Bush finally makes a good move on immigration


PDA






DRZinn
February 10, 2005, 12:24 PM
http://insider.washingtontimes.com/articles/normal.php?StoryID=20050210-123413-6019r


White House backs bill on aliens
By Stephen Dinan
THE WASHINGTON TIMES


The Bush administration yesterday strongly endorsed a bill to crack down on illegal aliens' use of driver's licenses and tighten asylum and deportation procedures, giving the measure a boost as debate began on the House floor and in anticipation of a final vote today.
"The legislation tightens procedures for noncitizen entry into and presence in the United States, facilitates the building of physical barriers where appropriate to protect U.S. borders, and facilitates the strengthening by the states of the standards for the security and integrity of driver's licenses," the administration said in a statement of policy.
House Republicans said they expect the bill, sponsored by Rep. F. James Sensenbrenner Jr., Wisconsin Republican and chairman of the Judiciary Committee, to pass the House today. Mr. Sensenbrenner said he has a commitment from House leaders to then attach the bill to the first "must-pass" piece of legislation to leave the House, which at this point appears to be the soon-to-be-submitted emergency-spending bill for the war in Iraq.
The key provision is the crackdown on illegal aliens' ability to obtain and use driver's licenses as identification.
About a dozen states currently allow illegal immigrants to obtain driver's licenses and the bill does not mandate that they change. But it says any ID used for federal purposes, such as boarding an airplane, must be obtainable only by someone lawfully present in the country.
Republican backers said the driver's license issue was a specific response to the September 11 terrorist attacks and to the call by the September 11 commission to crack down on licenses.
"Very simply, 19 terrorists had 63 driver's licenses. Driver's licenses allowed them to get money, to get transportation and to stage the attack on 9/11 on our country," said Rep. Duncan Hunter, California Republican and chairman of the House Armed Services Committee. "It has been made very clear to the American people that we have a compelling reason to reform that defect in our system, and the polls I've seen have shown support for that reform cuts across America."
The bill also gives judges more leeway in denying asylum to applicants, eases the rules for deporting those linked to terrorism overseas, and completing the remaining 3 miles of a 14-mile section of the U.S.-Mexico border fence near San Diego that has been delayed by environmental concerns.
In objecting to the bill yesterday, Democrats keyed on the asylum provisions.
"If this measure becomes law, this will close America's doors to Cubans fleeing from their country, religious minorities attempting to escape religious persecution, women fleeing from sex trafficking, rape or forced abortions," said Rep. John Conyers Jr., Michigan Democrat. "Unfortunately in our history, there have been a number of examples of this overreaction in the past."
He compared the measure to what he said were other overreactions in the past: Gen. Ulysses S. Grant, who "sought to expel the Jews from the South" during the Civil War and to the internment of Japanese Americans during World War II.
Democrats, joined by a large group of advocacy groups, said the bill is a piecemeal approach and should be scrapped in favor of a broad immigration-reform measure similar to what the president has proposed.
They also said Mr. Bush has shown he is not serious about border security by only funding in his new budget 10 percent of the 2,000 border patrol agents called for in the intelligence-overhaul bill that passed last year.
"The truth of the matter is Republicans are using national security as a facade to alienate hard-working, law-abiding and taxpaying immigrants," said Rep. Linda T. Sanchez, California Democrat. She said her family came to the United States seeking the American dream, and that she was "angered and outraged that under the guise of national security, the Republican Party is trying to punish those seeking the same dreams that my parents sought."
Acting Homeland Security Secretary Adm. James Loy told reporters Monday that the administration was trying to balance the Border Patrol's needs with those of other areas.
"It was simply recognized that the 210 [new border agents authorized under the budget] for this year is a reflection of millions of dollars of additional emphasis on that particular corner, and also recognition that we need to balance those things as we go on down the road with other priorities," he said.
But Rep. Christopher Cox, California Republican and the chairman of the new permanent Homeland Security Committee, said there is enough money in the Homeland Security area of the budget to fund all 2,000 agents, as well as the increases to detention beds and interior enforcement officials last year's bill also called for.
Yesterday's debate turned harsh at times, with Rep. Jim McGovern, Massachusetts Democrat, calling some of the bill's supporters "immigrant haters."
That prompted a caution from House Majority Whip Roy Blunt, Missouri Republican, who said, "Using terms like immigrant hater does not help this debate. This is about border security."
In the statement of policy, the administration indicated its focus was not on illegal immigrants' use of the licenses, but specifically about terrorists' abuses.
The administration said it wants to allow for "biometric screening of individuals who cannot otherwise satisfactorily demonstrate citizenship or lawful immigration status."
"Biometric screening, which is applied to most entering classes of aliens through the US-VISIT program, would be a valuable tool in identifying possible links to terrorism."
The White House also said it plans to work with Congress to tweak some of the provisions in the bill, including "refinement to ensure consistency with foreign-policy priorities."
In its statement, the administration was silent on the border fence and deportation provisions, though it did say it supported the asylum provisions, with some tweaking.

If you enjoyed reading about "Bush finally makes a good move on immigration" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
wingman
February 10, 2005, 06:46 PM
House Passes Measure to Improve Security,
Prevent Illegal Aliens from Obtaining Driver's Licenses

Colorado Lawmaker Applauds Belated Passage
of 9/11 Commission Recommendation

February 10, 2005

WASHINGTON, D.C. - Congressman Tom Tancredo (CO-06) today joined a
bipartisan majority in approving landmark legislation designed to
reduce illegal immigration and enhance national security. The bill,
HR 418, sailed through the House of Representatives today by an
overwhelming margin of 261-161.

"Today, the House of Representatives took a small step toward keeping
faith with the families of victims of September 11th by acting to
implement what are perhaps the most important recommendations that
the 9/11 Commission made," said Tancredo, chairman of the House
Immigration Reform Caucus. "This bill today represents possibly the
most significant improvement of border security and immigration law
in nearly a decade."

The bill, known as the REAL ID Act, gives immigration enforcement
officers and judges additional tools to expeditiously deport illegal
aliens and prevent foreigners from gaming asylum rules. It also
expedites the construction of a security fence along the U.S.-Mexico
border that was authorized nearly ten years ago but has not been
constructed because of legal challenges lodged by radical open-
borders and environmental groups. The bill also sets minimum
standards for Driver's Licenses and identification cards, helping to
prevent illegal aliens from obtaining identification cards needed to
board planes, access federal buildings, or use federal services.

This victory is a culmination of efforts made by the Immigration
Reform Caucus to include politically unattractive, but vitally
necessary border security reforms in response to 9/11. The bill now
moves to the Senate where it awaits further consideration.

"I sincerely hope that Senate leadership will move swiftly to approve
a clean bill," said Tancredo, referring to recent news reports that
some Senators may attempt to attach amnesty provisions to the
measure. "The Senate should follow our lead, and finish what we
started last year in implementing the 9/11 Commission's report."

Waitone
February 10, 2005, 08:01 PM
Judge the bill by its details. My guess is Bush gave Tancredo what he wanted in exchange for something hidden deep in the bill not receiving any attention. That's how bidness is done.

RealGun
February 10, 2005, 08:23 PM
Saying this is in response to 9/11 is like saying we are going into Iraq because of WMD. Baloney! The purpose is to reduce unqualified access to public services in States that border Mexico. John McCain (Arizona) said they should wait for a national solution, and now we are seeing just that.

Can'thavenuthingood
February 10, 2005, 09:05 PM
http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/0211/p01s04-woam.html

4,000 new American citizens born in Laredo last year. This just one city.

We wanted to clamp down the border, now we got it on the way if the Senate don't kill it.

Vick

ProGlock
February 10, 2005, 09:11 PM
My god do you people have a persistent short-term memory here? :cuss:

http://www.gunowners.org/a020905.htm

Art Eatman
February 10, 2005, 09:23 PM
Trouble is, ProGlock, is that what GOA sez it sez ain't what it sez, about DLs.

The uniformity is that if you ain't a citizen, and a state issues you a DL, it must in some manner say "Not A Citizen".

The other uniformity bit is that the info required by the fedlaw--to include a picture--is already required by most states--except a very few without pictures. Overall, faking a DL is to be made far more difficult. Mostly this bill makes life more difficult for illegal aliens from wherever.

Art

Standing Wolf
February 10, 2005, 10:04 PM
Overall, faking a DL is to be made far more difficult. Mostly this bill makes life more difficult for illegal aliens from wherever.

Fake driver's licenses with photographs aren't quite a dime a dozen, but not much more expensive. The bill inconveniences illegal aliens a little bit. Better than than nothing, to be sure, but it's at best a token gesture.

Art Eatman
February 11, 2005, 12:01 AM
StandingWolf, can they fake the barcode?

Art

Morgan
February 11, 2005, 06:40 AM
Even if you fake the ID, you can't fake the DMV computer system when a Cop checks it.

Unless, of course, you've got someone at DMV helping you, which is not unheard of.

sterculius_number_II
February 11, 2005, 07:44 AM
:( I really hate this a lot. I don't care what anybody says, it darned well *is* a national I.D./internal passport, that everyone will eventually be required to have on their persons at all times and present on demand. :eek:

I wish I didn't *have* to drive. I saw all this coming almost 35 years ago, and I hoped that by now I could have dropped off the grid and arranged my life so that I wouldn't need to drive or travel much at all. But I couldn't make it happen. Now they're going to force this thing on me -- because "driving is a privilege, not a right." :barf:

This has nothing to do with terrorism, and almost nothing to do with illegal immigration. It's just one more way to strip *Americans* of the few rags of freedom and privacy they still have. It's a way of tagging and tracking us, like they do birds and animals. :mad:

I hope all the data is in a magnetic strip, since I think those can be sabotaged and made unscannable fairly easily. It's the barcodes and chips that worry me more. I don't know how to screw those up without it being obvious. :confused:

And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads:
And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name. -- Revelation 13:16-17

If this thing isn't the mark of the beast, then it's sure paving the way for it. But don't worry: there'll be no shortage of good Christians ready and willing to enforce it. :barf:

Sterc

PaleRyder
February 11, 2005, 10:25 AM
Yes, it's the same bill that makes licenses national id cards, and gives Homeland Security the power to suspend any law without judicial review. Say goodbye to our Republic if this garbage passes.

rick_reno
February 11, 2005, 11:42 AM
small snipet at end of the article from GOA -

http://news.com.com/House+approves+electronic+ID+cards/2100-1028_3-5571898.html?part=rss&tag=5568415&subj=news.1028.5

House approves electronic ID cards
Published: February 10, 2005, 5:46 PM PST
By Declan McCullagh
Staff Writer, CNET News.com

TrackBack Print E-mail TalkBack
The U.S. House of Representatives approved on Thursday a sweeping set of rules aimed at forcing states to issue all adults federally approved electronic ID cards, including driver's licenses.

Under the rules, federal employees would reject licenses or identity cards that don't comply, which could curb Americans' access to airplanes, trains, national parks, federal courthouses and other areas controlled by the federal government. The bill was approved by a 261-161 vote.

The measure, called the Real ID Act, says that driver's licenses and other ID cards must include a digital photograph, anticounterfeiting features and undefined "machine-readable technology, with defined minimum data elements" that could include a magnetic strip or RFID tag. The Department of Homeland Security would be charged with drafting the details of the regulation.

Republican politicians argued that the new rules were necessary to thwart terrorists, saying that four of the Sept. 11, 2001, hijackers possessed valid state-issued driver's licenses. "When I get on an airplane and someone shows ID, I'd like to be sure they are who they say they are," said Rep. Tom Davis, a Virginia Republican, during a floor debate that started Wednesday.

States would be required to demand proof of the person's Social Security number and confirm that number with the Social Security Administration. They would also have to scan in documents showing the person's date of birth and immigration status, and create a massive store "so that the (scanned) images can be retained in electronic storage in a transferable format" permanently.

Another portion of the bill says that states would be required to link their DMV databases if they wished to receive federal funds. Among the information that must be shared: All data fields printed on drivers' licenses and identification cards, and complete drivers' histories, including motor vehicle violations, suspensions and points on licenses.

The Bush administration threw its weight behind the Real ID Act, which has been derided by some conservative and civil liberties groups as tantamount to a national ID card. The White House said in a statement this week that it "strongly supports House passage" of the bill.

Thursday's vote mostly fell along party lines. About 95 percent of the House Republicans voted for the bill, which had been prepared by the judiciary committee chairman, F. James Sensenbrenner, a Wisconsin Republican. More than three-fourths of the House Democrats opposed it.

Rep. Eleanor Holmes Norton, a Democrat from Washington, D.C., charged that Republicans were becoming hypocrites by trampling on states' rights. "I thought the other side of the aisle extols federalism at all times," Norton said. "Yes, even in hard times, even when you're dealing with terrorism. So what's happening now? Why are those who speak up for states whenever it strikes their fancy doing this now?"

Civil libertarians and firearm rights groups condemned the bill before the vote. The American Civil Liberties Union likened the new rules to a "de facto national ID card," saying that the measure would force "states to deny driver's licenses to undocumented immigrants" and make DMV employees act as agents of the federal immigration service.

Because an ID is required to purchase a firearm from a dealer, Gun Owners of America said the bill amounts to a "bureaucratic back door to implementation of a national ID card." The group warned that it would "empower the federal government to determine who can get a driver's license--and under what conditions."

sm
February 11, 2005, 11:50 AM
Dear Big Brother,

I don't like this.

Signed,

You Know Who

flatrock
February 11, 2005, 11:55 AM
PaleRyder wrote:
Yes, it's the same bill that makes licenses national id cards, and gives Homeland Security the power to suspend any law without judicial review. Say goodbye to our Republic if this garbage passes.

Bull. The only laws the DHS can suspend are those preventing the completion of the barriers and needed roads for those barriers. Completion of the barrier has been held up in courts for 10 years by legal challenges. It's been hashed to death, and the House is saying that the concerns that have been brough up do not outweigh the need for the barrier. This section of the bill gives the DHS the authority to complete the barrier without spending decades more in court.

SEC. 102. WAIVER OF LAWS NECESSARY FOR IMPROVEMENT OF BARRIERS AT BORDERS.

Section 102(c) of the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 (8 U.S.C. 1103 note) is amended to read as follows:

`(c) Waiver-

`(1) IN GENERAL- Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the Secretary of Homeland Security shall have the authority to waive, and shall waive, all laws such Secretary, in such Secretary's sole discretion, determines necessary to ensure expeditious construction of the barriers and roads under this section.

`(2) NO JUDICIAL REVIEW- Notwithstanding any other provision of law (statutory or nonstatutory), no court shall have jurisdiction--

`(A) to hear any cause or claim arising from any action undertaken, or any decision made, by the Secretary of Homeland Security pursuant to paragraph (1); or

`(B) to order compensatory, declaratory, injunctive, equitable, or any other relief for damage alleged to arise from any such action or decision.'.

I see nothing else in the bill that allows the DHS to suspend any laws. Read it for yourself. Go to http://thomas.loc.gov and search for bill h.r. 418

We have benefits in this country that are granted to citizens and paid for with taxpayer money. The federal government has a responsibility to make sure those benifits are not being received fraudulently. To do that they need to be able to specify minimum requirements for the types of identification accepted for access to those services.

I understand that many people would be happier if the government quit taking our money in taxes and quit providing those services. However, since that doesn't appear likely to happen, we need to have identification that isn't being given out to those who are ineligible for those services.

sterculius_number_II wrote:
I really hate this a lot. I don't care what anybody says, it darned well *is* a national I.D./internal passport, that everyone will eventually be required to have on their persons at all times and present on demand.

It could be used as a national I.D./internal passport. I don't disagree with that. We've basically have had to have a valid I.D. for many purposes for a very long time. The government does need to know who they are giving welfare benefits to. They need to know who they are fining for speeding, to ensure that someone else doesn't get stuck with the fine.

What they cannot do is require you to provide identification on demand without a reason to request that you do so.

There have been cases where officers have done so, and I'm not impressed with how our courts have defended our rights.

I'm not even sure I agree that the federal government requiring ID to board a commercial airline flight is constitutional. The courts appear to have decided that it's a reasonable infringement on our rights to provide safety. I'm not under the impression that the courts are supposed to have the authority to make such a determination.

There are definately real privacy and freedom issues involved here, but I don't think the I.D. itself is the right fight. I think that identification is needed for receiving some types of govenment benefits, or our system will go bankrupt at taxpayer expense due to abuses.

I don't think there is any real hope of convincing the government, courts, or even most people that a valid form of identification isn't needed.

We definately need to be vigilant and fight against having to provide identification on demand, but I don't think that fighting against the identification itself is practical.

edit: fixing broken link to bill
edit2: can't get link to work, replacing it with instruction on how to find the document.

garyk/nm
February 11, 2005, 12:03 PM
Ok, someone point out to me where I am wrong:
I don't have a problem with this. All this is doing is standardizing driver's license info and making them more difficult to counterfeit.

The American Civil Liberties Union likened the new rules to a "de facto national ID card," saying that the measure would force "states to deny driver's licenses to undocumented immigrants"

And this is bad how?

If you think your driver's license info is less accessable now, I submit that you are mistaken.

wingman
February 11, 2005, 12:33 PM
sad fact is we have failed over the years to control our borders and now
we need to control within. :banghead:

ProGlock
February 11, 2005, 12:47 PM
I thought the republicans were our saviors against these communist democrats? ***? You mean, they're actually in favor of turning our nation into the Fourth Reich?? For those of you who always spout off "It's only a 2 party system and no third party will EVER obtain power", fine, then shut up and eat the crow you have sowed.

http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2005/roll031.xml

Headless Thompson Gunner
February 11, 2005, 01:12 PM
I don't have a problem with this. All this is doing is standardizing driver's license info and making them more difficult to counterfeit.

Quote:
The American Civil Liberties Union likened the new rules to a "de facto national ID card," saying that the measure would force "states to deny driver's licenses to undocumented immigrants"


And this is bad how?

If you think your driver's license info is less accessable now, I submit that you are mistaken.It's a power grab. Your old driver's license was regulated by your state, according to the wishes of your state's voters.

Your new driver's license will be regulated by the Feds. It will likely include a great deal of personal information about you, and that information will be easily accessible to anyone who the Feds grant access to. Your state no longer has any influence over how much or little information is recorded about you, or who will have access to that information.

It's one more step towards the elimination of the States as a meaningful restraint against Federal authority.

Art Eatman
February 11, 2005, 04:37 PM
The Bill passed the House. New thread running.

Closed.

Art

If you enjoyed reading about "Bush finally makes a good move on immigration" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!