Immigration Bill Apparently Dead

[MKSheppard]

[Stravo]

Opponents for the Immigration Bill are focussing on the amnesty portion as criminal and indefensible. What else would you do for 12 million people already here? Deport them? Good luck with that. Jail them? Yeah, don't make me laugh. So what else would you do? Something has to be done with them and jail and deportation aren't it. So you have to deal with the reality that they are here and we need to do something about them so we don't have 12 million ghosts moving though the country at will. Amnesty may not be a great option but I have yet to hear someone float a better plan.

[Darth Wong]

A triumph for xenophobia! USA! USA! USA!!!

[MKSheppard]

Opponents for the Immigration Bill are focussing on the amnesty portion as criminal and indefensible. What else would you do for 12 million people already here?

Except we tried that back in the 80s. Back then it was "impossible to deport 3 million". Now it's turned into "impossible to deport 12 million".

Anyway, a lot of municipalities, who have to actually bear the costs of all the illegal immigration, are doing their own bills:

Link to an Indian site, I know lol but first one to the article I remembered

States introduce own immigration bills to counter federal law

Washington, June 25: Even as the US senate gears for a critical vote on the much-debated immigration bill later this week, lawmakers are concerned that a raft of legislations at the state level, with many recommending strict measures against illegal immigrants, might torpedo reform efforts.

At least 1,100 immigration bills were submitted by lawmakers by may end in the various states, more than double the last year's record total, according to the national conference of state legislatures.

It is largely out of a frustration over Congress' inability to deal with illegal immigration that several states are either considering or enacting a record number of "strongly worded proposals" targeting illegal immigrants, according to a daily.

The final tally for the bills is expected to rise as the issue continues to dominate debate in statehouses still in session, it said today. The ways in which state legislatures and law makers have come to terms with illegal immigration are varied and these include passing laws that limit illegal immigrants' ability to obtain jobs, find housing, get driver's licenses and receive many government services.

"They also empower state law enforcement agencies to inquire into an immigrant's legal status and hold for deportation those deemed to be here illegally. The idea is to make life so difficult for illegal immigrants that they will leave the state -- if not the country," the post has said. "Illegal immigrants will not come to Oklahoma if there are no jobs waiting for them," said state lawmaker Randy Terrill (Republican), who wrote his state's law, one of the most sweeping in the country.

[MKSheppard]

A triumph for xenophobia! USA! USA! USA!!!

You mean proposing to actually enforce our own borders and who comes into the country, like just about every country in the world is xenophobic?

We're far less xenophobic than say...mexico, where the cops on Mexico's southern border with central america routinely shoot and kill people as a matter of SOP; along with brutalizing them. Here, it's just pack them into air conditioned jails, then deport them via plane flights to their country of origin.

[Sea Skimmer]

Opponents for the Immigration Bill are focussing on the amnesty portion as criminal and indefensible. What else would you do for 12 million people already here? Deport them? Good luck with that. Jail them? Yeah, don't make me laugh. So what else would you do?

Gulag labor to build our great wall and anti tunneling trench on the southern boarder.

You mean proposing to actually enforce our own borders and who comes into the country, like just about every country in the world is xenophobic?

We're far less xenophobic than say...mexico, where the cops on Mexico's southern border with central america routinely shoot and kill people as a matter of SOP; along with brutalizing them. Here, it's just pack them into air conditioned jails, then deport them via plane flights to their country of origin.

Don’t forget that any foreigner in Mexico can be deported at any time for no reason at all.

[MKSheppard]

Don’t forget that any foreigner in Mexico can be deported at any time for no reason at all.

They also can't own any property at all. They have to "own" the property through a cutout company. I recall reading about this in the paper a while back, of americans who had spent a not insignificant amount of money to buy retirement homes in Mexico, only to find out that they were simply fucked in the end since they didn't really own it.

[MKSheppard]

Gulag labor to build our great wall and anti tunneling trench on the southern boarder.

You know, that's a giant ad hominem tactic, we don't have to deport all 12 million; we just have to make living in America illegally so uncomfortable that they leave of their own free will; which is what a lot of these statehouse bills are aiming to do - you can't prove that you're legal? Why, no drivers license or ID for you! And this means as a side effect you can't do a lot of other things, since many things require government furnished ID. And if there's a law forbidding Mexican Matricula Consular IDs......

[SirNitram]

What's that? The poor, poor GOP guttersluts can't give their corporate masters what they want, because they didn't fully think through incorporating the Southern Strategy of straight up racism and xenophobia?

Perish the thought.

[Gerald Tarrant]

My eclectic reading on the subject has lead me to the conclusion that huge influxes from the south are going to be a decreasing problem.

As the debate over illegal immigration from Mexico rages in Washington and across the country, and as the administration's reform bill hangs by a thread, few Americans are aware that this problem will automatically decline and eventually become a vague memory.

There has been a stunning decline in the fertility rate in Mexico, which means that, in a few years there will not be many teenagers in Mexico looking for work in the United States or anywhere else. If this trend in the fertility rate continues, Mexico will resemble Japan and Italy - rapidly aging populations with too few young workers to support the economy.

According to the World Bank's 2007 Annual Development Indicators, in 1990 Mexico had a fertility rate of 3.3 children per female, but by 2005, that number had fallen by 36 percent to 2.1, which is the Zero Population Growth rate. That is an enormous decline in the number of Mexican infants per female. The large number of women currently in their reproductive years means that there are still quite a few babies, but as this group ages, the number of infants will decline sharply. If this trend toward fewer children per female continues, there being no apparent reason for it to cease, the number of young people in the Mexican population will decline significantly just when the number of elderly is rising. As labor markets in Mexico tighten and wage rates rise, far fewer Mexican youngsters will be interested in coming to the United States. Since our baby boomers will be retiring at the same time, we could face a severe labor shortage.

There have been significant declines in fertility rates across Latin America, but Mexico's has been unusually sharp. In El Salvador, another country from which immigrants come, a 3.7 rate in 1990 became 2.5 by 2005. Guatemala is now at 4.3, but that is far lower than it was in 1990. Jamaica, another source of illegal U. S. immigrants, has fallen from 2.9 to 2.4 over the same period. Chile and Costa Rica, at 2.0, are actually slightly below a replacement rate. Trinidad and Tobago, at 1.6, is well below ZPG. For all of Latin American and the Caribbean, a rate of 3.2 in 1990 fell to 2.4 in 2005, a decline of 25 percent. This means less pressure on the United States from illegal immigrants from the entire area, not just from Mexico. A powerful demographic transition is well underway, and soon many of these countries may be worried about there being too few babies rather than too many. We may miss this labor, and wonder how we will replace it.

What is going on in Latin America? Better education and improved job opportunities for women mean that it has become quite expensive for them to leave the labor force to have more children. The improved availability of birth control technology and liberalization of abortion rules in some countries mean that it is easier for women to avoid that outcome.

Fertility rates are declining across the globe, but the change is particular striking to our south. The world fertility rate fell from 3.1 to 2.6 over the 1990-2005 period. The population bomb is becoming a fire cracker.

Another reason for the particularly sharp decline in Mexico is the cultural influence of the United States. Our xenophobic nationalists fear that we are being 'Mexicanized.' In fact the opposite may be underway. NAFTA, our mass media, the more widespread use of English, and the large number of people going back and forth (legally or otherwise) mean that Mexicans are increasingly influenced by our culture, and that implies fewer babies. The United States also has a fertility rate of 2.1, but that is the same as it was in 1990. Mexico is becoming more similar to the United States, which must frustrate their nationalists.

The main point for the United States is that we have only a temporary problem with illegal immigration from Mexico. For another decade or a bit more we must attempt to limit such entry, but then the problem will fade like the smile on the Cheshire Cat. Lou Dobbs, Rep. Tancredo and their xenophobic friends can calm down and relax.

link

One of many arguments i've heard against "amnesty" is that it will encourage more illegal immigrants. The demographic data suggests that there are decreasing pressures which send people to the United States.

It also seems to me that many who are in favor of ridding the US of illegal immigrants don't truly appreciate the costs of that. I'm not talking about the costs of rounding up and deporting, I'm talking about the costs to our economy of such a deportation.

An excerpt from a blog I like to read (she's a columnist for the Economist apparently)

I'm also kind of flabbergasted that my readers have taken the observation that groups of one people don't like being around groups of people who are different as an accusation of racism. I mean, there are crazies on the left who believe that this qualifies as racism, but the right is supposed to be immune to that sort of nonsense. You don't have to hate Mexicans, to disenjoy culture clash. Everyone's life is easier when we all agree. Against this, one has to weigh the many benefits of immigration. And not just to us wealthy, latte-sipping liberals. (Where was all this wealth when I was living on ramen in order to make my student loan payments?) Do you ever eat at a restaurant? Buy produce? Have a suit dry cleaned? Enter buildings to keep the rain off? Then you, my friend, are benefitting from illegal immigration. And if I really were the kind of wealthy elitist who already has mine, I wouldn't be the one to suffer from ending immigration. I'd fly in my produce from Guatamala. It's all the real Americans, the ones living form paycheck to paycheck, who get screwed. Remember what your supermarket looked like in the 1970's? Without immigrants in food production and processing, you can welcome those days back again; no one has yet built a machine that can cost-efficiently gut a chicken.

Jane Galt

I'm not convinced of the long-term desirability of limiting immigration. I actually think limiting immigration is the easy course. The audacious course that I always associate with "Can Do" America is to try to find a way to integrate 12 million new citizens; who knows there may be a Hispanic Tesla or Carnegie among those immigrants.

[Knife]

Meh, it wasn't the best bill or solution but it was something. At this point, something is better than absolutely nothing and the continuing nothing we'll get till atleast after the presidential elections next year.

[Zixinus]

Meh, it wasn't the best bill or solution but it was something. At this point, something is better than absolutely nothing and the continuing nothing we'll get till atleast after the presidential elections next year.

Actually, we can do worse then nothing. We could try the wall idea.

*ducks for cover*

[SirNitram]

We could waste money deporting all of them. Anyone who doesn't see how horrifically broken the immigration system can work that one out.

[Zixinus]

I wonder how many Lunar missions could be financed from that wasted money.

[Spice Runner]

I would like nothing more than to see a melt down of the current Republican party with the corporatist fuckers and big business on one side and the xenophobes, and racist scum on the other. Maybe this immigration issue will be the tipping point. One can hope at least.

[Surlethe]

A triumph for xenophobia! USA! USA! USA!!!

You mean proposing to actually enforce our own borders and who comes into the country, like just about every country in the world is xenophobic?

Yes, because our border laws are enforceable, right? You know, deporting ten million people is one of the more workable solutions being proposed. I can't see anything that could possibly go wrong with it.

We're far less xenophobic than say...mexico, where the cops on Mexico's southern border with central america routinely shoot and kill people as a matter of SOP; along with brutalizing them. Here, it's just pack them into air conditioned jails, then deport them via plane flights to their country of origin.

x < y. Therefore, y > 0. Can you tell me the flaw in that?

[Glocksman]

What's that? The poor, poor GOP guttersluts can't give their corporate masters what they want, because they didn't fully think through incorporating the Southern Strategy of straight up racism and xenophobia?

Perish the thought.

Eh, it wasn't just Republicans by any means.

Here's a list of Democrats (and the one Independent) who voted 'nay' on invoking cloture.

Baucus (D-MT)
Bayh (D-IN)
Bingaman (D-NM)Brown (D-OH)
Byrd (D-WV)
Dorgan (D-ND)
Harkin (D-IA)
Landrieu (D-LA)
McCaskill (D-MO)
Nelson (D-NE)
Pryor (D-AR)
Rockefeller (D-WV)
Sanders (I-VT)
Stabenow (D-MI)
Tester (D-MT)
Webb (D-VA)

Ironically, my state's Republican Senator supported the 'compromise', while my Democratic Senator voted 'no'.
I notice that both of West Virginia's Senators voted to kill the bill too.
As for why it failed, I guess if 80% of us are against it, and Bush's approval rating on the subject is only 9%, while Congress's rating is only 3%, I'd say its death was democracy in action.

[Ritterin Sophia]

West Virginian Democrats are about as liberal as the Republicans, they're holdover's from the Dixiecrats.

[Glocksman]

Opponents for the Immigration Bill are focussing on the amnesty portion as criminal and indefensible. What else would you do for 12 million people already here? Deport them? Good luck with that. Jail them? Yeah, don't make me laugh. So what else would you do? Something has to be done with them and jail and deportation aren't it. So you have to deal with the reality that they are here and we need to do something about them so we don't have 12 million ghosts moving though the country at will. Amnesty may not be a great option but I have yet to hear someone float a better plan.

The problems with the bill were many, but there were some good things in it.
IMHO, one of the chief reasons why it failed was the secrecy involved in originally crafting the bill and the attempt to shoehorn it through with very little time at all for debate, or even to read the 380 page bill and figure out just what it'd do.

We were supposed to take George Bush's, John McCain's, and Ted Kennedy's word that it was a Good Thing™, and frankly if they told me the sun rose in the east, I'd have to look out the window to see for myself.

As for other ideas, Senator DeMint said it best:

“There is a better way forward without this bill. The President has said that the border security measures can be implemented over the next 18 months, and they can be done under current law. Now the Administration needs to prove it and stop holding border security hostage for amnesty.”

“Once we have secured the border and restored trust with the American people, we can begin to take additional steps.”

Polls have shown, the people don't trust Congress and the President to keep their word on border security simply because they never have.
We were promised increased security when previous amnesties passed, and what happened?
The numbers of illegals increased from 3 million to an estimated 12-20 million, that's what happened.

Staunch the flood of illegals to a trickle, then we can talk about some form of legalization for those already here who haven't committed other crimes.
As for the illegal alien gangbangers, drunk drivers, and other assorted 'real' criminals, we have enough of our own and we don't need them.
So let's send them back across the border.
By catapult.

[apocolypse]

Opponents for the Immigration Bill are focussing on the amnesty portion as criminal and indefensible. What else would you do for 12 million people already here? Deport them? Good luck with that. Jail them? Yeah, don't make me laugh. So what else would you do? Something has to be done with them and jail and deportation aren't it. So you have to deal with the reality that they are here and we need to do something about them so we don't have 12 million ghosts moving though the country at will. Amnesty may not be a great option but I have yet to hear someone float a better plan.

The problems with the bill were many, but there were some good things in it.
IMHO, one of the chief reasons why it failed was the secrecy involved in originally crafting the bill and the attempt to shoehorn it through with very little time at all for debate, or even to read the 380 page bill and figure out just what it'd do.

Indeed. IIRC they tried to shoehorn the thing through in like four days or somesuch. Clearly many people are going to have a problem with this.

[SirNitram]

I notice that both of West Virginia's Senators voted to kill the bill too.

Gee, I wonder who might have been very vocal and eloquent about what a peice of shit this bill was.

Seriously, this bill would have excaberated the Visa problem of the US. Visas need to be killed dead and actual immigration allowed.

[Sea Skimmer]

I wonder how many Lunar missions could be financed from that wasted money.

In 2006 all US customs and boarder security, was funded by just 6.7 billion dollars of public money, plus about 1.3 billion in user fees. Farm subsidies cost more. NASA meanwhile, estimates the cost of restoring the US capacity the land a man on the moon at around 100 billion. The ISS has already cost that much, dispite shrinking to a fraction of its orginally planned size which was to cost only about 20 billion.