Rep. Todd Tiahrt, R-Goddard, has a commentary in Sunday’s Opinion pages setting out his views on immigration reform. Tiahrt, who voted for the House plan, strongly supports securing the borders (either with a fence or using technology), but he doesn’t favor making illegal immigration a felony. He does not support amnesty or special access to citizenship. “If an immigrant wants to earn U.S. citizenship, he must get in line by returning to his home country to apply,” he wrote. But Tiahrt doesn’t support mass immigration, which he said is unworkable and “would have a devastating impact on our economy.” Instead, he favors a “temporary job permit program” that would require illegal immigrants to register to continue working for a period of time. “After that,” he wrote, “they must return to their country of origin.”
Unlike Sen. Sam Brownback, R-Kan., who said he didn’t think Congress would agree this year on immigration reform, Tiahrt told The Eagle editorial board last week that he thinks reform will happen.
Posted by Phillip Brownlee
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- okobserver on Open thread 11/23
- Regular on Open thread 11/23
- Chas on Open thread 11/23
- Monkeyhawk on Moore has had enough of House
- Chas on Open thread 11/23
- Monkeyhawk on Open thread 11/23
- okobserver on Open thread 11/23
- Heckler on Open thread 11/23
- Chas on Open thread 11/23
- Monkeyhawk on Open thread 11/23
9 Comments
This was smokescreen to talk about immigration. The war and insurgency problems off the front pages.
Politicians under ethical clouds, being investigated, not reported.
It was loud and huge parading in American cities, confusing scenes.Too many Mexican flags riled people up.
Bush this week has gasoline price issues and powerless to do anything about it.
No way any immigration plan is going to happen prior to elections.
Tiahrt wants another term, he has a Million dollars. Doesn’t some young girl, she got babies, needs money for a heart transplant, to be on the list? Hit up Todd, he can run on his record in Congress and not have to spend a Million dollars.
He should be under a ethical cloud for rubber stamping Bush policy that has failed this country.
Phillip, I think that you made a crucial error when you wrote, “But Tiahrt doesn’t support mass immigration, which he said is unworkable and…”
I believe Tiahrt doesn’t support mass _deportation_ (not immigration).
I think Tiahrt gets it largely correct, his only real weasel clause is where he writes, “Business owners who knowingly hire illegal workers should be penalized. Stiffer penalties for such employers were included in the Border Security Act [passed in 05-Dec; Tiahrt voted affirmatively].”
This is weaselly because “stiffer” isn’t necessarily meaningful. Employer fines must be *significantly* stiffer in order to be effective in deterring illegal immigration. We must demonstrate to those employers who knowingly hire illegals that any cost savings due to lower labor costs will be *more than lost* in fines paid.
This is crucial, and Tiahrt appears to be dodging it.
Besides, if we’re going to ask illegals who wish to enter American’s citizenship track to return to their home country, then it’s only fair to dry up some of the honey that attracts them here in the first place: a job offerred by an American who knowingly chooses to employ illegals because s/he knows it’s cheaper.
Famous denial lines:”I did not know she was 15, I thought she looked 16″
“I did not know they were illegal aliens when I hired them, those liars fooled me.”
Is the standard for assessing a fine too high? The responsibility of hiring people legally should rest with the employer. The “knowingly” part of this should be eliminated. If you hired them, you are responsible. Period.
Point taken, DD, (another possibly weaselly qualification) but do you not agree that removing “knowingly” from the law could possibly unfairly burden *legal* immigrants?
I think removing “knowingly” from the law will do real harm to employers trying their best to hire legal immigrants. In fact, I suspect it will shift a lot of the burden, burden we hope will lay in the deterrent effect of the fine, to the legal immigrant rather than the illegal employer.
I suspect your disdain for Tiahrt may be clouding your own compassion here.
Do you think this is possible?
Your point taken, too flike. I hadn’t thought of that, but such a thing (taking out “knowingly”) could have a chilling effect on legal immigrants’ job prospects.
This problem is complex and multifaceted and that is why no simple solution will have the desired effect.
Thanks.
Temporary workers are NEVER temporary, just ask the Germans about the filthy Turks. Firstly, we need to stop giving citizenship to the offspring of non-citizens, it is illegal to do so. Next, deport all illegals, regardless of race. Lastly, kick all the able bodied Americans(mostly negroes) off of welfare and make them do the jobs that the illegals are doing, simple!
Deprortacion Total!
Viva La Raza Blanco!!!
Tiahrt should do well to learn the phrase: “You can’t have your cake and eat it too.”
Do you think the difference in views between god’s senator and tanker todd has to do with the idea that todd is up for re-election and sam is not?
Not that either of them would EVER put politics and personal gain before the facts…
I forgot this:
NO INCUMBENTS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1