North American union plan headed to Congress in fall
Powerful think tank prepares report on benefits of integration between U.S., Mexico, Canada

2007 WorldNetDaily.com

WASHINGTON – A powerful think tank chaired by former Sen. Sam Nunn and guided by trustees including Richard Armitage, Zbigniew Brzezinski, Harold Brown, William Cohen and Henry Kissinger, is in the final stages of preparing a report to the White House and U.S. Congress on the benefits of integrating the U.S., Mexico and Canada into one political, economic and security bloc.

The final report, published in English, Spanish and French, is scheduled for submission to all three governments by Sept. 30, according to the Center for Strategic & International Studies.
CSIS boasts of playing a large role in the passage of the North American Free Trade Agreement in 1994 – a treaty that set in motion a political movement many believe resembles the early stages of the European Community on its way to becoming the European Union.

“The results of the study will enable policymakers to make sound, strategic, long-range policy decisions about North America, with an emphasis on regional integration,” explains Armand B. Peschard-Sverdrup, director of CSIS’ Mexico Project. “Specifically, the project will focus on a detailed examination of future scenarios, which are based on current trends, and involve six areas of critical importance to the trilateral relationship: labor mobility, energy, the environment, security, competitiveness and border infrastructure and logistics.”

(Story continues below)

The data collected for the report is based on seven secret roundtable sessions involving between 21 and 45 people and conducted by CSIS. The participants are politicians, business people, labor leaders and academics from all three countries with equal representation.

All of this is described in a CSIS report, “North American Future 2025 Project.”

“The free flow of people across national borders will undoubtedly continue throughout the world as well as in North America, as will the social, political and economic challenges that accompany this trend,” says the report. “In order to remain competitive in the global economy, it is imperative for the twenty-first century North American labor market to possess the flexibility necessary to meet industrial labor demands on a transitional basis and in a way that responds to market forces.”

As WND reported last week, the controversial “Secure Borders, Economic Opportunity and Immigration Reform Act of 2007,” which would grant millions of illegal aliens the right to stay in the U.S. under certain conditions, contains provisions for the acceleration of the Security and Prosperity Partnership, a plan for North American economic and defense integration with remarkable similarities to the CSIS plan.

The bill, as worked out by Senate and White House negotiators, cites the SPP agreement signed by President Bush and his counterparts in Mexico and Canada March 23, 2005 – an agreement that has been criticized as a blueprint for building a European Union-style merger of the three countries of North America.

“It is the sense of Congress that the United States and Mexico should accelerate the implementation of the Partnership for Prosperity to help generate economic growth and improve the standard of living in Mexico, which will lead to reduced migration,” the draft legislation states on page 211 on the version time-stamped May 18, 2007 11:58 p.m.

Since agreement on the major provisions of the bill was announced late last week, a firestorm of opposition has ignited across the country. Senators and representatives are reporting heavy volumes of phone calls and e-mails expressing outrage with the legislation they believe represents the largest “amnesty” program ever contemplated by the federal government.

Meanwhile, while many continue to express skepticism about a plot to integrate North America along the lines of the European Union, WND reported last week that 14 years ago, one of world’s most celebrated economists and management experts said it was already on the fast track – and nothing could stop it.

Peter F. Drucker, in one of his dozens of best-selling books, “Post Capitalist Society,” published in 1993, wrote that the European Community, the progenitor of the European Union, “triggered the attempt to create a North American economic community, built around the United States but integrating both Canada and Mexico into a common market.”

“So far this attempt is purely economic in its goal,” wrote the Presidential Medal of Freedom honoree. “But it can hardly remain so in the long run.”

Drucker describes in his book the worldwide trends toward globalization that were evident back then – the creation and empowerment of transnational organizations and institutions, international environmental goals regarding carbon dioxide and agreements to fight terrorism long before 9/11.

More here.

——————————————————————————–

Note from D.A. – it is part of the “integration” of North America.

From the Southwest Nebraska News

Social Security ‘totalization’ scam will cost U.S. $207 billion

The Social Security “Totalization Agreement” between the U.S. and Mexico, which has already been signed between the two nations and is awaiting the President’s signature, would cost the United States an estimated $207 billion through 2040, according to a new study conducted by TREA Senior Citizens League.

The Totalization Agreement could make as many as 1.6 million Mexican workers and dependents eligible for U.S. Social Security benefits by 2040. Dependent family members could be eligible for benefits without having ever worked in — or even having visited — the United States.

The majority of Social Security benefits would go to Mexicans who performed illegal work in the United States. However, their dependents — possibly including a spouse, divorced spouse, widows or widowers, minor and disabled adult children, and dependent parents — are also eligible for benefits, and could increase the cost of totalized retiree benefits by as much as 50 percent.

In December 2006, TREA Senior Citizens League received the first known public copy of the U.S.-Mexico Totalization Agreement, 3 1/2 years after its initial request under the Freedom of Information Act.

A Totalization Agreement is intended to eliminate dual taxation for persons who work outside their country of origin. Under the U.S.-Mexico agreement, a Mexican worker would be able to receive “totalized” Social Security benefits with as little as 18 months of work; American workers must work at least 10 years to qualify for benefits.

“To put this in context, $207 billion is more than half of what we’ve spent on the Iraqi war — and instead of giving these billions to illegal workers, we should be preserving it for Americans who were promised that it would be there for their retirement years,” said Shannon Benton, executive director of TREA Senior Citizens League.

There are at least three ways Mexican workers who perform illegal work in the U.S. could benefit from such an agreement:

1. “Non-work” Social Security Numbers: Between 1974 and 2003, the Social Security Administration issued more than seven million “non-work” Social Security numbers; an estimated 827,200 Mexican citizens used those numbers to work illegally and would be eligible for benefits under a Totalization Agreement by 2040.

2. Visa Overstayers: Non-citizens who were granted temporary work authorization but then overstayed their visas and continued to work in the United States could receive credit for their illegal work under a Totalization Agreement.

3. Illegal Aliens: Mexican workers who entered the United States illegally on or after January 1, 2004 and work for at least 18 months would receive totalized credits for their unlawful work if immigration amnesty passes and they gain work authorization. The study estimates that another 809,175 Mexicans would become entitled to totalized benefits under immigration amnesty.

The agreement between the U.S. and Mexico was signed in June 2004, and is awaiting President Bush’s signature. Once President Bush approves the agreement, which would be done without Congressional vote, either House of Congress would have 60 days to disapprove the agreement by voting to reject it.

More here.

Rasmussen poll: Only 26% of Americans favor the Senate bill.
Click here to read.

Important Amendments Coming Soon:
Call Your Senators and Urge Their Support!

The debate over the Senate Amnesty Compromise is in full swing. Senate leaders have announced that debate will not end this week as previously planned but will be put on hold during the Memorial Day recess and then resume the first week of June. The extra time has allowed members to file numerous amendments, some of which will be controversial and the votes are likely to be close.

Today, several important amendments will be offered on the Senate floor. FAIR is asking all members and activists to call their Senators NOW and urge their support for the following amendments:

Cornyn Amendment #1184:
Restricts the ability of aliens who have engaged in criminal behavior (such as gang-related offenses, failure to register as a sex offender, and alien smuggling while using a firearm) from receiving benefits under our immigration laws.

Vitter Amendment #1157:
Deletes the amnesty portion of the bill (Title VI).

Dorgan Amendment #1181:
Sunsets the Y guest worker program after 5 years.

Please call your Senators and ask them to support these important amendments! Your calls do make a difference!

To find the phone number of your Senator, click here.

Below is my Marietta Daily Journal column today

Bush immigration bill amounts to…
Amnesty – Again

D.A. King
Columnist

“Never use the ‘A’ word – amnesty. But rather, find other words that don’t convey the power of what we are about” – Cardinal Roger Mahoney, Archbishop of Los Angeles, concerning ‘Comprehensive Immigration Reform’ to the National Council of La Raza, 2007

Cardinal Mahoney was offering sage and experienced advice to the very large and well-funded group of proponents of amnesty and open borders.

If you are curious about whom he means when he says “we,” perhaps a simple translation of the group’s name will help. In English, “La Raza” means “The Race.”
Mahoney went on to insist, “Our current immigration laws are, in a word, unjust.”

By “our laws,” he meant American laws.

“We” take in more than a million legal immigrants a year. Unjust?

His guidance, while certainly not a new concept, has been taken to heart by a very unlikely group of people pushing the latest attempt to legalize the millions of illegal aliens who represent a large portion of Mahoney’s constituents – I mean “flock.”

In politics, it is important to have a “message.” Successful politicians become so because they have learned to find a message that resonates with voters and stay with it over and over again, no matter what.

Mahoney’s message is clear enough. To get another amnesty for illegal aliens, don’t ever call it amnesty. And stick with that message.

The president’s message for years now has been that we must legalize the illegal aliens who are doing “jobs Americans will not do.”

Try hard to disregard the base insult from the leader of the American people in telling us that we are either lazy or over-paid. I have never decided which he means myself, but am leaning toward it being both.

Presently, the president’s message on the “grand bargain” in the Senate is that it will “help enforce our borders, but equally importantly, it’ll treat people with respect. This is a bill where people who live here in our country will be treated without amnesty but without animosity.”

The president broke Mahoney’s rule; He used the “A-word” in denying what most Americans can plainly see: If any legislation – under any name – grants legal status to illegal aliens, it is amnesty.

At present, the mind-boggling bill in the Senate grants “probationary status” to any illegal alien who is willing to give up his fingerprint, take a chance on the inept Department of Homeland Security actually being able to run a background check in 24 hours (It cannot, it lacks the resources) and swear that he will keep his job.

The now legalized alien can stay in the U.S. indefinitely in the “temporary” probationary status.

The promise, again, is that afterward, we will secure our borders and create a verifiable ID for the workplace.

Like we did in 1986?

The message from the U.S. Border Patrol Union Local 2544 in Tucson on the bill is that it is a “Senate sell-out.”

The message on the pending legislation from Kris Kobach, a professor of law at the University of Missouri-Kansas City, who served as chief consul on immigration law to the U.S. Attorney General 2001-03 is this: “The bill effectively shuts down our immigration-court system. If an alien in the removal process is eligible for the new ‘Z visa,’ the immigration judge must close the proceedings and offer the alien the chance to apply for the amnesty. The wheels of justice won’t just turn slowly, they’ll go in reverse.”

Newt Gingrich has a message on the Senate bill as well: “This bill is a disaster. It is a failure. It should be defeated. It should cease to exist.”

The president has been working toward amnesty-again since his inauguration and has refused to secure American borders even during a war on terror.

The president lacks the integrity to be trusted to fulfill any promise of future border security.

It is sad to see that most of the American people can plainly see what many U.S. Senators cannot.

This is amnesty-again.

While different from Cardinal Mahoney’s, the message to Georgia’s senators from Georgians is equally clear: Securing the border is a basic duty of government. We will no longer suffer the lack of that security and any attempt to make it a condition of another amnesty is will be treated with animosity – no matter what.

Listen to the citizens of Georgia, senators. We admire and respect you.

We will stick with you as long as you stick with us.

D.A. King is president of the Marietta-based Dustin Inman Society, a coalition dedicated to educating the public on the consequences of illegal immigration.

Chambliss, Isakson not backing down from support of immigration reform bill

By Marcus E. Howard
Marietta Daily Journal Staff Writer

MARIETTA – Despite a few boos from fellow Republicans at last week’s state GOP convention when he mentioned support for the Senate’s controversial immigration reform bill, U.S. Sen. Saxby Chambliss said he and Sen. Johnny Isakson would continue to defend it.

“I knew from day one when I came to Congress that this was an explosive issue,” the Republican from Moultrie said during a conference call with reporters Wednesday. “This is a great country we live in and everyone has a right to express themselves.”

He added that he thought there was more clapping at the convention in support of the legislation than booing.

“I disagree that most Georgians are opposed to this,” Chambliss said. “We’re getting more and more positive comments about it.”

There have been reports of a large volume of constituent calls to both senators as they go on the defensive against some liberals, who criticize the legislation as complicated, and against some conservatives who call it amnesty in disguise.

“We’ve got a long way to go,” Isakson said during the conference call. “But we look forward to working this thing to its conclusion.”

The bill now being debated in the Senate represents a major change in the nation’s immigration system that would reduce the importance of family ties and admit future immigrants based on their skills, education levels and job experience.

A proposed new visa called, “Z visa,” which would allow illegal immigrants to pay fees, as well as a $5,000 fine, in order to obtain the visa, would allow them to get on track for permanent residency and United States citizenship.

Also, a new class of guest workers would be allowed to temporarily work in the U.S. after new security measures are in place.

On Tuesday, the Senate voted to keep a provision of the immigration bill that would allow hundreds of thousands of temporary foreign workers to annually enter the country.

The next day, Senators voted 74-24 to cap the number of temporary guest workers at 200,000 a year. Chambliss and Isakson each voted for the guest-worker cap.

Chambliss called Tuesday’s main vote “very critical” to the bill’s survival.

Nevertheless, the Georgia’s two U.S. senators said their overall support of the bill remains contingent on tighter border security.

“Johnny and I are continuing to adhere to basic principals of border security first,” Chambliss said.

“We said we’d wait for the amendment process to proceed before making a final decision. I hope the final bill is a bill that I can support.”

Isakson and Chambliss both stressed that they didn’t believe the immigration bill – which must clear the U.S. House before President Bush, who supports it, can sign it into law – offers amnesty to the roughly 12 million illegal immigrants estimated living in the U.S.

However, that still is a tough sell to some officials in Georgia who remain adamant that the legislation is too lenient for people who have illegally entered the country.

“I have a great deal of respect for Sens. Johnny Isakson and Saxby Chambliss and I believe they are doing what they think is the best thing,” state Sen. Chip Rogers (R-Woodstock) said. “We just disagree over the need for a new law.”

Rogers, chairman of the Georgia Senate Immigration Reform Caucus, said based on past government failures, he believes the federal government does not have the capability to process and keep track of all the people who would receive temporary work visas.

“The problem is not the law,” he said. “The problem is enforcement of the law.”

Jerry Gonzalez, executive director of the Georgia Association of Latino Elected Officials, said he has a few concerns about the bill such as the temporary guest-worker program.

“It’s setting up for potential problems with people overstaying their visa,” Gonzalez said.

Nevertheless, Gonzalez said his organization, which represents approximately 200 officials, organizers, and business leaders, largely supports the immigration reform bill.

“We appreciate Sens. Johnny Isakson and Saxby Chambliss rolling their sleeves up and trying to get something done,” he said.

Gonzalez said for the past two weeks his association and its supporters have been urging the senators to “make the bill a better bill.”

Chambliss and Isakson said they would return to Georgia and continue to educate residents about the bill during the Senate’s Memorial Day holiday recess.

Isakson said he expects the final Senate vote on the immigration reform bill to come as early as June 9.

mhoward@mdjonline.com

Here below are the specific flaws of LA AMNESTIA BILL exposed by the Heritage Foundation.
Always cite exact section and paragraph…they cannot deny any of these and be honest. IT IS AMNESTY!

Flawed Provisions
The following are ten of the worst provisions—by no means an exhaustive list—of Title VI of the bill:

A Massive Amnesty: Title VI of the bill grants amnesty to virtually all of the 12 million to 20 million illegal aliens in the country today. This amnesty would dwarf the amnesty that the United States granted—with disastrous consequences—in 1986 to 2.7 million illegal aliens. It is also a larger amnesty than that proposed in last year’s ill-fated Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act. Indeed, the Senate’s bill imposes no cap on the total number of individuals who could receive Z-visa status.
To initially qualify for a Z visa, an illegal alien need only have a job (or be the parent, spouse, or child of someone with a job) and provide two documents suggesting that he or she was in the country before January 1, 2007, and has remained in the country since then. A bank statement, pay stub, or similarly forgeable record will do. Also acceptable under the legislation is a sworn affidavit from a non-relative (see Section 601(i)(2)).
The price of a Z visa is $3,000 for individuals—only slightly more than the going rate to hire a coyote to smuggle a person across the border. A family of five could purchase visas for the bargain price of $5,000—some $20,000 short of the net cost that household is likely to impose on local, state, and federal government each year, according to Heritage Foundation calculations.

Expect a mass influx unlike anything this country has ever seen once the 12-month period for accepting Z visa applications begins. These provisions are an open invitation for those intent on U.S. residence to sneak in and present two fraudulent pieces of paper indicating that they were here before the beginning of the year.

That is precisely what happened in the 1986 amnesty, during which Immigration and Naturalization Services discovered 398,000 cases of fraud. Expect the number of fraudulent applications to be at least four times larger this time, given the much larger applicant pool.
The Permanent “Temporary” Visa: Supporters of the bill call the Z visa a “temporary” visa. However, they neglect to mention that it can be renewed every four years until the visa holder dies, according to Section 601(k)(2) of the legislation. This would be the country’s first permanent temporary visa. On top of that, it is a “super-visa,” allowing the holder to work, attend college, or travel abroad and reenter. These permissible uses are found in Section 602(m).

A law-abiding alien with a normal nonimmigrant visa would surely desire this privileged status. Unfortunately for him, only illegal aliens can qualify, according Section 601(c)(1).

And contrary to popular misconception, illegal aliens need not return to their home countries to apply for the Z visa. That’s only necessary if and when an alien decides to adjust from Z visa status to lawful permanent resident (“green card”) status under Section 602(a)(1). And even then, it’s not really the country of origin; any consulate outside the United States can take applications at its discretion or the direction of the Secretary of State.

Hobbled Background Checks: The bill would make it extremely difficult for the federal government to prevent criminals and terrorists from obtaining legal status. Under Section 601(h)(1), the bill would allow the government only one business day to conduct a background check to determine whether an applicant is a criminal or terrorist. Unless the government can find a reason not to grant it by the end of the next business day after the alien applies, the alien receives a probationary Z visa (good from the time of approval until six months after the date Z visas begin to be approved, however long that may be) that lets him roam throughout the country and seek employment legally.

The problem is that there is no single, readily searchable database of all of the dangerous people in the world. While the federal government does have computer databases of known criminals and terrorists, these databases are far from comprehensive. Much of this kind of information exists in paper records that cannot be searched within 24 hours. Other information is maintained by foreign governments.

The need for effective background checks is real. During the 1986 amnesty, the United States granted legal status to Mahmoud “The Red” Abouhalima, who fraudulently sought and obtained the amnesty intended for seasonal agricultural workers (even though he was actually employed as a cab driver in New York City). But his real work was in the field of terrorism. He went on to become a ringleader in the 1993 terrorist attacks against the World Trade Center. Using his new legal status after the amnesty, he was able to travel abroad for terrorist training.

Amnesty for “Absconders”: Title VI’s amnesty extends even to fugitives who have been ordered deported by an immigration judge but chose to ignore their removal orders. More than 636,000 absconders are now present in the country, having defied the law twice: once when they broke U.S. immigration laws and again when they ignored the orders of the immigration courts.

The Senate’s bill allows the government to grant Z visas to absconders. Though the bill appears to deny the visa to absconders in Section 601(d)(1)(B), Section 601(d)(1)(I) allows U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services officials to give an absconder the Z visa anyway if the absconder can demonstrate that departure from the United States “would result in extreme hardship to the alien or the alien’s spouse, parent or child.”

This is a massive loophole because so many things can be construed to constitute “extreme hardship.” This might include removing a child from an American school and placing him in a school in an impoverished country, or deporting a person with any chronic illness. Attorneys representing aliens would also argue that if any member of an absconder’s family is a U.S. citizen, then the other members must remain in the United States, because the separation of family members would constitute extreme hardship.

This would also be a reward to those who have defied U.S. immigration courts. Those who have successfully fled justice could receive the most generous visa ever created, but those who complied with the law and have waited years to enter legally would have to wait longer still. (Indeed, the massive bureaucratic load caused by processing Z visas would undoubtedly mean longer waits for those who have played by the rules.) Further, those who have obeyed the law and complied with deportation orders would not be eligible for Z visas.

The effect of this provision may already be felt today. Why would an illegal alien obey a deportation order while this bill is even pending in Congress? If the alien ignores the deportation order, he may be able to qualify for the amnesty; but if he obeys the order, he has no possibility of gaining the amnesty.

Reverse Justice: The bill would effectively shut down the immigration court system. Under Section 601(h)(6), if an alien in the removal process is “prima facie eligible” for the Z visa, an immigration judge must close any proceedings against the alien and offer the alien an opportunity to apply for amnesty.

Enforcement of Amnesty, Not Laws: The bill would transform Immigrations and Customs Enforcement (ICE) from a law enforcement agency into an amnesty distribution center. Under Sections 601(h)(1, 5) if an ICE agent apprehends aliens who appear to be eligible for the Z visa (in other words, just about any illegal alien), the agent cannot detain them. Instead, ICE must provide them a reasonable opportunity to apply for the Z visa. Instead of initiating removal proceedings, ICE will be initiating amnesty applications. This is the equivalent of turning the Drug Enforcement Agency into a needle-distribution network.

Amnesty for Gang Members: Under Section 602(g)(2) of the bill, gang members would be eligible to receive amnesty. This comes at a time when violent international gangs, such as Mara Salvatrucha 13 (or “MS-13”), have brought mayhem to U.S. cities. More than 30,000 illegal-alien gang members operate in 33 states, trafficking in drugs, arms, and people. Deporting illegal-alien gang members has been a top ICE priority. The Senate bill would end that. To qualify for amnesty, all a gang member would need to do is note his gang membership and sign a “renunciation of gang affiliation.”

Tuition Subsidies for Illegal Aliens: The Senate bill incorporates the Development, Relief and Education for Alien Minors Act (DREAM Act). The DREAM Act effectively repeals a 1996 federal law (8 U.S.C. § 1623) that prohibits any state from offering in-state tuition rates to illegal aliens unless the state also offers in-state tuition rates to all U.S. citizens. Ten states are currently defying this federal law. Section 616 would allow these and all other states to offer in-state tuition rates to any illegal alien who obtains the Z visa and attends college.

The injustice of this provision is obvious. Illegal aliens would receive a taxpayer subsidy worth tens of thousands of dollars and would be treated better than U.S. citizens from out of state, who must pay three to four times as much to attend college. In an era of limited educational resources and rising tuitions, U.S. citizens, not aliens openly violating federal law, should be first in line to receive education subsidies.

Further, legal aliens who possess an appropriate F, J, or M student visa would not receive this valuable benefit. Nor would they be eligible for the federal student loans that illegal aliens could obtain by this provision.

Taxpayer-Funded Lawyers for Illegal Aliens: The Senate’s bill would force taxpayers to foot the bill for many illegal aliens’ lawyers. Under current law, illegal aliens are not eligible for federally funded legal services. Section 622(m) of the bill would allow millions of illegal aliens who work in agriculture to receive free legal services. Every illegal alien working in the agricultural sector would have access to an immigration attorney to argue his case through the immigration courts and federal courts of appeals—all at taxpayer expense. This provision alone could cost hundreds of millions of dollars each year.
Amnesty Before Enforcement Triggers. Proponents of the Senate approach have consistently claimed that it would allow delayed amnesty only after certain law enforcement goals are met. The text of the bill, however, tells a different story. Section 1(a) allows provisional Z visas to be issued immediately after enactment, and Section 601(f)(2) prohibits the federal government from waiting more than 180 days after enactment to begin issuing provisional Z visas.

These provisional Z visas could be valid for years, depending on when the government begins issuing non-provisional Z visas, according to Section 601(h)(4). Moreover, the “provisional” designation means little. These visas are nearly as good as non-provisional Z visas, giving the alien immediate lawful status, protection from deportation, authorization to work, and the ability to exit and reenter the country (with advance permission). These privileges are listed in Section 601(h)(1).

Conclusion

What becomes unmistakably clear from the details of the Senate’s bill is that it is not a “compromise” in any meaningful sense. Indeed, the sweeping amnesty provisions of Title VI cripple law enforcement and undermine the rule of law

.

Only a few of the significant problems with the amnesty bill ( More to come)

“All background checks on those applying for amnesty must be completed within 24 hours, although there is no justification why and plenty of reason to suggest that complete background checks can’t be done so quickly.” (Bill Tucker on Lou Dobbs, CNN, April 22, 2007)

“Gang members would be given amnesty if they renounce their gang membership. If an illegal alien is arrested in an enforcement raid and might be eligible for amnesty, the government must provide help in applying for the Z visa and release the illegal alien.” (Bill Tucker on Lou Dobbs, CNN, April 22, 2007)
The bill would decrease the length of the border fence to be built from approximately 854 miles authorized in 2006 to approximately 200 miles. (Bill Tucker on Lou Dobbs, CNN, April 22, 2007)
Under the bill anyone who absconds after being ordered deported will be eligible for amnesty. If they follow the law and follow a judge’s deportation order, they will not be elegible for amnesty – so they would not follow the law and leave. (Bill Tucker on Lou Dobbs, CNN, April 22, 2007)

Illegal aliens are already faced with a $5,000 fine (19 USC 1459 and 19 USC 1433), but this fine is not enforced. The $5,000 fine stipulated in the amnesty bill is simply a service charge to gain dual citizenship (Mexico already gives emigrants dual citizenship).
The Z (amnesty) visa could be extended indefinitely for the life of the holder. It is not temporary.
“If passed, this bill will make taxpayers pay the legal bills for illegal aliens seeking amnesty….” – Ken Boehm, Chairman of the National Legal and Policy Center (NLPC), May 22, 2007.
H1B visas will be doubled from 85,000 to 160,000, thereby displacing nearly 80,000 American high tech workers annually.

Under the amnesty, illegal aliens would not have to pay back taxes. But they would be eligible for earned income tax credit. (Lou Dobbs, CNN, May 23, 2007)
Once granted amnesty, illegal aliens would not have to learn English for seven years. (Lou Dobbs, CNN, May 23, 2007)

The amnesty specifies a “point system” for future legal entry into the U.S. However, this will not fully take effect for eight years. (Lou Dobbs, CNN, May 23, 2007)
“Section 413 promises U.S. help in getting financial services to Mexico’s poor and under-served populations, expanding effort to reduce the transaction costs of remittance flows, helping the Mexican government to strengthen education and job training, and increasing health care access for the poor in Mexico.” (Christine Romans on Lou Dobbs, CNN, April 22, 2007) “…we have truly entered a bizarre place, where the president of the United States, President George W. Bush, is representing the interests of Mexican citizens in this country, and Congress, our Senate, is attempting to impose a law that is appropriately the purview of the Mexican legislature.” Lou Dobbs, CNN, April 22, 2007)

“Section 413 asks the U.S. Congress to ramp up the six-year-old bilateral Partnership for Prosperity and highlights the broader North American Security and Prosperity Partnership.” (Christine Romans on Lou Dobbs, CNN, April 22, 2007)

Over the next 13 years alone, it would increase the current number of legal foreign-born green card holders from about 25 million (who arrived over 75 years) to around 50 million. (NumbersUSA.com)
Robert Rector, Heritage Foundation, just estimated that this particular amnesty will cost the American taxpayers 2.3 tp 2.5 trillion—that’s right trillion—dollars!

“…The White House misleads with its claims that the amnesty recipients won’t get welfare benefits. For the first decade or so they are in the United States, the adults can’t get means-tested welfare benefits but their children could. And after that first decade, the adults get to partake of the welfare state as well. For the next 40 years, notes Mr. Rector, they are eligible “for every single type” of these welfare benefits.”

“So the bottom line is that each of these households receives about $30,000 in government benefits, pays about $10,000 in taxes, at a net cost of around $19,000 per year [after rounding]. That’s the equivalent of buying each of these households an automobile and every year of their lives as long as they’re in the United States.” (The immigration time-bomb Washington Times editorial, May 23, 2007)

Interesting articles on the amnesty bill

Latino Groups Play Key Role on Hill – Virtual Veto Power in Immigration Debate, By Krissah Williams and Jonathan Weisman, Washington Post, May 16, 2007

“…After laboring in obscurity for decades, groups such as the National Council of La Raza [THE RACE], the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund, and the National Immigration Forum are virtually being granted veto power over perhaps the biggest domestic issue coming before Congress this year….”

Bush removes provision requiring back taxes from illegal immigrants [invaders], by Michael Kranish, Boston Globe, May 19, 2007

…”The Bush administration insisted on a little-noticed change in the bipartisan Senate immigration bill that would enable 12 million [illegal aliens… criminals] to avoid paying back taxes or associated fines to the IRS, officials said. — An independent analyst estimated the decision could cost the IRS tens of billions of dollars…”

PREMEDITATED MERGER – North America ‘partnership’ fast-tracked in border bill – Calls for speedier regional economic integration between U.S., Mexico World Net Daily, May 20, 2007

“The controversial “Secure Borders, Economic Opportunity and Immigration Reform Act of 2007,” which would grant millions of illegal aliens the right to stay in the U.S. under certain conditions, contains provisions for the acceleration of the Security and Prosperity Partnership, a plan for North American economic and defense integration, WND has learned.

The bill, as worked out by Senate and White House negotiators, cites the SPP agreement signed by President Bush and his counterparts in Mexico and Canada March 23, 2005 ­ an agreement that has been criticized as a blueprint for building a European Union-style merger of the three countries of North America….

Sen. Jim DeMint, R-S.C., also was quick to label the bill ‘amnesty.’

The senator said it ‘rewards people who broke the law with permanent legal status and puts them ahead of millions of law-abiding immigrants waiting to come to America.’

‘I don’t care how you try to spin it, this is amnesty,’ DeMint said.

‘I hope we don’t take a thousand page bill written in secret and try to ram it through the Senate in a few days,” he added. “This is a very important issue for America and we need time to debate it.’

REWARDING LAWBREAKERS, by Kris Kobach, New York Post, May 21, 2007

The immigration bill set to hit the Senate floor this week has over 300 pages – yet few people have seen the details. Proponents, led by Ted Kennedy, waited until the last minute to make the draft public – so most senators will be in the dark when they debate it.

But the text is now circulating on Capitol Hill, and the content is astonishing. Just when it is becoming clear that overwhelming majorities of Americans – of all parties and all races – say they want to see stronger enforcement of our laws, the bill would take the country full speed in the opposite direction.

As promised, the bill will legalize most of the 12 million to 20 million illegal aliens now in the country via a new “Z visa.” Each would pay $3,000 – only slightly more than the going rate to be smuggled into America.

But provisions buried in the fine print are far more outrageous. Here’s a sampling:

1) To qualify for the Z-visa amnesty, an illegal alien need only have a job (or be the parent, spouse, or child of someone with a job) and come up with a scrap of paper suggesting he was in the country before Jan. 1 of this year. Any bank statement, pay stub, or similarly forgeable record will do.

Expect a mass influx unlike anything this country has seen before, once the 12-month period for accepting Z visa applications begins. These rules are an open invitation to sneak in and present a fraudulent piece of paper indicating that you were already here.

2) Supporters of the bill call the Z visa “temporary” – neglecting to mention that it can be renewed indefinitely until the visa holder dies. Thus, we have the country’s first permanent temporary visa. On top of that, it’s a super-visa – allowing the holder to work, attend college or do just about anything else.

Are you a law-abiding alien who’s interested in switching to this privileged status? Sorry. Only illegal aliens can qualify.

3) Many criminals and terrorists will find it easy to get a Z visa. The bill allows the government only one day to conduct a so-called “background check” on the applicant. If the (already overstretched) feds can’t find anything in that single day, the alien gets a probationary visa that lets him roam at will and seek employment legally.

Plainly, the bill’s authors don’t have a clue how the government maintains info on criminals and terrorists. It has no single, searchable database of all dangerous people. Much data exists only in paper records that can’t be searched in 24 hours. Other information is held by foreign governments.

In this real-world version of “24,” if the federal government fails to find the key facts soon enough, we all lose.

4) The bill effectively shuts down our immigration-court system. If an alien in the removal process is eligible for the Z visa, the immigration judge must close the proceedings and offer the alien the chance to apply for the amnesty. The wheels of justice won’t just turn slowly, they’ll go in reverse.

5) The bill transforms the federal Immigrations and Customs Enforcement (ICE) from a law-enforcement agency into an amnesty-distribution center. If ICE officials apprehend an alien who appears eligible for the Z visa (in other words, just about any illegal alien), they can’t detain him. Instead, ICE must help him apply for the Z visa.

Rather than initiating removal proceedings, ICE will be initiating amnesty applications. It’s like turning the Drug Enforcement Agency into a needle-distribution network.

6) The bill even lets gang members get the amnesty. This comes at a time when violent international gangs have brought mayhem to our cities. More than 30,000 gang members operate in 33 states, trafficking in drugs, arms and people.

Deporting illegal-alien gang members has been a top ICE priority. This bill would end that: Under it, a gang member qualifies for the Z-visa privileges as long as he simply signs a “renunciation of gang affiliation.” He can keep his tattoos.

In Sen. Kennedy’s America, “immigration enforcement” will become an oxymoron. And – just like the last time we offered an amnesty, in 1986 – millions of new illegal aliens will flood the country to apply for the amnesty fraudulently.

This bill isn’t a “compromise” in any meaningful sense. It is a surrender.

Kris W. Kobach, a professor of law at the University of Missouri-Kansas City, served as counsel to the U.S. Attorney General, 2001-03. He was the attorney general’s chief adviser on immigration law.

____________

Immediate Release Contact: Phil Kent

May Phone: (404) 226-3549

Senate immigration bill gets an “F” on English and assimilation

ARLINGTON, Va.—“The proposed Senate immigration bill deserves an ‘F’ when it comes to defending English as the common, unifying language of our nation,” said K.C. McAlpin, executive director of ProEnglish, a group that advocates for making English the official language.

“The most glaring omission is that the Kennedy-Kyl bill fails to make English the official language of the United States,” said McAlpin. “So the Social Security Administration will continue providing interpreters in 150 foreign languages, and federal agencies will have to continue providing translations and interpreters in dozens of foreign languages. This is not the melting pot. This is a recipe for the balkanization of our nation,” he added.

“The Kennedy-Kyl bill would give millions of illegal aliens up to eight years to demonstrate a minimal knowledge of English. Then they would have three chances to pass the watered down English test that is part of the U.S. citizenship examination. That test requires applicants to read and write just two sentences in English,” McAlpin continued. “So the claim that those who get amnesty under this bill will have to learn English is nonsense,” he added.

A 2006 Rasmussen Reports survey found that 85 percent of Americans support making English the official language. A Harvard University survey of the nation’s youth released in April showed that 72 percent of young people between the ages of 18 and 24 favor official English, including majorities of both Hispanic and Asian young people.

“The Administration and the Senators who are pushing for passage of this bill should be ashamed for trying to deceive the American people into believing this bill will do anything real to require immigrants to learn English and assimilate,” said McAlpin.

LOCAL 2544 – U.S. BORDER PATROL

Tucson, Arizona

Toll Free (800) 581-2544 & Fax (520) 293-6044 to thank these brave Americans

Senate Sellout

05-20-07 Certain members of the United States Senate have embarked on an ill-informed path that will give amnesty to illegal aliens. They are attempting, once again, to sell the American people a bill of goods that rewards millions of illegal alien lawbreakers and throws the rule of law out the window. Both senators from Arizona, McCain and Kyl, have come out in support of this disastrous legislation. We are especially disappointed that Senator Kyl has helped sponsor this foolishness. We endorsed Senator Kyl last year, in a very close race, with the clear understanding that he would remain opposed to any form of amnesty that rewards illegal aliens.

We are dumbfounded.

We are currently working on a letter to Senator Kyl so that he clearly understands our profound disappointment in his actions. The letter will be posted here tomorrow. We expected this type of sell-out from Senator McCain, and even from Border Patrol Chief David Aguilar, but we didn’t expect it from Senator Kyl. We believed him to be a man of his word, in a political atmosphere where ones word doesn’t mean much anymore.

Is it any wonder that morale in the BP continuously erodes to levels never thought possible? Can you imagine telling Highway Patrolmen that drag racers and drunk drivers should be released without penalty and rewarded with continued driving privileges for breaking the law? Can you imagine telling DEA agents that cocaine, methamphetamine, and marijuana are good for people and that they need to back off their enforcement efforts?

Can you imagine telling game wardens that poachers are just “innocent victims” who should be given the fruits of their illegal behavior without penalty? Can you imagine telling our military personnel overseas that they’re really not fighting for anything important and that radical Islamists are just misunderstood folks who need a hug? If you can’t imagine any of this, then why should anyone imagine telling Border Patrol agents that massive illegal immigration is something to be honored with yet another amnesty program designed to reward the same people we risk our lives to arrest? This is disgraceful America.

Please click here to let your senators know how you feel about this piece of legislation