[rick_reno]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10482510/

WASHINGTON - House Republicans tried to close ranks Thursday over an illegal immigration bill that some complained wasn’t tough enough and others said was inadequate because it didn’t include a guest worker program.

Divisions threatened to delay passage of the far-reaching bill aimed at shutting down illegal traffic along the border while requiring employers across the country to verify the legal status of their workers.

“There’s kind of a left-right coalition against it,” said Rep. Jeff Flake, R-Ariz., with some opposed because of the absence of a guest worker program and others saying they didn’t want legislation that could open the door for a program that some consider equivalent to amnesty.

Supporters of the legislation defended their approach of acting to cut off the flow of illegal entrants before turning to the tougher issues of a guest worker program or other means to fill the jobs that now attract millions of undocumented workers.

“Until the borders are protected we cannot have any kind of meaningful immigration reform,” Homeland Security Committee Chairman Peter King, R-N.Y., said.

But almost all Democrats, and several border-state Republicans such as Flake and fellow Arizonan Jim Kolbe, pushed for a more comprehensive package that dealt with the estimated 11 million illegal immigrants already in the country.

The GOP bill “does nothing to solve the real problems of illegal immigration,” Kolbe said. “In fact it’s worse than nothing.”

White House backs House bill
The White House, in a statement, said it strongly supported the House bill, while adding that the administration “remains committed to comprehensive immigration reform, including a temporary worker program that avoids amnesty.”

President Bush almost two years ago urged Congress to enact a guest worker program, and repeated that message during a recent visit to the Mexican border.

Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn., says the guest worker issue will be on the table when the Senate takes up immigration reform in February. The main controversy is over whether the estimated 6 million illegal workers should have to leave the country before applying for a temporary worker program.

The House bill combines the work of King and Judiciary Committee chairman James Sensenbrenner, R-Wis.

The border security aspects, King said, include requiring the Homeland Security Department to employ the personnel and technology needed to secure the border, ending the “catch-and-release” policy for non-Mexicans and requiring the Pentagon and Homeland Security to come up with a common plan on the use of military technology to stop illegal crossings.

The bill also outlines increased penalties for smugglers and those re-entering illegally, authorizes police along the border to enforce immigration law and makes illegal presence in the United States, now a civil offense, a misdemeanor crime. The bill originally made illegal presence a felon, but Sensenbrenner’s spokesman, Jeff Lungren, said that was being changed because felonies require jury trials and consume too many resources.

Most significantly, the bill requires all employers in the country, more than 7 million, to check on the legal status of workers.

Why business opposes it
Randel Johnson of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce said in a telephone news conference Wednesday that the House bill was unacceptable to the business community because of “huge concerns” that the requirement to submit Social Security numbers and other vital statistics to a central database was unworkable. Companies that don’t verify the legal status of workers would be subject to penalties.

“We would be more comfortable if it was just applicable to new hires for several years,” he said.

Acting House Majority Leader Roy Blunt, R-Mo., said Republicans would work with their business allies on the verification program but added, “this is an issue that really they don’t get to determine.”

Critics of the bill also predicted that increased penalties and provisions for expedited removal of illegal entrants would drive those in the country illegally further underground.

Bishop Thomas Wenski of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, in the telephone news conference, questioned whether criminalizing illegal presence could implicate the good Samaritan who gives an illegal immigrant a glass of water.

[mbt2001]

Sharpen the old pencil and start writing the representatives so that we can get SOMETHING passed. Might as well start on the Senate too.

it only took them 10 years to get on this subject... :cuss:

[Biker]

To send free faxes to just about any Pol in the country, check out the site in my sig.:)
Biker

[Zedicus]

one step forward, two steps back.....:banghead:

[georgeduz]

if they stop people from jumping the border i will not be able to see my friends.

[Standing Wolf]

The Republicrats and Democans are united in sloth and petty concerns and complete indifference to the nation.

[Henry Bowman]

The Republicrats and Democans are united in sloth and petty concerns and complete indifference to the nation.At least it's a "bipartisan effort," eh Standing Wolf?

[ID_shooting]

I just do not see what is so gosh darn difficult here. There is only one solution.

Close the boarders, construct huge fences and man observation posts all along them. Have imigration facilities setup in various locations. Focus all potential immigrants through these places. Completely search and verify thier back ground. If they are clean, give them a visitors pass but make them report with local authorites under the threat of immediate arrest, forfiture of all assets gained and immediate deportation. If they choose to become citizens, let them apply and welcome them with open arms. Provided the have a marketable skill, are willing to lean enough english to function and can support themselves, give em a 5 year probation period during which the same restricions above apply. If they are convicted of a felony in that time, boot them out and tell them to go someplace else. Do this with every imigrant/visitor no matter what country they are from. Exceptions would be made for people fleeing natural disasters or war, I have no toruble helping people whose homeland is destroyed.

This approach just makes too much sence I guess.

[obiwan1]

ID:
I hope you contacted your congresscritter with those suggestions. Your input is the only way that they obtain "common sense".

[ID_shooting]

A similar proposal has been sent many times over, I even brought it up to rep. Butch Otter over christmass dinner a couple of years back.

[longeyes]

A "guest worker" program is not an answer to unchecked illegal immigration. Everyone knows that. So far I have yet to hear a plausible and effective "stick" to go along with the "carrot."

What we have now is a "don't catch, don't punish" policy, and so long as that's the case the situation is FUBAR.

We already have plenty of illegals, mostly Mexican, here now--why the hell are we concerning ourselves about how to accommodate MORE? Who benefits? Certainly not the tax-payers and citizens of the USA.

[longeyes]

No amnesty, no deal, Mr. President

by Patrick J. Buchanan
December 07 , 2005

When the 17th Street levee broke and the floodwaters of Lake Pontchartrain inundated New Orleans, the immediate imperative was: Fix the levee. Before the cleanup could begin, before the refugees could return, the levee had to be repaired so water stopped flooding into the city. Everybody understood this.

Why, then, has it taken five years for the White House to wake up to the first imperative in the immigration crisis: Fix the border, stop the flood? Why is President Bush still chattering on about a "guest worker" program that has nothing to do with the crisis?

Since he took office in 2001, Bush said in Tucson, Ariz., U.S. border agents have apprehended and sent home 4.5 million illegal aliens, "including more than 350,000 with criminal records."

Astonishing. That is 75,000 criminals a year, 200 felons a day, for the last five years, trying to break into our country to rape, rob and kill, and molest our children. Of the millions of illegals who succeeded in breaking in on Bush's watch, how many came to rape, rob and murder, like John Lee Malvo, the Beltway sniper?

This is a national crisis, an existential crisis. But after five years of ignoring it, and now finally addressing it, what did Bush say in Tucson? I can't defend the border if you won't give me a guest worker program. Said Bush, "[W]e will not be able to effectively enforce our immigration laws until we create a temporary worker program."

But this is preposterous. Bush is saying he cannot do his constitutional duty to protect the nation from invasion – unless we let 12 million illegal aliens become guest workers and allow greedy U.S. businesses to go overseas and hire foreigners for jobs that U.S. workers won't take at the paltry wages they offer.

But not since the "bracero" program of decades ago have we had a national guest-worker program. And never in our history have we given business carte blanche to go abroad and hire foreigners to come and take American jobs. Yet Bush says if we don't, he can't control the border. What he means is, he won't control the border.

The president's speech in Tucson was a kind of extortion of those who have fought for tough border protections. Bush is saying: Unless you give me what I want, a guest-worker program, you're not getting what you want. But what a majority of Americans want is what they have a right to demand: That Bush do his sworn duty and enforce the immigration laws of the United States.

Conservatives should reject this "guest-worker" program, even if it is Bush's price tag for border protection. Far from solving the crisis, this Chamber of Commerce-LULAC scheme will mean final defeat, after decades of struggle to protect the borders. For though Bush may say, "I oppose amnesty," his guest-worker program is amnesty.

Amnesty means no punishment and a reward for law-breaking. And that is exactly what Bush is proposing. In his guest-worker program, those who broke our laws and broke into our country get to stay and work for six years, then go home on sabbatical, then return to work permanently. What is that, if not rewarding law-breaking?

Twenty years ago, Ronald Reagan was persuaded to grant a one-time amnesty to millions of illegal aliens who had been here for years. Result: Some 1.5 million illegal aliens were caught almost every year after. They had missed out on the amnesty, and they, too, wanted in. When Bush first broached his "guest-worker" program two years ago, there was a surge to the border from Mexico.

A recent Pew Hispanic Poll found 46 percent of all Mexicans say they would like to live in the United States and 20 percent, more than 20 million, are willing to break in. If Congress votes for Bush's guest-worker program, nothing will stop the flood – for the world will see it as admission that America is a weak nation that will not even order out of its home those who have broken in uninvited, sat down at the table and demanded to be treated like a member of the family.

As Reagan said, the country that can't control its borders isn't really a country anymore.

The battle to regain control of the borders is a cause that has won the support of a No-Longer-Silent Majority. The open-borders, Business Roundtable Republicans know it. On the run, they want to compromise. They will accept some border security, they say, if they can get in return an amnesty for their illegal workers and the legislated right of U.S. businesses to go overseas and hire foreigners to take American jobs.

Conservatives need to tell the White House: No deal, no amnesty, do your duty, defend the border, or we will find men and women to replace you who will enforce our laws and protect our country.

© 2005 Creators Syndicate, Inc.

[Biker]

Pat's last paragraph sums it up for me.
Biker