Obama regime planing back door amnesty plan for illegals...

[OddsOn]

I have to tell you, as a natural born American citizen who has a wife who I had to legally immigrate to this country from the Philippines, I find the whole notion of amnesty disgusting. These people are breaking the law, taxing our educational, welfare and healthcare resources to the point of bankruptcy and these corrupt politicians want to basically buy their vote with amnesty?

A part of me hopes this goes viral and adds yet another nail in the liberal democrat coffin. The American people have had it with this crap and its reaching a boiling point. The tea party movement is a showing of good ole' American conservatism and has the liberals shaking in their boots come November; don't be confused, the majority of Americans are conservative including most moderate democrats.

Memo Outlines Backdoor Amnesty Plan

With Congress gridlocked on an immigration bill, the Obama administration is considering using a back door to stop deporting many illegal immigrants - what a draft government memo said could be "a non-legislative version of amnesty."

The memo, addressed to U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services Director Alejandro Mayorkas and written by four agency staffers, lists tools it says the administration has to "reduce the threat of removal" for many illegal immigrants who have run afoul of immigration authorities.

"In the absence of comprehensive immigration reform, USCIS can extend benefits and/or protections to many individuals and groups by issuing new guidance and regulations, exercising discretion with regard to parole-in-place, deferred action and the issuance of Notices to Appear," the staffers wrote in the memo, which was obtained by Sen. Charles E. Grassley, Iowa Republican.

The memo suggests that in-depth discussions have occurred on how to keep many illegal immigrants in the country, which would be at least a temporary alternative to the proposals Democrats in Congress have made to legalize illegal immigrants.

Chris Bentley, a USCIS spokesman, said drafting the memo doesn't mean the agency has embraced the policy and "nobody should mistake deliberation and exchange of ideas for final decisions."

"As a matter of good government, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services will discuss just about every issue that comes within the purview of the immigration system," he said in an e-mail statement. "We continue to maintain that comprehensive bipartisan legislation, coupled with smart, effective enforcement, is the only solution to our nation's immigration challenges."

He said the Homeland Security Department "will not grant deferred action or humanitarian parole to the nation's entire illegal immigrant population."

The memo does talk about targeting specific groups of illegal immigrants.

Mr. Grassley said it confirms his fears that the administration is trying an end-run around Congress.

"This memo gives credence to our concerns that the administration will go to great lengths to circumvent Congress and unilaterally execute a backdoor amnesty plan," Mr. Grassley said.

The memo acknowledges some of the tools could be costly and might even require asking Congress for more money.

At one point, the authors acknowledge that widespread use of "deferred action" - or using prosecutorial discretion not to deport someone - would be "a non-legislative version of 'amnesty.' "

The authors noted several options for deferred action, including targeting it to students who would be covered by the DREAM Act, a bill that's been introduced in Congress.

In testifying to the Senate Judiciary Committee on May 11, Mr. Mayorkas first said he was unaware of discussions to use these kinds of tools on a categorical basis, then later clarified that officials had talked about expanding the use of those powers.

"I don't know of any plans. I think we have discussed, as we always do, the tools available to us and whether the deployment of any of those tools could achieve a more fair and efficient use or application of the immigration law," he said.

He acknowledged, though, that he was not aware that those powers had ever been used before on a categorical basis.

Sen. John Cornyn, the Texas Republican who queried Mr. Mayorkas on the subject, warned him against pursuing that strategy.

"I think it would be a mistake for the administration to use administrative action, like deferred action on a categorical basis, to deal with a large number of people who are here without proper legal documents to regularize their status without Congress' participation. I will just say that to you for what it's worth," Mr. Cornyn, the ranking Republican on the Senate Judiciary immigration, border security and citizenship subcommittee, told Mr. Mayorkas.

"The American public’s confidence in the federal government’s ability and commitment to enforce our immigration laws is at an all-time low," Mr. Cornyn said in a statement. "This apparent step to circumvent Congress – and avoid a transparent debate on how to fix our broken immigration system – threatens to further erode public confidence in its government and makes it less likely we will ever reach consensus and pass credible border security and immigration reform.”

After reports earlier this year that the agency was working on these sorts of plans, Senate Republicans, led by Mr. Grassley, have sent letters to President Obama and Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano asking for details.

In one letter, the senators warned the president against making an end-run around congressional authority to write immigration rules, and asked for Mr. Obama to promise that he would not use the rules to grant mass pardons.

Rosemary Jenks, government relations manager for NumbersUSA, an organization that advocates for stricter immigration limits, said the memo is "an outrageous usurpation of congressional authority. It is unconstitutional, and a slap in the face to the American people."

She said that the memo could explain why the push for an immigration bill has faltered in Congress.

"This makes sense of the fact that [Senate Majority Leader Harry] Reid and [House Speaker Nancy] Pelosi and Obama are sitting back calmly content with not moving immigration reform this year - because they know Obama is trying to take care of it for them, without Democrats having to be tied down to a vote before the election," she said.

On the other side of the political spectrum, immigrant rights groups have demanded that Mr. Obama halt deportations until he secures a broad legalization bill from Congress - legislation that supporters call "comprehensive immigration reform" because it would tackle enforcement, some aspects of legal immigration and the status of illegal immigrants at the same time.

Two senators earlier this year wrote asking the administration to use its powers to stop deporting students who might be eligible for the DREAM Act, which would allow illegal immigrant college students brought to the U.S. at a young age to gain legal status. The legislation has not been passed by Congress.

Mr. Obama has rejected halting deportations, but his administration has been more careful about whom it pursues.

According to new figures from Immigration and Customs Enforcement, the administration has stepped up its efforts to deport illegal immigrants convicted of crimes, but removal of "non-criminal" illegal immigrants has slowed so far in fiscal 2010.

[mc mark]

hum?

Deportation of illegal immigrants increases under Obama administration

The Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency expects to deport about 400,000 people this fiscal year, nearly 10 percent above the Bush administration's 2008 total and 25 percent more than were deported in 2007. The pace of company audits has roughly quadrupled since President George W. Bush's final year in office.

[Major]

It's funny that you simultaneously support/oppose the following:

* Opposed to the admin taking unilateral action
* Support GOP in Congress, obstructing any substantial federal immigration reform (they did this when Bush proposed reform too)
* Support Arizona law because of federal government's inaction

[SamFisher]

very nice...a mail-order bride is a fine addition to the character you are playing.

[OddsOn]

Originally Posted by Major It's funny that you simultaneously support/oppose the following: * Opposed to the admin taking unilateral action * Support GOP in Congress, obstructing any substantial federal immigration reform (they did this when Bush proposed reform too) * Support Arizona law because of federal government's inaction

1. There are already laws on the books that the federal government should be enforcing instead of selectively "not enforcing". Trust me, its not a Dem or Rep thing, its a greedy, power hungry politician thing; both sides are ignoring the issue for the same reason....potential votes.

2. I didn't support the Bush plan either as he was also trying to grant amnesty. Amnesty does not a comprehensive reform plan make, lets curtail the border crossings and ramp up the security on the borders first and begin to use the local law enforcement to help sweep for illegals and then deport them. This whole notion about having a child in the USA and that somehow makes them a legal resident is bogus to, the intent of the law was for the slaves back in the 1800's and had no intention of supporting illegal immigration encouraging women to illegally cross into our country and give birth here.

3. the Arizona law is simply saying that they are going to enforce the federal laws already on the books. And all this nonsense regarding carrying papers is a bunch of crap, if you have a green card the government instructs you in no uncertain terms that you must carry this card in your possession "at all times".

[OddsOn]

Originally Posted by SamFisher very nice...a mail-order bride is a fine addition to the character you are playing.

Dude you don't even want to go there....

[SamFisher]

Originally Posted by OddsOn Dude you don't even want to go there....

i already planed my way into their through the back door.

[Major]

Originally Posted by OddsOn 1. There are already laws on the books that the federal government should be enforcing instead of selectively "not enforcing". Trust me, its not a Dem or Rep thing, its a greedy, power hungry politician thing; both sides are ignoring the issue for the same reason....potential votes.

Enforcing current laws is a temporary (and expensive) fix at best. That addresses the symptom but not the cause.

Originally Posted by OddsOn 2. I didn't support the Bush plan either as he was also trying to grant amnesty. Amnesty does not a comprehensive reform plan make, lets curtail the border crossings and ramp up the security on the borders first and begin to use the local law enforcement to help sweep for illegals and then deport them.

The Bush plan was not amnesty. We have ramped up security dramatically over the last 10-15 years. It's no different than ramping up the war on drugs. It's not a solution. It just sounds exciting.

Originally Posted by OddsOn This whole notion about having a child in the USA and that somehow makes them a legal resident is bogus to, the intent of the law was for the slaves back in the 1800's and had no intention of supporting illegal immigration encouraging women to illegally cross into our country and give birth here.

Maybe - but it was tested in the courts during the lifetimes of the people that originally passed it, and they never made an attempt to change it.

Originally Posted by OddsOn 3. the Arizona law is simply saying that they are going to enforce the federal laws already on the books.

No - it also states that police must proactively enforce this. And it specifically allows people to sue the police for not enforcing it - the police can't be used for not going after thieves, rapists, or murderers. But they can for not going after illegal immigrants. It goes far beyond just enforicng federal law.

Originally Posted by OddsOn And all this nonsense regarding carrying papers is a bunch of crap, if you have a green card the government instructs you in no uncertain terms that you must carry this card in your possession "at all times".

And yet, citizens are not required to carry ID. So what happens when a US citizen is stopped on suspicion of being here illegally?

[OddsOn]

Originally Posted by Major Enforcing current laws is a temporary (and expensive) fix at best. That addresses the symptom but not the cause. The Bush plan was not amnesty. We have ramped up security dramatically over the last 10-15 years. It's no different than ramping up the war on drugs. It's not a solution. It just sounds exciting. Maybe - but it was tested in the courts during the lifetimes of the people that originally passed it, and they never made an attempt to change it. No - it also states that police must proactively enforce this. And it specifically allows people to sue the police for not enforcing it - the police can't be used for not going after thieves, rapists, or murderers. But they can for not going after illegal immigrants. It goes far beyond just enforicng federal law. And yet, citizens are not required to carry ID. So what happens when a US citizen is stopped on suspicion of being here illegally?

yet the reason the judge decided to block the law has nothing to do with your comment above.

so what would you propose as a healthy plan for immigration reform that does not grant amnesty or reward the people who are breaking the law?

[Rashmon]

Is Howling Wolf or Jim Morrison involved in any way? If yes, I'm even more stoked. Thanks for the head's up Odd Son.

[JuanValdez]

1. I'm not sure how this is a de facto amnesty. It sounds like they would simply not choose to deport, but not make you a resident. So, everyone in these chosen categories would still be subject to deportation as soon as the administration changed its mind. Do I understand that right?

2. I'm not terribly surprised. Immigration has become a highly visible and politicized issue. Congress will not be able to make the changes that are needed. In the meantime, we have a genuine problem that should be fixed. End-runs around an inpotent Congress is inevitable. I suppose this is the Democrat counterpoint to the racist AZ law. If Congress would grow some balls and fix the problem, this other bs wouldn't be happening (which makes criticism by Senators particularly ironic).

3. I don't think amnesty before a genuine legislative fix is a good idea. But deferred action for people we would want to have the country if it wasn't for our inability to resolve our legislative gridlock might be a good idea. We can always deport them later.

4. Divisive attitudes like Rosemary Jenks' are the reason why Congress can't get anything done.

[OddsOn]

Originally Posted by JuanValdez 1. I'm not sure how this is a de facto amnesty. It sounds like they would simply not choose to deport, but not make you a resident. So, everyone in these chosen categories would still be subject to deportation as soon as the administration changed its mind. Do I understand that right? 2. I'm not terribly surprised. Immigration has become a highly visible and politicized issue. Congress will not be able to make the changes that are needed. In the meantime, we have a genuine problem that should be fixed. End-runs around an inpotent Congress is inevitable. I suppose this is the Democrat counterpoint to the racist AZ law. If Congress would grow some balls and fix the problem, this other bs wouldn't be happening (which makes criticism by Senators particularly ironic). 3. I don't think amnesty before a genuine legislative fix is a good idea. But deferred action for people we would want to have the country if it wasn't for our inability to resolve our legislative gridlock might be a good idea. We can always deport them later. 4. Divisive attitudes like Rosemary Jenks' are the reason why Congress can't get anything done.

The AZ law is not racist, I get so sick and tired of hearing people throw this term around on to any topic they want to scare other peoples opinions from.

Newsflash, profiling works, if you are hispanic, don't speak english, don't have any form of ID and are living in a border state with a known high rate of illegal border traffic then law enforcement might have a probable cause to look into the matter. If you are legal citizen you have nothing to worry about and probably would not mind this going on given the high crime rate, murder rate and drug traffic going on in your community.

yeah and Nancy Pelosi is a real unifier....

[Sweet Lou 4 2]

I am not sure how these illegal immigrants are such a drain considering they generate tax revenue. That's all we need to make sure they pay taxes.

Why are companies hiring illegal workers? Is it because they are cheaper or is it because you can't find anyone to do that kind of work at a reasonable pay?

[mc mark]

Originally Posted by OddsOn Newsflash, profiling works, if you are hispanic, don't speak english, don't have any form of ID and are living in a border state with a known high rate of illegal border traffic then law enforcement might have a probable cause to look into the matter. If you are legal citizen you have nothing to worry about and probably would not mind this going on given the high crime rate, murder rate and drug traffic going on in your community.

You'd fit right in in 1939 Germany

[Major]

Originally Posted by OddsOn yet the reason the judge decided to block the law has nothing to do with your comment above.

And that is relevant to... ?

Originally Posted by OddsOn so what would you propose as a healthy plan for immigration reform that does not grant amnesty or reward the people who are breaking the law?

The Schumer-Graham framework is a good starting point.

[OddsOn]

Originally Posted by mc mark You'd fit right in in 1939 Germany

Thats funny, you do realize that NAZI stands for the "National Socialist Party" right?

Go pound sand...

[rocketsjudoka]

Originally Posted by OddsOn I have to tell you, as a natural born American citizen who has a wife who I had to legally immigrate to this country from the Philippines, I find the whole notion of amnesty disgusting. These people are breaking the law, taxing our educational, welfare and healthcare resources to the point of bankruptcy and these corrupt politicians want to basically buy their vote with amnesty?

They are also people building our houses, picking our crops, washing our dishes and paying taxes through sales and payroll taxes.

A part of me hopes this goes viral and adds yet another nail in the liberal democrat coffin. The American people have had it with this crap and its reaching a boiling point. The tea party movement is a showing of good ole' American conservatism and has the liberals shaking in their boots come November; don't be confused, the majority of Americans are conservative including most moderate democrats.

I've been hearing the Tea Party complain a lot about government spending, government regulation but two questions I have yet to hear answered is how much will a massive heavy handed crackdown on illegal immigration costs and how much of an effect will it have on the economy? Enforcing immigration laws is government regulation and since it affects the largest input in our economy, labor supply, it will have a direct bearing on the economy and likely a heavy economic cost. I find it somewhat hypocritical then of Tea Partiers who complain about government regulation hampering business to now be clamoring for heavy handed enforcement of regulations.

[rocketsjudoka]

Originally Posted by OddsOn Thats funny, you do realize that NAZI stands for the "National Socialist Party" right? Go pound sand...

The significance of this is?

[Major]

Originally Posted by OddsOn Newsflash, profiling works, if you are hispanic, don't speak english, don't have any form of ID and are living in a border state with a known high rate of illegal border traffic then law enforcement might have a probable cause to look into the matter. If you are legal citizen you have nothing to worry about and probably would not mind this going on given the high crime rate, murder rate and drug traffic going on in your community.

Given that areas with high immigrant populations don't have particularly high crime rates, and the fact that crime has dropped in all the border states (including Arizona) over the last decade; and given that Mariscopa county, the one place that has focused so much on illegal immigrants is one of the few exceptions in that regard with a growing crime rate, if I were a legal citizen there, I'd want my cops focusing on the murderers and rapists rather than the illegal immigrants.

[mc mark]

Originally Posted by OddsOn Thats funny, you do realize that NAZI stands for the "National Socialist Party" right? Go pound sand...

Funny you should mention; I'm heading to the beach for the weekend!