EckerNet.Com

Surely our Congress critters aren\’t this insistent upon flaunting the will of the American public? Yeah, that\’s right, the DREAM Act has been introduced yet again in Congress, with bi-partisan support.  Despite the fact that the public has responded with overwhelming opposition every other time it\’s been brought up, it\’s still dragged out for another shot.

It\’s been introduced in both the Senate (S 729) and the House (HR 1751).  It\’s Republican supporters are Senators Lugar and Martinez.  It\’s time to once again remind the inmates that apparently run this asylum, that when we said we didn\’t want the DREAM Act the first 200 times we actually meant it.  Seriously, not kidding.  So first things last, how you get involved, and THEN I\’ll tell you why you should get involved.

Pick up your phone, your Congress Critters need to hear from you ASAP.
Senator Klobuchar – 202-224-3244
Representative Michelle Bachmann – 202-225-2331
Representative Keith Ellison – 202-225-4755
Representative John Kline – 202-225-2271
Representative Betty McCollum – 202-225-6631
Representative James Oberstar – 202-225-6211
Representative Erik Paulsen – 202-225-2871
Representative Collin Peterson – 202-225-2165
Representative Tim Walz – 202-225-2472

If you’ve never made a call or aren’t sure what to say, I’ll spell it out for you.

Hi, my name is xxxxxxx yyyyyyy, and I live in Minnesota. I’m calling about bill S. 729 or H1751, the DREAM Act, and I would like to ask Senator Klobuchar/Representative ???? to please vote against this bill of amnesty. Thank you.

It’s really that simple. Depending on the Congress Critter’s office and/or the staffer, they may ask your city or zip code or may just say thank you.  Now if you want to say more you can, but BE POLITE! Passions run wild and emotions get high. You may think the Senator/Representative would be a perfect outlet for those statements, but remember, you’re talking to a staffer who has already talked to hundreds of people like you.

Now….about those bills.  The actual text of either bill isn\’t yet available, but past revisions of the DREAM Act have all been pretty similiar and have included the following:

Amnesty – Basically any illegal immigrant can claim he was brought into the country before a certain age and they get amnesty.  Generally no checks are required to actually verify this information, so presumably simply a signed statement is enough.  And there is generally no age limit, so you could be 80 years old and claim to have been brought in by your parents 65 years ago.  Some educational requirements have typically come with this in order to preserve the feel-good aspect of the legislation, but those requirements have been so broad and/or vague as to be pretty much non-existent.

Free Instate-Tuition – It provides in-state tuition for illegal aliens at public universities. We don’t even provide in-state tuition to most American citizens from other states. In a nutshell, you are giving foreign students an advantage over American students, and putting illegal aliens on a fast track to citizenship over legal aliens who have played by the rules.  So while your son/daughter is struggling to afford college, your tax dollars are being used to pay for some 30-year old illegal alien to attend college just look enough to exploit a loophole.

Chain Migration – Once a student is amnestied they can take advantage of what\’s called \”Chain Migration\”.  Basically they earn the right to legally bring in their parents, grandparents, aunts, uncles, cousin\’s roommate\’s sister\’s best friend\’s babysitter, etc etc etc.  Which is why border enforcement activists have so vigorously opposed the DREAM Act, it\’s really a broad amnesty under the guise of a feel-good educational program.

Summary – So basically in a time of high unemployment, we\’re going to flood the job market with illegal aliens who will compete with real Americans.  In a time of huge deficits at all level of government, we\’re gonna to take on the additional cost of paying for the education of illegal aliens.

Sounds like a great plan huh??

No, then you know what to do…I told you at the top of this post.

[Crossposted at True North]

The usually ignorant Navarette has parroted it.  President Obama has blabbed about it.  Department of Homeland Insecurity Janet Napolitano has suggested it.  This idea that the drug gangs responsible for the violence in that failed state we call Mexico are getting their heavy weapons from the United States.  Problem with this idea is it\’s wrong.  It\’s been repeatedly proven to be wrong.  And pretending it has any validity not only wastes resources but it provides credibility to those seeking to intrude upon Second Amendment rights.

Even the most minimal amount of intelligent thought should bear that out…

“Quite frankly, in Mexico you can’t be armed enough,” said Mr Bethea. “The dynamic of this combat is approaching the early days of the Iraq war. The cartels’ men are well trained, disciplined and are armed with the latest weaponry, including armour-piercing bullets, rocket-launchers and grenades.”

AP bullets? Rocket Launchers? Grenades??  I got news for you folks, those aren\’t coming from the US.  Those are already very illegal in the US.  At best, if they are coming from the US they are being sold out the backdoor of US military armories, and that\’s the fault of people like President Obama, not US citizens.

But once again, the most basic of intelligent thought should suggest a completely different source.  Central America.  Why would drug gangs waste their time with jumping through all the legal hurdles to get basic weapons in the United States at inflated prices, when they can get heavy weapons for dirt cheap from Central America?

Of course none of this should be suprising to our elected leaders.  Recently the Senate Judiciary Committee held a hearing on this very issue.  And basically the end result is that nobody on the ground believes these weapons are coming from the US, there is no need for further laws.  And the point is made that we have lots of guns in this country but don\’t have the level of violence Mexico does.  It\’s almost as if guns themselves aren\’t the problem, and that perhaps a wall type structure should be built to keep out some of the crazy asshats who use weapons in such a violent and dangerous fashion.

But really when it comes down to it, this is just another episode of \”Blame America First\”.

[Crossposted at True North]

The amendment for E-Verify did not pass, as Senator Leahy made a motion to table the amendment and that motion passed 50 – 47.  All Republicans voted against tabling the motion and so did seven Democrats, including Senator Klobuchar of Minnesota.  As a result E-Verify will only be extended for six months.

E-Verify is one of the best tools we have for fighting illegal immigration.  It allows employers to quickly, easily and accurately determine the legal status of potential employees.  Thus it helps remove the jobs magnet that draws many illegal immigrants to this country.  And in this period of economic down turn and people losing their jobs, it also ensures that what job openings there are go to Americans and those legally permitted to work here.

There are reasons to keep a positive frame of mind however.  None of the debate was on the faults of E-Verify or anything of that nature.  In fact most of the debate did not involve any criticism of E-Verify at all, even from those that voted against it.  Most of the opponents made statements to the effect that this wasn\’t the time to extend it for five years and this wasn\’t the vehicle to do it with.

Also there is a negative that may actually be a positive.  Initially all Democrats (including Klobuchar) voted for the motion to table the amendment, and thus voted against E-Verify.  Then they huddled with Senator Reid, who once he knew how many Democrats he could control, let some of them change their votes.  More than likely he allowed those that were most in danger of angering their constituents to switch their vote.  Klobuchar is particularely surprising as she has never voted against illegal immigration.  That\’s a plus for Minnesotans that she\’s feeling that sort of pressure.  That should encourage us to lean on her in the future.

A fight to extend E-Verify will return within six months, but until then we need to keep on our Senators and let them know we haven\’t given up on this issue.

E-Verify, one of the best tools we have for immigration enforcement and I\’ve written about it extensively in the past.  Technically funding for this program expired last Friday.  But now it is looking like it is receiving new life.  Previously Senator Menendez was blocking consideration of reauthorization of E-Verify.  Then Senator Harry Reid was trying to block it\’s consideration with procedural measures.  That has since backfired and Senator Reid has agreed to allow it\’s consideration.

Senator Sessions introduced Amendment 604 to HR 1105 (Omnibus Bill) that would re-authorize E-Verify for five years.  It was supposed to be considered today but the House adjourned for the day without doing so.  However, it is on the docket of amendments to be considered tomorrow.  So you still have time to let your Senator know that you want E-Verify to pass.

Call your Senators at 202-224-3121.

A couple things to cover or be aware of:

• Do not vote for cloture on HR 1105 before the Amendment 604 has been considered.
• E-Verify is NOT controversial, it\’s been applauded by leading Democrats for being an essential tool in the fight against illegal immigration.
• In these tough economic times it ensures that businesses are not hiring illegal immigrants instead of Americans.
• Some Senators are saying that the omnibus bill already has an extension….technically that\’s true but only for six months.  Extending it six months at a time is how we got here in the first place.

Sen. Sessions\’ Amendment (#604) to the spending omnibus bill (HR 1105) would reauthorize the E-Verify employment verification system for a period of five years. However, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid has consistently prevented him from doing so.

It is interesting that Senator Reid has been so unwilling to allow a vote on E-Verify, a program he claims to support. In a letter to a constituent Senator Reid recently wrote,

\”Our country is facing difficult economic challenges and I am working hard to make sure that we can get Nevadans back to work. … I support reauthorization of the E-Verify program, as well as immigration reform that is tough on lawbreakers, fair to taxpayers and practical to implement.\”

— Letter from Sen. Harry Reid (D-Nev.), 2MAR09

Let\’s make Senator Reid live up to his word.

Call the Capitol Switchboard at 202-224-3121.

E-Verify is set to expire in March, but there is new Hope© that it will be extended, even if through rather unconventional means.  Amendments were just added to the American Recovery and Reinvestment Bill (that\’s the hopenchangy name for the ungodly huge stimulus bill) concerning E-Verify.

Now normally I\’m not a big fan of tacking on all sorts of unrelated crap to bills that \”have to pass\”.  It\’s cheap.  It\’s petty.  It\’s childish.  It\’s Washington DC!!  HOPE! CHANGE!  So while I do wish E-Verify was extended on it\’s own merit, the amendments are written such that they are germane to the spirit, if not the actual content of the parent bill.

First, Congressman Ken Calvert (R-CA) offered an amendment that would reauthorize E-Verify for four years. The language of this amendment is identical to H.R.6633, the bill that passed the House last July by a vote of 407-2.

Then, later in the evening, Congressman Jack Kingston (R-GA) offered an amendment that requires all businesses that receive stimulus money under the bill to use E-Verify to help ensure that their workforce is legal.

So, E-Verify, one of the best tools we have for immigration enforcement is looking like it is receiving new life.  And while I sincerely hope the Rape American\’s Pocketbooks Act (aka American Recovery and Reinvestment Bill) dies a firey painful death, I suppose we could count this as a silver lining.  Although I shit wrapped in silver is still shit, but at least it\’s sparkly!!

[Crossposted at True North]

In the 11th hour of his presidency, President Bush finally decided to commute the sentences of two former Border Control Agents, Ignacio Ramos and Jose Alonso Compean.

On his last full day in office, President Bush commuted the controversial sentences of two former Border Patrol agents convicted of shooting a Mexican drug runner in 2005.

The imprisonment of Ignacio Ramos and Jose Alonso Compean had sparked outcry from critics who said the men were just doing their jobs and were punished too harshly. They had been sentenced to 11- and 12-year sentences, respectively.

Their sentences will now expire on March 20 of this year.

It\’s really the least that Bush could do, as these Border Control Agents were simply enforcing the law, something that President Bush didn\’t have the backbone to do.

While it\’s good to see that Bush finally came to his senses regarding these two agents whom never should have been prosecuted to begin with.  It\’s sad to see however, that it took him two years to finally come around to that, and that he didn\’t pardon them.  He just commutted their senses and they still have to stay in jail until March 20th.

With the commution instead of a pardon, President Bush didn\’t even address the side-effects of Ramos and Compean\’s convictions.  Because of their prosecution, we now have a Border Patrol force that is literally afraid to do their jobs, or even return fire when fired upon.  The threat of prosecution for actually controling the border weighs heavily over every action the Border Patrol makes.  A pardon would at least have sent the message that these two didn\’t really do anything wrong, even though it took two years to decide that.

No, instead the miscarriage of justice was simply shortened rather than corrected.  But from President Bush, that\’s about the best we can expect on the border enforcement issue.  What\’s worse it wasn\’t likely to get better, regardless of which candidate won the November election.

[Crossposted at True North]

The United States is unique, perhaps, in that in modern history it has never had to deal with a nation failing on it\’s borders.  In it\’s early history, the United States depended on the oceans for protection.  While World War II demonstrated that was no longer possible, and 9/11 confirmed it, we still rely on the oceans to provide us at least a degree of seperation from troubled nations.  Those days are coming to an end, at least if a report from the Defense Department is to be believed.

Mexico is one of two countries that \”bear consideration for a rapid and sudden collapse,\” according to a report by the U.S. Joint Forces Command on worldwide security threats.

The command\’s \”Joint Operating Environment (JOE 2008)\” report, which contains projections of global threats and potential next wars, puts Pakistan on the same level as Mexico. \”In terms of worse-case scenarios for the Joint Force and indeed the world, two large and important states bear consideration for a rapid and sudden collapse: Pakistan and Mexico.

\”The Mexican possibility may seem less likely, but the government, its politicians, police and judicial infrastructure are all under sustained assault and press by criminal gangs and drug cartels. How that internal conflict turns out over the next several years will have a major impact on the stability of the Mexican state. Any descent by Mexico into chaos would demand an American response based on the serious implications for homeland security alone.\”

This is a big deal for a number of reasons.  Certainly Mexico is an important trade partner as well as a stable presence in Central American.  But more importantly a failed state on our 2000 mile southern border creates a huge national security risk of such weight we haven\’t faced before.

Certainly it raises the importance of security on our southern border.  While the threat of invasion isn\’t likely, the threat of massive influx of refugees is.  More dangerous will be the anarchy that will rule afterwards, in which drug lords and terrorists would hold sway and undoubtably try to push their way into the southern United States.

Suddenly the value of border control obstacles and personnel take on added importance as they would begin to serve a dual role.  A fence would still act as a force multiplier and an effective barrier, much as it has for Israel, which has forced Palestinians to lob rockets rather then send suicide bombers.  Military forces on the border would likely become a critical component of national security, rather than a stop-gap measure to temporarily bolster our Border Control forces.  In the face of such uncertainty and potential threats, we need more security rather than less

In the context of all this, Democrats are seeking to kill further construction of the fence, and in some cases are even advocating that parts of it be torn down.  Some things never really do change, regardless of who is President.

“The [immigration] bill will not flood our cities with immigrants. It will not upset the ethnic mix of our society. It will not relax the standards of admission. It will not cause American workers to lose their jobs.”
– Ted Kennedy, 1965

“This amnesty will give citizenship to only 1.1 to 1.3 million illegal aliens. We will secure the borders henceforth. We will never again bring forward another amnesty bill like this.”
– Ted Kennedy, 1986

“Now it is time for action. 2007 is the year we must fix our broken system.”
– Ted Kennedy, 2007

The Wall Street Journal reports that US workers are crowding out illegal immigrants in jobs that \”American’s won’t do\”. This is good news itself, but it also represents a fresh start for employers, especially those who employ low to unskilled workers. Inevitably this economy will turn itself around, when that happens many of those workers are going to be tempted to leave for greener pastures. Employers will have a choice.

Previously, employers complained they couldn’t adjust to the sudden removal of millions of their (illegal) workers. Now they will be without them, and it will be up to them to make the gradual adjustment to higher pay and better working conditions to keep many of those US workers working for them, rather than once again resorting to illegal workers.

The next time this issue comes around, even the most die-hard open borders activist should be unwilling to show any sympathy towards the employer who claims they can’t adjust to losing their illegal workers.

[Crossposted at True North]

Americanization, it’s important part of the immigration process…but the responsibility for it is apparently in dispute…

The United States must embark on an aggressive effort to integrate immigrants, including teaching them English and U.S. history, a federal task force recommended Thursday.

If this \”Americanization\” fails, the nation could see major problems in 20 or 30 years, with foreign-born populations detached from the larger society and engaging in anti-social behavior, said Alfonso Aguilar, who heads the U.S. Office of Citizenship.

Aguilar compared the potential strife to what is occurring in some Western European countries where foreign-born populations do not feel part of the larger society and are not accepted by many as full citizens.

\”We should not be naive and assume that the assimilation process is going to happen automatically,\” Aguilar said at a news conference.

I won’t dispute that Americanization is an important part of the process. Actually you could fairly easily argue it’s absolutely necessary for long-term success. One could also make very credible arguments that it’s critical for national security, and using the past two years of virtually any European country as a perfect case study…although France and Britain would probably be your best examples.

Problem is that normally it HAS been automatic. In fact it was Teddy Roosevelt who said,

“Every immigrant who comes here should be required within five years to learn English or leave the country.”

In the past while immigrants have been proud of their heritage, they’ve also been proud of their new home. After all, they came here for a reason. It was them that came here, not us that came there. Many saw Americanization as part of the path to success, and if they never quite learned English, certainly their kids did.

Somewhere along the line, and especially in the past generation, we appear to have forgotten many of these truths. Now we’re become so obsessed with diversity, and how “each of us is special and that’s okay!” Now immigrants are encouraged to resist the suffocating grasp of American hegemony. Americanization is now seen as “selling out” or “disgracing your ancestry”. The result is that not only are immigrants are no longer assimilating, they can’t even function in American society in some cases.

The long term and large scale effect of this practice of not assimilating is playing out in the suburbs of Paris, where riots and torched cars light up parts of the city where even the police dare not go. This obsession with diversity for the sake of feel-good liberalism, but at the expense of long term harmony, is stupid. Not only stupid, but it’s downright dangerous and will lead to our downfall.

So while Americanization is important to the country, a government program isn’t going to solve the problem. This requires a cultural shift. It means immigrants are going to have to embrace what it means to be an American. Presumably, since they came here, that idea should not be repulsive or offensive. That is not necessarily in opposition to being proud of one’s heritage either.

Where it is in opposition, well, I can’t help but recall another quote by Teddy Roosevelt

“The man who loves other countries as much as his own stands on a level with the man who loves other women as much as he loves his own wife.”

[H/T Mark Krikorian]

[Crossposted at True North]