says. Most moved to Texas. "These are families that have been here for a long time," she says.

Illegal immigrants also are leaving Georgia, where a law requires companies on government contracts with at least 500 employees to check new hires against a federal database to make sure they are legally authorized to work.

Mario Reyes, senior minister at the Tabernacle of Atlanta, says his church lost about 10 families this summer. His daughter, a real estate agent, is helping them sell their homes.

Churches across the city report similar losses, says Antonio Mansogo, a board member of the National Coalition of Latino Clergy and Christian Leaders.

"There's tension because you don't know when immigration (agents) might show up, and a lot of people don't want to take those chances," he says.

Real estate agent Guadalupe Sosa in Avondale, Ariz., outside Phoenix, says migration from the state began about three months ago, shortly after Gov. Janet Napolitano, a Democrat, signed a law that will take effect in January. Employers who hire illegal immigrants can lose their business licenses.

Of the 10 homes Sosa has on the market, half belong to families that plan to leave because of immigration tensions.

"They know they might be losing everything today or tomorrow," she says.

Maria Sanchez, 35, joined the migration with her sister and nephew, who are in the country legally. Sanchez was in the USA illegally, but she has gotten a temporary work permit.

The three lived in Aurora, Colo., when Sanchez was fired from her job as district manager of a fast-food chain after she couldn't provide a valid Social Security number.

Colorado has approved several immigration measures. One gives employers 20 days to check and photocopy documents such as driver's licenses and Social Security cards, which new workers present to prove their legal status.

Because of the laws, Sanchez, her sister and nephew left five months ago. "I moved to Utah because they don't have the same laws here," she says.

State Sen. Dave Schultheis says he hasn't observed a major migration out of Colorado but has heard anecdotal reports that illegal immigrants are leaving. "It's absolutely a good thing," he says. "We want to make Colorado the least friendly state to people who are here illegally."

In Hazleton, Pa., families started moving away after the city passed an illegal-immigrant law last summer, says Rudy Espinal, head of the Hazleton Hispanic Business Association. The law would fine landlords who rented to illegal immigrants and suspend the business licenses of companies that hired them. A companion measure would require tenants to register with the city and pay $10 for a rental permit.

A federal judge ruled the measures unconstitutional in July, but that hasn't stopped people moving away, he says.

"People are still leaving," Espinal says. "Some people have told me that they're leaving because they don't want their kids to grow up in an environment like this."

Hazleton Mayor Lou Barletta counters that some illegal immigrants who moved came back after the judge's decision, which the city is appealing. "I see a reversal," he says. "In a small city, it becomes obvious. ... Schools are overcrowded and there are five-hour waits in the emergency room."

He says, "We don't want to chase immigrants away, just the illegal aliens who are causing many of the problem we are having."

Most provisions of an Oklahoma law take effect in November. Among other things, it cuts off benefits such as welfare and college financial aid.

What frightens me about that fact is that Oklahoma evidently had to pass a special law in order to cut off welfare and college financial aid to illegals.

What the........??!?!?!

WHAT kind of insane asylum are we living in where illegal aliens can recieve EITHER of those benefits?!?! It is beyond belief that SOME politician in Washington has not already addressed that problem at the national level, and absolutely and completey cut off any funding for college money (!!!) going to illegals. What are those politicians good for, if they can't even plug the holes and stop such a bizarre and unwarranted giveaway?!?!?

Why not first make sure the US citizens living here are served by such types of aid, instead of giving money to illegals??

The governor of New York is joining a few other states in allowing illegal aliens to get driver's licenses. Driver's licenses are not a right but a priveledge and one that should be restricted to those who are here legally. We use our driver's license as the major form of picture ID when boarding planes. What good will they be for that purpose when every Tom, Dick and Harry can get one.

NBC11.com (Calif.) : October 2 , 2007

SAN FRANCISCO -- A judge extended a hold on a federal plan to force millions of illegal workers out of the workforce on Monday.

The Department of Homeland Security was set to send out letters to 140,000 employers across the country telling them that one or more of their workers had a problem with their Social Security information.

It would be a way to track down illegal immigrants who have provided their bosses with false Social Security numbers. Opponents to the rule said it unfairly penalizes employers and could lead to workplace discrimination.

Currently, the Social Security Administration sends what are called "no match letters" to employers telling them if a discrepancy crops up between an employee's name and Social Security number.

The Department of Homeland Security wants to include a second letter telling the employer it has 90 days to verify the worker's status or face possible criminal and civil action. The letters have been ready to go since the beginning of September.

The AFL-CIO, the American Civil Liberties Union and other groups asked a judge to put the move on hold. The judge extended the hold, which was set to expire on Monday, for 10 more days at the most while he considers arguments in the case.

The judge is expected to issue a ruling within the next two weeks. If he rules in favor of the Department of Homeland Security, the letters could start showing up in mailboxes around the country.

It could effect as many as eight million workers across the country. California's agriculture business is one of those that could be impacted by the rule.

NBC11.com (Calif.) : October 2 , 2007

SAN FRANCISCO -- A judge extended a hold on a federal plan to force millions of illegal workers out of the workforce on Monday.

The Department of Homeland Security was set to send out letters to 140,000 employers across the country telling them that one or more of their workers had a problem with their Social Security information.

It would be a way to track down illegal immigrants who have provided their bosses with false Social Security numbers. Opponents to the rule said it unfairly penalizes employers and could lead to workplace discrimination.

Currently, the Social Security Administration sends what are called "no match letters" to employers telling them if a discrepancy crops up between an employee's name and Social Security number.

The Department of Homeland Security wants to include a second letter telling the employer it has 90 days to verify the worker's status or face possible criminal and civil action. The letters have been ready to go since the beginning of September.

The AFL-CIO, the American Civil Liberties Union and other groups asked a judge to put the move on hold. The judge extended the hold, which was set to expire on Monday, for 10 more days at the most while he considers arguments in the case.

The judge is expected to issue a ruling within the next two weeks. If he rules in favor of the Department of Homeland Security, the letters could start showing up in mailboxes around the country.

It could effect as many as eight million workers across the country. California's agriculture business is one of those that could be impacted by the rule.

So what is being debated here is the fact there are millions of people in this country who have provided false information as to their legal status to work here and the fact they might be called on it. The reasoning for letting them slide is the fact that businesses like agriculture might suffer?????

i am having a hard time understanding why this is even a debate.. If these workers are put out of work then it could be a winning situation for pro immigration types.... If the California agriculture suffered,and the fast food industry suffered and the labor industry suffered as much as they perdict.... the outcry from everyone effected to make these vital members of our survival as a country full citizens would force the government to implement a better system of doing so.. not this 10 year,$12,000 joke they have now... it would also show this country how important these people are..... how many middle/upper class are going to pick tomatoes for 8 bucks an hour???? But when they realize these tomatoes are not in the stores for them to buy... watch how quick they ask these people to re-join the work force....
I say give these anti immigration types exactly what they want...and see how things are when the dust settles.

I say give these anti immigration types exactly what they want...and see how things are when the dust settles.



Anti immigration types? I don't know any, never met any. But I have met and talked with a bunch of assholes who support illegal aliens, that love to portray people as such.

Gets your terms right LF. No one is against immigration, or legal immigrants. But the snakes who cross our borders illegally, and those foolish enough to support them, deserve to be treated just as they are treated in Mexico.

LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - More than 1,300 foreign-born criminals and other immigrants who ignored deportation orders have been rounded up in southern California in the last two weeks in what officials said on Wednesday was the largest sweep of its kind in the United States.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20071003/ts_nm/immigration_sweep_dc_1

Brutal Murders in Newark Spark Outcry for Repealing Policies that Shield Illegal Aliens

The story is a familiar one. An illegal alien who had previously been apprehended or stopped by a local police officer is released back onto the streets of this country because local policies prohibit cops from acting on suspicion that the individual is here illegally. That illegal alien then goes on to kill or maim some innocent member of the community, while the people who instituted the sanctuary policies in the first place point the finger of blame at someone else.

On the night of August 4, the crime, allegedly committed by an illegal alien who had previously been in police custody, was so brutal that even the most fervent protectors of illegal aliens were forced to reconsider their sanctuary policies.

On that summer evening, four college students were gunned down in cold blood in Newark, New Jersey, killing three of them and leaving the fourth in critical condition. The community’s anger and grief turned to outrage when it was revealed a few days later that the chief suspect in the murders was an illegal alien who had previously been arrested for other heinous crimes, including the sexual abuse of a five-year-old.

Jose Carranza, the prime suspect, is an illegal alien from Peru, who at the time of the murders was facing other serious felony charges, but had been released on bail because no one in the Newark Police Department, or in the Essex County prosecutor’s office, had bothered to look into his immigration status. A second suspect was later revealed to also be an illegal alien.

Newark is a sanctuary city, having formally adopted policies that bar local police from seeking information about a suspect’s immigration status, or reporting illegal aliens to federal authorities. In all likelihood, had Carranza’s immigration status been known, he would have been denied bail as a flight risk, and Terrance Aeriel, Dashon Harvey and Iofemi Hightower would all be alive, and Natasha Aeriel would not be fighting for her life.

The Newark murders also coincided with efforts by state officials to make illegal aliens feel more welcome in New Jersey. In early August, Gov. Jon Corzine announced the formation of a blue ribbon commission tasked with finding ways to help guide illegal aliens on their pathway to citizenship.

As the facts of the case came to light, public anger boiled over as people learned that these crimes could easily have been prevented, but that their local governments had adopted policies that placed the protection of illegal aliens ahead of the protection of law-abiding citizens. That public outrage finally forced local officials to take action. On August 22, state Attorney General Anne Milgram issued a law enforcement directive setting down new guidelines for police in New Jersey.

Under Milgram’s directive, whenever a law enforcement officer “makes an arrest for any indictable crime, or for driving while intoxicated, the arresting officer, or a designated officer, as part of the booking process, shall inquire about the arrestee’s citizenship, nationality and immigration status.” The change in policy, unfortunately, comes too late for the Aeriel, Harvey and Hightower families, but if such policies are adopted and carried out nationwide, other families will be spared the grief that those New Jersey families have been forced to endure.

FAIR has fought vigorously against formal and de facto local policies that grant sanctuary to illegal aliens. In addition to creating an additional magnet for illegal immigration, these policies threaten the safety and security of ordinary citizens. Local police, in the course of carrying out their normal duties, who come across individuals whom they reasonably suspect are in the country illegal aliens, have an obligation to act on that suspicion, just as they would if they came across an individual who was sought by another police department. FAIR’s field staff has worked extensively with local immigration reform activist groups who are seeking to have their communities participate in the 287(g) program, under which local police can receive federal training to help them identify and detain suspected illegal aliens.

In light of the senseless and preventable murders in Newark, all local sanctuary and non-cooperation policies must be repealed. Knowing the danger that these policies pose to innocent citizens, politicians and police chiefs who institute them must be held accountable when they result in avoidable tragedies such as the ones that took place in Newark.


http://fairus.org

For now, cities can continue to break federal law without consequence. They can order their police not to report illegal aliens, even though federal law say such orders are illegal. The Clinton and Bush Justice Departments have refused to enforce the law. And tonight, 52 Senators decided against threatening the loss of federal funds if those cities don't end their sanctuary policies.

This was an embarrassing display by the Democratic Party.

All but one of the Democratic votes protected the ability of outlaw cities to protect illegal aliens from detention (and, thus, to protect the oulaw businesses that hire them).

Only Sen. Mary Landrieu of Louisiana broke with the Senate Democratic leadership's almost constant endorsement of illegal immigration.

Joining the Democrats were six Republicans who almost always can be counted on to support illegal immigration: Specter of Pennsylvania, Lugar of Indiana, Hagel of Nebraska, Stevens of Alaska, and then Collins and Snowe from Maine which is essentially a sanctuary state.