Maynard contemplates tax day (bumped from last year)
The picture above, in case you were wondering, is John Collier's artistic rendition of Lady Godiva. She graces our presence because her notorious ride was in fact a tax protest. Every now and then, at a domestic tax demonstration, there are rumors that a similarly-clad rider will appear. I don't know whether it ever really happens.
We live in a world where just about everything is taxed, sometimes overtly and sometimes with subtlety. Aside from being the source of government revenue, each tax is a little piece of social engineering, causing people to change their behavior to avoid paying. Sometimes this behavior modification is deliberate, such as the high cigarette taxes designed to discourage sales. Other times it's accidental, such as the "yacht tax" of a few years ago, which drove boat builders out of business.
Here are some fundamental tax types:
Consumption taxes, such as sales tax, which tax you for stuff you use
Production taxes, such as income tax, which tax you for your productivity
Property taxes, which tax you for stuff you own
Transfer taxes and fees, which tax you for transactions in which non-consumable goods change hands
Taxes on capital gains and investment income, which tax you on the growth of assets you hold
Excessive taxes can suck the life out of an economy. Some types of taxes are more toxic than others. A strong economic argument can be made favoring the consumption tax over the alternatives. Taxing consumption rather than production encourages savings, which are an essential part of the foundation upon which a prosperous economy is built. Also, taxing consumption levels the playing field with respect to domestic production, since all goods are taxed at the same rate regardless of origin, instead of having domestic goods weighed down by built-in taxes. Unfortunately, it's politically awkward for an elected official to advocate rational tax policy, because the political opposition strives to make good ideas sound ugly. Lowering or (gasp!) eliminating capital gains and income taxes appears to be a sop to the rich, and indeed it will make the lives of the rich easier. Of course, the rich take care of themselves in any case; a simpler tax structure makes their job less inefficient, and also makes it easier for the less-than-rich to aspire to riches. But that's a hard message to get across in a world where the misery merchants reinforce a sense of individual helplessness.
The FairTax organization is promoting an ambitious plan to abolish the IRS and replace the existing tax structure with a national sales tax that will generate the same level of revenue. That sounds like a wonderful idea to me. Imagine an end to income taxes and record keeping and all the other intrusive nonsense we put up with in order to assure the government takes its "fair" share of the fruits of our labor. But you can see this movement, as great as it is, faces an uphill battle.
Let's talk about the history of income tax for a moment. Another April 15 disaster was the sinking of the Titanic in 1912. Immediately afterwards, the Sixteenth Amendment was ratified, authorizing the American government to levy a tax on income. And the rest, as they say, is history.
Income tax rates have gone up and down over the years. Here is an interesting historical chart. You'll see some high marginal rates in the early years, but these only applied to the very very very rich. When we got into WWII, the income level at which confiscatory rates cut in dropped precipitously, and they stayed pretty much in place until Ronald Reagan's tax cuts. The high rates didn't affect the average wage earner, but they created a firm barrier against becoming rich through a salary. This made for what amounted to a national wage cap. Getting rich required, among other things, some very creative accounting.
As a practical matter, between George Bush's inclination to spend money and the Democratic inclination to take money, I don't imminently expect any tax reforms that will do more good than harm. If any of you are in a position to conjure up Lady Godiva, now would be a good time.
Like it or not, we mostly agree that taxes are a necessary evil. Unless we want to abolish government, then a functioning administration requires money. And, human nature being what it is, that money must be seized from the people by an authority with coercive powers.
Okay, so we're stuck with taxes. Then there arise questions of social engineering, combined with pragmatism and moral considerations. We want to grab taxes from "excess" (whatever that is) funds. We don't want to take the bread out of people's mouths.
A small, but typical, example is this situation in Iowa. Food is exempted from sales tax in order to allow people to purchase life's basic necessities unhindered. Who could argue with that?
But then we're stuck with defining "food". And then we get into grey areas, such as whether a Halloween pumpkin is tax-free "food" or a taxable "ornament". And so, by following this series of reasonable, logical, moral steps, we get to this point of absurd insanity:
The Iowa Department of Revenue decided that pumpkins are used primarily for Halloween decorations, not food, and should be taxed. Previously, they had been considered an edible squash and exempted from the tax. Iowans planning to eat pumpkins can still get an exemption from the sales tax, if they fill out the "Iowa Sales Tax Exemption Certificate" form.
In other words, you are required to file legal paperwork with the government regarding how you intend to use your pumpkin.
I wish this were a frivolous example. But it's not. In fact, we've completely lost our privacy to the tax authorities. We're required to explain and justify every dollar we receive. Our banks report our transactions to the government, just as we are required to report who we've paid. If there are any questions or discrepancies, we are assumed guilty, and we're stuck with the burden of proving our innocence. If you've ever received an inquiry from the IRS, you know what I mean.
Okay, let's not carry this too far. I'm not about to join the ranks of anti-tax extremists (such as this guy or this organization) because 1) As I said, I understand the need for taxes, and 2) These guys eventually end up in jail. But I'd prefer we move to a minimally simple tax code (such as is advocated by FairTax.org), along with a government that's slightly less ambitious about solving all our problems. The quest for social engineering via big government may be noble, but it inevitably leads to a midnight visit from the jack-o-lantern-booted Pumpkin Police.
(Disclaimer: I haven't seen "Sicko", so I'm only assuming it's as deceptive and ridiculous as his "Roger and Me", which I have seen. Normally I prefer to come to my own judgments, but there's a limit to how much brain rot I'm willing to endure.)
This TimesOnline article is interesting in that it conveys a Brit's impression of Moore's latest opus. It's a perspective worth understanding, since Moore tells us everything is peachy in Europe.
Sicko is a dishonest film. That is not only my opinion. It is the opinion of Professor Lord Robert Winston, the consultant and advocate of the NHS. When asked on BBC Radio 4 whether he recognized the NHS as portrayed in this film, Winston replied: "No, I didn’t. Most of it was filmed at my hospital [the Hammersmith in west London], which is a very good hospital but doesn’t represent what the NHS is like."
I didn’t recognize it either, from years of visiting NHS hospitals. Moore painted a rose-tinted vision of spotless wards, impeccable treatment, happy patients who laugh away any suggestion of waiting in casualty, and a glamorous young GP who combines his devotion to his patients with a salary of £100,000, a house worth £1m and two cars. All this, and for free.
This, along with an even rosier portrait of the French welfare system, is what Moore says the state can and should provide. You would never guess from Sicko that the NHS is in deep trouble, mired in scandal and incompetence, despite the injection of billions of pounds of taxpayers’ money.
Click to the article for more details. But you get the general point: There is no free lunch, and governments are lousy at managing resources.
On a related note..."Dead Meat" is a 25-minute film about the shortcomings of socialized medicine in Canada, which is so often held up as a shining beacon to us primitive Americans. It offers some interesting comments about the long delays and rationing of human health care, as contrasted against the ready availability of affordable veterinary medicine. Yes, the items being compared aren't exactly the same, but the observation is certainly fair: Government tampering ultimately squanders resources. And it's a fundamental economic law that when you give a valuable resource away for "free", you're going to have to ration it if you don't want to run out.
You can consider the Nanny State out of control when they decide to take away donuts from a senior center because they're bad for the residents. The very same seniors, who in their 60s, 70s and 80s, one way or another fought and won World War II, and defended this nation during the Korean and Vietnam wars. They survived the Cold War, the Cuban Missile Crisis, the drug-haze of the 60s, the disasters of Nixon and Carter in the 70s, Carter's recession, malaise and Iranian hostage taking. The didn't kill themselves, die of alcoholism or drug abuse, die in a car wreck, or get killed by some freak. They survived the 20th century.
And what do we do to honor and celebrate our seniors? We treat them like babies and take away their donuts. Yet we're so obsessed with making sure potheads can get their dope we open up "medical marijhuana" stores. Un-Effing-Believeable.
MAHOPAC, N.Y (AP) — It was just another morning at the senior center: Women were sewing, men were playing pool — and seven demonstrators, average age 76, were picketing outside, demanding doughnuts.
They wore sandwich boards proclaiming, "Give Us Our Just Desserts" and "They're Carbs, Not Contraband."
At issue is a decision to refuse free doughnuts, pies and bread that were being donated to senior centers around Putnam County, north of New York City. Officials were concerned that the county was setting a bad nutritional precedent by providing mounds of doughnuts and other sweets to seniors. The picketers said they were objecting not to a lack of sweets but that they weren't consulted about the ban.
"Lack of respect is what it's all about," said Joe Hajkowski, 75, a former labor union official who organized the demonstration. He said officials had implied that seniors were gorging themselves on jelly doughnuts and were too senile to make the choice for themselves.
"I'm 86, not 8," added C. Michael Sibilia...
Caregivers there and elsewhere say the doughnut debate illustrates the difficulty of balancing nutrition and choice when providing meals to the elderly.
"Senior citizens can walk down to the store and buy doughnuts. Nobody's stopping them," said Michael Jacobson, executive director of the Center for Science in the Public Interest in Washington.
No, I don't like Edwards. He's a preening hypocritical ambulance chaser who made his fortune on "junk science" lawsuits. His specialty was suing hospitals for babies born with cerebral palsy, an infirmity caused by genetic rather than environmental factors. But nothing melts the heart of a jury like a sick baby in the arms of a slick lawyer. Tens of millions of dollars went into Edwards' pocket. Where do you think that money came from?
So it's more than a little disgusting that Edwards, having done so much to alienate doctors and render health care unaffordable, has jumped onto the socialized medicine bandwagon in a big way.
The fundamental problem with socialism is, although it promises to help you, it ultimately controls you. How could it be otherwise? The government cannot giveth unless the government taketh away. Most of the advocates of "socialism lite" try to weasel around this inevitable consequence. My sincere thanks to John Edwards for this moment of clarity.
I'm not just talking about the dollar price (which Edwards promises will be paid by taxes on "the rich"). This gets down to control of your own body. You know; that thing that the abortion rights advocates tell you is constitutionally yours to do with as you like. As quoted by the Associated Press, Edwards states plainly of his plan:
"It requires that everybody be covered. It requires that everybody get preventive care," he told a crowd sitting in lawn chairs in front of the Cedar County Courthouse. "If you are going to be in the system, you can't choose not to go to the doctor for 20 years. You have to go in and be checked and make sure that you are OK." He noted, for example, that women would be required to have regular mammograms.
Edwards said his mandatory health care plan would cover preventive, chronic and long-term health care. The plan would include mental health care as well as dental and vision coverage for all Americans.
"The whole idea is a continuum of care, basically from birth to death," he said.
Does anybody understand that this is the death of freedom? You have to come in and subject your body to a government-mandated regimen. Hey, ladies, are you looking forward to having a government agent assigned to squeeze your breasts?
Even more chillingly, note the promise of mental health care. This presumably means we'd be subjected to a mandatory government sanity test. As a practical matter, they'll have us all on Ritalin or Prozac before long. Except for our elite, who will be puffing medical marijuana.
Note that the Canadian socialized health care, so often held up as an example for us to follow, outlawed private insurance in order to discourage anyone from opting out. Of course, the rich Canadians who aren't satisfied with their options or don't want to wait in line come to the US for medical treatment.
Even without any new socialist programs, Social Security and Medicare are on a track to bankrupt the nation over the next two generations. We're going to have to grapple with this national problem in any case. The only question is whether we're going to opt for a lot more socialism, or a lot less. (And I'm not hearing much leadership on the "less" side.)
By the way, you remember when John Kerry chose Edwards as his running mate? The word was that the liberal Kerry brought the conservative Edwards on board to balance the ticket. Hah!
The Sham Bush Admin "Illegal Immigration" Crackdown
As usual with President Bush lately, what he says is the case is quite the opposite. Skeletor (aka Homeland Security sec Chertoff) and Commerce Sec Carlos Gutierrez announced what is being touted as a "crackdown" on illegal immigration, but in fact is amnesty and an expansion of the so-called Guest Worker programs already in existence. You didn't know we have about 18 of them, did you?
I've been especially struck with the uniform reporting of this Amnesty/Guest Worker plan as a "crackdown" or "enforcement." If you simply read the thing, it becomes quite clear that it's neither. The EM, of course, also wants amnesty and open borders, so they're more than happy to help perpetuate the Bush lie that his admin is actually doing something about the continuing scourge. The insult here is not only is that not true, he's doing the opposite.
Under the new employer regulations — which go into effect in one month — employers who receive so-called "no-match" letters that identify discrepancies in a worker's tax records will have 90 days to resolve the problem.
The reason could be a clerical error or a name change because of marriage, but such irregularities often suggest the employees may be using a phony Social Security number to qualify for work.
If legal status can't be confirmed within 90 days, the employee must be fired.
Gee, I wonder if we, after committing the federal crime of falsifying federal documents or another crime of using a stolen identity, would get a letter simply telling us we have 90 days to get our act together? And what is the option for those who have used false documents? Why, get hooked up with the existing Guest Worker program, of course. And rules are being 'streamlined' to help make that happen. Yes, this is called "amnesty" attached to a "Guest Worker" program.
Gutierrez also said that to lessen the impact on businesses, the administration would streamline and improve temporary visa programs that allow foreign workers to come to the United States for agricultural and other seasonal jobs.
Yeah. I'm sure. Bully for you.
Here's a summary of the highlights of the bill, none of which, by the way, has been funded. So essentially it's meaningless, but they will implement the easing of the rules for the existing GW programs I'm sure. And the other thing we have to keep an eye on, is for the Fed to come back and say, after having this sham around for a few months, that now they've implemented "enforcement" let's get that amnesty bill back on track!
Mark my words, that is their plan. Here, courtesy of the San Jose Mercury News, are the 'highlights' of their sham:
—Hold employers liable for employing workers who have been notified of problems with their Social Security information and have not resolved those problems in 90 days. [Amnesty]
—Reduce the number of documents employers can accept to verify a worker's eligibility. [Meaningless]
—Raise civil fines imposed on employers who knowingly hire illegal immigrants by about 25 percent. [Meaningless. They always argue they don't know, and the Feds have to pursue this which they won't.]
—Prevent illegal immigrants who have agreed to leave the country from remaining in the country through legal maneuvers by making them subject to deportation if arrested and fining them $3,000. [Meaningless. And which illegal aliens 'agree' to leave? Those already convicted of crimes? And note the wobbly language, 'subject to' and 'if.' Doesn't mean either will ever happen.]
—Direct the Labor Department to make changes to the H2A agricultural seasonal worker program so it is easier for farmers to use, provides them workers on time and protects workers' rights. [Crackdown on illegal immigration? This is the expansion of an existing Guest Worker program]
—Correct processing delays in the H2B program for hiring seasonal workers for the landscaping, hospitality and other industries. [More expansion, to help all those identity thieves and SSN card forgers who need to be assimilated into the system after their amnesty]
—Extend from one year to three the duration of a visa for hiring professional workers from Canada and Mexico to attract more such workers to the U.S. [Guest worker expansion, open border facilitation.]
—Spend more money to speed up background checks on immigrants. [Not more comprehensive background checks, let's just cut the the stupid, irrelevant one-day thing we do now to an hour or two, opening the borders and working in those illegals who've been caught via the 'crackdown' on identity theft]
—Require the Social Security administration and Department of Homeland Security to devise a way to prevent undocumented workers from earning credit in the Social Security system for work they've done while in the country illegally. [Meaningless. 'Devise a way'? How long? When? What's their deadline? Absolutely meaningless pandering]
—Expand lists of organized gangs from other nations whose members are barred from automatic entry to the United States. [Expands lists. Great. That'll stop illegal aliens. And gang members. More lists. Terrific. And meaningless]
—Continue to work on creating a system that will record the exit of foreigners from the country for air, land and sea ports. [Yea, we found out we don't have one during the amnesty debate. Genius. But how about this--how about 'continuing to work on a system that will record THE ENTRY of foreigners INTO" this country??]
—By Jan. 31, 2008, begin phasing in requirements for U.S. citizens traveling to Canada, Mexico or the Caribbean to carry passports to re-enter the country at sea and land ports. [Great. This is the already existing passport requirement that we tried to implement this year and couldn't because the passport people got too overwhelmed.]
—Homeland Security Department will deliver "state of the border" reports regularly. [Ooh, well, that'll make all the difference. Not.]
Here's generally what transpired today when it comes to amendments, as though any of this matters. This entire Clown Dance is costing so much money, money would I'm sure all of you would have loved to have seen invested in your local public school, library, or after-school program. But no. Instead, these bastards spend money continuing their senatorial spew, maneuvering to pass a bill 3 out of 4 Americans find odious and dangerous.
Senators first turned back a Republican bid to reduce the number of illegal immigrants who could gain lawful status. Hours later, they rejected a Democrat's effort to postpone the bill's shift to an emphasis on education and skills among visa applicants as opposed to family connections...
The long day and night of votes contained some setbacks for the coalition's leaders, however. They failed to defeat a Republican proposal to give law enforcement agents access to rejected visa applications, which could lead to the arrest and deportation of some illegal immigrants who otherwise might escape detection.
On balance, however, the coalition's "grand bargainers" felt they had withstood their toughest challenges. "This means people want a bill very badly," said Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C.
Uh, what the hell is he talking about? What 'people'? The Senate Monkeys? They don't count--they're there to represent us, not themselves. What a patronizing moron.
The Senate voted 51-46 to reject a proposal by Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, to bar criminals — including those ordered by judges to be deported — from gaining legal status. Democrats siphoned support from Cornyn's proposal by winning adoption of a rival version that would bar a more limited set of criminals, including certain gang members and sex offenders, from gaining legalization. The Senate backed that amendment 66-32. [That would be the Kennedy amendment].
The Senate also rejected a proposal by Sen. Robert Menendez, D-N.J., that bill supporters called a "killer amendment." It would have delayed the bill's shift in favor of attracting foreign workers with needed skills as opposed to keeping families together...
Menendez's proposal would have allowed more than 800,000 people who had applied for permanent legal status by the beginning of 2007 to obtain green cards based purely on their family connections...
And this little gem...
Cornyn prevailed on another matter opposed by the grand bargainers, however. His amendment, adopted 57 to 39, would make it easier to locate and deport illegal immigrants whose visa applications are rejected.
The bill would have barred law enforcement agencies from seeing applications for so-called Z visas, which can lead to citizenship if granted. Cornyn said legal authorities should know if applicants have criminal records that would warrant their deportation.
Opponents said eligible applicants might be afraid to file applications if they believe they are connected to deportation actions. Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., said in an interview that Cornyn's amendment was "not a deal-killer" but would have to be changed in House-Senate negotiations.
Just think about it-- allowing law enforcement to see applications which indicate we have a serious criminal in our midst is something that 'will have to be changed.' At what point in this dance-of-death will these buffoons in congress think about the American people before they scramble to protect foreign criminals in our midst?
The GovTrack page for the bill also provides live updated tracking of the bill. You can get a nutshell of the day's events at NumbersUSA, including a list of the amendments yet to be addressed. That point may be moot after tomorrow, however, considering Reid has stated he will shelve the bill if they don't have the votes for cloture, to move away from debating amendments, and vote on the bill directly as it stands. Reid, however, is known as a blow-hard whom you cannot take seriously, so what actually end up happening tomorrow is still anyone's guess.
The "No Felon Left Behind" Cornyn/Kennedy Amnesty Comparison
**UPDATE after the jump. Scroll to the end of the post for more on the impact of the defeat of the Cornyn amendment.**
That's what Senator Cornyn noted the bill should be renamed if his amendment did not pass. You would think an amendment stating that a variety of criminal groups should be barred from receiving amnesty, benefits and American citizenship would be something everyone could agree on. Instead, it was controversial, with the proponents of amnesty, like Kennedy, arguing that Cornyn's bill would exclude virtually every single illegal alien out there from being able to 'come out of the shadows.'
That attitude alone--the belief that America not allowing criminals to benefit from the Amnesty bill, would negatively affect most of the illegal aliens in this country, exposes the deep racism which sits at the core of today's democrat Party, and every democrat and Republican who continues to try to jam this bill through.
Cornyn's amendment failed while a Teddy Kennedy alternative passed. During Tammy Radio, when all this was transpiring, the text of the Kennedy bill was no where to be found. But to their credit, my staff called Kennedy's office, they answered the phone, and agreed to email the summary of their bill to us immediately. I didn't expect that kind of cooperation, and appreciated it.
Bottom line, and an illustration of just how screwed-up this bill is in general, none of this would even have been addressed if Harry Reid had his way. As it is, Kennedy only delivered the alternative to give the clowns in the senate a way to save face without barring felons from receiving the benefits and rewards of the amnesty bill. I want to thank Pat S. for providing the juxtaposition of the the details of the Cornyn and Kennedy amendments.
No Felon Left Behind. Indeed.
The Cornyn/Kennedy Criminal Aliens Amendments Comparison
Gangs
Cornyn: Bars alien gang members
Kennedy: Deny admission and to ensure deportation of any gang members engaging in felony drug offenses, drug trafficking, witness intimidation, child pornography, alien smuggling or any crime of violence, including murder, kidnapping, arson, bank robbery, etc. [Well, courtesy of Teddy, being a member of gang who commits non-felony crimes is just fine. And if if you're a gang member who's never been caught or seen "engaging" in any of his specified crimes, Welcome to America! Because after all, just because you're a member of a criminal illegal alien gang doesn't mean you're not a good person. This rips the guts out of barring gang members, plain and simple.]
C: Aliens who fail to register as sex offenders
K: Any convicted sex offender will be inadmissible and deportable. [The difference here is subtle but important. You can plead 'guilty' or 'no contest' to a sex offense charge, or plead in some other manner that would require you to register as a sex offender, allowing the argument that you are technically not a "convicted" sex offender. Certain jurisdictions may also choose to register non-convicted offenders, such as those acquitted on grounds of insanity. Cornyn's wording caught every sex offender, regardless of why they have to register; Kennedy lets off the hooks thousands of sex offenders who played the system.]
Domestic Violence, Stalking, Child Abuse
C: Aliens convicted of domestic violence, stalking, crimes against children, or violation of protection orders.
K: Bar any immigrant convicted of a crime of domestic violence, a crime of stalking, or a crime of child abuse, child neglect, or child abandonment for which the immigrant served a year in jail. The amendment also establishes new bars for individuals who have violated a protective order issued by a court. [Both Cornyn and Kennedy are weak here. The issue of barring those who violated a protection order as opposed to those who have done something serious enough that a court issued a restraining order against them, is ridiculous. Of course, Kennedy's bill also welcomes with open arms untold thousands of wife beaters, child abusers, and stalkers, as long as they didn't serve a year in jail. Remember, in our world of the death of right and wrong, getting sentenced to a year in jail for those crimes is rare, let alone serving your full term. Kennedy knew he was welcoming this scum with open arms into our nation.]
Drunk Driving
C: aliens convicted of at least three DUIs
K: Inadmissible or deportable any immigrant who has been convicted of one felony for driving under the influence and sentenced to more than a year in prison.
[Should any of us be surprised that Kennedy, a man famous for his drinking, and has a historic moment of driving off a bridge leaving a young woman to die in the car, took the teeth out of this provision too?]
Enhanced Penalties for Illegal Entry
C: Absconders (i.e., aliens already ordered deported);
aliens deemed inadmissible or deportable as security risks (e.g., terrorists);
K: This section establishes new criminal penalties for any immigrant who enters the United States illegally. The new penalties range from 6 months imprisonment for a first offense to up to 10 years if the immigrant has previously been convicted of a felony and up to 20 years if the immigrant has previously been convicted of a felony and sentenced to a 60 month term. [This change completely guts the original intention of Cornyn's bill. C deals with illegal aliens currently in the U.S. who will benefit from the amnesty bill, but are only still here because they have ignored a federal order to leave. Kennedy completely eliminates that aspect by using the phrase "who enters the United States..." In other words, using the future-tense, not past. Kennedy, in the debate on the floor. referred to those who ignored the federal order to leave as a "garden variety" offense. Of course, these "new" penalties for illegal aliens will never be implemented. It means absolutely nothing, with the exception of giving cover to Senate Monkeys who want it to appear as thought they're dealing with the problem.]
Perjury and False Statements
C: Not addressed. CORRECTED: Yes, it was. Here's Cornyn's text: (F) CRIMINAL OFFENSES INVOLVING IDENTIFICATION.--An alien shall be considered to be deportable if the alien has been convicted of a violation of (or a conspiracy or attempt to violate) an offense described in section 208 of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 408) (relating to social security account numbers or social security cards) or section 1028 of title 18, United States Code (relating to fraud and related activity in connection with identification).''.
K: This provision states that a person who willfully submits materially false, fictitious or fraudulent statements related to an application for benefits under immigration law is subject to prosecution for
perjury and making false statements {I thought Cornyn's bill addressed the issue of aliens using forged federal documents as a bar, but apparently not. [UPDATE: Cornyn's amendment did address forged papers and aliens who took part in identity theft. See the end of the post for an update on this aspect and more] The Kennedy amendment has a lot of tunnels that aliens can use to protect themselves. Words like "willfully" and "materially false" as well as the specificity of applying for "benefits" not necessary the temporary permanent visa or the Z-visa. What Kennedy's amendment also arguably does is protect aliens from prosecution for using false documents while they're here by setting a standard for perjury (after those other extreme standards are applied) only after the amnesty bill passes, and only in regard to applying for benefits under immigration law. ]
Increased Penalties for Firearms Offenses
C: Aliens convicted of certain firearms offenses;
K: This provision expands current federal law to enhance the penalties for any immigrant who is convicted of alien smuggling and carries a firearm. The bill also makes conviction for a broad range of gun related crimes grounds for inadmissibility. [Notice the Kennedy provision only allows the barring of a human smuggler if they carried a firearm. You can still get the benefits of American hospitality and citizenship of you traffic in human beings, but perhaps use a machete to subdue people instead of a gun. And without the details of which "broad range" of gun related crimes, it's hard to make a distinction here.]
What we have learned through this comparison, is the Kennedy amendment means nothing, guts Cornyn's intentions, and opens the door wide for innumerable criminals to be officially legal in this country and continue to ruin lives and continue to do irreparable damage.
All so politicians can get more votes, businesses get cheap labor, and so the bankrupt social security system will get more taxes to prop it up after having been drained by big-spending, corrupt politicians,
Michelle Malkin has the list of how the Senate Monkey voted on both amendments. Knowing these differences, how people voted is a true education about the decency (or indecency) of each of these people.
UPDATE: 7:30pm PT:
While I will not link to the New York Times, they have a quite from Cornyn, about his failed amendment, which you should see.
Senate Rejects Most Changes to Immigration Bill
By a vote of 51 to 46, the Senate on Wednesday rejected an amendment proposed by Senator John Cornyn, Republican of Texas, that could have made hundreds of thousands of illegal immigrants ineligible for legal status.
Under Mr. Cornyn’s proposal, gang members, terrorists and other convicted felons would have been permanently barred from the United States and denied immigration benefits. Most significant, the amendment would have denied legal status to illegal immigrants who had flouted deportation orders or been convicted of identity theft or fraudulent use of identification documents.
Mr. Cornyn said his purpose was not to cater to “racists, nativists or know-nothings,” but to exclude “felons who have shown contempt for American law.” But Senator Charles E. Schumer, Democrat of New York, said Mr. Cornyn’s amendment would “gut the bill.” And Senator Edward M. Kennedy of Massachusetts, the chief Democratic architect of the bill, said: “Almost every hard-working immigrant in this country has been forced, at one time or another, to use false documents to get a job.”
So the senate officially feels that illegal aliens who have forged state and federal documents, have stolen your identity and ruined your credit history, forcing some onto months or years of work to try to fix the damage that was done, should be rewarded with amnesty and American citizenship.
And then there is the absconder issue--even those who have ignored a court order to leave this country will be rewarded with amnesty. No wonder so many of these people hold our country in such contempt. Why should they follow the laws when they get this sort of benefit when they don't?
Our Opinion of Our Government, In Pictures/Open Thread Emerges
Since the Political Elite seem to have trouble understanding us about complex legislation, like the Amnesty Bill, I'm hoping I will be able to convey our opinion of them using the more simple approach of the thing called 'pictures.'
After all , I'm sure there's more than one senator who's picked up a magazine or two just for the pictures. Here now, is my effort to communicate with the way-smarter-than-us-have-everything-figured-out Washington Elite. Despite their extremely high opinion of themselves, the most recent disapproval polls (which is what they really are) make it quite clear that the vast majority of us are, uh, not happy with the arrogant, incompetent buffoons in Washington. Also, it's been a while, so please feel free to consider this an Open Thread about the amnesty bill, the debate tonight, and anything else on your mind.
These are the "senators."
This is the "president."
The president's cabinet and staff.
This is our job assessment of the people in "government."
Your outrage over this issue is not only being felt by individual Senate Moneys, but also by the Republican National Committee. Senate Republican leader (now that's an oxymoron if I ever heard one) Mitch McConnell revealed his contempt for you when he declared last week that the amnesty bill...
...[W]on't cost "a single member of either party'' at the polls next year and predicted the bipartisan compromise will win Senate approval next month..."This is a divisive issue'' for both parties, said McConnell, a Kentucky Republican. But, he said, "I don't think there's a single member of either party next year who is going to fail to be re-elected over this issue.''
Funny enough, the backlash is already affecting the GOP, in one of the more serious ways--financially. In a surprising act revealing how dire the situation has become, the RNC has called off its entire phone solicitation program, letting go all of its 65 phone solicitors, and shutting the entire effort down.
RNC fires phone solicitors
The Republican National Committee, hit by a grass-roots donors' rebellion over President Bush's immigration policy, has fired all 65 of its telephone solicitors, Ralph Z. Hallow will report Friday in The Washington Times.
Faced with an estimated 40 percent fall-off in small-donor contributions and aging phone-bank equipment that the RNC said would cost too much to update, Anne Hathaway, the committee's chief of staff, summoned the solicitations staff last week and told them they were out of work, effective immediately, the fired staffers told The Times...
There has been a sharp decline in contributions from RNC phone solicitations, another fired staffer said, reporting that many former donors flatly refuse to give more money to the national party if Mr. Bush and the Senate Republicans insist on supporting what these angry contributors call "amnesty" for illegal aliens.
"Everyone donor in 50 states we reached has been angry, especially in the last month and a half, and for 99 percent of them immigration is the No. 1 issue," said the former employee.
To force the RNC to shut its phone fundraising operation is a remarkable accomplishment. Congratulations. This is what hurts them the most and is immediately felt, let; McConnell fantasize about what '08 may or may not bring. What Senate Monkeys like him must face, as Howard Beale made so clear, is we're mad as hell and we're not going to take it anymore.
I want to make one thing very clear--you must not let up. The senate has taken this entire week off, but they resume The Big Screw on Monday, June 4th. Even though Memorial Day weekend is over, our job isn't. The senate and the president are panicking. They've suddenly received a reminder that they're not in charge, you are. Our job will not be over until that bill is dead.
I'll leave you with another comment by McConnell, who perhaps unwittingly, grasped for one moment a Big Truth about what we're thinking:
Some lawmakers were uneasy, however, about trying to explain the complex bill to voters. Sen. Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., the minority leader, said opposition from the political extremes is "pretty obvious from the phone calls that all of us are getting. However, the American people would like us to do something."
Yeah, we sure would: It involves a swear word and performing a sex act on yourself. Go for it Mitch.
Bank Analyst: "America's Reliance on China Has Never Been Greater"
Every day reminds us how important the election of November 2008 will be. This frightening example of 'the new world order' and globalization illustrates how dangerous it is to do business with the devil.
US-China ties are headed for turbulence as combative US lawmakers threaten Beijing with punitive trade sanctions that could draw the ire of Chinese leadership.
A week of high-level talks in Washington failed to end their biggest dispute, Chinas undervalued currency, opening the prospect of a trade war between the world's richest and the most rapidly growing nation, analysts said. The Pentagon warned Friday that cash-flush China was militarizing under an opaque budget and that Beijing's ballistic nuclear missiles could now strike the United States...
Anti-China trade bills being drafted in Congress "could ultimately disrupt bilateral trade flows, and more importantly, capital inflows from China," warned Bank of America strategist Joseph Quinlan.
"Americas financial sugar daddy" is China, because it has capital "for a nation that abhors savings, worships spending and is addicted to other peoples money."
"While this is a worrisome development in and of itself, even more worrisome is that the United States has decided to play hardball with China over trade at a time when Americas financial dependence on that nation has never been greater," Quinlan said...
Washington is also concerned China is spending its mountain of foreign reserves on its military. An annual Pentagon report on Friday said China could be "planning for pre-emptive military options in advance of regional crises."
What are the other Illegal Alien Gangs (more accurately foreign national terrorist operatives) ICE knows about and has been tracking?
MS-13, Sureños, 18th Street gang, Latin Kings, Vatos Locos, Mexican Mafia, Bloods, Crips, Spanish Gangster Disciples, La Raza gang, Border Brothers, Brown Pride, Norteno, Florencia 13, Tiny Rascal, Asian Boyz, and Jamaican Posse.
Border Brother 'Gang' Member
As long as the freaks who run in any of these gangs have never been caught committing felonies,or have never been convicted of one, they, too, will be welcomed with open arms, given a visa which prohibits their deportation, guarantees them tax-payer funded lawyers (in the strange event they would ever need them), as well as all the civil-rights protection America gives its citizens. In other words, you will start to pay for their crime-and-entitlement ridden lives. Even though these people (and I use that term lightly) are not citizens, are career criminals, and are part of a scheme that is nothing less than domestic terrorism.
Yeah, and as you can tell by the pics, I'm sure this is just the crowd that will really mean it when they sign the 'renunciation' pledge on their visa form. Lovely.
The most controversial component of the Senate's Secure Borders, Economic Opportunity and Immigration Reform Act of 2007 is Title VI, euphemistically entitled "Nonimmigrants in the United States Previously in Unlawful Status." It would create a new "Z" visa exclusively for illegal aliens. This title would change the status of those who are here illegally to legal, essentially granting amnesty to those "previously in unlawful status." This seriously flawed proposal would undermine the rule of law by granting massive benefits to those who have willfully violated U.S. laws, while denying those benefits to those who have played by the rules and sometimes even to U.S. citizens.
Flawed Provisions
The following are ten of the worst provisions—by no means an exhaustive list—of Title VI of the bill:
Please go the Heritage site at the link provided and read this entire Issues paper. It gives you the foundation to explain to your seriously uninformed Senate Monkey why you're against the bill and what it does the the Rule of Law.
Americans: Border Security=Yes, "Path to Citizenship"=No
Forget amnesty, Americans are making it clear in the most recent national poll that even a so-called "path to citizenship" is unacceptable for those who decided breaking multiple American laws was just fine with them if it got them what they wanted.
Despite this, the Senate Monkeys are behaving as though they've accomplished the equivalent of a silent-but-powerful Vulcan Mind-Meld with Americans conveying to the them that we're all excited and happy about giving amnesty to 20 million-plus illegal aliens.
Here's a roundup of the opinion polls on the subject. And the claim at the beginning of this WaTi article that "many" polls indicate Americans want a 'path to citizenship' for these career criminals, that assertion is contradicted in the same story almost immediately. (Sparked by a question from Pat S. answered by botg in Comments).
Border security first, Americans tell polls
Americans favor stronger border security and enforcement of existing immigration laws before any new immigration rules take effect, according to polls. But a tough stance on enforcement of U.S. policy doesn't mean the country is opposed to more immigration, pollsters say, as many surveys also show support for giving illegal aliens in the United States a path toward legal residency or citizenship.
Opinion polls on the immigration debate vary and often contradict one another. But most surveys show that better border security and enforcement of current immigration law are priorities for Americans. Fifty-six percent of U.S. adults favored an "enforcement-only" approach to immigration reform with no path to citizenship for illegal aliens in the United States, according to a Rasmussen Reports poll conducted earlier this month. When a path to citizenship for illegal aliens was added to the mix, the Rasmussen survey showed 42 percent in support and 44 percent opposed.
In other words, support went seriously and quickly down the drain. A "path" to citizenship rewards law-breakers and is amnesty, no matter how many times the Senate Monkeys deny it, just like the emperor was still naked no matter how many times his lackeys insisted otherwise.
Effort to Remove 'Guest Worker' Program from Bill Fails
Some senators suddenly discovered what I have been arguing for quite some time--the creation of a 'guest worker' program codifies the idea that only certain brown-skinned people will do certain jobs. It creates a permanent under/slave class which is the antithesis of what this nation stands for. That said, if this bill passes in any form, what this nation stands for won't matter because this bill is cultural/economic/rule of law suicide. None of the 'details' in this bill mean anything--ultimately, rthis bill does one thing and one thing only: it establishes immediate legality for the 20 million plus illegals. It's that simple. All this other talk is meaningless.
Farm-state Democrats late Tuesday helped defeat an effort by two of their colleagues to strip the temporary worker program from the comprehensive immigration reform bill now being debated in the Senate
Senators voted 64-31 to reject an amendment by Democratic Sens. Barbara Boxer and Byron Dorgan to strike the provision for as many as 600,000 unskilled workers to enter the U.S.
Arguing against the measure, Boxer alleged that it was designed "to keep a supply of desperate low-wage workers" and is "a way to keep our workers down, keep their wages down, keep their benefits down, keep them weak, and in my view, at the end of the day, destroy the middle class."
Oh, but immediately legalizing 20-40 million illegal alien Mexicans won;t also do that? Sheesh.
The Heritage Foundation continues to work trying to alert people to the suicidal cost of this little project of the newly-dubbed on Tammy Radio "Senate Monkeys," animals obsessing about themselves, running around making a lot of noise, while getting nothing done except tearing the place apart.
Conservatives also point out that the illegals, once legal, would automatically be eligible for Social Security and Medicare and would not be required to pay any back taxes, something bill supporters say is simply impossible to calculate.
Conservative Heritage Foundation President Robert Rector estimates the total cost of the bill to be in the trillions of dollars, warning, "This $2.5 trillion cost is going to come smashing into the Social Security and Medicare systems at exactly the point those systems are already going bankrupt. So the bottom line is that these individuals will make no net contribution in taxes while they are working. They will be a deficit. But when they hit retirement, they will be an astonishing cost on the taxpayer."
Here's Tuesday's Washington Times column from Wesley Pruden. A good way to start your day as we assess how long it will take us to remind the Washington Elite that we're the boss.
What's an amnesty among these friends?
...Rarely has an issue so naturally brought together the cynically greedy of so many political persuasions. Nothing tells the story like the photographs, seen nearly everywhere over the weekend (including the pages of this newspaper), of Teddy Kennedy, Saxby Chambliss, Mel Martinez and Lindsey Graham yukking it up after the announcement of an amnesty designed by Rube Goldberg to guarantee permanent hell on the border.
Laughter, however, has begun to die in sorrow. Saxby Chambliss and Johnny Isakson, for a telling example, went home to Georgia to address the state Republican convention and heard hisses, boos, catcalls and curses when they attempted to bask in the honor and glory of it all...
The more the senators talked, the angrier their constituents balked. A scam to shut up the yokels once and for all had seemed so clever when they were back in Washington yukking it up with Teddy Kennedy. Now it seems maybe not even possible.
Yokelhood is not what it once was. Cable-TV and the Internet have changed all that. Yokels wear shoes now, read newspapers and even sometimes go to Harvard. This is the lesson Republicans learn over and over, always to their sorrow. Conservatives can smell a sellout even when there isn't one, and this time there's stink enough to overwhelm even the olfactorily challenged (and if that's not actually an adverb it should be). Karl Rove is sincerely seduced by the idea that he can make Christians of Muslims (in a manner of speaking) and Republicans of poor Mexicans, but he must have been smoking something stronger than Lucky Strikes to imagine he can inspire the yokels with immigration legislation with Teddy Kennedy's name on it.
The Wash Times also has a good piece featuring the impact of calls and letters from us rubes to congress about the amnesty bill. Tammy Radio regular guest over the past week, Roy Beck, president of NumbersUSA, is nicely featured.
April 2008
