Does anyone else think that illegal aliens should not be given any government assistance except to evict them?
Answer:
If mexican culture means waving a flag in protest to our laws as a nation of them, or Billboards completely in Spanish .in America..then to hell with your culture.it's all about my culture in my country!~ You know that for hundreds of years flags on foreign soil represent conquering land- so your culture is Americas enemy!~ A culture of crime and child birth! no thanks!
I totally agree with you! If you were an illegal and getting everything without paying into the system why would you want to come out of the shadows and be held accountable for your responsibility to the U.S. and start to pay or be sued, jail or ruined credit.
i agree with you...and i believe that if they live here...they should be out on the front lines with the men and women in iraq fighting for this country.
I absolutley agree,And you should be celebrating our senators have listened to the publics wishes ,the bill will not be signed,and is on the back burner to more important issues,YAHOOOOOOOOImmigration bill suffers a big setback By JULIE HIRSCHFELD DAVIS, Associated Press Writer
14 minutes ago
WASHINGTON - A broad immigration bill to legalize millions of people in the U.S. unlawfully suffered a stunning setback in the Senate Thursday, costing President Bush perhaps his best opportunity to win a top domestic priority.
ADVERTISEMENT
The bipartisan compromise championed by the president failed a crucial test when it could not attract even a simple majority for an effort to speed its passage.
Intense public concern over immigration across the country conspired with high political stakes to produce a roiling debate on the issue. Ultimately, those forces overwhelmed a painstakingly forged liberal-to-conservative alliance that sought to insulate their compromise from partisanship.
Supporters could muster only 45 votes to limit debate and speed the bill to final passage, 15 short of what was needed on the procedural maneuver. Fifty senators voted against cutting off debate.
Most Republicans voted to block Democrats' efforts to advance the measure.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (news, bio, voting record), D-Nev., who had made no secret of his distaste for parts of the bill, quickly pulled it from the floor and moved on to other business, leaving its future uncertain.
He insisted that the bill was not dead, but a crowded Senate calendar complicates its prospects.
"I, even though disappointed, look forward to passing this bill," Reid said. "I have every desire to complete this legislation, and we all have to work — the president included — to figure out a way to get this bill passed."
The measure's chances are even murkier in the House, where Democratic leaders don't plan to act on the divisive issue until the Senate has finished work on it.
Sen. Mitch McConnell (news, bio, voting record), R-Ky., the minority leader, said Democrats tried to rush the bill.
"I think we're giving up on this bill too soon," McConnell said.
The legislation would tighten borders and institute a new system to prevent employers from hiring undocumented workers, in addition to giving up to 12 million illegal immigrants a pathway to legal status.
Conceived by an improbable coalition that nicknamed the deal a "grand bargain," the measure exposes deep rifts within both parties and is loathed by most GOP conservatives.
All but seven Republicans voted against ending debate, with many arguing they needed more time to make the bill tougher with tighter border security measures and a more arduous legalization process for unlawful immigrants. Thirty-eight Republicans and Sen. Bernard Sanders (news, bio, voting record), a Vermont independent, opposed the procedural tactic.
All but 11 Democrats supported the move, but they, too, were holding their noses at provisions of the bill. Many of them argued it makes second-class citizens of a new crop of temporary workers and rips apart families by prioritizing employability over blood ties in future immigration.
Thirty-seven Democrats and Sen. Joseph Lieberman (news, bio, voting record), a Connecticut independent, voted to advance the measure.
Proponents had argued that the bill, on balance, was worth advancing.
"We can all find different aspects of this legislation that we differ with," said Sen. Edward M. Kennedy of Massachusetts, the leading Democratic architect of the bill.
He held out hope after the vote that the measure would survive. "Doing nothing is not an alternative," Kennedy said. "This issue isn't going away."
"I believe that we will yet succeed," said Sen. Arlen Specter (news, bio, voting record), R-Pa., a framer of the bill who was one of few in his party who backed the procedural move.
The defeat for the compromise was the culmination of a week of ups and downs for the contentious immigration measure, which mirrored the tumultuous process that went into crafting it.
Kennedy partnered with Sen. Jon Kyl (news, bio, voting record), R-Ariz., and several centrists to craft a bill that melded conservative themes of tougher border security and limiting immigration with the liberal goal of legalizing those who are in the U.S. unlawfully and welcoming future arrivals.
In the end, however, Kyl broke from the bipartisan clique that hatched the agreement, siding with Republicans who said they hadn't gotten enough chances to toughen the bill.
"It's time to scrap this mess of a bill," said Sen. Jim DeMint (news, bio, voting record), R-S.C., a conservative who had failed in several attempts to make the measure more punitive toward illegal immigrants.
Liberal groups, which had pressed hard for the measure's passage despite their many complaints about its elements, were dismayed at Thursday's result.
Frank Sharry, the executive director of the National Immigration Forum, called the vote "a huge disappointment to immigrant communities and those seeking a solution to the dysfunctional immigration system in America."
"We fear the result was a matter of politicians — particularly Republicans — not wanting to confront obstinate members of their own parties in order to let the majority's will — and the people's will — prevail.
The raucous congressional debate over immigration reflected the cloudy public sentiment about the issue demonstrated in recent polls.
A survey conducted May 30-June 3 by the nonpartisan Pew Research Center for the People and the Press found overwhelming support — among two-thirds of the public — for giving illegal immigrants citizenship if they have jobs, pass background checks and pay fines.
But people were fairly ill-informed about the complex Senate measure, which less than one-third said they had heard a lot about.
Those who had heard at least a little about it were split on the Senate measure, which melds conservative themes of tougher border security and limiting immigration with the liberal goal of legalizing those who are in the U.S. unlawfully and welcoming future arrivals.
Of that group, 33 percent favor the bill, 41 percent oppose and 26 percent gave no response or said they didn't know. Republicans opposed it by 43 to 36 percent, Democrats by 37 to 33 percent, and independents by 46 to 31 percent.
___
The bill is S.1348.
That's the laws of the land if only they were enforced.
are you a caymanian who hates different races of people? this whole damn world belongs to everyone. how come you think that because your a citizen of a particular place that you can kick those who are not a citizen like you.
Look at the past. In the 80's Reagan gave amnesty to illegals then. Did it prevent any more from crossing our borders since then?
This bill that is being proposed by both parties is BS and they know it! If they give these illegal aliens a path to citizenship(amnesty), then more will come and the same thing will happen again. WE DO NOT HAVE BORDER SECURITY that is effective YET!
Officially, illegals can't get welfare, but the government is hardly serious. The illegals run up welfare on one stolen social security number, then when it runs out, they steal another. Anchor babies is another way in which they help themselves. If the government itself won't check SSNs, certainly private employers won't or can't. We need to put a stop to this.
You have just stated the essence of why rational people oppose the illegal invasion, which to this point has been rammed down our throat by some scumbags in Washington. I saved a list of the 'Yea' voters, so that I know who really cares about our country.
What motivation do citizens have to pay taxes if they are not the beneficiaries of them? Why do libs think it's an American instinct (or obligation) to act as surrogate parents to all people in the world who come from failed societies like Mexico?
When 51% of the population becomes tax consumers as opposed to tax payers, society collapses. Even the socialist dream world promoted by the far left democrats... it just won't work. My contingency plan, if American citizens sit idly by and watch this country turn into Mexico, is to immigrate to Australia. Legally, of course.
Rosa, man, you are just fascinating.
So because an undocumented immigrant goes to a hospital and receives help or aid they should be deported. So should all the people who are here legally be deported who don't work and receive aid?
As it is, undocumented workers are unable to receive welfare but do pay into taxes for your information. They also pay into Medicare and Social Security system that they do not qualify to receive. So where is all this money? Ask your government! Someone has it, it's not the immigrants fault the government doesnt know how to handle money!
As for the immigration reform... just because this one didn't pass trust me, it was a stupid reform Presented by Bush. Let's wait till the real Presidents get it... the Democrats. Then you'll be wishing you hadn't said anything.
You know how many Citizens don't work, are unemployed? More than 67% look it up! Yet the immigrants get the fault for the strain on the economy... who's taking advantage of it, not them they can't get anything back.
Get over your almighty selves this country was built by immigrants for immigrants!
You`re right on it !! Here`s my question to the people who favor ILLEGAL Amnesty ! If an ILLEGAL "breaks our laws" to sneak in our country , what in God`s name makes` you think the ILLEGALS will "OBEY OUR LAWS" when they are here ?? Give the Liberals a dictionary and have them look up thr definition of " ILLEGAL" ; "SNEAK" , "CITIZEN" , and "ALIEN".....For FOXAMERICA.. The democrats held both houses of Congress under President Reagan , and guess who sponsored the Amnesty Bill you are speaking of in 1986 ?? TED KENNEDY !! Go Figure ?
I absolutely agree. Seems like here in Tx, since Bush became president he let them all over here just because his sister in law is Mexican. Mexicans are giving all hispanics a bad name. Myself, being of Spanish heritage am sometimes called Mexican even though I look completely white. They come over here pregnant, and ironically go into labor within hours of swimming across. We all know they drink Comino (Cumin) tea to induce the baby and come into the ER to have it. Some have multiple Medicaid accounts. Why do we give them assistance? I cant even get my Social Security card changed into my married name and I was declined in a letter by a hispanic SS office rep. But can they? SURE THEY CAN! I think that Mexicans who have any signs of Mexico on their clothing, a flag, or even speak Spanish in America and expect us to do the same need to be catapulted back to Mexico @ once. In Houston English barely exists. Our crime has shot up to the 2nd most in the nation, because of them!
Illegal aliens should get a one way ticket home
I'm right there with you, and agree 100%.
For Rosa:
"So because an undocumented immigrant goes to a hospital and receives help or aid they should be deported."
Damn straight.
"So should all the people who are here legally be deported who don't work and receive aid?"
No - because (get this!!) they're here LEGALLY.
Wrap your head around that little concept.
And if you're whining about how they're allegedly paying into a system that they can't qualify to receive, whose problem is that? Theirs. If they were here LEGALLY (translated: NOT BREAKING THE LAW), it would be a different story.
I definitely feel the same way. Also they should be given an affadavit of birth but no birth certificates for the anchor babies. I think their hospital use should be stopped as they are closing hospitals vital to our citizens by not paying for their services. If you can't prove citizenship or legal status no public assistance of any kind should be provided. It sounds harsh but again, we're not a charitable institution, we're a nation that's being invaded by illegals. We can't afford them now or ever. I don't even think we should provide them a way home, they came here with no help from our government, we owe them nothing. I wish I could feel differently but they make it impossible by being so demanding. We need to enforce the laws! They'll go home of their own volition when the hand outs stop. I won't even get started on their abuse of our education system.
The Immigration information post by website user , MyTend.com not guarantee correctness.
More Immigration Questions and Answers ...