Amnesty Bill SHOT DOWN!!!

#177
#177
GAVol said:
If the old laws can't be enforced, what's the point of passing new laws?
Click to expand...

When the new laws address the root of the problem AND give more manpower and resources to do this? If this bill actually ADDS TO the ability to enforce the old laws plus takes away a huge reason people take the illegal path to get here?
 
#180
#180
Teddyhead said:
Can you back that up somehow? I mean if that is true I would like to know but I can't just take your word for it. Forgive me.:)
Click to expand...

I watched the report on your bud Lou Dobbs' show. Ed Lavanderas did a report and walked right through the gate that was clearly not secure right off the Rio Grande river. Surely something on you boy Dobbs is reliable right?
 
#181
#181
allvol123 said:
You are saying we can't enforce laws but you want a whole lot more of them.

:crazy:
Click to expand...

Dense. Completely dense. We cannot enforce them because of lack of manpower plus resources. This bill adds to both. Shocking that cocept doesn't sink in. Maybe repeating yet again will work.

:crazy: :crazy:
 
#182
#182
CSpindizzy said:
Dense. Completely dense. We cannot enforce them because of lack of manpower plus resources. This bill adds to both. Shocking that cocept doesn't sink in. Maybe repeating yet again will work.

:crazy: :crazy:
Click to expand...

I think if you'll be condescending just a few more times, you'll convince everybody that you're right.
 
#183
#183
Immigration bill sticker shock

A government study puts the cost of the Senate's version of reform at $127 billion over 10 years.
By Gail Russell Chaddock |

Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor

WASHINGTON
The price tag for comprehensive immigration reform was not a key issue when the Senate passed its bill last May. But it is now.

One reason: It took the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) - the gold standard for determining what a bill will cost - until last week to estimate that federal spending for this vast and complex bill would hit $127 billion over the next 10 years.

At the same time, federal revenues would drop by about $79 billion, according to the CBO and the Joint Committee on Taxation. If lawmakers fix a tax glitch, that loss would be cut in half, they add.

In field hearings across the nation this month, House GOP leaders are zeroing in on the costs of the Senate bill. It's a bid to define the issue heading into fall elections and muster support for the House bill, which focuses on border security. They say that the more people know about the Senate version, including a path to citizenship for some 11 million people now in the country illegally, the less they will be inclined to support it.

"We are now just beginning to see a glimpse of the staggering burden on American taxpayers the Reid-Kennedy immigration legislation contains," said House Judiciary Committee Chairman James Sensenbrenner, who convened a field hearing at the State House in Concord, N.H., Thursday on the costs of the Senate bill.

But business groups and others backing the Senate bill say that the cost to the US economy of not resolving the status of illegal immigrants and expanding guest-worker programs is higher still. "In my opinion, the fairer question is: How will illegal immigrants impact the costs of healthcare, local education, and social services without passage of comprehensive immigration reform?" said John Young, co-chairman of the Agriculture Coalition for Immigration Reform, at Thursday's hearing.

"Had we solved this problem in a truly comprehensive way in 1986 ... we would not have the daily news reporting outright shortages of farm labor threatening the very existence of agricultural industries coast to coast," he adds.

Experts are poring over the new CBO data - and coming up with radically different assessments of the social costs of reform, ranging from tens of billions of dollars higher to a net wash.

On the issue of border security - a feature in both bills - there is little disagreement. The CBO estimates that the cost of hardening US borders in the Senate bill is $78.3 billion over 10 years, or about 62 percent of the bill's total cost.

The fireworks involve new entitlement spending in the Senate version. The CBO sets the price tag for services for some 16 million new citizens and guest workers at $48.4 billion through fiscal year 2016. That includes $24.5 billion for earned income and child tax credits, $11.7 billion for Medicaid, $5.2 billion for Social Security, $3.7 billion for Medicare, and $2.4 billion for food stamps.

But it's easier to estimate the cost of a mile of fence than to assess the prospects for millions of workers, once they can work legally and claim benefits.

"The amnesty alone will be the largest expansion of the welfare system in the last 25 years," says Robert Rector, a senior analyst at the Heritage Foundation, and a witness at a House Judiciary Committee field hearing in San Diego Aug. 2. "Welfare costs will begin to hit their peak around 2021, because there are delays in citizenship. The very narrow time horizon [the CBO is] using is misleading," he adds. "If even a small fraction of those who come into the country stay and get on Medicaid, you're looking at costs of $20 billion or $30 billion per year."

Nonsense, say others who've studied the bill. Immigrant workers are also adding value to the economy, especially once they are working legally and paying taxes. Overall, it's a wash, they say.

"As you increase the number of immigrants to the US and as they get better jobs because a number of them will have attained legal status, they will pay higher taxes," says Leighton Ku, senior fellow at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities in Washington. "On a longer-run basis, it looks as if the revenues will grow faster than the entitlement costs."
 
#184
#184
CSpindizzy said:
I watched the report on your bud Lou Dobbs' show. Ed Lavanderas did a report and walked right through the gate that was clearly not secure right off the Rio Grande river. Surely something on you boy Dobbs is reliable right?
Click to expand...

If Lou said it that's good enough for me! Man, thank goodness for people like Lou looking out for us!:thumbsup:
 
#186
#186
#187
#187
CSpindizzy said:
Dense. Completely dense. We cannot enforce them because of lack of manpower plus resources. This bill adds to both. Shocking that cocept doesn't sink in. Maybe repeating yet again will work.

:crazy: :crazy:
Click to expand...

Lack of manpower. I guess the president has exhausted the use of the military on the border? Or is it more that he really does not see it as an issue.

It does not take 900 pages to get manpower and resources into place. It is a simple task. Didn't sink in Cspinn, you are just too far above me.
 
#188
#188
GAVol said:
I think if you'll be condescending just a few more times, you'll convince everybody that you're right.
Click to expand...

Well when someone completely ignores what I said, I have no choice but to be condescending to that person. It's sad when you repeat something multiple times and someone still doesn't bother reading it but chooses to take something out of context.
 
#191
#191
CSpindizzy said:
Well when someone completely ignores what I said, I have no choice but to be condescending to that person. It's sad when you repeat something multiple times and someone still doesn't bother reading it but chooses to take something out of context.
Click to expand...

OK Cspinn, you have not done this as well?
 
#193
#193
allvol123 said:
Lack of manpower. I guess the president has exhausted the use of the military on the border? Or is it more that he really does not see it as an issue.

It does not take 900 pages to get manpower and resources into place. It is a simple task. Didn't sink in Cspinn, you are just too far above me.
Click to expand...

Check his ability to do so. States are reluctant to give up the NG resources and the military is reserved for Iraq and potentially Iran. You know, fight them over there so we don't have to over here.

And doing so costs money. You need approval for that. That won't happen. It doesn't take 900 pages but it does take some pages.
 
#197
#197
CSpindizzy said:
Check his ability to do so. States are reluctant to give up the NG resources and the military is reserved for Iraq and potentially Iran. You know, fight them over there so we don't have to over here.

And doing so costs money. You need approval for that. That won't happen. It doesn't take 900 pages but it does take some pages.
Click to expand...

So he does not have the ability?

Men have to be fed and housed and trained no matter where they are. It would cost some more, but nothing that would bother people. You are right it does take some pages, and that I all I wanted.
 
#198
#198
allvol123 said:
Lack of manpower. I guess the president has exhausted the use of the military on the border? Or is it more that he really does not see it as an issue.
Click to expand...

You be the judge...

george-bush-aztlan-partisan.jpg
 
#199
#199
Since it takes money and Congressional approval for your method, how does that get passed? How do we stretch the military even more? Prepared to pay more for that? Do you support using the military along the Canadian border as well? All East and West Coast and Gulf Coast ports? All coastlines?
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top