Can Amnesty Be Stopped?

Almost six years ago, the last time the Washington establishment tried and failed to shove “comprehensive immigration reform” down the nation’s collective throat, the unemployment rate was 4.5 percent. In some quarters that’s considered “full employment.”

Now we have a much higher unemployment rate of 7.9 percent, 48 previous months during which the rate has been 7.8 percent or higher, and indications of job-market pain we haven’t seen since the Great Depression. Despite all of this, immigration “reform,” more properly characterized as “de facto amnesty for illegal aliens,” appears at this point to be on track towards passage.

Far more even than the recent termination of his “jobs council,” which met only four times in two years and accomplished nothing, President Barack Obama’s grim determination to push through “reform” in such persistently dire circumstances makes a mockery of his assertions that he cares about economic progress, and that “the most important thing we can do is to make sure that we are creating jobs in this country.”

Washington’s original attempt to circumvent the nation’s clear will during the second quarter of 2007 ultimately failed when the Senate rejected the related bill by a vote of 46-53 on June 28.

Just a few days earlier, the measure’s passage seemed assured. What happened? In an effort which in retrospect was a precursor of the longer-lasting and still quite powerful Tea Party movement, deeply concerned Americans rose up in massive numbers and demanded a rejection of what became known, largely as a result of efforts by extraordinary and tireless columnist and blogger Michelle Malkin, as “shamnesty.” Everyday Americans’ powers of persuasion were such that when the bill’s failure became a foregone conclusion on the Senate floor, both senators from Ohio retreated from days-earlier public positions of strong support and voted “no.”

Then-Senator Barack Obama voted “yes.” Though that vote kept him in good standing with the radical amnesty advocates at La Raza, the historical record shows that Obama played a critical role in the bill’s ultimate rejection when he voted several weeks earlier, as the late Robert Novak noted, to include a “poison pill” provision in the law “aimed at emasculating the essential guest-worker program.”

Obama’s move was then seen as “surprising” (again via Novak):

because he had participated, uninvited, one time in the bipartisan negotiating process. He had demanded and won a provision permitting immigrants to stay on the job after being designated “not employable” by the government under the new system until their appeals were exhausted.

In hindsight, Obama’s about-face, as has seemingly been the case throughout his career as a legislator and then as President, was about enhancing his career. His maneuver, as noted, made the passage of immigration “reform” unlikely. Why would he do this? Obama and his handlers apparently calculated that they had to keep the “need” for “reform” available as a campaign issue during his nomination fight against Hillary Clinton. If the immigration issue had gone away, as would have been the case if “reform” had passed, Obama’s ability to mobilize support among Hispanics and other groups heavily supported by the then-influential radicals at ACORN would have been seriously compromised.

The cynical calculations continued into Obama’s presidency. Obama correctly believed that his Hispanic supporters, after grousing a bit about his inaction, wouldn’t abandon him at reelection time if he ignored immigration “reform” during his first term. He was right.

Since the 2007 rejection of “shamnesty,” the government has had ample opportunity to do the one thing it can do without the benefit of legislation: enforce and secure our country’s borders. Instead, under Obama, as a suit brought last summer by Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents shows, border enforcement has turned into a national laughingstock:

The agents allege that President Obama’s policies have reduced the number of illegal aliens who will be deported back to their country of origin.

The ICE agents allege in their lawsuit that … they must choose between enforcing federal laws and being disciplined by their commanders, or obeying their supervisors thereby violating oaths of office and a Clinton administration law — passed by a bi-partisan Congress in 1996 — that mandates the deportation of illegal aliens.

… In the 20-page legal complaint, the agents state they’ve been ordered to ignore an entire category of illegal aliens. The agents allege they were told to stop requesting proof of citizenship or immigration status.

Almost no other country tolerates a situation where non-citizens can enter their country and stay with virtual impunity — certainly not Mexico, whose sanctions against those who it finds are in their country illegally are especially harsh.

Absent controlled borders, efforts to provide a “path to citizenship” to the millions who knowingly entered and stayed in the U.S. illegally will not only cause even larger waves of illegals to arrive so they can someday start down the same “path.” It will also enable those who attain citizenship to bring in millions of spouses, children, and other relatives. The strain on schools, public-health systems, social services, infrastructure, and government finances at all levels will be incalculable.

With unemployment already stubbornly high and seemingly destined to stay there as long as Obama occupies the White House, where will all of these new arrivals find jobs? The President and those who support “shamnesty” are, despite their platitudes, unconcerned about such things. Securing a permanent leftist governing majority is far more important than fixing a largely broken economy.

More and more, immigration “reform” looks like yet another application of the system-breaking Cloward-Piven strategy.

Conservatives who go along with this deeply misguided scheme may not like the verdict their voters render when they are next up for reelection.

Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: Click here.

  • Nanis

    If they keep giving amnesty every 20 years or so this vicious cycle will never end and they will always expect for a next. You cant keep giving them what they want so easily it has to cost them if they really want it.

    • hiro

      I believe that this amnesty is going to be a mess there will be alot of muslim immigrants but hes using the latinos as scapegoats to cover up.

  • BS77

    Look at the flag and say hasta la vista, baby!

  • joe

    We've had 7 amnesties and everyone has been a failure.
    They've drug in millions more in extended family. We have 3 times the population of Mexico with almost double the unemployment .Mexico encourages their uneducated ,poor and criminal citizens to immigrate ,not Dr's and scientists .

    Our government pretends we benefit greatly from immigrants but the stats do not coincide .
    49% of illegals have not graduated from high school. 64% use at least 1 entitlement program here,53% are single parents ,their birth rate is almost double that of American citizens .5 million illegals purchased homes that ended in foreclosures .
    And those farm field workers stories are a farce.Only 3% work the fields .
    More are drug dealers and importers of underage sex workers than farm hands.
    Prosecuting and imprisoning illegal criminals negates any benefit gained.
    Then add in environmental damage ,strain on healthcare ,utilities and infrastructure and they become a burden.
    We don't need or want them. This has to be stopped once and for all.

  • Gayle

    With conservative "friends" like Rubio buckling and folding, who needs enemies.

    Get active in your local tea-parties, folks; and in your state-leve GOP (they're NOT the same as the national guys!). The next 1-2 years are going to be a bumpy ride, and we need all the bodies and voices we can get.

    • JacksonPearson

      Sen. Marco Rubio have way more allegiance to Hispanics elsewhere, than to America.

  • cynthia curran

    Here's idea, Republicans love guestworker programs among the buisness class. Illegal immirgants in maidi work or farmwork could qualify for a work vists but only is good for 5 years. If by the 5 years they are currenlty unemployed they can't get an renevwal. We need to deal with the vists overstay which isn't only Hispanic, its Asians and sometimes Europeans like the Irish that overstay. My plan would in 5 years empty California which has very high employment rates among the illegal immirgant population which is currently11 percent or in heavily ilegal Hispanic cities like Santa Ana, and also Texas which has a lower unemployment among illegal immirgnats buti is around 8 percent of lots of people in both states and other states.

  • cynthia curran

    The main problem is the overstayes, however both the left and the right have exaggered the employment rates of illegal immirgants who are not all employed in the US. In California about 500,000 to 600,000 of illegal immirgants are living off of relatives in the poorer Hispanic or sometimes asian cities landlords allow several families to rent, so illegal immirgants have some unemployed people in that family that are lliving off of relatives to stay in USA. The unemployment rates of Los Angeles, Maywood and Anaheim and Santa Ana are higher than cities which much smaller illegal immirgant populatios like Torrance, Santa Monica, Huntingon Beach or Irvine.

  • Davidka

    At the time of the 1986 amnesty, I was an immigration lawyer and saw everything first hand. The whole program was massively corrupt, especially the absurd farmworker program, where virtually no evidence of residence in the U.S. or farm work was required. I would estimate about 80% or more of the farmworker amnesties granted were totally fraudulent, and everyone, especially the INS workers, who were under orders to approve almost everything, knew it.

    I also agree witht he letter writer who pointed out that B.O. wants to legalize huge numbers of Muslims under the cover of helping Hispanics.

  • ObamaYoMoma

    It makes me nauseated every time I hear a talk show host including Marco Rubio's name in the list of true conservative leaders. He is about as conservative as GWB was a conservative and as for as I'm concerned, GWB wasn't only the most incompetent Republican President ever in American history, he also didn't have a conservative bone in his extremely leftwing liberal body. That's the problem with the Republican Party; it was hijacked by the left starting with GWB's father.

    Screw the Republican Party, they don't have a clue with respect to domestic policies and when it comes to Islam and foreign policy, they are just as incompetent as the Marxists that now control the Dhimmicrat Party. As a result, this country is on the fast track to perdition!

    • cathy

      The Progressives within the Republican Party do not get it … or many they do … in regards to the Islamic agenda that is being furthered within and without of America.

      ED: Rand Paul’s amendment to prohibit transfer of F-16s and tanks to Egyptian government; ROLL CALL VOTE
      January 31, 2013

      • ObamaYoMoma

        I don't know anything about Rand Paul. I just hope he isn't a mentally incompetent suicidal loon like his dad when it comes to foreign policy.

  • cathy

    The Evolution from Conservative to Progressive/Liberal?

    Marco Rubio, March 2009

    “I am strongly against amnesty. The most important thing we need to do is enforce our existing laws. We have existing immigration laws that are not being adequately enforced. Nothing will make it harder to enforce the existing laws, if you reward people who broke them. It demoralizes people who are going through the legal process, its a very clear signal of why go through the legal process, if you can accomplish the same thing if you go through the illegal process. And number two, if demoralizes the people enforcing the laws. I am not, and I will never support any effort to grant blanket legalization/amnesty to folks who have entered, stayed in this country illegally.”

    Rubio-Obama immigration plan? Senator’s proposal looks like White House policy
    Posted on Wednesday, 01.16.13

    A reason for that optimism: Rubio’s ideas and comments closely mirror those of President Obama in a 2011 policy speech in El Paso Texas.

  • cathy

    Would the "gang of eight" led by Marco Rubio be advocating a pathway to citizenship for eleven million Muslims who chose to bypass required legal channels for entering the United States? In other words … a pathway to destroy the American Way from within.

    A Pandora’s box is being open in regards to amnesty for illegals from Mexico. A precedence is being established. All nationalities are going to be demanding equal treatment.

    Also … think about it. Those worldwide waiting in line attempting to enter the country through the legitimate process are now placed behind eleven million illegals. What an ultimate betrayal for doing right.

  • cathy

    House bipartisan effort on immigration underway, with input from Paul Ryan
    January 28, 2013

    Former GOP 2012 vice presidential candidate Paul Ryan, who chairs the House Budget Committee, while not formally part of the group, is supporting the effort, and is encouraging fellow members to move forward with major immigration reform legislation this year.

  • cathy

    Mark Levin: If you think amnesty helps the GOP win elections, you’re dead wrong. And here’s why…
    January 28th, 2013

  • cathy

    LTC Allen West on Illegal Immigration

  • Ghostwriter

    I think that our priority should be LEGAL immigrants and American citizens. The illegals have been hurting our country for years. Not just Americans who've been hurt by this but LEGAL immigrants as well.

    • bluffcreek1967

      No, our priority should be to have no more immigrants (legal or otherwise) until the economy greatly improves. Why would any sane nation continue to permit immigration in any form when so few jobs are available? And when we finally do allow immigration into our land, we would be much wiser to allow only white immigrants from western, european nations. Third-world immigrants has and will radically alter American culture and the demographics of our once great nation.

  • cynthia curran

    At the time of the 1986 amnesty, I was an immigration lawyer and saw everything first hand. The whole program was massively corrupt, especially the absurd farmworker program, where virtually no evidence of residence in the U.S. or farm work was required. I would estimate about 80% or more of the farmworker amnesties granted were totally fraudulent, and everyone, especially the INS workers, who were under orders to approve almost everything, knew it.

    I also agree witht he letter writer who pointed out that B.O. wants to legalize huge numbers of Muslims under the cover of helping Hispanics. This is true.

  • cynthia curran

    Well, I'm tired of this game with Rubio. Ted Cruz who also has some Cuban isn't doing what Rubio is doing.;

  • cynthia curran

    Believe it or not, there are a few enviromentalists that have not been bribed by the rest of the left that opposed this since Hispanics have more babies and grow the population. Also, some Democratics opposed this since it drives wages down.

  • bluffcreek1967

    No, unfortunately, Amnesty cannot be stopped. We are going full bore with this foolish agenda, and both the Democrats and Republicans are determined to flood our land with third-world, uneducated Mexican-Indian peasants. Our nation will soon resemble LA County (CA) with all of its crime, gang problems, and barrio culture. Think it won't happen? Watch and see!

  • cynthia curran

    The key wod is stop hiring them. Sometimes its hard when their is no e-verify but millions would leave if the job market dried up, its the agri-business among Republcians that pushed their use to no end unless they get a new guestworker program.

  • cynthia curran

    More and more, immigration “reform” looks like yet another application of the system-breaking Cloward-Piven strategy.

    Conservatives who go along with this deeply misguided This is true most far left groups favor legalizing them. My suggestive meatpacking was force to not hire them as much so they brought in somilians who are Muslim but it shows that illegal immirgants from Mexico and Central America can be replaced. Granted, there are some illegals form Ireland amd every country. Changed immirgation where the old quota system can be updated, Europeans are probably one of the least groups that are able to immirgant have Eastern European Countries like Moldiva compete with illegal immirgants in farmwork, cleaning, and so forth, changed the work vistas where it doesn't favor the Latin and Asian countries who dominate immirgation do to family members. A 5 year guestworker program where it may or may not be renewel but it will favor the countries not represent as much and I don't mean middle eastern or Africian Countries, European immirgation. Vista overstays are the big problem to deal with even with a new system.

    • Allisio

      … changed the work vistas where it doesn't favor the Latin and Asian countries who dominate immirgation do to family members.

      If you're still around, you mean " Latin American"? because the Latin Countries are the following: Italy, France,Romania, Portugal and Spain. For your information the Latins, the Latin Language and Culture, all come from Italy and not from Spain.

  • cynthia curran

    Sometimes Eastern Europeans moe conservative than Hispanic groups since their countries have been thru communists, not 100 percent proof but better than what the Republicans are wanting now. Also, some of the Eastern European Countries are more socially conservative because they follow the more traditional morality of the Eastern Orthodox Church or Roman Catholic Church than their counterparts in Western Europe, usaally there are folks in Poland more to the right on the social issues than Mexico.