amnesty

Mark Levin asks 10 questions of the open-borders propagandists

by  • 

The President of the Landmark Legal Foundation and syndicated talk-radio host Mark Levin has 10 questions for the open-borders propagandists:

1. There’s a backlog of up to 6 million status change applications at ICE. ICE cannot locate 636,000 absconders whose cases have been adjudicated and who are supposed to be deported. GAO after GAO report has found that the ICE and Department of Homeland Security are bureaucratic disasters. So the question is, how will these bureaucrats handle tens of millions of more cases?

2. The bill provides that these bureaucrats will have only one business day to conduct security checks for each applicant. The federal government is incapable of conducting millions of security checks in such a time frame. So, how will these security checks be accomplished in one business day?

3. After the one business day, the bill provides that the government SHALL confer a probationary legal status on the illegal alien. If that’s not amnesty, then how do you define amnesty?

4. If an illegal alien “renounces” his gang status, that’s sufficient for receiving probationary legal status. How will you make sure that such a person is not, in fact, a gang member before conferring legal rights on him?

5. The bill allows for chain migration for EIGHT YEARS before a point system kicks in. You ask what we’re supposed to do with the up to 20 million illegal aliens who are already in the country, and yet you provide for 50 to 80 million more aliens to enter. So, you’re really talking about legalizing tens of millions of new aliens, including aliens who aren’t even in the country yet. What is you public policy justification for this?

6. How can you deny that legalizing and importing tens of millions of mostly poor and illiterate aliens from the Third World won’t be an economic catastrophy for the Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, Food Stamps and other entitlement programs? Even Milton Friedman said he would favor open borders but for the fact that to do so would be to massively expand the size of the federal government.

7. How can you deny that legalizing and importing tens of millions of mostly poor and illiterate aliens from the Third World won’t drive more hospitals out of business and place enormous financial burdens on our school systems?

8. Why should American citizens believe you are serious about border security when the bill does NOT require more beds for temporary detention, more prison beds, or more fencing. In fact, CURRENT LAW requires more detention and prison space and more fencing than this bill provides.

9. The bill provides for a very low threshold when it comes to the kinds of documents you need to claim amnesty — such as records from day labor centers, labor unions, “sworn declarations” from any non-relative (a co-worker or friend will do). How can the bureaucracy possibly determine the integrity of any of these documents?

10. The bill provides for free legal counsel paid for by the taxpayers of this country. Isn’t this a boondoggle for the trial lawyers and doesn’t this open the entire process to activist judges?

Editor: Reprinted with Mark Levin’s permission.

amnesty, Political wind, REAL ID

Delay in ‘Real ID’ undermines immigration bill

by  • 

There is more proof of fraud within the proposed ‘Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act of 2007.’ Native born and naturalized employees will be required to show — as proof of legal status — their employers either a “United States passport or a driver’s license or identity card issued by a State, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, or an outlying possession of the United States that satisfies the requirements of the ‘Real ID Act of 2005.'” (Click here and see Title III). Yet no state or territory requires a person to show proof of citizenship to obtain a driver’s license or identification card.

No problem, right? The ‘Real ID Act‘ requires states to verify a person’s legal status before issuing a driver’s license or identification card. Yet there are problems:

1) Mandatory compliance (*) with the ‘Real ID Act’ has been waived from May 11, 2008, to the end of 2009 by the Secretary of Transportation and the Act can be waived into infinity.

2) No state or territory is currently in full compliance with the Act.

3) Congress has provided less than half the funding needed to implement ‘Real ID’ and neither the states nor federal government will protect their own citizens; they simply refuse to pay the rest of the bill.

4) Many states accept Mexico’s matricula ID card as proof of legal status (to some degree) even though they are not tied to a central database, the breeder documents accepted when applying for one are highly suspect, and applicants are allowed to attest to information (such as date and place of birth) in lieu of documentation.

5) Four Senators have introduced legislation that would strip the legal status provisions of the ‘Real ID’ Act. Senator Akaka (D-HI), Leahy (D-VT), Sununu (R-NH), and Tester (D-MT) want to replace it with the ‘Identification Security Enhancement Act of 2007‘ (S. 717) that requires only: the person’s full legal name; the person’s date of birth; the person’s gender; the person’s driver’s license or personal identification card number; a photograph of the person; the person’s address of principal residence; and the person’s signature. States would be prohibited from requiring proof of legal status.

I read this morning where Senator Kennedy (D-MA) said, “The day it passes, we’re going to put in legislation to try to fix it.” Yet the “fix” is already in; it is in Title III of the ‘Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act of 2007.’ And if that provision gets amended, no problem, Senators Kennedy, Akaka, Leahy, Sununu, and Tester will just fix it some more.

Update, 8:39 PM EDT:

* If they ever impose an actual compliance date, states would either comply or clearly state on their driver’s license and identification cards, “may not be accepted by any Federal agency for federal identification or any other official purpose.”

Michelle Malkin posted about this post on her site today. Thanks, Michelle. Your new site is looking good. — Editor