It looks as though the Intelligence Reform Bill is actually going to get passed. In all actuality, it will be without any significant immigration reform. Senator Sensenbrenner of Wisconsin has been holding out. He claims the bill lacks sufficient tightening of immigration and border security. Read the story here.
I agree completely, and I hope he holds out. I cannot understand why Pres. Bush is balking at the idea of border security reform. This is one of the areas where I just cannot go along with ol’ W. In fact, I’m just about to elevate him to Pinko-Commie status, should he keep this up.
Michelle Malkin had an article a few days ago, which detailed the reforms that Sensenbrenner wanted. None of these sound like a bad idea to me. Critics are saying that Sensenbrenner’s additions have no place in an intelligence reform bill. That could very well be true, but where else are we going to put it where it could do some good? Let’s also keep in mind the bill implements things the 9/11 Commission wanted changed, as necessary for our security. Border security seems to me to dovetail nicely.
The most publicized aspect of what Sensenbrenner wanted was to deny illegal aliens drivers’ licenses. Gee, what could possibly be the problem with that?
First, the Democrats do not want anything like that because it will deny them votes. Vote against that, and the Hispanic voting bloc will go crazy. Also, this is the party that started back in the 1800’s buying immigrant votes; legal or otherwise. They know their fan base has a big portion of illegals in it. The easier the Dems make it on people to get over here and start cheating our system, the better off the Dems will be come election time. All the more people to exploit, as far as the Dems are concerned.
With drivers’ licenses, it makes it much easier to get around in this country. It also makes it easier to obtain other forms of ID, open a bank account, get a Blockbuster card, rent a car (or a Ryder truck, if one is so inclined), etc. Feel safe yet? It makes it easier to get a voter registration card. As noted, who are the sneaks going to vote for? I’ll give you a hint, it won’t be Bush or Nader. Probably not Pat Buchanan, either.
The Republicans don’t seem to want it either, with a few notable exceptions like Sensenbrenner. Why? Cheap labor, maybe? That’s a possibility, I suppose. Or are they afraid of alienating the Hispanic voting bloc? Both scenarios seem plausible.
Denying invaders ID doesn’t seem like a bad idea.
Neither does throwing out aliens who have overstayed their visas. Let’s keep in mind that several of the 9/11 terrorists had done precisely that. So what’s wrong with booting people out who have overstayed their official welcome? Not a darn thing, if we want to preserve New York City’s architecture and population density from airplane damage.
The changes also called for adding at least 2,000 new Border Patrol agents. Find one of these guys sometime and talk to them. It’s not hard if you live in a border state. Ask them in they have enough manpower to police the borders. I bet I know what that answer is.
There was also a bit in there about making stiffer penalties for people who use or create false identification documents. I guess our vaunted lawmakers figure that giving illegals drivers’ licenses will cut back on those pesky ID fraud crimes. I suppose that’s right. This is a great example of what happens when the government tries to be more efficient.
We cannot have a secure state unless we know and control exactly who is coming into it. This is not a difficult concept to grasp. I cannot see how any of these reforms are a bad thing for the security of our country. It seems the only thing preventing us from adequately defending our borders is our politicians. I’m disappointed in our politicians for not trying to do the right thing. However, I guess that if I trust politicians to do the right thing, I’m pretty misguided. Silly me. I thought they were supposed to be looking out for me out there in Washington.