Working for logical immigation reform based on a stable population, a recognition of the finite nature of our natural resources and the adverse impact of continued growth on our quality of life, standard of living, national interest, character, language, sovereignty and the rule of law. Pushing back and countering the disloyal elements in American society and the anti-American rhetoric of the leftwing illegal alien lobbies. In a debate, when your opponents turn to name calling, it's a good sign you've already won.

Tuesday, March 8, 2011

Dee Perez-Scott Opposes Immigration Reform

Dee Perez-Scott opposes meaningful immigration reform and prefers to support illegal aliens.

Immigration in its many forms has become the main driver of America's population growth. Newly arriving immigrants of all categories -- legal, quasi-legal and illegal -- now add at least 1.1 million to yearly U.S. population growth of 3.3 million. Net new arrivals and births to immigrants together total 2.1 million, nearly two thirds of all current population growth, and presaging more future growth from their second and later generation descendants. The total foreign-born population reached 35 million in 2005.

Plain Talk and Tough Strategies for Immigration Curbs

There are three interacting streams in today's mass immigration: illegal immigrants, legal immigrants and "quasi-legal" (or fictional "temporary") immigrants. All bring in people for extended or permanent stays, adding them to the nation's resource-consumptive population base. The new entrants compete for jobs, particularly with less skilled residents. All streams are now largely ungoverned by any effective numerical limits or rational comprehensive management.

America needs the omplete elimination of illegal and quasi-legal immigration and reduction of current legal immigration by 80 percent.

Illegal Immigration: Raising the Costs and Risks

Illegal immigrants are those 500,000 to 600,000 aliens each year who sneak across America's borders, or use fraud to pass through our ports of entry, or acquire a temporary visitor visa and remain permanently.

Assuming an aroused public can inspire our sluggish government with a will to enforce, there are many promising ideas already circulating among restrictionist legislators, enforcement professionals, and reform-minded citizen groups.

Sustained, regular enforcement of existing rules and penalties would significantly curb illegal immigration. Effective and sustained internal enforcement based on E-verification of work status is the sine qua non of border security in depth. Continuing improvements in infrastructure, staffing and the rules of engagment at the border are essential but ineffective in the absence of total internal enforcement. Illegal aliens must understand that they will be identified, detained, and deported involuntarily. Immigration decisions need to be made within 24 hours of the aliens' apprehension. With a rigid set of guidelines, these decisions can be rendered by justices of the peace except for the most difficult poltical asylum cases. If you are here and do not have proper authorization and documentation, appeals of removal orders will be limited to one week from the date of the immigration decision. To accomplish this goal we need:

Mandatory imposition of fines and/or jail terms -- for illegal entry, illegal presence, document and visa fraud, and knowingly hiring illegal aliens -- would hasten the end of illegal immigration.

More physical and technical barriers to entry, with sufficient manpower to maintain and police them.

Better rules of engagement so lethal force can be used on gun and drug smugglers and sick persons and pregnant women are not admitted under any circumstances.

A streamlined process of deportation, which is now mired in interminable appeals.

Regular E-verification of legal immigration status during transactions with government, banking, health care and real estate sectors to detect illegal aliens and ensure their removal.

Sizable increases in the number of investigators, border patrol agents, federal attorneys, judges, immigration justices of the peace and more detention space and personnel to make these steps work. Payment of operators of detention facilities on the basis of detainee throughput rather than detainee days. Immigration justices of the peace embedded in all detention facilities.

Systematic enlistment of local and state law enforcement agencies to cooperate with the Federal government in identifying and turning over illegal aliens to the DHS (Department of Homeland Security)as suggested in Arizona's SB1070 law.

All these tougher measures would conform to prevailing public opinion, as demonstrated in the rush of congressional bills now seeking them (See House Bill HR 4437 passed in December 2005) and in opinion polls. In a 2003 poll , two-thirds or more of the respondents supported mandatory prison terms and fines for illegal immigration, detention of illegal aliens by state and local government, and strict application of fines or criminal penalties on employers who knowingly or unknowingly hire them. A documented failure of the E-vefication system is the only excuse that should be considered.

Legal and Quasi-Legal Immigration: An 80 Percent Reduction

Most of the official immigration numbers count annual grants of legal residency -- a little less than one million in 2004 -- rather than the real-world inflow of people.

And there are several million more in the pipeline for green cards and the accompanying right to bring in families. Naturalization of the alien opens the door without limits to his spouse, children and parents, and, within limits, to his adult children and his siblings. "Chain migration" powers both illegal and legal immigration. Therefore chain immigation must be eliminated. Adult relatives of citizens and permanent residents must compete on a level playing field with other applicants. Spouses and minor children of citizens and permanent residents must be counted against the over all quota.

To stop the chain migration snowball and immigrant-fed population growth, legal immigration should be cut to not more than 200,000 per year, a level supportive of eventual reduction of U.S. population. An 80 percent cut will mean eventually ending all family reunification.

The new ceiling of 200,000 admissions should be used to satisfy core U.S. national interests.

a) Humanitarian -- Up to 30,000 for permanent humanitarian admission of the most endangered refugees and asylees. All other humanitarian admissions would be for short terms only.
b) Work -- 110,000 for PhDs in physical science, engineering, math, or mediciemn, other skilled professionals, technicians, artists and entrepreneurs and their immediate families. There would be no admissions of semi-skilled or unskilled workers.
c) Special Needs -- Up to 10,000 slots to cover an array of special immigrant allocations, such as religious ministers, rare specialty workers, military recruits, and foreign employees of the U.S. government.
d) Existing so-called "temporary" visas for workers and professionals -- These now account for 220,000 "quasi-legal" immigrants a year. They should be abolished and skilled labor needs met under the 200,000 limit.
e) Transitioning Away from Family Reunification -- Family reunification should be phased out. Petitions of U.S. citizens for nuclear families approved before enactment would be honored. For five years thereafter 50,000 slots a year would be allotted for qualified spouses and minor children of U.S. citizens under strict eligibility rules. Afterward, the 50,000 numbers would be prorated among the three permanent categories.

Other steps to keep the numbers low are:

An absolute ban on amnesties and Mariel-type mass "emergency" admissions.

An end to citizenship by birth for "anchor babies" born here to illegal and temporary visa aliens, now seen as required by the 14th Amendment. Anchor babies born to illegal alien parents accounted for 380,000 births in 2004, nearly 40 percent of all births to immigrants. Bills regularly introduced in Congress would end automatic citizenship with a clarifying statute. If legislation fails, the constitution should be amended.

No comments: