Tag Archives: amnesty

Through Obamacare, taxpayers will fund perpetual enrollment of Democrat-voting welfare recipients . . .

centernewsnetwork.com:

Former New York State Lieutenant Governor Betsy McCaughey reports that taxpayers will spend billions to fund permanent Obamacare implementation and outreach programs which will not only sign up potential Obamacare subscribers but will also register the uninsured to vote (as Democrats of course) and enroll them in any other available welfare programs.

Of course, the outreach will be done by reliable Democrat voter recruiters like the NAACP, SEIU and AFL-CIO, among others.

Who doubts that the Schumer/Rubio Amnesty bill includes similar outreach programs designed to draw illegal immigrants and their friends and families “out of the shadows” and into the taxpayer-funded, Democrat-voting welfare complex?

Gang of 8 panics; offers to improve “Border Security Act” which CBO found provided no security . . .

centernewsnetwork.com:

Today’s super-improved “border security” provisions are claimed by the Gang of 8 to be even better than yesterday’s border security measures! After we were told that the Amnesty Bill couldn’t be changed and was the greatest bolstering of border security in US history.

We were told yesterday that failing to support yesterday’s Amnesty Bill meant the end of the Republican Party. And now the bill that couldn’t be changed has somehow been improved.

Sorry. A temporary surge of order agents under the control of Janet Napolitano fails to convince the Center.

The CBO scoring shows that the Schumer/Rubio “Border Security, Economic Opportunity, and Immigration Modernization Act” will only reduce illegal immigration by 25%, and will increase unemployment while reducing wages. In other words it will not secure the border and it will not create economic opportunity.

And we are not persuaded that the Act “modernizes” immigration, whatever that means, or that “modernization” of immigration is a pressing national issue.

And it doesn’t modernize immigration either . . .

centernewsnetwork.com:

CBO scoring shows that the Schumer/Rubio “Border Security, Economic Opportunity, and Immigration Modernization Act” will only reduce illegal immigration by 25%, and will increase unemployment while reducing wages. In other words it will not secure the border and it will not create economic opportunity. And we are not persuaded that the Act “modernizes” immigration, whatever that means, or that “modernization” of immigration is a pressing national issue.

AP account of CBO scoring of “Border Security” Act ignores findings that borders will not be secured, wages will fall and unemployment will increase . . .

1. USA Today: WASHINGTON — The American economy would suffer some initial struggles if a Senate bill legalizing the nation’s million unauthorized immigrants becomes law, but the overall effect would be a reduction in the federal deficit, according to an analysis from the Congressional Budget Office.

But the CBO also found that the border security components in the bill would reduce illegal immigration only by 25%.

2. AP: http://news.yahoo.com/cbo-senate-immigration-bill-help-economy-010711853.html

“Not all the forecast was as favorable, though. CBO said average wages would decline through 2025 as a result of the bill, and that unemployment would go up slightly.”

Rubio: Border security must wait because first we have to “do something” about illegal immigrants by legalizing them . . .

From the Center:

Rahm Emanuel reminded us early in the Obama Administration that Progressives never let a “crisis go to waste . . . it’s an opportunity to do things you think you could not do before.”

Government by continuing crisis, whether fact-based or by press release, is the Progressives preferred political strategy. The activists and their mainstream media allies hype a so-called crisis and then demand that the government “do something” about it. When that “something” fails, we are told that “it would have been worse” and we now must “do more.”

Unfortunately, Sen. Rubio, in pushing his Amnesty Bill, is playing the “do something” card to convince Americans that “legalization” of illegal immigrants must come before border security because “you have to do something with the people who are here illegally so we know who they are.”

Sorry, Sen. Rubio. We don’t have to “do something” about illegal immigrants other than enforce the existing law. We don’t have to “know who they are” unless it is to arrest and deport them.

Bilingual double-talk from Rubio on Schumer-Rubio Amnesty Bill . . .

Washington Times:

In his own appearance on the Spanish-language Univision network, Mr. Rubio tried to assuage some Hispanics who fear that their legal status will be held hostage to border security. Mr. Rubio said illegal immigrants will get quick legal status and work permits regardless of whether the borders are secure — but won’t be given a full pathway to citizenship until more enforcement is imposed.

“Nobody is talking here about preventing legalization. Legalization will take place,” Mr. Rubio told Univision in an interview scheduled to air Sunday.

“First comes legalization, then comes this border security measure and then comes the permanent residency process. What we are talking about here is the permanent residency system,” Mr. Rubio said. . . . Opponents argue that giving illegal immigrants immediate legal status repeats the mistake of the 1986 amnesty, when millions were put on a quick path to citizenship but promises of tighter border security and interior enforcement went unfulfilled.

Rubio vows to lead Senate opposition to Amnesty bill he and Schumer wrote . . .

Daily Caller:

In an interview on Hugh Hewitt’s radio show on Tuesday night, Republican Florida Sen. Marco Rubio indicated that he would not support the “Gang of Eight” immigration bill he had helped author unless it is changed.
Earlier in the day, Rubio had said that immigration reform was still short of the 60 votes it needs to pass the Senate.
“Well, let me first say that the news of what I said today on Fox about there not being the 60 votes: Actually, Sen. [Robert] Menendez of New Jersey, a Democrat, said the same thing last week,” Rubio said. “And that’s a fact. And the reason why is because while there’s a group, well, the majority of our colleagues are prepared to do immigration reform, they’re only prepared to do it if we ensure that this illegal immigration problem never happens again.”

Rand Paul nails the essential flaw in Schumer/Rubio Amnesty plan . . .

“SEN. RAND PAUL: I am worried that the bill before us won’t pass. It may pass the Senate, may not pass the House. I want to be constructive in making the bill strong enough that conservatives, myself included, conservative Republicans in the House will vote for this because I think immigration reform is something we should do.

In this bill I am worried, though, and this is similar to what Senator [Ron] Johnson said, that it says, well, you have to have a plan to build a fence, but you don’t have to build a fence. And if you don’t have a plan to build a fence, then you get a commission. I don’t know what happens if the commission doesn’t do anything. That’s the story of Washington around here.

To me, it’s a little bit like Obamacare. And I hate to bring that up, but 1,800 references to the secretary shall at a later date decide things. We don’t write bills around here. We should write the bill. We should write the plan. We should do these things to secure the border whether it be fence, entry, exit, we should write it, not delegate it. What’s going to happen in five years if they don’t do their job — maybe not even them, maybe somebody else who doesn’t do their job in five years, and the border is not secured? We will be blamed for the next 10 million that come here illegally. (Senate Homeland Security Committee Hearing, May 7, 2013)”

The goalposts are always moved leftward; you are a bigot if you don’t keep approving . . .

WASHINGTON — Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy is expected to introduce an amendment to immigration reform legislation next week that would extend rights to same-sex couples — a move that one crafter of the bill says will kill its chances of passing.

Leahy, a Vermont Democrat, will propose allowing foreign-born partners in same-sex relationships with Americans to apply for green cards, according to the prominent gay-rights group Immigration Equality. Currently, the rights apply only to foreign-born spouses of heterosexual couples.

“Senator Leahy has been a champion of the cause for over a decade,” Rachel Tiven, executive director of the group said yesterday.

Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.), one of the “Gang of 8” bipartisan group of senators that crafted the immigration bill, contends that introducing the same-sex marriage issue into the fragile legislation giving a path to citizenship for 11 million illegal immigrants would kill the bill — and cost his support.