Tag Archives: Gang of Eight

The REAL reason our Southern Border will never be secure

nicholasstixuncensored

The Senate on Tuesday by a vote of 54-39 rejected an amendment to the latest version of the Senate’s new immigration bill. The amendment offered by Senator John Thune of South Dakota should have been a no brainer to pass. The Thune Amendment simply called for the completion and funding of a 700 mile stretch of double tiered fencing along our Southern Border.

What was so surprising about the failure of this amendment was some of the reasoning for its failure. Most of the Senators that voted against it were Democrats; but there were also five Republicans, including all four members of the so called “Gang of Eight” that voted against the measure too. The so called Republicans were: Senator John McCain, Senator Lindsey Graham, Senator Jeff Flake, and surprisingly even Senator Marco Rubio. The only Senator not part of the Gang of Eight that also voted against the measure was Alaskan Senator Lisa Murkowski.

Senator John McCain said he voted against the measure stating, “We should leave that issue (the border fence) to the best judgment of the Border Patrol.” This is the same John McCain who in a tough primary challenge in 2010 actually ran a campaign ad in which he says, “let’s build the dang fence!”

Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina also voted against the measure which is not surprising because pretty much anything John McCain does Lindsey follows suit.

Senator Jeff Flake, who replaced a solid conservative in Jon Kyl, also voted against the measure. Unfortunately as of late Mr. Flake has been living up to his name when it comes to the immigration issue.

Alaskan Senator Lisa Murkowski, who routinely sides with the Democrats also voted against the bill. She was appointed in 2002 by her father, another Rino Republican Frank Murkowski who at the time was Governor of Alaska.

However the most surprising vote came from Senator Marco Rubio. As one of the leaders of the Gang of Eight he was supposed to be the Conservative voice of reason when it came to crafting the immigration bill. Mr. Rubio has been talked about as a possible contender for the Presidency in 2016. By voting against this measure he may have severely diminished any hopes he had at seeking the Republican Nomination for President in 2016.

So why did five Republicans vote against a measure that would have helped eliminate more illegal immigration? Don’t they realize that if they pass Amnesty they will be committing political suicide? Don’t they even question the motives of the Democratic Party who are so focused on passing Amnesty they are trying to rush it through as quickly as possible? Why are they afraid to make border enforcement an integral part of the process?

The short answer is they have bought into the Democratic Party’s scare tactics, and have misinterpreted the election results of 2012. They think that passing Amnesty is somehow going to ingratiate themselves into the majority of Hispanic voter’s minds and allow them to capture more of the vote share. This is a grave miscalculation. If we grant Amnesty to 11 million illegal immigrants the majority, over 60% of these new voters will be votes for the Democratic Party. Typically you dance with the person who brought you to the party and these new voters will be doing the twist front and center for the Democrats.

Republicans can win these voters with the right message and the right messenger. Granting Amnesty is not the solution unless they are interested in a government that will become a dictatorship under a one party rule.

So why is the Republican Party willingly putting themselves in a position that will lead to permanent minority status?

The long answer is the Republican Party of 2013 is no longer about limited government and individual freedom. The Republican Party of 2013 is about Globalism and the embracing of a New World Order.

For those of you who have never heard of the website SPP.GOV I implore you to Google it as soon as possible. SPP.GOV stands for the Shared Prosperity Partnership of North America. This is the real reason why you will never see a fence built on the Southern Border. The idea behind the Shared Prosperity Partnership is to create a North American Union similar to the European Union in Europe.

The North American Union, if it were ever to be implemented would combine Canada, the United States, and Mexico into one large Global Governance. In addition it would also change our currency from the almighty dollar bill into something called the Amero. Finally it would create a super highway that would start in Southern Mexico, run straight across the United States, and end somewhere in Northern Canada.

This is the true reason both parties are not serious about protecting our borders. This is why both parties want to pass Amnesty. This is why it is so vitally important that we fight this bill or any Amnesty bill now and in the future. If we somehow allow Amnesty to pass there is a real good possibility that a North American Union could be in our future.

Think about what a North American Union could do to our sovereignty rights? Think about what it could do to our Constitutional rights, especially our Second Amendment? Think about what it could do to our currency and our economy? Worst of all, think about what it will do to our deep rooted American pride? As Americans we are a very prideful people. We have always separated ourselves from the rest of the world based on our unique history and coveted status as the world’s most powerful superpower. Why would we ever knowingly want to give up that status or relinquish our standing in the world?

For America to remain a free country we must protect our borders. A country that does not protect its own borders will cease to be a country at some point. Any thought of legalizing illegal immigrants without first securing our borders could be a means to an end for America.

Solving the illegal immigration issue could be simple if we use some common sense.

First thing we should do is modify the birthright citizenship rule to only grant citizenship to the child being born on American soil. By eliminating citizenship to the parents of the child born here you send a clear message that just because your child was born here doesn’t give you the right to claim citizenship. If illegal immigrants knew that only their children who were born here could have automatic citizenship you would see a lot less illegal immigrants crossing the border to have children and abusing this law.

The second thing we could do is finally complete the fence across the entire border. Once the border is secure, we could build 2 or 3 maximum security correctional facilities in each one of the Border States right along side of it. We could even save the taxpayer’s in each respective Border State the cost of building these complexes by having the illegal aliens we capture help build them.

Finally, after we deport all the folks who have criminal records we give the remaining aliens a choice.

The first choice is immediate deportation or they would run the risk of being incarcerated in one of the maximum security correctional facilities they helped build.

The second choice would be to have them serve in our military. If they want to be Americans and truly love our country, than they should be willing to fight and die for it. After they have served in the military for a few years they should be granted full citizenship on the day they have been honorably discharged. At that point they should be entitled to every single benefit that natural born Americans have. That is how you fix the illegal immigration issue.

As a writer, commentator, and radio talk show host my job is talk about the important issues and offer common sense solutions. With all the dysfunction that permeates through Washington, D.C. it would be a miracle if any sound legislation ever was to pass. In the meantime it is imperative that we call our Senators and Congress members and let them know that we strongly oppose this bill. A majority in America and a minority in Congress can create a majority in Congress.

The Capitol switchboard number is (202)224-3121
John McCain: (202)224-2235
Lindsey Graham: (202)224-5972
Jeff Flake: (202)224-4521
Lisa Murkowski: (202)224-6665
Marco Rubio: (202)224-3041

Suggested by the author:

Dismantling Washington
Let’s all sue the Internal Revenue Service!
Why Attorney General Eric Holder is the worst in U.S. History
How the left uses identity politics and fear tactics to influence voters
www.joshbernsteinpoliticalwriter.com

S. 744: Here Comes Trouble



immigration
The immigration “Gang of Eight” has been instrumental in bringing Comprehensive Immigration Reform (S. 744, the Border Security, Economic Opportunity, and Immigration Modernization Act) to Congress in 2013.

Congress asked the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) to examine S. 744. The CBO did, looking only at the effects of the first ten years of the bill. Knowing that, the “Gang of Eight” wrote the bill so that long-term effects don’t kick in until after the tenth year. What does all of this mean? TROUBLE!

One of the major provisions of S. 744 is the “path to citizenship.” A new “registered provisional immigrant” (RPI) status for eligible undocumented immigrants (illegal aliens) would be created. Those in RPI status also qualify for a Social Security number and state driver’s license. All registered immigrants (and spouses and children) could, after 10 years, seek to become lawful permanent residents (LPRs). Three years later, they would be eligible to apply to become US citizens. The only requirement is that aliens be in the US as of December 31, 2011.

The Heritage Foundation also examined S. 744, and their conclusions are, at best, disturbing. They examined the bill from three perspectives: reducing flow, effects on workers, and cost.

  • Reducing flow (of illegal aliens): S. 744 would, according to the CBO, reduce the future inflow of illegal immigrants into the US over the next two decades by only 25 percent, despite promises of a secure border. CBO estimates that by 2033, 7.5 million new illegal immigrants will have entered the US and taken up residence. Gosh, I may be naïve, but I’ll bet that they ALL will say they were here before December 31, 2011.
  • Effects on Workers: The CBO estimates that per capita Gross National Product (GNP) would lower by .7 percent by 2023, and per capita GNP will be lower until 2031. Further, the CBO estimates the bill would drive down their average wages for legal American workers. Wages will be depressed until 2024. It is important to measure post-tax wages as well as per capita GNP.
  • Cost: Robert Rector of The Heritage Foundation estimates that the new 7.5 million illegal immigrants could cost the taxpayers (federal, state, and local) an additional $400 billion over 20 years. Rector comments:

    “S.744 provides only a temporary delay in eligibility to welfare and entitlements. Over time, S.744 makes all 18.5 million [11 million here now plus 7.5 million new ones] eligible for nearly every government program, including: Obamacare, 80 different welfare programs, Social Security and Medicare. When this occurs, spending will explode, but nearly all the real costs do not appear in the CBO score.”

    “… the most significant costs during the lifetime of would-be legalized immigrants are during their retirement years after they qualify for Medicare and Social Security. For the vast majority of unlawful immigrants, that is well past the 10-year budget window.”

Senator Jeff Sessions (R-AL), ranking member of the Senate Budget Committee, said:

“The bill’s drafters relied on the same scoring gimmicks used by the Obamacare drafters to conceal its true cost from taxpayers and to manipulate the CBO score. There is a reason why eligibility for the most expensive federal benefits was largely delayed outside the 10-year scoring window: to mislead the public.”  [emphasis mine]

And, the “11 million” illegal aliens already here have established a track record. For example:

  • Fifty percent of all immigrant households with children used at least one welfare program, compared to 32 percent for non-immigrants.
  • Fifty seven percent of households headed by an immigrant with children used at least one welfare program, compared to 39 percent for non-immigrant households with children.
  • Immigrant households’ use of welfare tends to be much higher than non-immigrants for food assistance programs and Medicaid. A large share of the welfare used by immigrant households with children is received on behalf of their US-born children.
  • Welfare use tends to be high for both new and established immigrants. Sixty percent of immigrant headed households with children who arrived since 200 used at least one welfare program.

Does anyone believe that the new illegal immigrants will be any different? If so, I own a bridge in which you may be interested.

BTW, the term “Gang of Eight” is applied to any bi-partisan group of eight Senators. There is presently a “Gang of Eight” for intelligence. Don’t be confused by that term.

But that’s just my opinion
Please visit RWNO, my personal, very conservative web site!

Marco Rubio and the Magic Beans

Immigration-CautionShortly after last year’s presidential defeat and at the beginning of the Great Republican Panic of 2013, I wrote here about what a bad idea morally and legally amnesty for illegal aliens is. Guess what? It still is.

In a sane universe “immigration reform” would be specifically designed to benefit the citizens of the nation passing the law, rather than be a law that only benefits non–citizens who came here illegally at the expense of the citizens.

But that hasn’t stopped Sen. Marco Rubio (R–FL) from eagerly joining the Gang of Ocho’s efforts to pass a “comprehensive” amnesty bill. After being trapped in a room with both Sen. Chuck Schumer (D–Publicity) and Sen. John McCain (R–Media Loves Me, Unless I Run for President), Rubio has evidently developed Stockholm Syndrome. He claims this amnesty bill does not have any amnesty provisions. Instead is has a “path to citizenship” where the length of time before amnesty kicks in somehow makes amnesty more tolerable for conservatives.

Yet I have a simple test for supporters of any immigration reform bill. If removing the portions that deal with granting citizenship to people who came to the US illegally causes Democrat support to vanish, then what you have is an amnesty bill and not a “reform” at all.

During her testimony before Congress in support of the bill, Sec. of Homeland Security Janet Incompetano said the 844–page bill has many benefits, including stricter accountability for employers and improving border security. Yet you can accomplish both of those goals without legalizing 12 million illegal aliens and doing so might just reduce the number of illegals here now.

Opponents of actually enforcing immigration law claim the government can’t deport 12 million people, but no one I know is advocating that. In fact this is one of the areas where I prefer a libertarian solution: the illegals got here on their own without government assistance and they can leave on their own, too.

In a true magic beans moment, Rubio is so proud of the 13–year “path to citizenship” — as if a slow motion surrender to illegality is an improvement over an immediate surrender. Maybe he thinks during this cooling off period Republican outreach teams can contact the newly legal and persuade them they are really naturally conservative and should be voting GOP.

But I’ve got news for Marco: it’s not going to happen. His 13–year path is going to be the civil unions of the immigration fight. As soon as Rubio’s bill is passed Democrats will begin complaining about second–class citizenship for brown people. As Neil Munro has written, the bill already has 400 “exemptions, exceptions, waivers, determinations and grants of discretion and even better will be administered by the OBAMA ADMINISTRATION!

We will be lucky if the 13–years lasts 13 months.

Democrats will get their immediate temporary permanent status for the illegals and the increased border security will never happen. The same goes for employer sanctions.

We heard the amnesty and border security shuffle when Reagan granted amnesty to 3 million (Gee, wasn’t he a Republican?). Amnesty was immediate and border security was absent, which is why we are preparing to legalize 12 million now.

The fines Rubio dreams of (much like the $1,500 fines the Commonwealth of Virginia was going to impose of indigent drunk drivers) will never be collected and the English proficiency test will be found to be culturally insensitive. Instead, illegals will get a waiver for the fine and if they can look at two photos and distinguish George Washington from Simon Bolivar their English is good to go, too.

You think I’m exaggerating? Ha! The Democrats in charge of the District of Columbia are preparing to introduce legislation that would require pharmacies, and possibly doctor’s offices, to provide translators — at business expense — for any customer or patient who does not speak English. That in a nutshell (apt phrasing, that) is the Democrat philosophy on immigration.

And by the way, I was being conservative when I said 12 million illegals would join us. According to NumbersUSA it will be more like 33 million, because “comprehensive reform” doesn’t manage to reform one of the major failings of current immigration policy called “family reunification.”

You probably think unifying families makes sense, because parents should be able to bring their children into the country. But you are wrong, that policy would be the reform. Current Democrat policy defines “family” as grandfathers, grandmothers, uncles, aunts, cousins, kissing–cousins, step–relatives and BFFs. So 33 million may be a conservative estimate.

Tea Party favorite Rubio is flacking for a bill that will only encourage more illegal immigration in the future, will not provide increased border security, will cost taxpayers billions, will depress wages for lower income workers, will burden the welfare system and — according to a report from Emily Schultheis in Politico — give Democrats 11 million so new voters, which is about the voting population of Ohio.

This leaves conservatives with a choice of opinions regarding Marco Rubio. One, he’s either too gullible to ever be allowed in the Oval Office or two, he’s a Democrat sleeper agent.