Get Your Blog Up

“This administration is populated by people who’ve spent their careers bashing government. They’re not just small-government conservatives—they’re Grover Norquist, strangle-it-in-the-bathtub conservatives. It’s a cognitive disconnect for them to be able to do something well in an arena that they have so derided and reviled all these years.”

Senator Hillary Clinton

Wednesday, April 05, 2006

Tougher on immigration

Let me see if I have this right. The way to appear tough on immigration for the hardline conservatives is to vote for a weaker version of Kennedy/McCain?
While the McCain-Kennedy plan would apply equally to all immigrants who arrived in the United States before January 2004, the Hagel-Martinez proposal would make people who arrived between January 2001 and January 2004 climb steeper hurdles to obtain legal status.

Neither plan offers legalization to immigrants who have entered the country illegally since January 2004.

The estimated 3 million illegal immigrants who have been in the country two to five years would have to go to one of 16 designated points of entry within the next three years and apply to stay legally as a temporary worker. But they would be given no guarantee of getting permanent residency or citizenship.

The big difference then, is for those who have been here since '01. They would more than likely remain illegals, because they won't want to go back to the border. So the "tough on illegals stance" means that five years in the country deserves the same thing that's been decried as "amnesty", but 4 years and 360 days doesn't. Oh, and the bill wouldn't have a Democrat's name attached to it either, even though it's roughly the same idea.

Sounds way tough to me.

Setting the bar at five years or three years is just an arbitrary point. It's still going to have an adverse impact on families that now have legal sons and daughters here in the country, and we shouldn't tear them apart. So I say, if the bill passes April 10th, make that the day of denial.