What We’re Learning About the ‘Gang of Eight’ Amnesty Plan

 

 

There appears to be general consensus on the need for immigration reform, but the devil is, as always, in the details.  As Sen. Ted Cruz has explained:

 

“There is widespread, bipartisan support for fixing our nation’s broken immigration system, and we should approach it by addressing those areas where we can reach agreement so that we actually have a chance of passing an effective bill into law.”

 

The so-called ‘Gang of Eight’ Immigration Reform proposal arrived on the scene with much promise, but review of the details of the plan are revealing that initial optimism was not well-placed.  The more Americans look at the plan, the less many Americans like it.  In the words of Former Sen. Jim DeMint:

 

“I think if people read the bill, that it will be blocked…because once you get into it, just like Obamacare, it is not the way it’s been advertised.”

 

Sen. Rand Paul has also noticed disturbing similarities to Obamacare:

 

“To me, it’s a little bit like Obamacare…I hate to bring that up, but 1,800 references to the secretary shall at a later date decide things. We don’t write bills around here. We should write the bill. We should write the plan.”

 

While the proposal is being sold, in part, as a means of securing the borders and improving security generally, the front-line border patrol and immigration officers have been shut completely out of the process:

“A mass legalization, or amnesty, of millions of illegal aliens, combined with an increase in future immigration, will have profound consequences for every law enforcement officer in the country and especially those who enforce our nation’s immigration laws…But we have been shut out of the process.” – ICE Union President Chris Crane

 

Former INS Special Agent Michael Cutler echoes Mr. Crane’s concerns, warning that the bill is ‘a national security nightmare.’

Additional information from Mediaite: 10 Errors in the Gang of Eight Bill

 

Upon a review of the Gang of Eight bill, commentators and analysts have discovered a number of potentially-alarming facts:

 

 

  1. The Bill Will Cost Taxpayers Upwards of 6 Trillion Dollars 
     
  2. The Bill Will Legalize Between 30-60 Million Immigrants
     
  3. The Bill Creates a New National ID Database With Information on–Including Photographs of–Every Citizen and Resident
     
  4. The Border Security and Enforcement “Triggers” are Not Based on Results, or Even Activity, but Rather on ‘Plans’ for Future Activity

 

 

 

1. The Bill Carries an Estimated $6.3 Trillion Price Tag

Heritage: The Fiscal Cost of Immigrants and Amnesty to the US Taxpayer

 

2. Scope of the Plan : 30-60 Million Newly-Legalized Immigrants

 

Daily Caller: Senate Bill Will Legalize 30 Million

 

F.A.I.R. Visa Projections

 

PowerLine: is the Real Number 57 Million?

 

The Bill Removes Current Immigration Caps

 

Washington Examiner: Loopholes Put Illegals on Fast Track to Citizenship

3. The Bill Creates a New National ID Database

 

In its current form, the bill provides for accumulation of broad categories of government photos and information, state and federal, into a single national ID database.

 

Washington Post: E-verify Expansion Draws Fire from Civil Libertarians

 

Cato: The Path to National Identification

 

What Are the National ID Implications of the Senate Immigration Bill?

 

4. Border Security and Employment Verification “Triggers” are a Sham – Require Plans, but not Results

 

POLL: Most Voters Think Border Security Should Come First

 

Marco Rubio: Border Security Inadequate in Gang of Eight Bill

 

“The day the bill passes, there will be an effective amnesty for the vast majority of illegal immigrants – abandoning the Gang of Eight’s public promise of enforcement first.” – Sen. Jeff Sessions

 

“[W]hatever parts of E-Verify are still standing after 10 years will almost by definition be good enough–since the law only seems to require that the DHS Secretary have ‘implemented’ a  mandatory employment verification system to be used by all employers’–not that it actually be in use by all employers, or have been ‘implemented’ in a way that covers, say, 50% of new hires, or 40%, or 25%.  It just needs to be … ‘implemented’ somewhere, in a form that’s intended to be scalable to cover ‘all’ employers.” – Mickey Kaus

 

“As I read it, the border security provisions in this bill would necessarily mean that the border patrol will shift resources away, in a preannounced fashion, from most of the border sectors in order to reach the goals for only a few…We can only imagine what the transnational criminal organizations that move drugs, people and contraband across our border will do in response.” – Sen. John Cornyn

 

A Built-in Loophole Makes the Triggers Irrelevant:

 

“[The Bill] creates a huge loophole that makes [the enforcement triggers] entirely irrelevant.”

 

This entry was posted in News. Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *