Immigration bill suffers major defeat in Senate

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

The bill is dead, people. Time to find the next big issue.

[Jamie76 0]

The bill is dead, people. Time to find the next big issue.

At least until 2009. Never the less, glad to see it was defeated.

[Thelma nd Doni 0]

Sometimes our political system works for the good of the USA!

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

We don't need to deport anyone. Just enforce the laws we have, make it impossable for them to work and they will leave on their own. Funny how things would work out if we just enforce the law.

I've been asking for a long time now, with no answer forthcoming from anyone - exactly how we go about enforcing these laws in an aggressive manner. Might as well have been whistling in the wind.

How do we enforce employment laws in an aggressive manner? That to me implies some sort of massive audit programme.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

At the currrent rate of deportation, it would take 72 years to get them all out.

I remember back in the day the border patrol roamed the streets like cops and checked for docs, just like asking for someones ID! If they didnt have em, they got a free bus ride south.

72 years?

Back in the day? You mean we had a national ID card in the past? And all Americans were required to show it to law enforcement officials at all times? Did they ever accidentally deport Americans who had left their wallets at home? Gee.

Anyhow, yeah, 72 years, because sorting out who is here legally and who isn't, and whether they're an EWI or an overstay, whether they deserve a three- or ten- or lifetime ban are things that take time to go through the court system. We'd have to increase the number of judges by a factor of 100 to get it down to a reasonable time. Plus, you'd have to build more jails, commission many more officers. You get the idea.

That's a lot of cash that I'd rather see go other places, like improving legal immigration or securing the border, and cracking down on employers, not just rounding people up.

I agree that would be quite likely happen. Thinking here of the detention centers that were set up in parts of the UK to deal with the illegal immigration problem over there. Took so long to go through their cases (and they couldn't leave until they were processed) that some of the people staged a mutiny, burned down the building and fled into the countryside!

[GaryC 7]

We don't need to deport anyone. Just enforce the laws we have, make it impossable for them to work and they will leave on their own. Funny how things would work out if we just enforce the law.

I've been asking for a long time now, with no answer forthcoming from anyone - exactly how we go about enforcing these laws in an aggressive manner. Might as well have been whistling in the wind.

How do we enforce employment laws in an aggressive manner? That to me implies some sort of massive audit programme.

I would rather pay for the enforcment than have the illegals stay. A national ID card with biometrics would be a good start. Tripling the fines for hiring an illegal would be another. Snitch lines with rewards for turning in companies that hire illegals would be another. None of that would cost a lot.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

The bill is dead, people.

Gotta love the sound of that.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Racking up the penalties is all well and good but it still doesn't address the enforcement issue.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Racking up the penalties is all well and good but it still doesn't address the enforcement issue.

I think a lot of profiteers would start to get cold feet once their peers are doing time. I say it's worth a shot.

[no name 1]

Racking up the penalties is all well and good but it still doesn't address the enforcement issue.

I think a lot of profiteers would start to get cold feet once their peers are doing time. I say it's worth a shot.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Racking up the penalties is all well and good but it still doesn't address the enforcement issue.

I think a lot of profiteers would start to get cold feet once their peers are doing time. I say it's worth a shot.

Worth a shot sure. I'm just asking how. Otherwise - what exactly would I be agreeing to?

[GaryC 7]

It just takes action rather than lip service. I am holding out hope that the next election will see some real action.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

It just takes action rather than lip service. I am holding out hope that the next election will see some real action.

Yes it does. But if we're talking a viable long term strategy here with long-term effects - there must surely be something new and relatively robust in terms of enforcement.

[Pinocchio Liberal 268]

I've been asking for a long time now, with no answer forthcoming from anyone - exactly how we go about enforcing these laws in an aggressive manner. Might as well have been whistling in the wind.

Probably cuz no answer would suit you! Possibly.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Racking up the penalties is all well and good but it still doesn't address the enforcement issue.

I think a lot of profiteers would start to get cold feet once their peers are doing time. I say it's worth a shot.

Worth a shot sure. I'm just asking how. Otherwise - what exactly would I be agreeing to?

Stiff penalties. Fines large enough to put a business out of business and mandatory time for those in charge of hiring illegals. That's it. Once the first lot is sent up the river and the first businesses go belley up, there'll be a lot more sensitivity on the issue. People will reconsider whether it's really worth it to take the chance. Put the enforcement portion of the bill through and let's see five years from now where that gets us. Then we talk about the rest. The government has a credibility gap on the enforcement that needs to be addressed before America will sign off on a large scale amnesty. Said amnesty wouldn't be quite so large in scale if the government demonstrates that the enforcement works.