With Sincere Apologies and Thanks

I have, regretfully, had to tighten posting requirements for this blog.  You will now have to be a registered WP user.

Personally, I hate having to register for everything and didn’t want to have to make people do so here.  Unfortunately, the few have, yet again, ruined it for the many.  I figured this may happen but had hoped it would not have occurred so soon.

Recently, a poster used several different identities and went so far as to lie about service in the military (unethical, to say the least, especially in the case of the latter) in an effort to promote and defend their points (note: I deleted their posts and my responses).  It doesn’t appear to be the first time this has happened here, either.  That is something I can simply not tolerate and I think other posters here would feel the same way.

For those of you who did post and did so ethically, despite our disagreements, THANK YOU for being honest and not engaging in any deception of other blog readers and posters.

(Bennett) Placating Utahns on Amnesty Bill (Update)

From the SL Trib entitled “Sen. Bennett sides with Bush on immigration reform“:

Angry Utahns by the hundreds are calling, e-mailing and faxing Sen. Bob Bennett, R-Utah, demanding he oppose an immigration bill that would provide legal status to an estimated 12 million undocumented immigrants.
Those voters generally receive a coy answer.
“My public position is that I’m reviewing the amendments,” Bennett said Tuesday.
It’s a ploy meant to defuse emotion. But here’s what Bennett’s staffers are not saying: he plans to vote for it.

Not shocking or earth shattering. Bennett just doesn’t want your opinion to bother him on this issue. Bother him anyway, it is your right (and duty). If you want more background on the bill, I‘ve written up my problems with it and the Heritage Foundation has a good, brief analysis on some of the glaring ‘inadequacies’ with the bill.

The pro-Amnesty side has not been able to satisfactorily address the issues raised and it seems they are losing the argument given the fact that they are now resorting to race-baiting, name calling, and other ad hominem attacks (Chertoff and, now, Chavez) when challenged to address specifics within the bill. This really isn’t anything new, but it is coming from folks who usually won’t resort to unless their totally desperate.

President Bush is also going after those questioning the bill (especially 601(h) - which does give immediate ‘probationary’ legal status without a limit on renewal and no fines etc…sounds like amnesty):

Amnesty is forgiveness for being here without any penalties — that’s what amnesty is. I oppose it. The authors — many of the authors of this bill oppose it. This bill is not an amnesty bill. If you want to scare the American people, what you say is, the bill is an amnesty bill. It’s not an amnesty bill. That’s empty political rhetoric, trying to frighten our fellow citizens…

…Those determined to find fault with this bill will always be able to look at a narrow slice of it and find something they don’t like. If you want to kill the bill, if you don’t want to do what’s right for America, you can pick one little aspect out of it, you can use it to frighten people…

Basically, the White House seems to think if you disagree with portions of the bill and would like to see them fixed or addressed - sit down and be quiet. The fact of the matter is that the vast majority of those opposing the bill aren’t out to scare anyone, there are simply some factual issues within the bill that need to be addressed.

A lot of the resistance to this bill actually goes back to 1986 (and subsequent limited amnesty bills) where enforcement promises were broken, current laws are essentially unenforced, the border fence which was cut in size and is progressing very slowly, and this bill continues to allow for sanctuary cities. After this, people tend not to be so open the the ‘trust me, we’ll do it this time’ line.

Ultimately, many people want to actually see the enforcement stuff implemented first prior to any amnesty or guest worker programs being implemented (besides, 601(h) etc, the current bill gives the bureaucracy power to interpret that enforcement is ‘good enough’ and immediate authority to implement the visa programs). That’s why I suggested running this in two separate bills - pass and implement the enforcement bill, then pass the ‘guest worker’ bill (I think the latter would face far less opposition).

In the meantime, feel free to use the VIP line to call Hatch and Bennett.

UPDATE: Ed Meese  discusses several issues (found at the Heritage Foundation).  He was the Attorney General during the Reagan Admin and, as I recall, was around during the 1986 Amnesty bill:

It’s Time To Say Thank You

THANK YOU ALL

You are always in our prayers.
You will forever have our gratitude.

America Supports You

Calling Your Senator (special number) plus misc stories (update)

***First: Remember Memorial Day is around the corner. Say thanks to a soldier/sailor/airman etc (or former soldier), offer a special prayer for those in harms way, do something (bring a treat to a recruiting office, donate to a military support group - plenty to choose from at AmerricaSupportsYou.mil)***

OK, on to that special number we can all use:

Are you one of the “little people” who is having a tough time getting through to your Senators? Or maybe you just want an easier way to call them without having to ‘hold’ while paying long distance charges. Well, here is the ‘VIP’ line you, too, can use:

1-800-417-7666 (English)
1-800-882-2005 (Spanish)

The line is actually a hotline established by a pro-amnesty group (Malkin gives background on the organization), and the line works very well - I used it and rapidly made contact with both Senator offices. You will hear a message in Spanish, press 1 (for your senior Senator - Hatch) or 2 (for your junior Senator - Bennett) at anytime during this first message. You will then here a brief message be asked to press 1 again (you can press 1 at anytime during this second message). You will then be connected. HotAir also has Audio of the Spanish Version.

Now some other stories -

Immigration:

• Hugh Hewitt has linked up a really good Houston Chronicle series entitled “Breaching America” - the series details the entry of some illegal aliens who originated from “countries with jihadist networks”.
  • Latest (and last) Part in the Series: ‘I’ve Made it To America‘
  • Flash presentation on one of the illegal aliens’ journey
• Sen. Coleman’s Anti-Sanctuary Bill Defeated
• Re: The White House Response to The Corner - amnesty for illegal immigrant gang members
• Public alerts Senate on immigration bill - huge reaction opposing the bill
• Chertoff smears those opposing the bill

Iraq:

• Congress Passes Iraq Funding (finally)
  • House Roll Call and Senate Roll Call (How your Representative and Senator voted) - [UPDATE] note: Enzi, Coburn and Burr voted ‘nay’ due to pork that remained in the bill. In the House, Cannon and Matheson supported the pork amendment, while Bishop voted against it (kudos to Rob Bishop).
• ‘Mookie’ Sadr reappears in Iraq - don’t know how long he’ll stay before hiding again
• [UPDATE] More information and links on Sadr’s appearance.
• One of Mookie’s top militants is neutralized by the Brits
• [UPDATE] MNFIraq Youtube Video of beautiful ‘t-wall’ murals

Islam Vs. Islamists:

• PBS to air Islam vs Islamists (there is a deal in the works, I don’t count this as a sure thing, however).

Immigration Act’s Unacceptable Flaws (with suggested fixes)

The “Secure Borders, Economic Opportunity and Immigration Reform Act of 2007” in not acceptable as it currently stands.

I feel that the act is deficient in ensuring enforcement measures will be sufficiently implemented prior to legalization, provides several gaping loopholes allowing criminal illegal aliens to remain in the country, disenfranchises identity theft victims, potentially creates a communications wall for law enforcement, fails to adequately address sources of greater national security risk, and provides benefits to illegal immigrants unavailable to law-abiding people here.

First, subsection 604(b)(2) states “Nothing in this subsection shall require the Secretary to commence removal proceedings against an alien whose application has been denied, terminated, or revoked based on the Secretary’s finding that the alien is inadmissible or deportable.” Unfortunately, subsection 604(b)(2) includes several cross references to other subsections which disqualify illegal immigrants from “Z Visas”. These cross referenced subsections include disqualification of convicted felons, aggravated felons see (8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(43) and 1101(h) – this includes murders, rapists, etc), multiple misdemeanor conviction (601(d)(1)(F)), in addition to the other significant violations (such as fraud and willful misrepresentation) as enumerated in the subsection. This is totally unacceptable. Subsection 604(b)(2), and similar language, should be stricken or amended to require that the Secretary remove such criminal illegal aliens.

Additionally, subsections 1(a), 601(f)(2), and 601(h)1-5 appear to allow illegal immigrants to immediately gain probationary legal status (upon passage of the bill) prior to any of the purported “triggers” actually being implemented. This is entirely unacceptable, particularly given the government’s abysmal track record regarding implementing promised immigration enforcement measures (such as the 1986 Simpson-Mazzoli Act). Language regarding the probationary legal status as noted in the aforementioned sections should be stricken to allow for no such defacto legal status until such time as triggers are, indeed, implemented.

Second, subsection 604(a) prohibits the government or its contractors to inform identity theft victims that their identity has been compromised by an illegal immigrant. This prohibition carries a penalty of $10,000 if violated (subsection 604(g)). It is common knowledge that many illegal immigrants have engaged in identity theft and document fraud of not only adult, but children’s identities. At a minimum (I think an additional fine or disqualification of visa eligibility would be appropriate), the agency processing the illegal immigrants’ documentation, which includes W-2s (contain the stolen social security number they used), should be allowed/mandated to inform the holder (or parents of the holder) of that number that their identity is compromised and action needs to be taken. Further, subsection 604(b) should be amended to include identity theft as an “exception to confidentiality” and included in subsection 601(d)(1)(F) as grounds for ineligibility . Victims are left to their own devices, time, and expense to determine and clear up the breach, a process that could take years, particularly in the case of children (parents are much less likely to check their children’s identity and credit records, for obvious reasons).

Third, subsection 604(a) and 604(c) limits release of information to law enforcement agencies only if the information is required as part of an ongoing criminal investigation (604(c) – evidently no release would be allowed for a civil suit) or only with specific approval of the Secretary of Homeland Security. September 11th terrorists were found to have attained fraudulent identities through illegal immigrants, There should be no barrier for law enforcement agencies to attain this potentially vital information which could prevent future terror or security threats. This is unacceptable subsections 604(a) and 604(c) should be amended to provide electronic versions of the submitted documentation (organized by state) to all law enforcement agencies without Homeland Security approval nor with the requirement of an ongoing criminal investigation.

I realize this has been included to encourage illegal aliens to come forward, however it is not appropriate nor can it be justified for Federal employees to turn a blind eye to felonies committed against US citizens and their children by illegal aliens. What message does this send to our children regarding respect for the rule of law.

Fourth, subsection 605(a) provides blanket amnesty from both civil and criminal suits to employers who knowingly hired illegal immigrants and, more importantly, knowingly accepted fraudulent documents and stolen identities. The subsection also provides amnesty from tax violations. Subsection 605(a) should be stricken. Identity theft victims should be allowed to hold employers, who knowingly enabled the theft, responsible for their actions. Additionally, fair playing field should be maintained where unethical businesses are not rewarded for tax evasion while ethical businesses are essentially punished (likely incurred greater costs due to legal compliance).

Again, I understand that this provision may have been enacted to encourage employers to come forward, but the message it sends to the ethical business community and our future business leaders is unconscionable.

Fifth, the current bill does not differentiate between nations of origin. Clearly, entrants from certain nations (such as those that sponsor terror or actively and aggressively oppose US interests) pose potentially greater threats and would beg of much more scrutiny than those originating from nations we consider our allies. While not perfect, this would allow a higher likelihood of identifying real and potential threats prior to security breaches.

Finally, Section 616 enacts the DREAM Act which provides significant educational benefits unavailable to US Citizens and legal immigrants (and student visa holders). This section would repeal the 1996 law requiring US Citizens also be provided in-state tuition rates if illegal immigrants are given the benefit. This is wrong and amounts to a slap-in-the face of US citizens and legal immigrants and visa holders. This section should be entirely stricken and the 1996 law upheld.

The above is just “my wish list” of issues I have noticed thus far. There are many more significant problems related to this bill (refer to the recent Heritage Foundation report entitled “Rewarding Illegal Aliens: Senate Bill Undermines The Rule of Law“) which need to be addressed. Given the amount of extremely problematic provisions, I am not positive the act can be salvaged. Ultimately, I believe enforcement and legalization should be dealt with in separate bills to allow for enactment of enforcement methods first and providing for more manageable, less intricate legislation.

I’m beginning to think Boehner’s assessment of the bill is dead on.

The Immigration Analysis Consolidated (Update)

Hugh Hewitt took a few days to go over the immigration bill. Hewitt is a lawyer and brings an analysis of the bill along with loopholes etc from a legal perspective. The analysis is long, but worth reading to get a better idea of what lies with in the potential legislation. I will try to post snippets I found interesting if/when I get the chance:

The Immigration Analysis Consolidated (Bumped and Updated)

UPDATE:

Hot Air has also put up one of Malkin’s ‘Vents’ where she discusses how illegal immigrant ID fraud helped shelter some of the 9/11 hijackers. Interestingly enough, the new immigration bill prohibits government employees with first hand knowledge of id theft to inform the victims and prohibits them from informing law enforcement (law enforcement must go to them with an investigation - the bill does NOT allow ‘tips’ to law enforcement - see sec.604(c)). For more information on the ID theft protection illegal immigrants will receive as well as a link to the draft legislation see. Click the above link for details on the protection (look comment #3 for a summary) as well as a link to download the draft legislation.

This new wall of communication will not do us any good, should it pass.

More: Michell Malkin also has an interesting post regarding identity theft with a cameo by a Utah driver’s license: Documents of the “Undocumented” [link temporarily redacted].

In other news, Utah has completed an audit about the costs of educating illegal immigrant’s children. Davis County Watch caught the initial (not much information) release. More information was released today: Schooling illegals costly

Now onto some excerpts from Hewitt’s post:

Section 601(h)(2), (3), (4), (5), and (6) lay out additional provisions concerning this huge –indeed almost certainly 90% plus?– portion of the illegals currently in the country that are not subject to the “triggers,” and even notes in subparagraph (5) that if an illegal is arrested or detained prior to filing his or her application for Z permit status, “the Secretary shall provide the alien with a reasonable opportunity to file an application under this section after such regulations are promulgated.” Unless the computer spits out a no within 2 days of submitting the application, the illegal gets probationary Z status –before even one more mile of fence is built or a workplace verification system is constructed.

Perhaps I am wrong, but I can only read Section 601(h) as a massive undercutting of the entire concept of “triggers,”…

A note on the bail provision. Sec. 1 promised the end of “catch and release” by pledging a “catch and return” policy. But the bail requirement of Section 113 seems to provide well-off illegal entrants with a “catch, pay, and release” option that –in practice– would benefit an odd group of illegal entrants: those with financial resources, which may in fact be the very people we most want to question, correct? Section 113 is an amendment to 8 U.S.C. 1226(a)(2), which currently reads…

If you wanted to end “catch and release,” wouldn’t the law simply declare that no bond shall be available and the alien to be detained until such time as he or she can be returned to the country of origin? There may be an explanation here that eludes me, but it looks like “catch and release” is simply not outlawed by the new law, only made less automatic.

A Clean Military Funding Bill? (Update)

Found this on Captain’s Quarters blog (AP article):

In grudging concessions to President Bush, Democrats intend to draft an Iraq war-funding bill without a timeline for the withdrawal of U.S. troops and shorn of billions of dollars in spending on domestic programs, officials said Monday.

The legislation would include the first federal minimum wage increase in more than a decade, a top priority for the Democrats who took control of Congress in January, the officials added.

While details remain subject to change, the measure is designed to close the books by Friday on a bruising veto fight between Bush and the Democratic-controlled Congress over the war. It would provide funds for military operations in Iraq through Sept. 30, the end of the fiscal year.

They will still stick in the unrelated wage hike but the ridiculous timelines will be gone. We’ll see if this sticks.

Not to worry, though, come September, we’ll probably go through this all over again.

UPDATE: Bob Kerrey (former Senator, D-NE) has written an opinion entitled “The Left’s Iraq Muddle“. This is a must read (go to link). Some snippets:

No matter how incompetent the Bush administration and no matter how poorly they chose their words to describe themselves and their political opponents, Iraq was a larger national security risk after Sept. 11 than it was before. And no matter how much we might want to turn the clock back and either avoid the invasion itself or the blunders that followed, we cannot. The war to overthrow Saddam Hussein is over. What remains is a war to overthrow the government of Iraq.

Some who have been critical of this effort from the beginning have consistently based their opposition on their preference for a dictator we can control or contain at a much lower cost. From the start they said the price tag for creating an environment where democracy could take root in Iraq would be high. Those critics can go to sleep at night knowing they were right.

The critics who bother me the most are those who ordinarily would not be on the side of supporting dictatorships, who are arguing today that only military intervention can prevent the genocide of Darfur, or who argued yesterday for military intervention in Bosnia, Somalia and Rwanda to ease the sectarian violence that was tearing those places apart. [referring to Sen. Biden, D-DE]

American liberals need to face these truths: The demand for self-government was and remains strong in Iraq despite all our mistakes and the violent efforts of al Qaeda, Sunni insurgents and Shiite militias to disrupt it. Al Qaeda in particular has targeted for abduction and murder those who are essential to a functioning democracy: school teachers, aid workers, private contractors working to rebuild Iraq’s infrastructure, police officers and anyone who cooperates with the Iraqi government. Much of Iraq’s middle class has fled the country in fear.

With these facts on the scales, what does your conscience tell you to do? If the answer is nothing, that it is not our responsibility or that this is all about oil, then no wonder today we Democrats are not trusted with the reins of power. American lawmakers who are watching public opinion tell them to move away from Iraq as quickly as possible should remember this: Concessions will not work with either al Qaeda or other foreign fighters who will not rest until they have killed or driven into exile the last remaining Iraqi who favors democracy.

The key question for Congress is whether or not Iraq has become the primary battleground against the same radical Islamists who declared war on the U.S. in the 1990s and who have carried out a series of terrorist operations including 9/11. The answer is emphatically “yes.”

This does not mean that Saddam Hussein was responsible for 9/11; he was not. Nor does it mean that the war to overthrow him was justified–though I believe it was. It only means that a unilateral withdrawal from Iraq would hand Osama bin Laden a substantial psychological victory.

Those who argue that radical Islamic terrorism has arrived in Iraq because of the U.S.-led invasion are right. But they are right because radical Islam opposes democracy in Iraq. If our purpose had been to substitute a dictator who was more cooperative and supportive of the West, these groups wouldn’t have lasted a week.

…I believe it is possible to build what doesn’t exist today in Washington: a bipartisan strategy to deal with the long-term threat of terrorism.

This just brushes the surface of his point.  The article is actually quite short, but to the point.  Again, I highly recommend reading the full opinion.

Count The Amnesties Game (Illegal Aliens and Businesses get Felony Amnesty)

UPDATE: See also, the more recent Immigration Act’s Unacceptable Flaws (with suggested fixes)

This is getting much closer to confirmation of what I had blogged about:

National Review has a PDF version of the new immigration bill (draft, May 18, 2007).

CitizensForTaxFairness.org (they also have some good stuff on identity theft) linked to yours truly in one of their posts and has made up a game for us all to play. I’ve also included a few answers they/others have found (excerpts with emphasis added):

HOW TO PLAY:

Take the Senate’s comprehensive immigration reform bill once its available, read through the hundreds of pages and see how many amnesties you can find. For example, amnesty from document fraud or amnesty from identity theft, etc.

Send your answers to: Info@CitizensForTaxFairness.org

Click here to see the amnesties found in the Senate bill.

Here are the amnesties listed at this time (see, also, their results page - likely better updated than this post):

1. Amnesty from all back taxes. Illegal aliens who have evaded taxes are given full and total amnesty from all back taxes at the insistence of the Bush Administration.

2. Amnesty from document fraud and identity theft for the millions of illegal aliens who routinely use fraudulent documents to obtain jobs and other benefits but who have not been convicted of these felonies.Section 604 of the act specifically prohibits government employees from reporting crimes disclosed in an illegal alien’s application for adjustment of status or in any of the supporting documents to law enforcement or to the victims of identity theft. Should federal government employees report document fraud, identity theft and other felonies, they are subject to a $10,000 fine. This is pure and simply total amnesty for criminal illegal aliens who have committed multiple felonies. The act offers no justice for the American citizen victims of these crimes and leaves them to recover their identities and credit histories at the cost of hundreds of hours of work and thousands of dollars.

3. Amnesty from illegal entry into the United States that allows all 12 to 20 million illegal aliens to remain in the United States with probationary legal status in violation of the rule of law. In addition, it prohibits anyone from being deported between the time the law is enacted and the time they file their paperwork. This permits them to continue to use their fraudulent documents and stolen identities with impunity until such time as they are given new documents by the U.S. government.

4. Amnesty for businesses who have violated federal tax law - Section 605. Any business that didn’t pay taxes associated with the employment of illegal aliens has the slate wiped clean. Employers who violate tax laws while hiring authorized workers receive no such amnesty.

5. Amnesty for businesses that have hired illegal aliens in violation of current law - Section 605. Businesses that have accepted fraudulent documents, stolen identities including those of hundreds of thousands or possibly even millions of American children, and who have paid substandard wages are granted total amnesty.

This appears to have been interpreted from the draft bill but I doubt much will substantively change.

Right now the bill would be a step backwards for victims. The identity thieves and businesses get amnesty. I assume that means a victim could NOT sue the business or thief for trashing their identity and/or credit because no crime would have been committed (amnesty would cover it). Better yet, if someone dares let you know that your or your child’s identity was compromised, they face a $10K fine!

You wouldn’t even be given the courtesy to know you may have some cleaning up to do on your identity. You would be left to figure it out on your own which may take years (especially in the case of children) to realize you were victimized.

In the meantime, thieves and businesses are free to use little Cindy’s SSN with no worries.

Finally, HotAir also has a post up about the the administration’s insistence on tax amnesty (even Teddy Kennedy wasn’t going to give them that).

Illegal Immigration ID Theft in a Nutshell (Amnesty)

I thought I would put up a reasonably succinct post regarding the relationship of identity theft and illegal immigration. I thought this would be best since I noted that the current amnesty bill will also grant amnesty to those who engaged in identity theft.

Here is a scenario of how identity theft is used:

My name is Fritz. I entered the country on a flight from Germany in 1995.  On the immigration form I filled out when I entered at the airport, I declared that I was entering as a tourist for a month visit (not my intent, but I wanted in). Rather than going through the arduous process of getting a work visa etc, I illegally stayed in the country.

I began to look for a job and realized that I needed a Social Security number to work as I had no work visa etc.

I rapidly found an identity dealer [unfortunately, ID theft is big in our country]. Ultimately, I knew there were two possibilities with the card I received:

1. A made up number which may or may not belong to someone.

2. A known SSN that belongs to a US citizen (either someone live or a deceased person’s identity).

I hoped for the first but I was short on money and needed to work if I was to make a life in this country.

I used the SSN card and number to fill out my work forms and falsify the citizenship statement on the I-9 form [several felonies have now been committed]. My employer asks nothing nor do they verify the SSN, as their priority is to get my labor.

I begin work for the company and have moved up the ladder over the past 12 years. I am married with two children (both in school) and I have obtained a car loan and a home using the SSN. I have kept up on all my payments.

—-

My name is Julie. I was born in 1990. Unbeknownst to me or my family, my identity was stolen in 1995 (I was five years old [see video below]) and to transfered Fritz along with 10 others who have used it since [identity thieves target children's identities as they are unlikely to check their credit reports etc].

I will soon be graduating from high school and my family is a lower-middle class family. I applied for a pell grant, a scholarship for low income families, and some student loans. All have been denied because earnings reports (linked to SSN) indicate I made too much to qualify.

Ultimately, While Fritz didn’t impact my credit, two of the other’s using my number did. I do not qualify for a low interest loan based on my credit score and have been denied a credit card (I can’t even get an internet access account).

At this time, I will likely have to postpone going to University as I can not afford to and must clear up my social security records and credit record so as to attempt to qualify for the scholarships, grants, and loans. I hope to have it all cleared up so that I can attend the second semester but the scholarships and grants are likely all allocated. I will have to go into more debt (loans) than expected in order to start mid-year or commence my college education next year.

Fritz and the 10 others will been given amnesty for the SSN identity theft. Also, do not think that your credit can be protected simply by checking it twice a year etc (see the footnote on this post for a link to the MSNBC story)

—–

I hope that was brief and to the point. The best case scenario is that Julie’s credit is ok but she would still have to contend with the earnings ultimately disqualifying her from the scholarships, grants, etc (likely to result in him postponing her education). Additionally, if a number is made up rather than stolen, there is still a 50/50 chance that the number belongs to someone (half of all SSNs have been allocated). That means Julie could have been born into identity theft (the ‘made up number’ is assigned to her after she was born - see the second video, below).

Unfortunately, everyone continues to focus on the lives of the illegal immigrants while forgetting the victims.

Ending on the positive - If you want to check on you SS report or that of your children’s, see my post on checking SSNs (UCourts). Also, now would be a good time to contact your Senators and Representative.

Here’s the link to the story and here’s the video:

ID Theft Amnesty (The Illegal Immigration Deal) Updated

Congress appears not to have any problem at all letting you clean up your own identity and that of you children’s (several posts on this link detail ID theft associated with illegal immigration). From the below links, it appears congress will give anyone who stole you children’s identity a pass and even allow them to invite their entire family into the country. Be prepared to pucker:

A Disaster: The GOP Caves On Border Security

GOP talking points on their immigration bill capitulation

The Wash Times also reports (White House backs off alien safeguards):

The Bush administration, trying to win an immigration agreement with Democrats, is backing away from safeguards designed to target businesses that hire illegal aliens and to prevent a repeat of the rampant fraud that resulted from the 1986 amnesty.

Republicans are pleading with the Bush administration to hold firm on the safeguards, arguing that otherwise any new guest-worker program will be unworkable.

Immigration Deal Would Grant Amnesty to Parents, Spouses and Children

Report: Senate Republicans sign off on amnesty

I feel sorry for those who entered legally (including those on student visas). It doesn’t appear they get the same sweetheart deal given those who violated our laws. I guess it serves you right for taking the months and years of work to do the right thing.

For the rest of us, enjoy the tedium of cleaning up those social security (and credit records).

PS, Now would be a good time to contact your Senators and Representatives.

UPDATE: HotAir has a rundown with more details on the Amnesty proposal (along with plenty of links and ongoing updates as more information comes to light).

UPDATE: Reaction from DeMint: “I don’t care how you try to spin it, this is amnesty”.

UPDATE: See also: Illegal Immigration ID Theft in a Nutshell (Amnesty)