Arlen Specter says "It is not amnesty. This will restore the rule of law." Okay, I'm going to trust you just this once that you can fulfill all the requirements that have been stated in congressional/presidential conferences about the Z Visa Non-Amnesty program. But this must be our line in the sand. Shame on me if you fail and I trust you again.It would be essentially impossible to round up all the illegal aliens in our country and deport them. It would cause an upheaval greater than the current problem we are trying to solve. But if we don't solve the current problem, America will become a nightmare, and it will become necessary to attempt to do just that.
This is why I like the Z Visa agreement that congress and the president have agreed on in substance. I don't think that it equates to amnesty, but I will not be surprised if our national government's inability to perform ultimately proves me wrong.
The Z Visa agreement requires the following of illegal aliens:
- They must apply for and obtain a Z Visa.
- They must pay applicable fines and a $5,000 penalty.
- Each head of household must return to their home country.
- They stay on track for gaining permanent residency status.
- They must be identified under a new worker-identification program.
My grand assumption is that the existing Federal government really wants to solve the immigration problem (are Ramos and Compean released from prison yet?), to make illegal immigration very difficult, and to make legal immigration more straightforward. That's why when Arlen Specter pays homage to "the rule of law" I get all warm and fuzzy for at least a minute.
We already have a law that says we need to build a fence. That needs to be done post haste, or the entire Z Visa thing will be a chimera as regards restoring the rule of law.
If this doesn't work, it's gonna get ugly. Because either we ignore the problem, and everyone's respect for the law dwindles to the point of spitting on it and substituting their own law in its place, or we round up all the illegal people and tell them they are only wanted if they come here through legal channels.
This what I sent to several senators. Sorry if this is not correct for your blog. Karen
ReplyDeleteI am writing to you with a feeling of total impotence, in getting this current congress, especially Sen. Kyl and Sen. Kennedy, to listen to the citizens of our country. We don't want amnesty, anchor babies, and chain immigration.
Living in the Los Angeles area and seeing the havoc happening here is frightening. The high school kids who used to get summer and after school jobs at McDonalds, can't or are forced out if they are not of Hispanic origin and speck Spanish. Ordering is a nightmare, as the English words are not understood or are misunderstood. Can't you see what this mass flood of low educated or non- educated peoples, with loyalty only to their country of origin, is doing? Forget future votes and a stable economy because a lot of big money will just move elsewhere. What about our children? Will the Hispanic Spanish speakers who are, possibly, less qualified and agree to cheaper wages get the jobs my children apply for, like what is happening in the construction industry, landscaping, mechanics, etc?
This bill, S.1348, is the most UN-AMERICAN drabble I have ever, in my lifetime, seen presented before the Senate. It slaps the face of all of those who founded our great nation, and all of those who followed the law to immigrate legally.
I hope for your own dignity and peace of mind, you will retreat from this heinous stance toward the destruction of America as we now know it today.
Sincerely, Karen Boudreau
Sen. Specter is right when he says that any immmigration bill that can pass both houses of Congress and get the President's signature is going to be problematic for many Americans. Count me among the dissatisfied.
ReplyDeleteI don't like failure to follow the rule of law, but the $5000 penalty is going to be a non-starter. You are asking people to pay a third to a half of their annual income, quit their jobs, and go to their native country and wait for who knows how long until our bungling bureaucracy determines that it's OK for them to come back. That's a joke. It cannot work in practice.
Does the bill reform the INS? Does the bill provide the INS with adequate resources to deal with the demand?
Maybe this bill is stepping stone, but it's not a reasonable solution.
Even the news media, as evidenced by the wording in the article from Hirschfeld Davis from AP, is deliberately deceptive. The agreement would simply allow illegal immigrants to "come forward" and obtain a Z visa - with no penalty whatsoever. The Z visa then allows them to legally work in this country, and for employers to legally hire them. This is amnesty by any definition ever used.
ReplyDeleteunlawflcombatnt
Economic Populist Forum
VIVA LATINOS,Florida,Nevada,Texas,Colorado,California,Nuevo Mexico,Arizona...etc all latin land.....jajajaja
ReplyDeleteI will assume you're serious. So what would you do with all that other land--run it into the ground like you have Mexico? If you could get rid of corruption, excess government, and disincentives to produce in those south of the border countries (like voting Chavez out of office in Venezuela before there's no longer a chance to vote) then you wouldn't need to come to the United States in droves.
ReplyDeleteThere, I read it. I do have a question... The head of the house is supposed to return to the country of origin. I have read this is for a year, what do they do there for a year and what does the family do here when el padre is back in Peru where there is no work?
ReplyDeleteHave you been to Peru, Bolivia, Mexico or any other of these forlorn nations?
I also have to agree to some degree with the sentiments of mi hermano Alvaro: 'Viva Latinos'. We started the war back in 1846 with Mexico by annexing their real estate. Now they are taking it back one family and a baby at a time. So much for your rule of law.
I personally prefer salsa to catsup and tortillas to Wonder bread. May the grocery store shelves be filled to overflowing.
At the time that I wrote this post, I was not familiar with the details of the bill. Actually, I'm still not as familiar as I should be. I agree with you that it's not practical for them to stay for a year before returning.
ReplyDeleteThe issue of whose land it was nearly two centuries ago is a side issue that takes energy away from the most important issue at hand.
You know Frank for being a right leaning blogist you are rather opened minded. That is not a commodity found in abundance.
ReplyDeleteWhose land this is still belongs to the discussion. By force we stole, took and murdered our way across the North American continent. I think we need to understand our own heritage of wars and ethnic cleansing with respect to the red man and our role in propagating slavery for two centuries in the USA. Only by understanding our past may we come to view the world and ourselves. Do you read Stephen Ambrose? He is one of the very best of American historians.
Best wishes,
That almost sounds like the equivalent of "for an African-american, you're pretty smart." I know some left-wing bloggers who aren't so open minded themselves (my largest experience in this regard has been as a contributor and frequent commenter to OneUtah.org.)
ReplyDeleteThe only Ambrose I have read is Citizen Soldiers and Band of Brothers, but I do have a copy of Undaunted Courage. Would this be your recommendation to get the perspective you're talking about? I think your terminology a bit harsh, but I agree that we should understand our history of slavery (but also how we were instrumental by example in eradicating it from much of the world) and how we mistreated the Native Americans. It is not something we should be proud of by any means.
You may be interested in my post about "Freedom Writers" (movie based on a true story). This gave me a whole new perspective about how individually and collectively many Latinos feel powerless against 'the white man'.
Sometimes my learning path parallels the path of irony. Most recently: (1) I talk about border fences, and then I watch a movie that gives me a better understanding of how minorities in America feel, and (2) I take a snipe at Al Gore, and in the next post I praise him for excellent insights in his new book.
So, no, I am not monolithic. Sometimes the opinions I throw out upon the canvas of Simple Utah Mormon Politics are very unrefined, and I hope for them to be refined at least in part by excellent comments from people such as yourself, whether they agree or disagree with me.
Thanks again.