Double Exposure, Inc.
August 20, 2008, 02:13:06 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Bottom of the Box date TBD; location TBD. More information will be available soon!
 
Home Help Search Calendar Login Register
Pages: [1] 2 3 4   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: For those who are curious...  (Read 1859 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Oni no Ted
Demonic Admin
Super Meeper
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 522


All your browser are belong to us


WWW
« on: May 31, 2007, 12:41:43 AM »

The Immigration bill currently in the Senate

This thing is HUGE (790 pages)

Your tax dollars at work  Undecided

As a side note, this bill was sponsored by a swindler (Reid) and worse (Kennedy)
« Last Edit: May 31, 2007, 12:43:52 AM by Oni no Ted » Logged

LucasJamison
?
Avatars
Super Meeper
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 558


« Reply #1 on: May 31, 2007, 01:50:49 PM »

's expensive, for sure - 10s to 100s of billions over the next 10 years.  It seems to do a reasonable job of hitting the key issues people are concerned about with regard to immigration, though.

The biggest effect on most people will be that when you apply for employment, you're going to have to start submitting the EINs of your employers for the previous 5 (completed) calendar years.  That's gonna make a huge mess for a while.  Anyone in HR will have to deal with the processing side of this and the EEVS they want to set up, too... but in the end it'll be just one more process.

It'll have a net result of driving most illegals off of payroll, anyway.  Not sure how various employers and criminals will try to work around this one yet.
Logged

eveilebotenoynaecrofnacenoonsevlesmehtrofdniftsumlla
hguorhtraelcsemocebllagnidnapxerevesillahtiwenoemoceb
otsiezilaerotesuactsujtuohtiwforewollofrehtonamrahton
tlahsuohtsdrawotseyeriehtnrutohwlladiallahsuoynahtrehgih
ecrofonezingocerllahsuoyotnrutersgnihtllamorfemocsgniht
llanaemedotsinialpxeot
Horace
Senior Staff
Senior Meeper
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 248



« Reply #2 on: June 02, 2007, 01:15:22 PM »

What I have heard, and this is by no means conclusive, is that this bill is pretty much a rehashing of the laws already in effect, with a few minor changes.
Wouldnt surprise me to find out this is true.
I mean, who would ever expect politicians to plaigerize old laws with a few new twists just to make it look like they were actually doing something?

Of course, the funniest (to me) and saddest part of the whole debate are those like kennedy who want to call anyone that wants the borders and laws enforced "racist". Personally I never knew crime was a race....
Logged

I'm not really as scary as some people think I am. (re something Julie said to me at reg one night)
Mark
Senior Staff
Senior Meeper
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 369


If you're leaving scorch marks get a bigger gun.


« Reply #3 on: June 03, 2007, 08:37:19 PM »

Does anyone think the people who will be voting on this beast have ANY CLUE what is really in it?

I'd love to see some massive legislation get passed with some obscure clause designating the 19th Wed. of the year as being National Pink Poka Dot day.  Then see is anyone catches it.
Logged

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all poker players are created equal, that they are endowed by their buy-in with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Raise, Call, Fold, and the pursuit of Pocket Aces.
Oni no Ted
Demonic Admin
Super Meeper
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 522


All your browser are belong to us


WWW
« Reply #4 on: June 03, 2007, 09:35:46 PM »

Does anyone think the people who will be voting on this beast have ANY CLUE what is really in it?

I'd love to see some massive legislation get passed with some obscure clause designating the 19th Wed. of the year as being National Pink Poka Dot day.  Then see is anyone catches it.

Scary thing is, this bill is small compared to some others I've seen. The last transportation monstrosity, er... I mean 'transportation omnibus budgetary bill' was over 1200 pages, and contained all kinds of 'creative construction' (A bridge to an island with 50 residents, cost $50,000,000 + overruns. Among other things)
Logged

LucasJamison
?
Avatars
Super Meeper
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 558


« Reply #5 on: June 04, 2007, 01:41:32 PM »

Of course, the funniest (to me) and saddest part of the whole debate are those like kennedy who want to call anyone that wants the borders and laws enforced "racist". Personally I never knew crime was a race....

The allegation being that they are not, in fact, seeking to enforce immigration laws out of a desire for justice, per se, but are instead motivated by xenophobia and/or racism.  This is the case for some percentage of those in favor of stricter border / immigration law enforcement, so the criticism isn't entirely out of left field. Entirely unfair, of course, that someone in politics should paint everyone in a given group with the same brush as its most distasteful members...
Logged

eveilebotenoynaecrofnacenoonsevlesmehtrofdniftsumlla
hguorhtraelcsemocebllagnidnapxerevesillahtiwenoemoceb
otsiezilaerotesuactsujtuohtiwforewollofrehtonamrahton
tlahsuohtsdrawotseyeriehtnrutohwlladiallahsuoynahtrehgih
ecrofonezingocerllahsuoyotnrutersgnihtllamorfemocsgniht
llanaemedotsinialpxeot
Horace
Senior Staff
Senior Meeper
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 248



« Reply #6 on: June 04, 2007, 06:03:55 PM »

The allegation being that they are not, in fact, seeking to enforce immigration laws out of a desire for justice, per se, but are instead motivated by xenophobia and/or racism.  This is the case for some percentage of those in favor of stricter border / immigration law enforcement, so the criticism isn't entirely out of left field. Entirely unfair, of course, that someone in politics should paint everyone in a given group with the same brush as its most distasteful members...

Well, the law of bad apples (the bigger the group, the more likely there is a bad apple) of course says that some who want the borders enforced, do so because they are racist.
But my reference was indeed in reguard to those who will paint everyone who wants the borders enforced as being racist. It is the same as calling someone racist because they want the airport security to look more closely at those who are statistically more likely to be terrorists than some 90 year old grandmother that can barely walk.
And its not just the politicians. Its also judges that will allow suits such as the "I put a cup of coffee with no lid between my legs and drove over a speed bump, its all mickey D's fault" or the "I'm too fat and lazy to cook for myself so its burger kings fault that I'm morbidly obese".

And it isnt political party either. Neither side are angels.
But this is all part of the reason that I hope to live long enough to see the Libertarian Party gain enough power nationally to see if they will carry out their promises to fix the laws (not just immigration) and the courts etc. or they are just more of the same old politicians wearing different hats.

Brian
Logged

I'm not really as scary as some people think I am. (re something Julie said to me at reg one night)
Alf Cunha
Avatar System Staff
Senior Meeper
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 431



« Reply #7 on: June 04, 2007, 07:11:46 PM »


Quote
It is the same as calling someone racist because they want the airport security to look more closely at those who are statistically more likely to be terrorists than some 90 year old grandmother that can barely walk.

**  Speaking as one of those folks who would most likely be profiled at the airport: I WANT to be stopped along with the other dark-skinned, Middle-Eastern looking passengers - the grandma with the 20 oz. bottle of Diet Pepsi and a set of nail clippers in her purse is NOT going to be taking down an international flight  Tongue
Logged

Alf Cunha
Item GM
SigmaCaine
House Galahad
Avatars
Super Meeper
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 506


Just a guy...


WWW
« Reply #8 on: June 05, 2007, 03:39:26 AM »

"I put a cup of coffee with no lid between my legs and drove over a speed bump, its all mickey D's fault"

Tangent:
Parroting and lack of research are the roots of many problems.
Logged

I dare you to tell me to walk through fire
Wear my soul and call me a liar
LucasJamison
?
Avatars
Super Meeper
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 558


« Reply #9 on: June 05, 2007, 11:58:11 AM »

Well, the law of bad apples (the bigger the group, the more likely there is a bad apple) of course says that some who want the borders enforced, do so because they are racist.  But my reference was indeed in reguard to those who will paint everyone who wants the borders enforced as being racist. It is the same as calling someone racist because they want the airport security to look more closely at those who are statistically more likely to be terrorists than some 90 year old grandmother that can barely walk. 

You specifically cited Kennedy as having done so.  I am unable to quickly find a quote of his where he does this - do you happen to have one available? 

And its not just the politicians. Its also judges that will allow suits such as the "I put a cup of coffee with no lid between my legs and drove over a speed bump, its all mickey D's fault" or the "I'm too fat and lazy to cook for myself so its burger kings fault that I'm morbidly obese".

I'm sorry, but... what are you talking about?  No one has successfully sued McDonalds or Burger King over those.  A judge in NY threw out a civil suit over something similar to the BK thing you reference here, a couple years ago.  Judges, even really hardline partisan ones, even ELECTED ones, are usually pretty good at doing things, if not the right way, then at least the legally defensible way.  Mostly.

And it isnt political party either. Neither side are angels.
But this is all part of the reason that I hope to live long enough to see the Libertarian Party gain enough power nationally to see if they will carry out their promises to fix the laws (not just immigration) and the courts etc. or they are just more of the same old politicians wearing different hats.

Don't even get me started on greeditarians...
Logged

eveilebotenoynaecrofnacenoonsevlesmehtrofdniftsumlla
hguorhtraelcsemocebllagnidnapxerevesillahtiwenoemoceb
otsiezilaerotesuactsujtuohtiwforewollofrehtonamrahton
tlahsuohtsdrawotseyeriehtnrutohwlladiallahsuoynahtrehgih
ecrofonezingocerllahsuoyotnrutersgnihtllamorfemocsgniht
llanaemedotsinialpxeot
Frigemall
Da Pope!
Avatars
Super Meeper
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 614


Living on a bomb and a prayer


« Reply #10 on: June 05, 2007, 01:45:06 PM »

Mostly what I object to in this bill is that it tries to do too much. I believe the simple answer to the problem is to sure up the border enforcement, with real and strict penalties for those who are caught crossing illegally. A fence should be built to cover the entire border. Border patrol should be increased. Any buisiness found to knowingly hire an illegal should pay huge fines. Those found to be forging documents for illegals should go to jail. Once the steady flow of illegals crossing the border is at least slowed, then other bills can be drafted to deal with what to do with those already here. I think they are simply trying to put the cart before the horse.
Logged
LucasJamison
?
Avatars
Super Meeper
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 558


« Reply #11 on: June 05, 2007, 03:34:40 PM »

I believe the simple answer to the problem is to sure up the border enforcement, with real and strict penalties for those who are caught crossing illegally. A fence should be built to cover the entire border. Border patrol should be increased.

Excluding Alaska, Hawaii, and various territories and possessions, the land borders of the continental US make up around 5-6 THOUSAND miles.  That's a huge fence.  Some of that may be impassable due to natural features of the terrain, but even if that accounts for half, you're still looking at 2-3000 miles of fencing.  When people talk about building security fences, they typically mean double or triple fencing, razor wire, motion sensors... and of course, people to man the walls, in sufficient numbers that they can do so effectively.

This would be a fairly difficult and expensive proposition.  As for what to do with the people you catch - how do you punish them?  Jailing them is expensive, fining them would be difficult, and the threat of being deported is clearly not enough to stop people.  Even summary execution might not be a total deterrent, and no one's suggesting that yet.

Any buisiness found to knowingly hire an illegal should pay huge fines.

This would fall under "dealing with those already here", which you say should not be dealt with yet, I believe. 

There are currently some penalties in place... United States Code, Title 8, Chapter 12, Subchapter II, Part VIII, § 1324a lays out a few, but the top civil fine is 10000 per instance and the top criminal penalty (and it's only criminal if a pattern of behavior is shown such that the person is obviously intentionally engaging in the employment if unauthorized aliens) is $3K and 6 months in jail. 

I agree, though,  that stiffer corporate penalties ought to exist.

Those found to be forging documents for illegals should go to jail.

For which I refer you to:

UNITED STATES CODE > TITLE 8 > CHAPTER 12 > SUBCHAPTER II > Part VIII > § 1324a
UNITED STATES CODE > TITLE 18 > PART I > CHAPTER 47 > § 1028

Among, I'm sure, other related statutes at both the state and federal level with regard to document fraud and identity theft generally.  The prison terms don't tend to run in the double digits, and the fines rarely reach 5.  I dunno what you consider appropriate, but take a look, let me know if you think these need to be tougher.  I'm not sure on these.

Once the steady flow of illegals crossing the border is at least slowed, then other bills can be drafted to deal with what to do with those already here. I think they are simply trying to put the cart before the horse.

Well, the current issue, for most people, ISN'T the rate or flow of immigration, it's the fact that 3% of the US population are not legal residents, and the various impacts that has on public safety, public health, and the economy.  Stopping even 1,000,000 people from entering the country illegally and remaining here this year (and I don't think the numbers are quite that high yet), will have less of an impact that dealing effectively with those already here, so no solution that proposes just to stop the flow, without also addressing the current population, will be satisfactory.  I think it'd be easier to implement effective solutions, though, if they'd break this up in a few pieces and pass separate legislation.
Logged

eveilebotenoynaecrofnacenoonsevlesmehtrofdniftsumlla
hguorhtraelcsemocebllagnidnapxerevesillahtiwenoemoceb
otsiezilaerotesuactsujtuohtiwforewollofrehtonamrahton
tlahsuohtsdrawotseyeriehtnrutohwlladiallahsuoynahtrehgih
ecrofonezingocerllahsuoyotnrutersgnihtllamorfemocsgniht
llanaemedotsinialpxeot
Horace
Senior Staff
Senior Meeper
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 248



« Reply #12 on: June 05, 2007, 05:36:24 PM »

You specifically cited Kennedy as having done so.  I am unable to quickly find a quote of his where he does this - do you happen to have one available? 

One of the many e-news letters I get mentioned it. I'll see if I can find it again and post it if I do.
But even if Kennedy did not say that, the point remains, there are people who will call you racist simply for wanting better border security.

Quote
I'm sorry, but... what are you talking about?  No one has successfully sued McDonalds or Burger King over those.  A judge in NY threw out a civil suit over something similar to the BK thing you reference here, a couple years ago.  Judges, even really hardline partisan ones, even ELECTED ones, are usually pretty good at doing things, if not the right way, then at least the legally defensible way.  Mostly.
Quote

Several years ago McDonalds was sued for the coffee incident. The lady initially won several tens of millions, but the award was substantially reduced on appeal. I know this example is true, but it is long ago that it would be harder to find any references than it is worth.
As for the Burger King case, I'll concede that I did not follow that one enough to know what happened with it. But just the fact that such a case was filed is a travesty. The lawyer who represented the case should be disbarred and publicly humiliated.

Again the point is, however, that even if I am wrong with these two examples, I could list several more, including some from friends of mine who are cops and prison guards and even a couple lawyers, about the nuisance suits that are filed all the time.
Logged

I'm not really as scary as some people think I am. (re something Julie said to me at reg one night)
Frigemall
Da Pope!
Avatars
Super Meeper
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 614


Living on a bomb and a prayer


« Reply #13 on: June 05, 2007, 09:03:38 PM »

In many cases it is not whether the laws are on the books, it is whether they are enforced. Many of the current penalties on the books would be quite effective if they were simply enforced. There are several towns along the border that are so afraid of the consequences of enforcing border securitry that they have built bridges with special student lanes to help students who live in Mexico get to school in the USA faster. Other groups provide maps to Mexicans so they will find the best way across the border. If we at least started with the Mexican border as far as fences go, it would help greatly. The cost would be defrayed some by the savings of not providing schooling for illegals or medical care, not to mention welfare benefits. As far as making so most buisinesses won't hire illegals for fear of huge fines, this is a deterrant for those crossing the border if they know there will not be work, healthcare or places for them to live. Those who help illegals cross should face severe penalties, such as fines and jail time. Any municipality that does not enforce federal laws should have federal funds stripped from them. If a bandaid is put on a huge cut it will do nothing.
Logged
Oni no Ted
Demonic Admin
Super Meeper
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 522


All your browser are belong to us


WWW
« Reply #14 on: June 05, 2007, 10:38:06 PM »

Not that The Mexican Government condones illegal immigration or anything like that...

http://www.diggersrealm.com/mt/archives/000613.html
Logged

Pages: [1] 2 3 4   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.5 | SMF © 2006-2008, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!

© 2008 Double Exposure, Inc. All rights reserved.