Getbig Bodybuilding, Figure and Fitness Forums
Getbig Main Boards => Gossip & Opinions => Topic started by: syntaxmachine on August 07, 2014, 11:09:54 AM
-
The author's hypothesis is certainly consistent with getbig Republicans' behavior/beliefs.
The (Real) Reason Why the House Won't Pass Comprehensive Immigration Reform
http://www.brookings.edu/blogs/fixgov/posts/2014/08/04-immigration-tea-party-constituencies-parker?rssid=immigration&utm_source=feedblitz&utm_medium=FeedBlitzRss&utm_campaign=FeedBlitzRss&utm_content=The+%28Real%29+Reason+Why+the+House+Won%27t+Pass+Comprehensive+Immigration+Reform
"It’s been a year since the Senate passed a comprehensive immigration bill. George and Jeb Bush and Sens. John McCain and Lindsay Graham support it. Conservative public intellectuals such as David Brooks, Grover Norquist, and Karl Rove also support it, as well as more than 100 conservative economists, the Wall Street Journal and the CATO Institute. Comprehensive immigration reform enjoys a level of popularity that should make it a win-win for all involved. Still, House Republicans refuse to support it — even though the Senate recently passed a bipartisan bill with which many conservatives are satisfied.
With every reason to pass comprehensive immigration reform, why are House Republicans standing in its way? Many claim that the Senate bill amounts to amnesty, a measure they suggest leaves us no better off than we are now. They stress securing the border and expelling the 11 to12 million “illegal aliens” residing in the United States.
House Republicans argue that the Senate bill amounts to nothing more than a breach of the rule of law – a foundational conservative tenet. But something beyond ideology drives House Republicans’ resistance to comprehensive immigration reform.
Let’s review the case against comprehensive immigration reform from the House GOP’s perspective.
They argue that the conservation of law and order requires the following. First, the 11 million “illegal aliens” must be expelled. To do what the Senate bill suggests, and legalize the undocumented six months later, amounts to amnesty rewarding criminal behavior. Second, legalization is accompanied by nominal preconditions. However, House Republicans complain that the fine imposed by the Senate bill, at $2K, isn’t enough. According to their calculations, it’ll only amount to $7 per month, and can be waived. Third, House Republicans also contend that the requirement to pay back taxes will be difficult to enforce. Fourth, the criterion for passing the criminal background check has a major loophole. It seems that some “illegal aliens” will be eligible for legal status even if they’ve been convicted of a felony—albeit one that was ultimately plead down.
Here’s the rub, though: In addition to prioritizing law and order, conservative doctrine also requires a commitment to fiscal responsibility. The Senate bill goes a long way toward addressing this need.
For starters, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimates that the bill will save approximately $135 billion during the first decade of implementation, a figure that includes the cost of securing the border. The bill will also save taxpayers as much as an additional $685 billon in the ensuing ten years. That’s a savings of almost $1 trillion ($820 billion) over twenty years. Additionally, the CBO estimates that the Senate bill promises to reduce illegal immigration by at least one-third to one-half in the ten years following its enactment.
Conservatives not affiliated with the House embrace the legislation because it’s consistent with major tenets of conservatism.
Why, then, do many House Republicans oppose comprehensive immigration reform, as presented in the Senate bill?
It’s because House Republicans aren’t motivated by true conservatism. Rather, they represent constituencies haunted by anxiety associated with the perception that they’re "losing their country" to immigrants from south of the border.
The Republican Party is 89 percent white, and 97 percent of Republican House districts in the 113th Congress have white majorities. Moreover, 67 House Republicans won seats with the support of the Tea Party. And people who are highly identified with the Tea Party are anxious about Latino immigrants are taking over “their” country. In some instances, Tea Party groups are leading the charge against comprehensive reform.
Nativism enjoys a strong presence in the Tea Party Caucus among House Republicans. Indeed, according to the most recent data gathered by the Institute for Research & Education on Human Rights (IREHR), approximately 70 percent of the House Tea Party Caucus overlaps with the anti-immigrant House Immigration Reform Caucus.
If opposition to immigration reform is motivated by conservatives' concern with law and order, as House Republicans claim, we should observe no differences between Tea Party and non-Tea Party conservatives in the mass public on immigration policy, but that’s not what’s happening.
A national survey I conducted revealed significant discrepancies between Tea Party conservatives and non-Tea Party conservatives, especially when it comes to “illegal” immigrants and immigration policy:
--When asked whether or not "restrictive immigration policies are based in part on racism," 40 percent of non-Tea Party conservatives say that racism has something to do with restrictive immigration policy versus 18 percent of Tea Party conservatives.
--Almost two-thirds (66 percent) of Tea Party conservatives want to eliminate birthright citizenship (part of the 14th Amendment) versus 46 percent of non-Tea Party conservatives — a 20-point difference.
--Only 30 percent of Tea Party conservatives support the DREAM Act versus 50 percent of non-Tea Party conservatives, another 20-point difference.
It’s clear that Republican constituents are fraught with anxiety induced by the perception of a cultural threat. To verify this point, I probed how Tea Party identifiers felt about “illegal” immigrants’ presence in America. When asked about how they feel about “illegal aliens,” it turns out that 82 percent of Tea Party identifiers are either anxious or fearful of them.
This is the real reason why the House GOP refuses to pass the Senate bill: their constituents are anxious, even fearful that immigrants will take over the country."
-
Rich people want more immigrants, then they have more people to sell to.
Stupid middle class republican voter dont get that.
-
no, they want cheap labor to produce the products they sell to people who actually have money to buy them
dems want votes
And since it requires an army of government workers to convert hundreds of billions of taxpayer money every year into EBT and other benefits, it all works out beautifully for both parties. Everyone likes a bigger more expensive government.
-
So...'losing our country' to invaders shouldnt be resisted, it should be embraced??
Gotta love liberal ideology. Ideology of western suicide.
How about...maybe...because mass amnesty would not be good for the country or its citizens?
Fucking liberals...everything is racism ::)
-
So...'losing our country' to invaders shouldnt be resisted, it should be embraced??
Gotta love liberal ideology. Ideology of western suicide.
How about...maybe...because mass amnesty would not be good for the country or its citizens?
Fucking liberals ::)
invaders? LOLZ they are people with basically similar culture, similar religion, similar life goals. Oh wait they are the mongol hordes!
This will be the final stake that destroys the republican party. They will be in hibernation for a decade out of executive office or they will concede allow for amnesty for illegals.
Isnt evolving or die the republican way?...except when it comes to politics right?
-
invaders? LOLZ they are people with basically similar culture, similar religion, similar life goals. Oh wait they are the mongol hordes!
This will be the final stake that destroys the republican party. They will be in hibernation for a decade out of executive office or they will concede allow for amnesty for illegals.
Isnt evolving or die the republican way?...except when it comes to politics right?
You make way too many assumptions. This is about votes and money. With a little bit of "culture" thrown in, to egg the far right.
-
so a growing population that is alienated by 1 party will vote for them ? right...
Republicans will be crying for decades cause this issue. Wrong side of history on this one.
-
no, they want cheap labor to produce the products they sell to people who actually have money to buy them
dems want votes
And since it requires an army of government workers to convert hundreds of billions of taxpayer money every year into EBT and other benefits, it all works out beautifully for both parties. Everyone likes a bigger more expensive government.
you get a prize. Neither party gives a damn about Latinos or blacks, only the extreme right or left "cares"...but the Dems want the Latino vote so that they keep "winning".
Such a sham.
-
you get a prize. Neither party gives a damn about Latinos or blacks, only the extreme right or left "cares"...but the Dems want the Latino vote so that they keep "winning".
Such a sham.
This.
This isn't about whats good for people or for the country, its about votes and money, plain and simple.
just opening our arms for countless more unskilled people when we already have employment issues will drive down labor prices and vastly increase competition for OUR unskilled labor force.
it's a bad idea. Fuck them anyway, why do they expect us to just "let them in", when so many others have waited and gone through the process? Fucking entitlement complex.
-
invaders? LOLZ they are people with basically similar culture, similar religion, similar life goals. Oh wait they are the mongol hordes!
This will be the final stake that destroys the republican party. They will be in hibernation for a decade out of executive office or they will concede allow for amnesty for illegals.
Isnt evolving or die the republican way?...except when it comes to politics right?
Do you think suddenly adding millions of third world migrants will be good for the nation? How so? Seems like you are just a typical lib who cheers on anything that is bad for america.
-
Do you think suddenly adding millions of third world migrants will be good for the nation? How so? Seems like you are just a typical lib who cheers on anything that is bad for america.
lol an an average redneck is skilled? Many of these people are just like any other american ,willing to work an pay taxes. You know why europe sucks? Negative birth rates. We need an influx of people here to pay for services and goods for old ass fucks.
I see nothing bad about immigration. You seem to blinded by your hatred of other races and cultures.
-
This.
This isn't about whats good for people or for the country, its about votes and money, plain and simple.
just opening our arms for countless more unskilled people when we already have employment issues will drive down labor prices and vastly increase competition for OUR unskilled labor force.
it's a bad idea. Fuck them anyway, why do they expect us to just "let them in", when so many others have waited and gone through the process? Fucking entitlement complex.
you are a moron. Jobs will go to the cheapest labor weither they are in our country or not...Businmess are not gonna sit around and be like OMGZ we only have white people around who demand high wages, guess we gotta pay them what they "demand". They will simply move their jobs off shore.
The world is flat buddy. People pay for talent not unskilled labor.
-
Capitalism, Big Business , cheap labor/ thread
-
you are a moron. Jobs will go to the cheapest labor weither they are in our country or not...Businmess are not gonna sit around and be like OMGZ we only have white people around who demand high wages, guess we gotta pay them what they "demand". They will simply move their jobs off shore.
The world is flat buddy. People pay for talent not unskilled labor.
This isnt about white, or brown, or anything else.
It's about why the fuck would we let in hundreds of thousands of people when we cant employ or take care of our own? What possible reason can you give me that would justify simply opening the border and letting these people come here without going through the same process as everyone else? Why are they entitled to be citizens when there is a waiting list for people who actually have skills and could come in, find work and be productive members of society?
-
Rich people want more immigrants, so they can lower salaries and they have more people to sell to.
Stupid middle class republican voter dont get that.
fixed.
-
This isnt about white, or brown, or anything else.
It's about why the fuck would we let in hundreds of thousands of people when we cant employ or take care of our own? What possible reason can you give me that would justify simply opening the border and letting these people come here without going through the same process as everyone else? Why are they entitled to be citizens when there is a waiting list for people who actually have skills and could come in, find work and be productive members of society?
Hes blinded by his utopian lib ideology and will automatically address any challenge to that as 'racism'. ::)
-
This isnt about white, or brown, or anything else.
It's about why the fuck would we let in hundreds of thousands of people when we cant employ or take care of our own? What possible reason can you give me that would justify simply opening the border and letting these people come here without going through the same process as everyone else? Why are they entitled to be citizens when there is a waiting list for people who actually have skills and could come in, find work and be productive members of society?
Did i ever say we should open borders?? I said we should grant amnesty to those already here. Im all for locking down borders and enforcing laws on the book. The mass deportation and imprisonment of millions is a joke though. Lets all keep in mine that this country was founded on illegal immigration.
Grant amnesty after they are forced to take classes in English , US history/civics and pledge an oath to our Constitution.
-
Hes blinded by his utopian lib ideology and will automatically address any challenge to that as 'racism'. ::)
IM not even a liberal lol. Its idiots who make everything in to a conservative/liberal debate. You are caught in a ridiculous paradigm. People in power dont care about that shit. Squabbling over ideology is a plebs job.
-
Did i ever say we should open borders?? I said we should grant amnesty to those already here. Im all for locking down borders and enforcing laws on the book. The mass deportation and imprisonment of millions is a joke though. Lets all keep in mine that this country was founded on illegal immigration.
Grant amnesty after they are forced to take classes in English , US history/civics and pledge an oath to our Constitution.
thats not amnesty if they have to go through a process. Thats called 'legal immigration'
-
This.
This isn't about whats good for people or for the country, its about votes and money, plain and simple.
just opening our arms for countless more unskilled people when we already have employment issues will drive down labor prices and vastly increase competition for OUR unskilled labor force.
it's a bad idea. Fuck them anyway, why do they expect us to just "let them in", when so many others have waited and gone through the process? Fucking entitlement complex.
Exactly, there's absulutly zero benefit to lower and middle class Americans. I can see how this clearly benefits the upper class and globalist elite though.
George and Jeb Bush and Sens. John McCain and Lindsay Graham support it.
This says it all...
-
Do you think suddenly adding millions of third world migrants will be good for the nation? How so?
I'd love to understand this as well.
Syntax, please break this down in a way that I can understand it. :D
-
lol an an average redneck is skilled?
We have enough trouble with the unskilled rednecks as it is, they have every right to be here. We don't need to add to the problem with unskilled immigrants from a different culture who don't even speak the language.
-
you guys realize this is a made up issue right? How is your day to day life affected by some Mexican immigrant lol.
-
I'd lose my mind if I was in southern states. Ireland, a country with 4 million people, had 400,000 immigrants in the space of a few years. They worked, didn't greatly increase crime rate and many left when economy was fucked. However, these were legal as we are an EU country and have strict visa controls (took me 7 months to convince immigration I was with my gf legitimately for more than 2 years).
You have a similar amount, 10% of your pop, coming in illegally, largely from Central and South America but also Irish etc overstaying visas. They broke the law to get there, distort wages, criminal activity is increased and you are supposed to bend over and take it? Fuck that. If you wanna talk about more people for the super rich to sell to, last time I checked super rich have MNCs and can sell abroad and use the internet.
-
I'd love to understand this as well.
Syntax, please break this down in a way that I can understand it. :D
Its the most basic of questions but it has never been answered by any of them.
It goes up there on the shelf alongside 'what are we doing in afghanistan' ;D
Never an answer.
-
Bush2 got 44% of hispanic vote in 2004.
Mccain got 33 or 34%, I believe?
Romney got 27%.
Trend is NOT something repubs want to see.
-
Did i ever say we should open borders?? I said we should grant amnesty to those already here. Im all for locking down borders and enforcing laws on the book. The mass deportation and imprisonment of millions is a joke though. Lets all keep in mine that this country was founded on illegal immigration.
Grant amnesty after they are forced to take classes in English , US history/civics and pledge an oath to our Constitution.
What do you think will happen when we grant amnesty to the millions here illegally? Millions more will come. They will get the memo- just get in any way you can, and the taxpayers will take care of you.
And the idea that the same government that passes mass amnesty is also going to 'lock down the border' and prevent mass illegal immigration is a fantasy.
And this county wasnt founded on illegal immigration ??? Before, everyone came thru LEGALLY and were processed at ellis island, quotas were established, long immigration moratoriums followed waves of migration...you have no clue what you are talking about, do you?
-
you guys realize this is a made up issue right? How is your day to day life affected by some Mexican immigrant lol.
And the closet racist comes out. I told you that you assume too much.
People always make the assumption that it is "just" Mexicans, when there are a lot of groups like Central Americans due to the destabilization in that area (Thank You America),
Then you have Africans and people from the Middle East, Eastern Europeans and Russians, and a lot of people from Asian countries, especially Chinese in the Eastern states like NY.
-
you guys realize this is a made up issue right? How is your day to day life affected by some Mexican immigrant lol.
Higher crime rates, higher healthcare costs, higher taxes, lower wages, future voting base with huge cultural/political differences... I could go on and on.
-
There is a reason that we cap the amount of legal immigrants that come to the USA at any given time. It isn't because we hate brown people. It's because our country can not absorb an influx of millions of people (largely poor and likely to need government assistance) all at once. Especially those that have no interest in assimilating to the American language, culture and way of life. It would collapse and is collapsing our system.
Liberals aren't in a hurry to get immigration reform passed because of some huge benefit to the United States or out of any great compassion for Mexicans. They are doing it because they see a huge wave of new Democrat voters that will depend on them for their every need and be eager to support their plans of income and wealth redistribution. Bottom line, it's more votes and more power for the Democrats.
People come here from Mexico for a better life. If we wreck our entire social, economic and political system then that "better life" will cease to be and we will end up as just another poor, corrupt, lawless wasteland. But by all means just continue to take the easy route and call anyone who believes in protecting our borders and the rule of law a racist. It's very fashionable to do that and a lot of people will think you are hip and evolved.
-
And the closet racist comes out. I told you that you assume too much.
It's not just Mexicans, a lot of Central Americans due to the destabilization in that area (Thank You America),
Then you have Africans and people from the Middle East, and Russians, and a ton of people from Asian countries, especially Chinese in the Eastern states like NYC.
Besides, why would they want to be Americans, why would they want to be citizens. Even Americans don't like being Americans anymore. If a person doesn't have to pay taxes, can drive around on roads that they don't have to pay for, go to stores which cater to you, don't have to learn the language, and your kids don't have to learn the language, and you can get jobs, what is the point of being a citizen of the US?
There is no real benefit to being an American citizen to many people. Especially to people who already don't trust their own governments, and are very leery about the US'.
I've had some guys I used to know who were illegals... and they all told me the same thing.
they come to take the free shit that we give them. And all 4 of fhem used to mock us and tell me how stupid we were, and that they wouldn't come here if we ever got wise and stopped handing them money.... they literally told all pf their friends came here to take and had zero intention of ever paying taxes or putting money into the system.
hell, one of them had 4 fake Social security cards of dead people that had full disability and welfare, and he took that moneu and sent it back to mexico where he was heading back yo once he had enough to retire down there.
let that sink in. He drew welfare from 4 social numbers and sent the money to mexico so he could go retire like a king. And he was selling those counterfeit cards to all his friends.
-
That nonsense that started this thread is Democratic propaganda. You sheep are so easily led. Obama and his administration is making a mess out of the border and are receiving heat over it. They need to lead the sheep and they will do that by blaming the Republican led house when all hell is breaking loose at the border because of Obama's policy. You guys are fools to believe this. I will give them this, they know how to manipulate the simpletons. No immigration reform isn't needed. Enforcement of the laws already on the books is needed.
One of the primary reasons he wants all the Mexican he can get into America is because he knows once given citizenship he will have millions of Democratic voters. If he knew Mexican immigrants would vote Republican building a fence would be a top priority.
-
The borders have been open for decades under republican presidencies. It's not a dem vs repub issue. It's a business vs citizen issue.
-
The borders have been open for decades under republican presidencies. It's not a dem vs repub issue. It's a business vs citizen issue.
I guess you haven't been reading the papers concerning the mess that has been happening in the past couple of months under Obama's policies. Yes, both Republican and Democrats have failed to stop the flow but it's unprecedented the past couple of months. Obama has also stopped state and local law enforcement from enforcing federal law concerning illegal immigrants coming here through the Mexican border. Wouldn't Obama want all the help he could get on illegal immigration? It is a Republican vs Democrat problem when this administration is encouraging illegal immigration through the Mexican border.
-
I have no doubt Obama's admin has given Mexico millions in 'drug aid' or other money to be embezzled in exchange for them express-shipping all those central American Childrenz to our borders.
Mexican SOP has been for their border patrol to beat, rape, shoot and then kick out their southern border hoppers and all of a sudden they are giving them special visas and putting them on trains? Yeas... ::)
Double win for both countries.
-
"It’s clear that Republican constituents are fraught with anxiety induced by the perception of a cultural threat".
So...'losing our country' to invaders shouldnt be resisted, it should be embraced??
Higher crime rates, higher healthcare costs, higher taxes, lower wages, future voting base with huge cultural/political differences... I could go on and on.
...we hate brown people.
-
"For starters, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimates that the bill will save approximately $135 billion during the first decade of implementation, a figure that includes the cost of securing the border. The bill will also save taxpayers as much as an additional $685 billon in the ensuing ten years. That’s a savings of almost $1 trillion ($820 billion) over twenty years. Additionally, the CBO estimates that the Senate bill promises to reduce illegal immigration by at least one-third to one-half in the ten years following its enactment."
it's a bad idea. Fuck them anyway
Do you think suddenly adding millions of third world migrants will be good for the nation?
Higher crime rates, higher healthcare costs, higher taxes, lower wages, future voting base with huge cultural/political differences... I could go on and on.
...we hate brown people.
That nonsense that started this thread is Democratic propaganda. You sheep are so easily led.
-
"For starters, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimates that the bill will save approximately $135 billion during the first decade of implementation, a figure that includes the cost of securing the border. The bill will also save taxpayers as much as an additional $685 billon in the ensuing ten years. That’s a savings of almost $1 trillion ($820 billion) over twenty years. Additionally, the CBO estimates that the Senate bill promises to reduce illegal immigration by at least one-third to one-half in the ten years following its enactment."
how does that work exactly? Illegals and their ninos cost LA County alone $1.6 billion every year.
by legalizing them so the parents can claim more benefits we'll get more money back?
-
"For starters, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimates that the bill will save approximately $135 billion during the first decade of implementation, a figure that includes the cost of securing the border. The bill will also save taxpayers as much as an additional $685 billon in the ensuing ten years. That’s a savings of almost $1 trillion ($820 billion) over twenty years. Additionally, the CBO estimates that the Senate bill promises to reduce illegal immigration by at least one-third to one-half in the ten years following its enactment."
Id be interested on them to elaborate exactly how its going to generate revenue... and what assumptions are being made?
-
Id be interested on them to elaborate exactly how its going to generate revenue... and what assumptions are being made?
The illegal workers pay taxes for services they won't be able to use. Also, less expensive labor could translate into cheaper goods/services for everyone. Whether or not this is a net gain for the US is a point of contention, but that's where the revenue comes from
-
The border is open to anybody that wants to come in..
Border fence ;D
It's a joke...
For every 100 they catch.. another 500 or more get thru..it will never stop.
It's a business.. some people are getting super wealthy due to lack of laws
Allowing people to stay with no consequences..
-
Bush2 got 44% of hispanic vote in 2004.
Mccain got 33 or 34%, I believe?
Romney got 27%.
Trend is NOT something repubs want to see.
BIG DEAL!
Bush 43 got 40% of the Latino vote; he got a narrow win (which only looked decisive when compared to 2000).
Reagan and Bush 41 got about 30% of the Latino vote; they both won in LANDSLIDES.
-
The author's hypothesis is certainly consistent with getbig Republicans' behavior/beliefs.
The (Real) Reason Why the House Won't Pass Comprehensive Immigration Reform
http://www.brookings.edu/blogs/fixgov/posts/2014/08/04-immigration-tea-party-constituencies-parker?rssid=immigration&utm_source=feedblitz&utm_medium=FeedBlitzRss&utm_campaign=FeedBlitzRss&utm_content=The+%28Real%29+Reason+Why+the+House+Won%27t+Pass+Comprehensive+Immigration+Reform
"It’s been a year since the Senate passed a comprehensive immigration bill. George and Jeb Bush and Sens. John McCain and Lindsay Graham support it. Conservative public intellectuals such as David Brooks, Grover Norquist, and Karl Rove also support it, as well as more than 100 conservative economists, the Wall Street Journal and the CATO Institute. Comprehensive immigration reform enjoys a level of popularity that should make it a win-win for all involved. Still, House Republicans refuse to support it — even though the Senate recently passed a bipartisan bill with which many conservatives are satisfied.
With every reason to pass comprehensive immigration reform, why are House Republicans standing in its way? Many claim that the Senate bill amounts to amnesty, a measure they suggest leaves us no better off than we are now. They stress securing the border and expelling the 11 to12 million “illegal aliens” residing in the United States.
House Republicans argue that the Senate bill amounts to nothing more than a breach of the rule of law – a foundational conservative tenet. But something beyond ideology drives House Republicans’ resistance to comprehensive immigration reform.
Let’s review the case against comprehensive immigration reform from the House GOP’s perspective.
They argue that the conservation of law and order requires the following. First, the 11 million “illegal aliens” must be expelled. To do what the Senate bill suggests, and legalize the undocumented six months later, amounts to amnesty rewarding criminal behavior. Second, legalization is accompanied by nominal preconditions. However, House Republicans complain that the fine imposed by the Senate bill, at $2K, isn’t enough. According to their calculations, it’ll only amount to $7 per month, and can be waived. Third, House Republicans also contend that the requirement to pay back taxes will be difficult to enforce. Fourth, the criterion for passing the criminal background check has a major loophole. It seems that some “illegal aliens” will be eligible for legal status even if they’ve been convicted of a felony—albeit one that was ultimately plead down.
Here’s the rub, though: In addition to prioritizing law and order, conservative doctrine also requires a commitment to fiscal responsibility. The Senate bill goes a long way toward addressing this need.
For starters, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimates that the bill will save approximately $135 billion during the first decade of implementation, a figure that includes the cost of securing the border. The bill will also save taxpayers as much as an additional $685 billon in the ensuing ten years. That’s a savings of almost $1 trillion ($820 billion) over twenty years. Additionally, the CBO estimates that the Senate bill promises to reduce illegal immigration by at least one-third to one-half in the ten years following its enactment.
Conservatives not affiliated with the House embrace the legislation because it’s consistent with major tenets of conservatism.
Why, then, do many House Republicans oppose comprehensive immigration reform, as presented in the Senate bill?
It’s because House Republicans aren’t motivated by true conservatism. Rather, they represent constituencies haunted by anxiety associated with the perception that they’re "losing their country" to immigrants from south of the border.
The Republican Party is 89 percent white, and 97 percent of Republican House districts in the 113th Congress have white majorities. Moreover, 67 House Republicans won seats with the support of the Tea Party. And people who are highly identified with the Tea Party are anxious about Latino immigrants are taking over “their” country. In some instances, Tea Party groups are leading the charge against comprehensive reform.
Nativism enjoys a strong presence in the Tea Party Caucus among House Republicans. Indeed, according to the most recent data gathered by the Institute for Research & Education on Human Rights (IREHR), approximately 70 percent of the House Tea Party Caucus overlaps with the anti-immigrant House Immigration Reform Caucus.
If opposition to immigration reform is motivated by conservatives' concern with law and order, as House Republicans claim, we should observe no differences between Tea Party and non-Tea Party conservatives in the mass public on immigration policy, but that’s not what’s happening.
A national survey I conducted revealed significant discrepancies between Tea Party conservatives and non-Tea Party conservatives, especially when it comes to “illegal” immigrants and immigration policy:
--When asked whether or not "restrictive immigration policies are based in part on racism," 40 percent of non-Tea Party conservatives say that racism has something to do with restrictive immigration policy versus 18 percent of Tea Party conservatives.
--Almost two-thirds (66 percent) of Tea Party conservatives want to eliminate birthright citizenship (part of the 14th Amendment) versus 46 percent of non-Tea Party conservatives — a 20-point difference.
--Only 30 percent of Tea Party conservatives support the DREAM Act versus 50 percent of non-Tea Party conservatives, another 20-point difference.
It’s clear that Republican constituents are fraught with anxiety induced by the perception of a cultural threat. To verify this point, I probed how Tea Party identifiers felt about “illegal” immigrants’ presence in America. When asked about how they feel about “illegal aliens,” it turns out that 82 percent of Tea Party identifiers are either anxious or fearful of them.
This is the real reason why the House GOP refuses to pass the Senate bill: their constituents are anxious, even fearful that immigrants will take over the country."
Care to explain why Obama didn't pass amnes.... ahem....comprehensive immigration reform when he had control of BOTH houses of Congress his first two years, including a SUPERMAJORITY in the Senate for months?
-
"It’s clear that Republican constituents are fraught with anxiety induced by the perception of a cultural threat".
If Latinos voted Republicans, Obama (along with Reid and Pelosi) would round up those illegal aliens and send them packing back to Mexico/Honduras/Guatemala within a year and that wall would be up on the border in six months.
The Dems simply want a coalition of broke Negroes and broke Latinos (with just enough guilty white libs) to keep themselves into perpetual power. Yet, Obama wants the GOP to take the blame, which is why he didn't pass this crap in 2009 and 2010 when he had the chance (and the votes from Congress).
-
Rich people want more immigrants, then they have more people to sell to.
Stupid middle class republican voter dont get that.
Also cheap labor force. Keeps wages low. Illegal's don't join or form unions.
-
This.
This isn't about whats good for people or for the country, its about votes and money, plain and simple.
just opening our arms for countless more unskilled people when we already have employment issues will drive down labor prices and vastly increase competition for OUR unskilled labor force.
it's a bad idea. Fuck them anyway, why do they expect us to just "let them in", when so many others have waited and gone through the process? Fucking entitlement complex.
there is a war between the higher social class and the middle and lower ones. buffet said it himself
“There’s class warfare, all right,” Mr. Buffett said, “but it’s my class, the rich class, that’s making war, and we’re winning.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/26/business/yourmoney/26every.html?_r=0
forget color, race, origin, it's all about money. Only poor and middle classes have to deal with the massive importation, "immivasion" from the third world.
-
Rich people want more immigrants, then they have more people to sell to.
Stupid middle class republican voter dont get that.
Rich people want more ILLEGAL ALIENS for cheap labor. That way they don't have to pay someone $10/hour when they can pay the illegals HALF of that.
Stupid poor/middle-class Democrat voters don't get that.
-
The illegal workers pay taxes for services they won't be able to use. Also, less expensive labor could translate into cheaper goods/services for everyone. Whether or not this is a net gain for the US is a point of contention, but that's where the revenue comes from
Yeah I dont see that happening. The majority I knew (small farming town that has a massive illegal population) only the parents worked.
The kids all drew up and sold counterfeit social security cards to the families, as I said one guy had 4 of them that hed use. ... dead peoples numbers set up to recieve full disability and welfare. ... and they used that money to buy drugs to start a business, they were in the business of prostitution, drugs, and gangbanging.
They drew out as much as possible through our welfare system and sent it back home to accts so that they could return home and live like kings. Also theyd knock up american chicks to get welfare money for the kid.
They get as much as they can and put back as little as possible. Several of them flat told me they only come here ttoabuse the system for free money and then theyd head back to mexico. One I worked with was a legal immigrant here for 20 yrs.... didny speak english and refused to learn or teach his kids because he wasnt American and didnt want them to identify as such. He was sending all of his paychecks to mexico so he could go retire. He refused to put any money into the US system because he felt that we were shit.
-
BIG DEAL!
Bush 43 got 40% of the Latino vote; he got a narrow win (which only looked decisive when compared to 2000).
Reagan and Bush 41 got about 30% of the Latino vote; they both won in LANDSLIDES.
The hispanic vote was much smaller back then. Much smaller % of total US population.
-
"For starters, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimates that the bill will save approximately $135 billion during the first decade of implementation, a figure that includes the cost of securing the border. The bill will also save taxpayers as much as an additional $685 billon in the ensuing ten years. That’s a savings of almost $1 trillion ($820 billion) over twenty years. Additionally, the CBO estimates that the Senate bill promises to reduce illegal immigration by at least one-third to one-half in the ten years following its enactment."
The CBO has a great track record of looking out for the best interests of everyday Americans.
(http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=545253.0;attach=574189;image)
-
The hispanic vote was much smaller back then. Much smaller % of total US population.
If that's the case, why did Bush 43 barely win in 2004 vs. Bush 41's cakewalk to the Oval Office in 1988?
The short answer is (and I'm sure you know this) is that Bush the Elder (as did Reagan) got way more of the WHITE VOTERS.
And that, 240, is the point.
If the 2016 GOP candidate can energize the white electorate, particularly working-class voters, Hilary (or whoever get the DNC nod) is TOAST, no matter how many Latinos (legally or not-soleaglly) go her way. If there's any demographic on which the GOP should concentrate, it's working-class white men, older single white women, and married white women. Black and Hispanic women are pretty much lost (too many are single mothers and hooked on daddy government).
Romney got beat up because millions of GOPers (seeing little difference between him and Obama, especially on healthcare) sat on the sidelines. And that's exactly why Obama wants the GOP to commit suicide by passing amnesty. Otherwise, he would have taken care of this issue when the GOP COULD NOT STOP HIM in 2009 and early 2010.