Bush's Temporary Working Program

[charmie]

Does anyone of you know if the congress already approved the proposal of Pres.Bush???
If yes, what will be the 1st thing to do to apply for the program?
thank you

[charmie]

Does anyone of you know if the congress already approved the proposal of Pres.Bush???
If yes, what will be the 1st thing to do to apply for the program?
thank you

[chuck]

this only proposal at this time. tom daschel and chuck hagel have also made a proposal in senate which is more liberal. both are only proposed. they have to go thru complete process which is sometime in future if it gets that far. i have hope.

[E.]

President has done a great thing by bringing this problem into the focus of our Lawmakers.

Now it is up to congress to decide how to deal with the presence of 10 mln undocumented population here.
Whatever they decide, it should be done as soon as possible.
For security reasons undocumented population should either be granted a temporary legal status or forcibly deported at once.
This kind of situation can't go on for too long.

[Still Learning]

Why can't it go on for "long"? It's gone on for YEARS. I can see them trying to deport everyone.....

[SAMMY]

As far as this "Guest Worker" program goes, then I believe you guys should know the following:

[1] This "Guest Worker" program that President Bush has suggested is NOT an immigrant visa or a green card so that people could live here permanently. Instead, it is a non-immigrant visa, which is temporary in nature, and would be good for 3 yrs only, but it can be extended one more time for another 3 yrs if alien can fulfill its further requirements for its extension. There won't be any automatic extension on this after first 3 yrs of its validity. With that in fact, aliens will be allowed to stay for maximum six year. This guest worker program won't lead them to have green card automatically in the future as many of them heard from lots of people. Because, in order to have permanent visa or green card, aliens still need to be sponsored thru employer or family members as the way it is now. Thereby, lots of people and critics are questioning that what would happen after those 3 or 6 yrs? Will aliens be forced to leave the country? As you know, lots of people might be buying houses or cars if they are going to stay here for that long, and their children would be going to school too here during those years, so after those years, will they be forced to sell their houses, cars and would need to compromise their children's ongoing education? If these people, who are illegal here, wanted to live here for just 3-6 yrs only, then they would have returned back to their homeland already by now, rather than staying here illegally for that long. So, they are not here for 3-6 yrs only.

[2] I heard lots of people saying this, and I also watched President Bush's statements time to time, wherein President Bush has been emphasizing on ˜family unification', but if this temporary visa is only for 3-6 yrs, then how would it unite the family, since lots of illegal aliens have families here who are either USC or LPR, like either spouse, children or parents, or siblings?

[3] In order to be eligible for this "Guest Worker" visa, aliens still need an employer to sponsor them, and employer still needs to go thru all the requirements with U.S. Labor Dept wherein employer will need to prove to Labor Dept. that there is no qualified Americans for that particular job, and employer will also need to provide the proofs that they are able to provide the prevailing wages to aliens if aliens are allowed to work for them. So, my point is-isn't it the same requirements are needed for Immigrant visa? If someone has to go thru all these things then why they will settle for nonimmigrant visa, when they can go for immigrant visa for a permanent right to live here? How this ˜guest worker' program is differed than employment based green card when the formalities and requirements are same? I don't think that- illegal people who are here for so long would come out of shadow just for stay here for 3-6 yrs only, because they are not looking to live here legally for 3-6 yrs, especially when they will know that they will end up in the same situation after 3-6 yrs where they are now. I think they are looking for some kind of permanent legal status. But the truth is, President Bush has made very clear in his State of the Union address that his administration is not going to grant blanket amnesty to illegal, because then it would undermine our immigration laws, and it would be a reward to those who broke our laws deliberately, and it will encourage illegal immigration.

[4] I heard lots of people saying that why this program is introduced only now when election is around the corner? Why it was not introduced before when President Bush had enough time [4 yrs] to bring this up? Critics are saying that it is purely a political move to get mostly Latino votes.

[5] As you know this is only a proposal, and nothing else. As well, I am sure that nothing will happen this year on this proposal. As you know-they have debated 245(i) since 2001 and still there is nothing on that, so you can guess how long it will take. And, there is no guarantee either that the Bill for this proposal will ever be passed in the Congress. Matter of fact, it is seemed that it will never pass in the Congress, because even mostly Republicans are against of this proposal. Truth of the matter is- the republican majority leader in the house- Tom Delay has said in an interview with CNN on 23rd of this month that he wants to see more restrictive version of this proposal. He wants every illegal aliens to go back to their country first and then apply from there for this guest worker program. He said that he would push very hard for this amendment into this proposal, because otherwise it will be same as if we are rewarding to lawbreakers, who broke our laws deliberately, regardless of this proposal is for nonimmigrant visa or immigrant visa. He was also stating that he is going to purpose another important amendment into it wherein he will purpose to enforce the immigration laws by local law enforcement agencies like Europe. As you know that once a law is made then no State can deny following the law because Federal laws always supercede State laws.

I don't know if Govt. can deport every illegal, but I do know for sure that if other law enforcement agencies will enforce immigration laws, then govt. would be able to track down illegal in most of situation, as in Europe. But, I know this amendment would compromise civil liberty, but govt. will argue national interest and national security over civil liberty as they did on passing Patriot law. I guess we all need to wait for time, because Time will only tell what is going to happen in the future.

[acelaw]

You have the clear act that has passed the house that will make states enforce Federal law, how would this violate civil liberties?


The CLEAR Act of 2003
Posted by niel (October 31, 2003 01:59 PM)
The Clear Law Enforcement for Criminal Alien Removal Act of 2003, sponsored by Rep. Charlie Norwood (R-GA), would encourage local and state police departments to "investigate, apprehend, detain, or remove aliens" discovered in the course of their normal law enforcement duties. This encouragement would come in the form of the witholding of funds that would otherwise be allocated to the state or locality under other laws.
Most of the opposition to this legislation has come from immigration advocacy groups; other groups have focused on the unfunded mandate requiring the use of state and local officials to enforce federal law.
However, a much overlooked aspect of the legislation is the unprecedented step toward a police state in the United States. Under this legislation, every police officer would have the right "” indeed, the responsibility "” to ask anyone they stop in the routine performance of their duties for proof of their legal status. Presumably the police would use their judgement as to whether any individual was likely to be an illegal immigrant; I'll give you one guess as to which racial group is least likely to be asked for their passport or green card.
The United States has never required that its citizens carry proof of their citizenship, and to give local police the ability to demand "your papers, please" is a dangerous step on the slippery slope towards a police state.

[AliBA]

Sammy--Enforcement could be stepped up against employers, thereby drying up jobs illegal aliens hold. No need for deportation. No work, no welfare, no way to support yourself here. Many, if not most, will leave.

[E.]

I think government must be clear and consistent in its intentions and implementation of its laws.
It should not send out double signal to the community, closing its eyes on illegal aliens on one hand and promising to CLEAR them all on the other.
That is not right.
It actually demoralizes both the Law Enforcement and Citizens, and confuses those Illegal aliens who don't know what to expect and thus hopelessly wait for solution that never comes.
I would support ANY swift, honest and CLEAR decision, whatever it be.
If it is CLEAR Act then let's be clear about it.
If it is Temporary or Permanent Residence-then let us make that clear to everyone.
I am sure if government was consistent and sent steady, firm handed message, many of the illegals would leave voluntarily knowing that there is no future for them in the States.
And the Law Enforcement could then focus on those stubborn and foolish lawbreakers who still ignored its' demands to leave.
That is all I have to say.
And that is why I said earlier:this should not go on for too long.

I would also suggest to inform public about the facts, costs of legalizing and deporting illegals, benefits of doing the either one. And then hold Nationwide polls and let congress take the will of people into account.And ACT.ACT whatever action it might be.
ACT but not uselessly talk or deliberate for a decade.

That is all I can say.

[AliBA]

We already have had national polls (Gallup and such) which show Americans want less immigration overall and no amnesty for illegal aliens. But that doesn't matter to Congress and other public officials. They get most of their money (campaign funds, lobbying jobs after they're out of Congress, etc.) from special interests such as corporations and ethnic lobbies. Even with a jobless recovery, Bush's White House is trying to "spin" a "guest worker" program as something the U.S. needs. Now, instead of "filling jobs Americans won't do", the White House is trying to convince the public that if only we legalize illegal aliens, that will increase security. How such a program would accomplish this is open to question. Most wouldn't sign up if it means a chance they'd have to return home after 3 or 6 years. If they're violent criminals or terrorists, they probably wouldn't show up anyway. Without security checks (which would divert manpower away from other terrorism efforcts) and enforcement (actually going after people who don't sign up and deporting them), a "guest worker" program accomplishes nothing. Certainly nothing that couldn't be done without the expense and delays that such a program would create.

[acelaw]

E.
How much clearer do you need the law then this ?


Under Title 8 Section 1325 of the U.S. Code, "Improper Entry by Alien," any citizen of any country other than the United States who:

Enters or attempts to enter the United States at any time or place other than as designated by immigration officers; or

Eludes examination or inspection by immigration officers; or

Attempts to enter or obtains entry to the United States by a willfully false or misleading representation or the willful concealment of a material fact;
has committed a federal crime.

Violations are punishable by criminal fines and imprisonment for up to six months. Repeat offenses can bring up to two years in prison. Additional civil fines may be imposed at the discretion of immigration judges, but civil fines do not negate the criminal sanctions or nature of the offense

It should not send out double signal to the community, closing its eyes on illegal aliens on one hand and promising to CLEAR them all on the other.
That is not right.

We have increased the budget of INS/BICE to 7 Billion from
$500,000 in 1975 to try and stop this , we do not have unlimited resources to spend here so where is the double signal we send ? We have a law , we have a well defined border , none of it maters to those who break into this country and overrun our security services then blame us for there actions,that victim hood thing again HUH?We forced you to come and violate our laws. LOLOL

[E.]

Acelaw, you know VERY well what I am talking about.
The LAW that is not enforced is no better than a PAPER.
I said ACT not TALK.
Congress has the power to enact the law that will FORCE ALL LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES in US to cooperate and enforce the Immigration Laws within the border.
AND DON'T TELL ME IT CAN'T BE DONE!
JUST LOOK AT I.R.S. !!!

This talk(about illegals and not enforcing the law) is useless and is good only for those who benefit from cursing them.

Good thing would be to ACT, one way or another.

And, Acelaw, you know well what I mean when I say "double message".
I mean THE FACT that for many years there are contradictory laws that are debated in congress regarding this issue and none ever gets passed.

So, what a young, 16 year old must think when there is a DREAM Act that has bipartisan support on one hand and at the same time a CLEAR ACT , and none actually ever signed to law.
Should he wait, hope for DREAM ACT to be enacted or should he leave before CLEAR ACT, avoiding unesessary arrest and humiliating enforcement of the immigration law?

Now, when there is no action but only contradictory talk-that is what "double message" is!

And BY THE WAY, ACELAW, LEARN TO READ!!!
I AM NOT A MEXICAN AND I DID NOT CROSS BORDER ILLEGALLY!!!!

Great Lord!
No wonder you can't comprehend and respond to simple postings, leave alone the "complicated" ones like this one.

[SKS]

Eazy-E

Don't get too worked up over acelaw.....he is a lost soul. You hit the nail on the head, and it is something I've stated this whole time.

You are describing what I like to call "lipservice". PROVE to me, and you, that something will get done........

Bah. I like the ol' "Well, the wheels are in motion." That one is my favorite because it has been used too much and means nothing.

OUR Congress ain't gonna do anything real serious either one way or the other......

And as far as being labeled a Mexican and/or border crosser, that is acelaw's favorite thing to do. Anybody that disagrees with him, is somehow an illegal immigrant Mexican. He did the same routine with me, saying I was somehow involved in the group La Raza, which I know nothing about......

Just get used to his B.S. and spin, and take it in stride.

[Pasha Patel]

sorry wrong thread

[acelaw]

E
And, Acelaw, you know well what I mean when I say "double message".
I mean THE FACT that for many years there are contradictory laws that are debated in congress regarding this issue and none ever gets passed.

There is Bills debated in congress all the time , HAVE BEEN FOR OVER 200 YEARS . They are not LAWS or even close to being laws, listen closely we have LAWS ON THE BOOKS NOW , THOSE ARE THE ONES WE FOLLOW UNTIL CHANGED!!!SO IF YOU BROKE THEM,THEN YOU/they ARE A CRIMINAL PLAIN AND SIMPLE!!!! You don't enter a country illegally ,then hang out waiting for the laws to change and then when they don't you throw a fit!!!! Where are you from!!!!

Here is a BILL, not a law! that has been referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce. A date has not been set for a vote on the bill by committee members for referral to the floor for a full vote.
So if you read more into this then what it is ,just talk right now,that's your fault because you have not taken the time to learn how our government works NOW HAVE YOU????

Bill would require fingerprinting of undocumented aliens by ER staff
By MICHAEL A. SALORIO, Staff Writer
WASHINGTON, D.C. "” Emergency room staff would have to fingerprint or photograph any undocumented immigrant they treat and report the patient to the Department of Homeland Security to begin deportation procedures if a bill introduced here Wednesday is enacted.
Rep. Dana Rohrabacher, R-Huntington Beach, introduced House Resolution 3722, also referreds to as the Undocumented Alien Emergency Medical Assistance Amendments of 2004.
The bill seeks to amend section 1011 of the recently enacted Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement and Modernization Act of 2003. Section 1011 provides $1 billion to reimburse hospitals for the costs of treating undocumented immigrants. The bill would impose conditions on federal reimbursement of emergency health services furnished to these patients.
The U.S.-Mexico Border Counties Coalition funded a study in 2000 that found the 24 counties adjacent to the Mexican border spent $190 million to provide emergency care to undocumented immigrants that year. Of all the border states, California spent the most treating undocumented immigrants with unreimbursed expenditures at $79 million. Texas came in second with $74 million, Arizona at third with $31 million and New Mexico fourth with $6 million.
In a December 2003 story published in the Press, El Centro Regional Medical Center chief executive officer David Green said the hospital incurs an estimated $1.7 to $2 million annually treating undocumented immigrants.
In that same story, a hospital official said 80 percent of those costs are incurred by the hospital's emergency room where an average of 10 undocumented immigrants were treated each month in 2003 and 14 a month in 2002.
Personnel with Pioneers Memorial Hospital in Brawley were unable to provide the level of losses incurred by the hospital's emergency room treating undocumented immigrants. Additionally, the number of undocumented immigrants treated each month in the hospital's emergency room was unavailable.
Rohrabacher was opposed to the Medicare bill passed last year because of the $1 billion in funding it provided to hospitals for reimbursement of their costs associated with treating undocumented immigrants.
Federal law mandates hospitals treat anyone requiring emergency care and prohibits a patient being denied treatment on the basis they cannot afford to pay. The $1 billion in the Medicare bill marked the first time the federal government made money available to hospitals to reimburse their costs incurred by treating undocumented immigrants.
GOP leaders promised Rohrabacher they would bring his immigration proposal to a vote this year in exchange for his vote on the Medicare bill.
"I opposed that and I was not going to vote for the Medicare bill because of that, but the leadership in the House agreed that if I would vote for the Medicare bill, that I could write legislation that would, in some way, mitigate the damage that I felt was inherent in providing U.S. tax dollars officially to pay for services, health services, for people who have come to this country or are currently in this country illegally," said Rohrabacher during his speech on the House floor introducing his legislation.
"Our health care system, our emergency rooms are breaking down under the pressure and the strain of illegal immigrants. And that is what leads me to the legislation which I introduced today," said Rohrabacher.
Hospitals would still be eligible for federal funding for treating undocumented immigrants under Rohrabacher's bill. However, in order to be reimbursed hospitals would have to ask patients if they are U.S. citizens or not.
If the patient answers they are a U.S. citizen, no further action is required by the hospital. If the patient answers he or she is not a citizen, the hospital would then fingerprint or photograph the patient and contact the Department of Homeland Security to report the patient's immigration status, address and the name of their employer.
The bill directs the Department of Homeland Security to begin deportation proceedings against any patient who is an undocumented immigrant. Employers of these patients would be required to reimburse the federal government for the Medicare money paid to hospitals.
Dr. Michael Berger, emergency room director at Pioneers Memorial, said hospital staff would be required as a matter of law to follow the provisions of Rohrabacher's bill if it were to be enacted.
Berger said that although the bill might make undocumented immigrants apprehensive in coming to the hospital to receive treatment, word would quickly spread that all they would have to do is answer ˜Yes' to the citizenship question since there is no requirement the hospital verify patients are citizens if they answer so.
"It doesn't seem to have much teeth. If you just ask people and ask for no proof ... it's kind of hollow. ... Bottom line, this seems like a weak bill. ... Your heart is in the right place but your head isn't, Mr. Congressman," said Berger.
Elise Bryant, spokeswoman for El Centro Regional, said the hospital had no official position on the proposed legislation in light of the proximity to the date it was introduced.
Bryant added Rohrabacher's legislation might conflict with the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act of 1986 that prohibits hospitals from asking patients financial status questions, under which citizenship queries would fall, until after the patient has been treated.
Rohrabacher on the House floor said: "It is just a couple of more questions to be asked routinely in the process in which they are already being asked questions before they treat patients."
"The way it reads, the congressman is proposing upon admission they ask whether they are a citizen. That would violate EMTALA," said Bryant.
Jan Emerson, spokeswoman for the California Healthcare Association, an association of hospitals whose members include El Centro Regional and Pioneers Memorial, said the organization is opposed to Rohrabacher's legislation.
"When a person comes into an emergency room under current legislation we're not allowed to ask a patient if they have health insurance or if they are a citizen. We first must treat them," said Emerson.
The legislation is not practical because undocumented immigrants would figure out they only have to answer "Yes" to the citizenship question and give a false address and phone number, added Emerson.
"Our mission is not to be the INS. Our mission is to heal. Our job is not to be an INS agent. It's the federal government's job," said Emerson.
Rep. Bob Filner, D-Chula Vista, said the purpose of hospitals is to heal patients and not to be a law enforcement agencies. Filner added he doubts the bill will become law.
"Hospitals are there to treat the sick and injured and not there to be police agencies. ... It's an incredibly mean-spirited approach to a real problem. What we need to do is reimburse hospitals for treating anyone that is undocumented and have a policy with Mexico that would help them bring down their rate of emigration. This is a horrible bill," said Filner.
Rohrabacher's bill has been referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce. A date has not been set for a vote on the bill by committee members for referral to the floor for a full vote.


So, what a young, 16 year old must think when there is a DREAM Act that has bipartisan support on one hand and at the same time a CLEAR ACT , and none actually ever signed to law.
Should he wait, hope for DREAM ACT to be enacted or should he leave before CLEAR ACT, avoiding unesessary arrest and humiliating enforcement of the immigration law?

HE SHOULD OF OBEYED THE LAWS OF OUR COUNTRY TO START WITH, GET IT!!!!!HE SHOULD NOT EVEN BE IN HERE TO WORRY ABOUT IT, GET IT!!!

Now, when there is no action but only contradictory talk-that is what "double message" is!

What has this to do with people who have violated our laws and entered this country ILLEGALY ????So what there is talk until it becomes law , THAT'S ALL IT IS!!!!

And BY THE WAY, ACELAW, LEARN TO READ!!!
I AM NOT A MEXICAN AND I DID NOT CROSS BORDER ILLEGALLY!!!!


Did I ever say you were?????