IBD: Post-election lame ducks could pass more bills most hate

Immigration: Even with time running out, Democrats haven't dropped the idea of ramming through illegal-immigrant amnesty to create more Democratic voters. Their new push shows an array of underhanded tactics to sneak that in.

After passing major programs that most Americans don't want — from a wasteful stimulus to a health care nightmare — Democrats know it's time to pay the piper with voters.

But another touchy issue — immigration — looms large on their to-do list. And because 70% of Latinos backed Democrats in 2008, a lot of mischief could be in the works — including an amnesty for illegals that would serve both as political payback and a way to create a new voting bloc.

The outlines of a plan can be seen in several ways, the first of which is Congress' mixed messages on the question of action during the lame-duck session.

Rep. Chris Van Hollen, D-Md., told the Hill Tuesday that House Democrats don't plan to use that pocket of time after elections in November and the seating of a new Congress in January to pass any major new legislation.

But House Speaker Nancy Pelosi isn't so sure, saying Tuesday she was "hopeful" Democrats would wrap up their work before that so a lame-duck session wouldn't be necessary.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid was even more straightforward. "We're going to have a lame-duck session, so we're not giving up," he told the leftist group Net-roots Nation over the weekend.

All of this suggests the lame-duck period could be prime time for unpopular measures such as amnesty. Democrats could reward their immigration lobby supporters but evade fallout from angry voters after the elections.

With 25 million citizens jobless, Obama calls for amnesty

Once again Pres. Obama has shown that he considers immigration to be primarily a game of political calculation rather than an issue that deeply affects how many millions of U.S. workers must remain unemployed.

His renewed call for massive numbers of work permits for foreign workers is an incredible slap in the face to the 25 million Americans who want a full-time job but cannot find one.

Senators suggest Obama is considering White House amnesty

Several Senators have learned of a possible plan by the Obama Administration that would provide a mass Amnesty for the nation's 11-18 million illegal aliens. Led by Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), eight Senators addressed a letter to the President asking for answers to questions about a plan that would allow DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano to provide an amnesty if they can't secure enough votes for a bill in the Senate.

The letter that was sent to Pres. Obama earlier today asks the President for clarification on the use of deferred action or parole for illegal aliens. The executive actions are typically used in special cases and are evaluated on a case-by-case basis, but if 60 votes can't be secured in the Senate to pass a mass Amnesty, the Administration may use the discretionary actions as an alternative.

John Kyl: Obama won't secure border until amnesty is enacted

In a stunning revelation at an Arizona town hall meeting this past Friday, Republican Senator Jon Kyl told his constituents that President Obama privately insisted that he will not secure the border until amnesty for illegal aliens passes first. According to Kyl, Obama argued that Democrats would lose their bargaining chips for any type of amnesty if the government beefs up its presence on the chaotic border. “The problem is,” Obama allegedly told Kyl, "If we secure the border, then you all won’t have any reason to support comprehensive immigration reform.”

SEN. JON KYL: I met with the president in the Oval Office, just the two of us… Here’s what the president said. “The problem is,” he said, "If we secure the border, then you all won’t have any reason to support comprehensive immigration reform.”

[gasps from the audience]

KYL: In other words they’re holding it hostage. They don’t want to secure the border unless and until it is combined with comprehensive immigration reform. I explained, “You and I have an obligation to secure the border. That’s an obligation. It also has some potentially positive benefits. You don’t have to have comprehensive immigration to secure the border, but you have to have a secure border to get comprehensive immigration reform. You may be surprised, maybe you don’t think that there’d be any more incentive, but I’m not so sure that that’s true. In any event, it doesn’t matter we’re supposed to secure the border.”

That’s why this is being done. They want to get something in return for doing their duty. And that’s—

AUDIENCE MEMBER: Chicago politics.

KYL: Yeah.

Haitians who were living here when the earchquake hit can come to the U.S.; let the documentation fraud begin

A story in Saturday's New York Times on the recent influx of illegal Haitian migrants coming into the United States from Canada offers us a micro-preview of what might unfold if illegal immigrants in the U.S. are granted an amnesty. Ever since the Obama Administration unveiled its mini-amnesty for all Haitians in the U.S. at the time of the January 12 earthquake, Haitians, many of whom have been previously deported, have been coming to the U.S. to try to take advantage of the new (limited time only, cannot be combined with other coupons) "Temporary Protected Status" offer. (Void where prohibited, and see Mark Krikorian's blog on how "temporary" status is never temporary.)

But how will the recent migrants conjure up phony proof that they were living in the U.S. prior to the earthquake, you ask? If there is one thing I learned from my years adjudicating visa applications at American embassies overseas, it's that aspiring migrants are very, very good at procuring documents. Ask a visa applicant for an original copy of the Magna Carta, and they'll be back at the embassy the next day with a piece of paper they swear is the genuine article.

Anyone who doubts that migrants who are determined to live in the U.S. won't be able to figure out how to procure bogus apartment leases and other documents to "prove" that they've been living in the U.S. for a given amount of time is either hopelessly naive or willfully ignorant. If a full-scale amnesty becomes a reality, be sure that aspiring migrants from around the world aren't going to be deterred by any arbitrary "must have entered by" hurdles that Congress lays down.

It's also important to remember that would-be migrants from all over the world are following our debate over the fate of illegal immigrants already in the country. They won't know or care about all the fine print attached to any amnesty plan because all they'll hear is this: The Americans are giving out green cards, now is the time to go.

Using everyone's money to produce more Democrats; it's seamless and successful

"To make sure our students don't go broke just because they chose to go to college, we're making it easier for graduates to afford their student loan payments," Obama said.

"The average student ends up with more than $23,000 in debt. So when this change takes effect in 2014, we'll cap a graduate's annual student loan repayments at 10 percent of his or her income."

Under the measure, private banks would no longer get fees for acting as middlemen in federal student loans. The government would use the savings to boost Pell Grants and make it easier for some workers to repay their student loans. In addition, some borrowers could see lower interest rates and higher approval rates on student loans. Savings are also meant to go toward reducing the deficit and helping to pay for expanded health care.

My take:

Like amnesty for illegals and looser immigration laws, enhancements to student loan programs are guaranteed to generate votes for Democrats.

With looser immigration rules and amnesty, the relationship is direct. Grateful beneficiaries reward the party that helped them out. Yes, there are victims - American citizens who are displaced by the new arrivals and join the unemployment rolls. But those workers generally are displaced from low-level jobs and have been conditioned to vote Democrat. In most cases, they will continue to do so.  For the Democrat Party, it's a win-win transaction.

With students, the process is more prolonged. First, when student aid is enhanced, more young people have money to enroll in college. But college administrations quickly capture much of the new money by raising tuition.

As revenue grows, colleges hire more professors and admit more students. It is undeniable, however, that colleges - especially liberal arts colleges - serve as incubators of liberal and radical voters. If you doubt this, check the vote counts in communities where large numbers of students live. The net result: more votes for Democrats.

That's one reason why rich conservatives often turn out to have liberal or radical sons and daughters. Under the Obama administration, that won't change.

Next up: A strong bid for amnesty for illegals, followed by a surge in votes for Dem candidates

Between 1980 and 2008, 25.2 million people were granted permanent residency (green cards) by the United States. A comparison of voting patterns in presidential elections across counties over the last three decades shows that large-scale immigration has caused a steady drop in presidential Republican vote shares throughout the country. Once politically marginal counties are now safely Democratic due to the propensity of immigrants, especially Latinos, to identify and vote Democratic. The partisan impact of immigration is relatively uniform throughout the country, even though local Republican parties have taken different positions on illegal immigration. Although high immigration may work against Democratic policy goals, such as raising wages for the poor and protecting the environment, it does improve Democratic electoral prospects. In contrast, immigration may help Republican business interests hold down wages, but it also undermines the party’s political fortunes. Future levels of immigration are likely to be a key determinant of Republicans’ political prospects moving forward.

Would amnesty encourage illegal immigration? Yes

Critics of an amnesty for illegal immigrants contend it would only encourage more illegal immigration. Well, surprise, surprise: That's just what the average Mexican on the street thinks, too.

According to CIS: "A clear majority of people in Mexico, 56 percent, thought giving legal status to illegal immigrants in the United States would make it more likely that people they know would go to the United States illegally."

In addition, the think tank stated that: "Of Mexicans with a member of their immediate household in the United States, 65 percent said a legalization program would make people they know more likely to go to America illegally."

And that raises another question: Just how many more Mexicans would like to immigrate to America? According to CIS: "Interest in going to the United States remains strong even in the current recession, with 36 percent of Mexicans (39 million people) saying they would move to the United States if they could. At present, 12 to 13 million Mexico-born people live in the United States."

As jobless toll rises, Dems invite more immigrants

When did we lose the loyalty of our exalted leaders? How did we turn them off to the point where their loyalty shifted to citizens of other lands? Will they ever give us a chance to win them back?

President Obama has declared himself a "citizen of the world," and apologized to foreigners whose feelings may have been hurt by the Texas cowboy who preceded him in the White House. Worse, he has ordered the closing of the Guantanamo, Cuba, group home where terrorists who have plotted against America are housed, even in the absence of an alternative destination.

The Texas cowboy, in turn, made it very clear that, faced with a choice between Americans and Mexicans, he sided with the Mexicans. President George Bush's eight years in the White House brought eight years of relentless hispandering and a to-hell-with-them brush-off of American workers and families.

Before the Texas cowboy there was President George Herbert Walker Bush, who famously said, "It is the sacred principles enshrined in the United Nations charter to which the American people will henceforth pledge their allegiance."

That's the bad news. The good news is that, so far as is known, no one has been arrested yet for reciting the pledge to the flag or putting the interests of Americans first. But then, when was the last time our exalted leaders put the interests of Americans first?

Ostensibly, the objective of the ongoing hispandering was to corral immigrant voters for the Republican Party, a reasonable objective given the increasing role of hispanics in American elections. In November, they accounted for 9 percent of the total vote.

But the receptive teatment accorded by the Bush administration attracted a horde of illegal immigrants from Mexico, who readily took the low-paying jobs that traditionally have been filled by students and young workers eager to climb onto the first rung of the economic ladder.

I am familiar with that rung, having pitched manure, weeded fields and rebuilt railroad bridges.

The Bush administration and its apologists answered the critics by arguing that the Mexicans were simply "doing the jobs that Americans won't do." But the argument was flawed. There are no jobs that Americans won't do. Reports put out by the Bush administration showed that Americans made up most of the work force in every category of employment tracked by the federal government.

Bush and his apologists lied. It was more important to them that their party got hispanic votes than it was to protect vulnerable American workers trying to get a foothold in the work force and a chance at the American dream. The illegals not only took jobs from Americans, but suppressed wage rates for blue-collar workers who did have jobs.

The Republican Party is in disrepute because it deserves to be. Its most recent candidate for president, Sen. John McCain, often boasts about his forays "across the aisle" to vote for liberal proposals.

It is a measure of the arrogance and anti-Americanism of our exalted leaders that the Democrats, now in power, plan to try again to provide amnesty, as well as a probable pathway to citizenship, to illegal immigrants who are here. Because the border fence remains unfinished, that includes an untold number of Mexicans who will set out for the border as soon as the bill is passed.

So, it wasn't enough that young blue-collar Americans were denied a chance in recent years; now, they are to be denied again as a predictable new waves of illegals crosses the southern border to claim jobs and medical and educational benefits available here.

Senate Majority leader Harry Reid has introduced the new amnesty bill, which is cosponsored by Ted Kennedy, Mark Begich, Jeff Bingaman, Sherrod Brown, Barbara Boxer, John Kerry, Dick Durbin, Amy Klobuchar, Pat Leahy, Carl Levin, Joe Lieberman, Claire McCaskill, and Charles Schumer.

The title of the bill is: "Stronger Economy, Stronger Borders Act of 2009."

If satire was intended, the title would be funny. But it isn't satire. It's a reflection of how our exalted leaders think. Words don't have to make sense. Titles on bills don't have to reflect reality. That is why, in the midst of rising unemployment and a dangerous recession, the Democrats are preparing to expand the work force, perhaps by millions of illegals from Mexico.

Since any new workers will be surplus, some will inevitably take jobs now filled by Americans. The unemployment rolls will grow.

How many Republicans will support this absurdity remains to be seen.

Their previous hispandering has not been rewarded. In the November election, hispanics voted for Obama by a two-to-one margin, even giving him a 57 percent majority in Florida, a state previously won by Bush.

There must be a word for people who do the same thing over and over again while expecting a different result. Oh yes, now I remember; Albert Einstein's word for it was "insanity."