Breaking: Bush, Senate leaders reach immigration agreement; Update: “I don’t care how you try to spin it, this is amnesty”; Update: Illegals slam bill as too onerous

posted at 1:15 pm on May 17, 2007 by Allahpundit

Fox News and MSNBC are reporting that the hour of reckoning is at hand. Stand by for details, although I think we already know most of them.

Update: “Quick legal status.”

A bipartisan group of senators reached agreement with the White House Thursday on an immigration overhaul to grant quick legal status to millions of illegal immigrants already in the U.S. and fortify the border against new ones…

It set the stage for what promises to be a bruising battle next week in the Senate on one of Bush’s top non-war priorities.

The group of lawmakers had been haggling over the terms of agreement for weeks were reviewing language negotiated Wednesday night in efforts to nail down a deal. Among the final sticking points was a stubborn dispute over how much family ties count toward green cards under a new “point system.” The plan prioritizes advanced skills and education levels for future immigrants.

Update: The formal announcement is at 1:30. Reuters has a few of the basics already; it looks like the GOP won the battle over whether illegals can bring extended family with them.

The legislation would create a temporary worker program that would require laborers to return home after a period of time. Tough border security and workplace enforcement measures would go into place before the temporary worker program, congressional aides said.

The proposal would limit family-based migration to immediate family members and establish a merit-based system by which future migrants could earn points for skills, education, understanding of English and family ties.

Update: Michelle is posting reaction and points to a WashTimes report from last night that claimed Bush was ready to cave on safeguards that would prevent fraud in the guest-worker program. She also links to a point by point rebuttal of the GOP talking points at Lone Wacko.

Update: Quote of the day:

Senator Jim DeMint, Republican of South Carolina, said he had doubts about this approach, but said Congress had to do something because his constituents were telling him that “they feel they are being overrun with uncontrolled immigration.”

The irony is that most Republicans would accept a compromise on the back half of the equation, even if it meant legalizing large numbers of illegals who are already here, if the party was serious about plugging the leaks in the border. Show us a sustained, good faith effort to secure it and then we can deal charitably with the “undocumented.” Anyone think that’s in the offing?

Update: WaPo has the major details. 400,000 “guest workers” a year. And unless they’ve made an oversight, the English-language requirement for the “Z visa” that would grant permanent legal status has been dropped: “each Z Visa itself would be renewable indefinitely, as long as the holder passes a criminal background check, remains fully employed and pays a $5,000 fine, plus a paperwork-processing fee.”

Update: Near as I can tell (nitty gritty details being suspiciously hard to come by in news reports on immigration), there are two basic innovations to the bill: replacing family connections with a “points system” that emphasizes job skills and education as the key criteria for a green card — which seems odd given the argument about needing low-skilled workers to do the jobs Americans won’t do — and the requirement that the “Z visa” program not be triggered until certain measures have been taken to enforce the border. Question per Lone Wacko: Does that mean actual, concrete improvements in border security or merely passing laws and allocating funds for improvements that are never going to be made, like that nifty border fence they passed last year?

We had a Republican Congress and a Republican White House for six years. Six years, and it’s come to this.

Update: Bush applauds. And I take it back — here’s the line of the day:

“This is what my 9th grade teacher told me government is all about and I finally got to experience it,” said Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.).

Update: The Counterterrorism Blog says it’s a national security disaster:

In short order, the system will be overwhelmed. Whatever minimal fraud detection and prevention safeguards might be erected won’t last long in the face of hundreds of thousands, perhaps millions, of applications and petitions to be adjudicated. What that means is the information provided on those applications and petitions, and whatever supporting documents they may have (if any), will essentially be taken at face value. Whatever the applicant alien tells the adjudicator will essentially be taken at face value. There will be little time or process available to verify anything, perhaps beyond running the applicant’s name through a standard battery of computer databases (and, even that may become so time consuming some will slip through the cracks).

Update: Who among the GOP candidates reaps the whirlwind on this? It’s got to be McCain, right?

Expect Rudy to pronounce himself “troubled” by the deal.

Update: Jim DeMint: “I don’t care how you try to spin it, this is amnesty.”

Update: Tancredo goes right after McCain:

“Senator McCain and his allies seem to think that they can dupe the American public into accepting a blanket amnesty if they just call it ‘comprehensive’ or ‘earned legalization’ or ‘regularization.’ Unfortunately for them, however, the American people know amnesty when they see it,” said Tancredo. “The President is so desperate for a legacy and a domestic policy win that he is willing to sell out the American people and our national security.”

“If Senator McCain and Senator Kennedy spent as much time working on improving border security as they did poll testing creative euphemisms for amnesty, America would be a much safer place,” quipped Tancredo.

Update: Rich Lowry thinks the “triggers” are a scam from the word go, with amnesty granted immediately upon passage of the bill and the “Z visas,” which are keed to the enforcement triggers, only relevant insofar as they allow the bearer to travel. But even if Lowry’s wrong, what happens to the illegals who are here while the feds are working towards the triggers? Let’s say they get bogged down and can’t get them done for another decade. What’s the status of the “undocumented” during that interim period?

Update: Illegal aliens don’t like the bill either, a claim which will doubtless be trumpeted by proponents to “prove” that it’s a fair compromise. Actually, what it proves is that even the amnesty side of it is crap that won’t achieve what it means to.

The sub-moronic “touchback” provision comes in for special abuse:

David Guerra wants to be legal, but he says the path to citizenship offered by the Senate on Thursday would be too risky and too expensive, and could end up driving him deeper into the shadows…

“If I go home, who is going to guarantee that I’ll be let back in?” said the 44-year-old who lays bricks, clears weeds and does landscaping…

“Where would I find $5,000? In two years, I don’t get $5,000,” said Daniel Carrillo Maldonado, an illegal immigrant who was looking for construction work outside a Home Depot in Phoenix…

Amy Ndour, a 23-year-old illegal immigrant from Senegal who lives in New York, said she would be willing to pay the $5,000 fine, but not return home because her family there depends on what she earns as a hair braider.

“I’m helping myself” here, she said. “I’m helping people there too.”…

Many illegal immigrants said they had little incentive to apply for residency because the process was long and did not offer much hope of bringing their families.

“If I’ll never be able to bring my family, why should I apply?” said Jose Monson, a 33-year-old illegal immigrant from Guatemala who has lived in Los Angeles for four years. “I prefer to just stay here illegally.”


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 4 5 6

I only hope the one bright spot in this will be amongst the hordes heading for the US border will be a terrorist group among them who will do the job Americans will not do- and Take out this traitor for the good of the American people.

Ah, thanks for helping me find that, Bradky. Mellen is now also banned.

It’s going to take awhile for me to read all the way through this. Got any other glaring bannable offenses to point me to off the top?

Allahpundit on May 19, 2007 at 12:16 AM

Allahpundit on May 19, 2007 at 12:16 AM

Take a look at following post for the ones I saw. Not sure if all are “bannable offenses”, but hysterical at the very least.
Bradky on May 18, 2007 at 1:43 AM

Bradky on May 19, 2007 at 12:23 AM

Where the hell is a Lee Harvey Oswald when you need one?

Here we go. Chief1942 is banny ban banned.

Allahpundit on May 19, 2007 at 12:26 AM

It is about time for whites, who pay a disproportionate share of the tax revenue in this country, to look out for our own collective ethnic interests in the same manner blacks and Hispanics do for now on… They have their “La Raza,” it is time for us to have our “The Race.”

tommy1 = ban diddly banned.

Allahpundit on May 19, 2007 at 12:28 AM

>Take a look at following post for the ones I saw.

Narc. :)

Doghouse on May 19, 2007 at 1:35 AM

I dunno, Allah&Bradky.

There are a lot of people are hopping mad about this deal; some wrote angrily.

What is this? The Soviet Union?

dhimwit on May 19, 2007 at 9:21 AM

I think a lot of people who use skin color as a distiction in this issue are just reacting to the constant assualt that they are under from race-baiters like these clowns that we see on Fox supporting this bill. They try to make it a skin color issue and when someone responds in the same context, the race-baiters scream racism.

La Raza, the NAACP, etc foster the division between whites and non-whites and whites know they cannot have any organization that can get national respect that is exclusive to white issues (whatever those are. I’ve never figured it out). This is hypocritical AND when minorities attack whites on skin color, those whites who feel threatened by that will respond in kind without considering the fact that they are not allowed to do that. That priveledge is reserved for minorities.

AP would have still banned these folks, but I wonder if bradky would tell us under what name and which liberal forums he comments on so those he accuses here on HA can see what kind of comments he makes out of sight of HA members?

csdeven on May 19, 2007 at 9:45 AM

An analogy …. let’s say I build a beautiful swimming pool
in my backyard and all the neighborhood kids are sneaking it to enjoy it. What can I do ….

1. Nothing can be done some say, because you can’t remove all the kids from the neighborhood …

2. Build a big fence around my yard … okay, that will stop some kids, but not those who climb over the fence …

3. Fill in the pool … yup, reduce or eliminated the attraction and the kids will stop coming …

To control immigration, we need to reduce or eliminate the attraction … in this case jobs … enforcing employer sanctions would be a good start … remember the mandatory 55 mph speed limit in the ’70′s … the Fed’s threatened to
withhold highway funds if states didn’t comply … why not use a similar technique for states and localities that flaunt immigration law by withholding or reducing various Federal funding options …. this would no doubt get some cities and states to re-think their sactuary laws.

What is lacking isn’t the means to control immigration but rather the will to control it. What is being done now is a
contortion act to make the public think somthing is being done while guaranteeing that nothing really happens.

Paul

pbary on May 19, 2007 at 10:34 AM

why not use a similar technique for states and localities that flaunt immigration law by withholding or reducing various Federal funding options …. this would no doubt get some cities and states to re-think their sactuary laws.
pbary on May 19, 2007 at 10:34 AM

I agree, but it is hypocritical for the federal governement to punish local governments in that way. The Feds have caused the “need” for sanctuary cities by not securing the border.

csdeven on May 19, 2007 at 11:16 AM

>let’s say I build a beautiful swimming pool
in my backyard and all the neighborhood kids are sneaking it to enjoy it. What can I do …

4. Shoot anybody that climbs over your fence. That would stop them.

Doghouse on May 19, 2007 at 12:44 PM

>

Yes balance of efforts is important, but realistically it is doubtful that our lengthy borders can be totally shut down cost effectively … these folks aren’t streaming across the border due to some new found affection for our way of life … the motive is economic and the fact there
is little enforcement once here …remove the incentive and
reduce the number of safe havens and the problem will dimish substantially. We’ve got the muscle to enforce through employers both via the courts and the IRS … and there is plenty of precedent of using tax code and the IRS to shape social policy … again the tools are there and the
means to implement these reforms are not really all that
complicated … what is lacking is the political will to actual do something meaningful which leads us to this meaningless pretzel of a bill …

Paul

pbary on May 19, 2007 at 1:03 PM

An analogy …. let’s say I build a beautiful swimming pool
in my backyard and all the neighborhood kids are sneaking it to enjoy it. What can I do ….

When I was a teenager (seventies) my family lived in a house located in South Central LA with a swimming pool in the backyard–it’s not all “ghetto”–and had the same problem, though we had a high brick fence.

When I came back to LA in the nineties, I went to check out the old house. One of the subsequent owners had erected a row of steel bars along the top of the fence. In addition, the bars had sharpen tips and were curved outward toward the street in order to make climbing the fence a rather “sticky” situation.

Hmmm.

Afterthought: I wonder how they got that curve in those steel bars. After all, Rosie O. says that fire can’t melt steel. Perhaps they got someone really strong to bend them.

;-)

baldilocks on May 19, 2007 at 4:58 PM

so those he accuses here on HA can see what kind of comments he makes out of sight of HA members?
csdeven on May 19, 2007 at 9:45 AM

I post here the majority of the time. DU, Kos and tnr are pretty much the same in my opinion. Two are left and one is right — most posters are hysterical and not worth my time because they don’t want to engage in discussion. I have a limited number of hours in the day that I assign to the internet. Too much life to live in the real world.

I like this site because there are some that I can have a meaningful dialog with. The rest of my free internet time I use to read background on the various issues. Realclearpolitics.com is my primary pick. It has all the major pundits, transcripts and a variety of opinions from both sides of the spectrum.

I will note that you do a lot more name calling than I ever have.

Bradky on May 19, 2007 at 6:55 PM

Allahpundit-

Ooo! OOO!

“Paul” of pbary used “flaunt” ( “…flaunt immigration law…”) when he meant “flout”!

Bananarama!

/sarc off.

profitsbeard on May 19, 2007 at 9:33 PM

It never ceases to amaze me how people will shun one poll but stake their life on one that supports their opinion (recent poll regarding the Truthers comes to mind).

Bradky on May 18, 2007 at 7:27 AM

It never seems to amaze me how one will favor a poll over someone’s personal experience.

I grew up in southern Arizona. Come on down and spend 30-40 years and see for yourself. I now live in northern Mexico.

AZ_Redneck on May 19, 2007 at 10:44 PM

AZ_Redneck on May 19, 2007 at 10:44 PM

Just out of curiosity are you a Hal Turner fan? Saw a survivalist internet group with someone using AZ_Redneck recommending his site.

Bradky on May 20, 2007 at 12:15 AM

I just want to remind everyone

I got to meet someone in Qatar at an Embassy Function. A general and several of his officers at a gala and it hit home to me.

Just want to remind everyone that hispanics of both legal and illegal status have fought and died for the flag in far away lands.

Keep that in mind, they have served and died by the tens of thousands.

One came home, parents are illegals he was 20, buried very near a Raymondville detention camp called Ritmo, as the Hero he was.

Lets balance this discussion with the fact that thousands serve in Law Enforcement, Fire, Rescue and EMT. People, who might have been deported a few decades earlier.

EricPWJohnson on May 20, 2007 at 8:13 AM

Bradky on May 19, 2007 at 6:55 PM

I’ve already caught you lying and I don’t buy your latest line of crap either.

csdeven on May 20, 2007 at 8:16 AM

EricPWJohnson on May 20, 2007 at 8:13 AM

It’s clear that those people have assimilated. The issue is those who REFUSE to assimilate.

csdeven on May 20, 2007 at 8:18 AM

CSDeven

Millions never assimilated, how many of us have grandparents or greatgrandparents from Europe who got here and never went through the process because once you have kids everything points towards citizenship, plus after social security numbers and drivers licenses were issued getting passports and what not in the 50′s and 60′s were not difficult.

Remember that many never spoke english as well allways the later generations.

EricPWJohnson on May 20, 2007 at 9:16 AM

csdeven on May 20, 2007 at 8:16 AM

Again with the name calling. Your definition of lying seems to be “When someone presents facts that don’t line up with my view of an issue, they have lied”

As for catching me lying you know that is not true. You are likely referring to the truthers statistics (22% of all voters and 35% of democrats — you just can’t stomach the thought if you accept the 35% you must accept the 22%) and my comments on the milblogging issues (bandwidth observation which I provided proof for).

Lemmings I tell you!

Bradky on May 20, 2007 at 9:47 AM

Just out of curiosity are you a Hal Turner fan? Saw a survivalist internet group with someone using AZ_Redneck recommending his site.

Bradky on May 20, 2007 at 12:15 AM

After a little researching into who Hal Turner is, I can tell you ‘no’ I am not a fan. Unfortunately, user IDs are not globally unique.

Also, regarding the survivalist portion, also ‘no’ I am not a survivalist. But I am an avid hunter, fisher, …, prior service as a Marine, … that can confuse and scare alot of sheep.

AZ_Redneck on May 20, 2007 at 12:03 PM

Remember that many never spoke english as well allways the later generations.

EricPWJohnson on May 20, 2007 at 9:16 AM

Everyone in my faimly and all my friends families grandparents etc learned the language and assimilated.

csdeven on May 20, 2007 at 1:10 PM

Bradky on May 20, 2007 at 9:47 AM

No clue about that. Probably by that time I had stopped reading your tripe. You know exactly what I am talking about because I called you on it at the time.

Liar.

csdeven on May 20, 2007 at 1:12 PM

Allahpundit-

>

Man, tough crowd , however you are indeed correct!

P.

pbary on May 20, 2007 at 3:37 PM

AZ_Redneck on May 20, 2007 at 12:03 PM

Thanks for answering. Glad to hear that.

Bradky on May 20, 2007 at 5:32 PM

pbary-

Just yanking AP’s ban-chain with some irrelevant grammatical goofiness. Didn’t mean to flaunt it.

;^)

profitsbeard on May 21, 2007 at 12:07 AM

Csdeven

Most did not, my grandparents spoke fluent Swedish and much later english. In the 80′s many towns like Lockport speak mostly cajun French even after 200 years. Go to any china town etc.

Also, if Poles, Swedes, and Italians had come in as great a velocity as the hispanics no doubt Chicago would be speaking polish and Swedish and New York City would be 1/2 italian speaking today.

So what I’m saying is be careful what you wish for, some fools in Texas were actually writing legislation requiring your great grandparents also be native born. (Silly them they thought the federal government would allow something to just be passed for hispanics) fortunately the Gov and some converned legislators killed it in committee.

What these brain surgeons didn’t realize that they just authorized about 60% of us to be illegal aliens

thats how stupid and ridiculous this debate is getting because if you carefully examine truthfully the patterns of immigration it really has only been properly regulated since the 60′s.

You see, if you go back to the newspapers 100 to 125 years ago all immigrants were considered illegal (in other words illegal immigrants was an oxymoron in the 1880′s)

Going through Ellis island never ever made you legal you needed a work contract and a 5 year sponsor

Anyone got their great grandparents work contracts

and people were sent home, millions of Chinese and almost a million Philipinos were stripped of citizenship and sent home, many native born.

So be careful when we with a mighty sword pass who is and who isn’t a citizen or a native American etc.

This country was Founded by immigrants – whether the Mayflower bunch wanted us here or not!

EricPWJohnson on May 21, 2007 at 4:56 AM

EricPWJohnson on May 21, 2007 at 4:56 AM

Well stated. Unfortunately I think it will fall on deaf ears. Too much hysteria and indignation that congress did what it rarely does – come up with a bipartisan bill that tries to address the problem with a semblance of common sense.

Bradky on May 21, 2007 at 7:47 AM

pbary-

Just yanking AP’s ban-chain with some irrelevant grammatical goofiness. Didn’t mean to flaunt it.

;^)

profitsbeard on May 21, 2007 at 12:07 AM

****

fair enough, just don’t flout it

pbary on May 21, 2007 at 9:01 AM

Comment pages: 1 4 5 6