The Amnesty bill bans immigration officials from forwarding criminal histories to law enforcement for deportation purposes.
What good is a background check that doesn't actually penalize criminals? Like the rest of Amnesty 2013, it exists only to aid the Democratic Party's culture of criminality.
Their concern is with a clause that would, during the background check process, prohibit immigration officials from forwarding criminal histories to law enforcement for deportation purposes.
"The idea is we are supposed to be weeding out the bad apples," said Steven Camarota, of the Center for Immigration Studies. "But the big problem with the bill is it does not require those denied the amnesty to leave the country. In fact, a confidentiality provision in the bill prevents law enforcement from using information in the application to go find you."
That means felons and fugitives -- particularly those with three or more misdemeanors, who are not supposed to be eligible for legal status -- can remain in the shadows, in the U.S. Critics also say the check is no more than a rubber stamp, with no personal interview, reference check or state-issued identification required.
"I don't mean to be flip," Center for Immigration Studies Executive Director Mark Krikorian told a Senate panel recently. "But this section could have been subheaded 'no illegal alien left behind.' The goal seems to be get amnesty for as many people possible."
The background check, like the border security provision, is camouflage for the real goal of maximum amnesty.
Immigrant rights supporters argue people with small offenses on their record who are otherwise qualified to immigrate to the U.S. should not be excluded, and that those with children or spouses in the U.S. should not be sent home because of an old felony or gang affiliation.
Well sure. Why would we want to lower Chicago's murder rate anyway?
So we've got a background check without the background check part that doesn't lead to deportation for criminals. And the alternative to this amnesty, we are told by its advocates, is de-facto amnesty. I don't know about you, but de facto amnesty, which costs 6.3 trillion dollars less and doesn't offer criminals a sweetheart deal, is starting to look pretty good right now.