20 Loopholes in the Senate Immigration Bill

Thanks to Jack M. at Ace of Spades we can read what Jeff Sessions of Alabama identifies as what more is wrong with this shamnesty bill.

20 Loopholes in the Senate Immigration Bill


Loophole 1 – Legal Status Before Enforcement:

Amnesty benefits do not wait for the “enforcement trigger.” After filing an application and waiting 24 hours, illegal aliens will receive full “probationary benefits,” complete with the ability to legally live and work in the U.S., travel outside of the U.S. and return, and their own social security card. Astonishingly, if the trigger is never met and amnesty applications are therefore never “approved,” the probationary benefits granted to the illegal alien population never expire, and the new social security cards issued to the illegal alien population are not revoked. [See pp. 1, 290-291, & 315].

Loophole 2 – U.S. VISIT Exit Not In Trigger:

The “enforcement trigger,” required to be met before the new temporary worker program begins, does not require that the exit portion of U.S. VISIT system – the biometric border check-in/check-out system first required by Congress in 1996 that is already well past its already postponed 2005 implementation due date – to be in place before new worker or amnesty programs begin. Without the U.S. VISIT exit portion, the U.S. has no method to ensure that workers (or their visiting families) do not overstay their visas. Our current illegal population contains 4 to 5.5 million visa overstays, therefore, we know that the U.S. VISIT exit component is key to a successful new temporary worker program. [See pp. 1-2].

Loophole 3 – Trigger Requires No More Agents, Beds, or Fencing Than Current Law:

The “enforcement trigger” does not require the Department of Homeland Security to have detention space sufficient to end “catch and release” at the border and in the interior. Even after the adoption of amendment 1172, the trigger merely requires the addition of 4,000 detention beds, bringing DHS to a 31,500 bed capacity. This is far short of the 43,000 beds required under current law to be in place by the end of 2007, or the additional 20,000 beds required later in the bill. Additionally, the bill establishes a “catch, pay, and release” program. This policy will benefit illegal aliens from countries other than Mexico that are caught at the border, then can post a $5,000 bond, be released and never show up for deportation hearings. Annual failure to appear rates for 2005 and 2006, caused in part by lack of detention space, doubled the 2004 rate (106,000 – 110,000 compared with 54,000). Claims that the bill “expands fencing” are inaccurate. The bill only requires 370 miles of fencing to be completed, while current law already mandates that more than 700 miles be constructed [See pp. 1-2, & 10-11, and EOIR’s FY2006 Statistical Yearbook, p. H2, and The Secure Fence Act of 2004].

Loophole 4 -- Three Additional Years Worth of Illegal Aliens Granted Status, Treated Preferentially To Legal Filers:

Aliens who broke into the country illegally a mere 5 months ago, are treated better than foreign nationals who legally applied to come to the U.S. more than two years ago. Aliens who can prove they were illegally in the U.S. on January 1, 2007, are immediately eligible to apply from inside the U.S. for amnesty benefits, while foreign nationals that filed applications to come to the U.S. after May 1, 2005 must start the application process over again from their home countries. Last year’s bill required illegal aliens to have been here before January 7, 2004 to qualify for permanent legal status. [See pp. 263, 282, & 306].

Loophole 5 – Completion of Background Checks Not Required For Probationary Legal Status:

Legal status must be granted to illegal aliens 24 hours after they file an application, even if the aliens have not yet “passed all appropriate background checks.” (Last year’s bill gave DHS 90 days to check an alien’s background before any status was granted). No legal status should be given to any illegal alien until all appropriate background checks are complete. [See pp. 290].

Loophole 6 – Some Child Molesters Are Still Eligible:

Some aggravated felons – those who have sexually abused a minor – are eligible for amnesty. A child molester who committed the crime before the bill is enacted is not barred from getting amnesty if their conviction document omitted the age of the victim. The bill corrects this loophole for future child molesters, but does not close the loophole for current or past convictions. [See p. 47: 30-33, & p. 48: 1-2]

Loophole 7 – Terrorism Connections Allowed, Good Moral Character Not Required:

Illegal aliens with terrorism connections are not barred from getting amnesty. An illegal alien seeking most immigration benefits must show “good moral character.” Last year’s bill specifically barred aliens with terrorism connections from having “good moral character” and being eligible for amnesty. This year’s bill does neither. Additionally, bill drafters ignored the Administration’s request that changes be made to the asylum, cancellation of removal, and withholding of removal statutes in order to prevent aliens with terrorist connections from receiving relief. [Compare §204 in S. 2611 from the 109th Congress with missing §204 on p. 48 of S.A. 1150, & see missing subsection (5) on p. 287 of S.A. 1150].

Loophole 8 – Gang Members Are Eligible:

Instead of ensuring that members of violent gangs such as MS 13 are deported after coming out of the shadows to apply for amnesty, the bill will allow violent gang members to get amnesty as long as they “renounce” their gang membership on their application. [See p. 289: 34-36].

Loophole 9 – Absconders Are Eligible:

Aliens who have already had their day in court – those subject to final orders of removal, voluntary departure orders, or reinstatement of their final orders of removal – are eligible for amnesty under the bill. The same is true for aliens who have made a false claim to citizenship or engaged in document fraud. More than 636,000 alien fugitives could be covered by this loophole. [See p. 285:19-22 which waives the following inadmissibility grounds: failure to attend a removal proceeding; final orders of removal for alien smuggling; aliens unlawfully present after previous immigration violations or deportation orders; and aliens previously removed. This appears to conflict with language on p. 283:40-41. When a direct conflict appears in a statute, the statue is interpreted by the courts to the benefit of the alien.].

Loophole 10 – Learning English Not Required For A Decade:

Illegal aliens are not required to demonstrate any proficiency in English for more than a decade after they are granted amnesty. Learning English is not required for an illegal alien to receive probationary benefits, the first 4-year Z visa, or the second 4-year Z visa. The first Z visa renewal (the second 4-year Z visa) requires only that the alien demonstrate an “attempt” to learn English by being “on a waiting list for English classes.” Passing a basic English test is required only for a second Z visa renewal (the third 4-year Z visa), and even then the alien only has to pass the test “prior to the expiration of the second extension of Z status” (12 years down the road). [See pp. 295-296].

Loophole 11 – Earned Income Tax Credit Will Cost Taxpayers Billions In Just 10 Years:

Current illegal aliens and new guest workers will be eligible for the Earned Income Tax Credit, a refundable tax credit designed to encourage American citizens and legal permanent residents to work. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that this loophole will cost the U.S. taxpayer up to $20 billion dollars in just the first 10 years after the bill’s enactment. To be consistent with the intent of the 1996 welfare reforms – which limited new immigrants from receiving public benefits until they had been legal permanent residents for five years – the bill should withhold EITC eligibility from amnestied aliens until they become legal permanent residents. Closing this loophole will save the taxpayers billions of dollars. [See p. 293 after S.A. 1190 was adopted, p. 307, p. 315, §606. All that is required for EITC eligibility is a social security number and resident alien status. Nothing in the bill’s tax provisions limit EITC eligibility. The issuance of social security numbers to aliens as soon as they apply for amnesty will ensure they are able to qualify for the EITC.]

Loophole 12 – Affidavits From Friends Accepted As Evidence:

Records from day-labor centers, labor unions, and “sworn declarations” from any non-relative (acquaintances, friends, coworkers, etc) are to be accepted as evidence that the illegal alien has satisfied the bill’s amnesty requirements. This low burden of proof will invite fraud and more illegal immigration – even aliens who are not yet in the U.S. will likely meet this burden of proof. DHS will not have the resources to examine whether the claims contained in the “sworn declarations” of the alien’s friends (that the alien was here prior to January 1, 2007 and is currently employed) are actually valid. [See p. 293: 13-16].

Loophole 13 – Taxpayer Funded Legal Counsel and Arbitration:

Free legal counsel and the fees and expenses of arbitrators will be provided to aliens that have been working illegally in agriculture. The U.S. taxpayer will fund the attorneys that help these individuals fill out their amnesty applications. Additionally, if these individuals have a dispute with their employer over whether they were fired for “just cause,” DHS will “pay the fee and expenses of the arbitrator.” [See p. 339:37-41, & p. 332: 37-38.]

Loophole 14 – In-State Tuition and Student Loans:

In-state tuition and other higher education benefits, such as Stafford Loans, will be made available to current illegal aliens that are granted initial “probationary” status, even if the same in-state tuition rates are not offered to all U.S. citizens. This would normally violate current law (8 U.S.C. §1623) which mandates that educational institutions give citizens the same postsecondary education benefits they offer to illegal aliens. [See p. 321: 8-31].

Loophole 15 – Inadequacy of the Merit System:

The “merit system,” designed to shift the U.S. green card distribution system to attract higher skilled workers that benefit the national interest, is only a shell of what it should have been. Though the merit system begins immediately, it will not increase the percentage of high skilled immigrants coming to the United States until 2016, 8 years after enactment. Of the 247,000 green cards dedicated to the merit based system each year for the first 5 years, 100,000 green cards will be reserved for low-skilled guest workers (10,000) and for clearing the current employment based green card backlog (90,000). From 2013 to 2015, the number of merit based green cards drops to 140,000, and of that number, 100,000 green cards are still reserved each year for low-skilled guest workers (10,000) and for clearing the current employment based green card backlog (90,000). Even after 2015, when the merit system really begins (in 2016) by having 380,000 green cards annually, 10,00 green cards will be reserved specifically for low skilled workers, and points will be given for many characteristics that are not considered “high-skilled.” For example, 16 points will be given for aliens in “high demand occupations” which includes janitors, maids, food preparation workers, and groundskeepers. [See p.260: 25 – p. 261: 20, p. 262, & The Department of Labor’s list of “occupations with the largest job growth” available at www.bls.gov/emp/emptab3.htm].


Loophole 16 – Visas For Individuals That Plan To Overstay:

The new “parent” visa contained in the bill which allows parents of citizens, and the spouses and children of new temporary workers, to visit a worker in the United States is not only a misnomer, but also an invitation for high rates of visa overstays. This new visa specifically allows the spouse and children of new temporary workers who intend to abandon their residence in a foreign country, to qualify to come to the U.S. to “visit.” The visa requires only a $1,000 bond, which will be forfeited when, not if, family members of new temporary workers decide to overstay their 30 day visit. Workers should travel to their home countries to visit their families, not the other way around. [See p. 277:1 – 33, and p. 276: 38-43].

Loophole 17 – Chain Migration Tippled Before Being Eliminated:

Though the bill will eventually eliminate chain migration (relatives other than spouses and children of citizens and legal permanent residents), it will not have full effect until 2016. Until then, chain migration into the U.S. will actually triple, from approximately 138,000 chain migrants a year (equal to 14% of the 1 million green cards the U.S. currently distributes on an annual basis) to approximately 440,000 chain migrants a year (equal to 45% of the 1 million green cards the U.S. currently distributes on an annual basis). [See pp. 260:13, p. 270: 29 – pp. 271: 17]

Loophole 18 – Back Taxes Not Required:

Last year’s bill required illegal aliens to prove they had paid three of their last five years of taxes to get amnesty. This year, payment of back taxes is not required for amnesty. The bill requires taxes to be paid at the time of application for a green card, but at that time, only proof of payment of Federal taxes (not state and local) is required for the years the alien worked on a Z visa, not the years the alien has already worked illegally in the United States. Though Senator McCain’s S.A. 1190, adopted by voice vote, claimed to “require undocumented immigrants receiving legal status to pay owed back taxes,” the amendment actually only required proof of payment of taxes for “any year during the period of employment required by subparagraph (D)(i).” Since the bill does not contain a subparagraph (D)(i), nor require any past years of employment as a prerequisite for amnesty, the amendment essentially only requires proof of payment of taxes for future work in the U.S., not payment of “back taxes.” [See p. 307, and p. 293 as altered by S.A. 1190, amendment p. 2: 19-20.]

Loophole 19 – Social Security Credits Allowed For Some Illegal Work Histories:

Aliens who came to the U.S. on legal visas, but overstayed their visas and have been working in the U.S. for years, as well as illegal aliens who apply for Z visa status but do not qualify, will be able to collect social security credits for the years they worked illegally. Under the bill, if an alien was ever issued a social security account number – all work-authorized aliens who originally came on legal visas receive these – the alien will receive Social Security credits for any “quarters of coverage” the alien worked after receiving their social security account number. Because the bill requires social security account numbers to be issued “promptly” to illegal aliens as soon as they are granted “any probationary benefits based upon application [for Z status]” (these benefits are granted 24 hours after the application is filed), an illegal alien who is denied Z visa status but continues to work illegally in the U.S. will accumulate Social Security credits. [See pp. 316:8 – 16, and pp. 315: 32-39]

Loophole 20 – Criminal Fines Not Proportional To Conduct:

The criminal fines an illegal alien is required to pay to receive amnesty are less than the bill’s criminal fines for paperwork violations committed by U.S. citizens, and can be paid by installment. Under the bill, an illegal alien must pay a $1,000 criminal fine to apply for a Z visa, and a $4,000 fine to apply for a green card. Eighty percent of those fines can be paid on an installment plan. Under the bill’s confidentiality provisions, someone who improperly handles or uses information on an alien’s amnesty application can be fined $10,000. Administration officials suggest that the bill’s “criminal fines are proportionate to the criminal conduct.” Why, then, is the fine for illegally entering, using false documents to work, and live one-tenth the fine for a paperwork violation committed by a government official? [See p. 287: 34, p. 317: 9, p. 315:6-8, & remarks made by Secretary Gutierrez on Your World with Neil Cavuto, 4:00 May 31, 2007]

Congressional Priorities

The Senate is ready to start debate on the thousand page bill that is not even fully written, few details are available, only the rough draft summary.The are anxious to ram this through without the usual oversight and debate. Why? They don't want anybody to know what is really in the bill, knowing it will not survive the light of day. It will devastate our border security, open the country to a further deluge in illegal immigrants in order to line up for the new Z visa (a joke in itself) and will over a period of time cost this country trillions, not billions, in social services, and future welfare and social security burdens. Out schools systems, hospitals and other institutions are already at the breaking point and then add millions more to the immigrant pool and you are looking at disaster. Our Medicare, Medicaid programs are already in serious trouble with the additional burden of millions more flooding our borders. Not to mention the security failure of allowing possible terrorists in our porous borders. Yet the Congress must pass this bill before the Memorial Day break.

Contrast this rush to pass this bill with the funding of our troops with a clean supplemental. 100 days and counting. 124 billion proposed including 25 billion of pork bribes to pass a bill they knew would be vetoed. We have men and women in harms way, sent by the very same lawmakers who are now play political games of gotcha in a game of brinksmanship. Both instances are shameful and one hell of a way to run a country. I would like to say that we deserve better but we are the ones who voted these clowns into office and stand here just shaking our heads. People seem to be more interested in American Idol or what Rosie is going to say next. There is a saying that I vaguely remember abou the only thing worse than apathy is fanatical apathy.

The Fine Print of the Immigration Bill

When I posted earlier about the devil being in the details, I was right on the money. Hugh Hewitt, a law Professor and blogger among other things has been pouring over the details since the 700 page summary was released and spent a very productive weekend for our benefit. So far he has broken it down in 8 parts and I'm sure he is not through with this large and complicated document. It is actually worse than I thought. His concluding statement in Part I is spot on.

Perhaps I am wrong, but I can only read Section 601(h) as a massive undercutting of the entire concept of "triggers," an undercutting which various talking points have not underscored or quantified, which points to why the jam down demanded by Senator McCain is so reprehensible. Ordinary citizens have almost zero chance of figuring out what this bill intends and how its provisions will interact, and the proxies on whom they might rely will hardly have any opportunity to fully vet the language.

As I noted below, the president and the GOP Senate leadership need to postpone any cloture vote until the law is examined, debated and amended.

Scott at Powerline gives us a little background on the "F*ck you" incident and what really went on. Well worth reading it.

UPDATE: Be sure to check out N.Z. Bear's online version of the draft immigration bill which allows for section-by-section comments.

Different types of immigrants

I posted this entry in May of last year and and felt it might be a good repost considering todays news and pending legislation. It seems as appropriate today as it did a year ago. Maybe more so. Here is the first few paragraphs but the whole thing can be found at the link.
There are, IMO, several different classifications of "Immigrants"

1. What I consider true immigrants are those who come to this country and resolve to be a part of this country, become citizens, and are willing and anxious to assimilate into our country and society. They strive to learn the language and will be proud to be called Americans. These include the people who jumped through all the hoops legally and also include many who came here illegally. These people are the type that made America what it became after 1776.

2. My second category is the ones who come here illegally, have no thought of trying to assimilate or contributing to the betterment of the country and have no intention of becoming citizens. They are here to take as much as they can, get all the benefits tax free, strain our health care and school systems to the breaking point and yet have no love for this country. They remain faithful to their own heritage (which I have no problem with) and to the flag and country from where they came from, even though it was unable to provide anything for them. They come as "guest workers" whether wanted, needed, legal or not.

3. The third type I identify are the Colonists. This group, both legal and illegal, and even some citizens who believe in Aztlan and the Reconquista. Their motto is "It was ours once and it will be again, Gringo's out" This idea is resonating with many of the young second and third generations of Latino immigrants, both legal and illegal. It could be seen in the big demonstrations a couple of weeks ago with the signs and the flags. Since then they have become a little more media savvy. The Europeans initially came here as colonists too and overwhelmed the culture and the people who were here. That does not mean that we should lay down and let others do it to us. We built this dream that they want, from a wilderness into what is the best nation in the world. What have they done with their countries that makes their citizens want to come here?

For my conclusions, here is the link.

Devil in the details

If the devil is indeed in the details then it seems that the more details we learn about this Amnesty bill, the more it looks like it is chock full of demons. Nobody seems to know for sure what all is in this bill, now at a draft stage of 700 pages and expected to grow to 1000 pages. Not even the people who will be voting on it has any idea and will have little time to study and debate it before voting.
One provision that has come to light is the forgiveness of any back taxes owed by illegal aliens. Do you think for one minute that the IRS would forgive any citizen for unpaid taxes? The Boston Globe fills us in on this latest demon detail.

The Bush administration insisted on a little-noticed change in the bipartisan Senate immigration bill that would enable 12 million undocumented residents to avoid paying back taxes or associated fines to the Internal Revenue Service, officials said.

An independent analyst estimated the decision could cost the IRS tens of billions of dollars.

A provision requiring payment of back taxes had been in the initial version of a bill proposed by Senator Edward M. Kennedy, the Massachusetts Democrat. But the administration called for the provision to be removed due to concern that it would be too difficult to figure out which illegal immigrants owed back taxes.

The dropping of the back-tax provision was not made clear in the announcement of the immigration reform proposal on Thursday. Secretary of Homeland Security Michael Chertoff, speaking in reference to illegal immigrants seeking legal status, said, "You've got to pay your taxes." He did not state whether he was referring to back taxes, future taxes, or both.

White House spokesman Scott Stanzel, asked in a telephone interview yesterday to clarify Chertoff's remark, said it referred only to future taxes.

"It is important that the reformed immigration system is workable and cost efficient," Stanzel said. "Determining the past tax liability would have been very difficult and costly and extremely time consuming."

Stanzel stressed that immigrants would be required to pay a fine of up to $5,000 if they want to apply for a green card to become a legal resident, although that fine is not for failure to pay taxes.

Laura Capps, a spokeswoman for Kennedy, said a provision for requiring back taxes was in Kennedy's original bill and that Chertoff called for it to be removed. "Chertoff thought it would be too challenging to accurately determine the amount of an applicant's back taxes," she said.

If you're thinking that flat-rate $5000 fine would cover it anyway, guess again-- Mel Martinez is looking to get that dramatically reduced if not removed entirely. Freed Thompson had this to say about this "comprehensive" immigration bill.

But there's an old saying in Washington that, in dealing with any tough issue, half the politicians hope that citizens don't understand it while the other half fear that people actually do. This kind of thinking was apparent with the "comprehensive" immigration reform bill that the U.S. Senate and the White House negotiated yesterday.

I'd tell you what was in the legislation, but 24 hours after the politicians agreed the bill looked good, the Senate lawyers were still writing what may turn out to be a one thousand page document. In fact, a final version of the bill most likely will not be made available to the public until after the legislation is passed. That may come five days from now. That's like trying to digest an eight-course meal on a fifteen-minute lunch break....

...

Is it any wonder that a lot of folks today feel like they're being sold a phony bill of goods on border security? A "comprehensive" plan doesn't mean much if the government can't accomplish one of its most basic responsibilities for its citizens -- securing its borders. A nation without secure borders will not long be a sovereign nation.

No matter how much lipstick Washington tries to slap onto this legislative pig, it's not going to win any beauty contests. In fact, given Congress's track record, the bill will probably get a lot uglier -- at least from the public's point of view. And agreeing to policies before actually seeing what the policies are is a heck of a way to do business.

There is no telling how many devils there are in this pit. As Thompson says, we may never know until past the time it is enacted into law.

Eating Crow, and liking it

In my previous post I stated that the Amnesty Bill was a fait accompli. Apparently it may not be a done deal yet. According to this from the Washington Times

"The president's willingness to accept the granting of amnesty to millions of illegal immigrants has sent a harmful message to Republican voters around the country," said Rep. Mike Pence, Indiana Republican. "But I also believe that'll sort itself out in the primaries of 2008. At the end of the day, this is an issue where I find myself focusing less on politics than what policy I think is in the best interests of the American people."
Last year, both Mr. Pence and Sen. John Cornyn of Texas appeared to be promising allies for Mr. Bush. Mr. Pence met with the president in the Oval Office to talk about the congressman's plan to have illegal aliens leave the country and apply to re-enter from outside.
When Democrats won control of Congress, Mr. Bush tacked left, negotiating with Mr. Kennedy, Massachusetts Democrat, and producing a deal on Thursday that many Republicans say is amnesty.
"The core of the apple here is the fact that 12 million illegal immigrants in this country can get right with the law without leaving the country. I think for most Americans, that is amnesty," Mr. Pence said, adding that from his read of his colleagues -- Democrats and Republicans -- "I don't believe the Senate bill has a future in the House."
Also on the outside of the deal is Mr. Cornyn, who at one point had a bill that most closely mirrored Mr. Bush's principles of a temporary-worker program and requiring illegal aliens to leave the country without creating a new path to citizenship for them.

If this bill does actually go down in flames, I will be very happy. Someone pass the salt and pepper please.

Bastante es Bastante revisited

The latest update on the new Amnesty Bill in Congress. The title is in reference to a post I made in 2005 if you're wondering. It means enough is enough. It seems the new bill may be a fait accompli. Dare I say that it is a travesty and a very unfunny joke. I don't care how they spin it or by what nuanced names they try to call it, it is amnesty. Not only for those already here but for the flood to come. The border security part of the bill is a farce, just like the 700 mile fence, passed and funded is sitting in limbo. All that ended up being was political drama for public consumption. 2 miles have been constructed. Let us look at a little history of past efforts from the mouth of Sen.Kennedy

1965: "The bill will not flood our cities with immigrants. It will not upset the ethnic mix of our society. It will not relax the standards of admission. It will not cause American workers to lose their jobs."

1986: "This amnesty will give citizenship to only 1.1 to 1.3 million illegal aliens. We will secure the borders henceforth. We will never again bring forward another amnesty bill like this."

2007: "Now it is time for action. 2007 is the year we must fix our broken system."

Thank you Senator Kennedy. We read about this next partnership in the Washington Post.

When Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass.) declared last week that unnamed "stakeholders" would decide whether Congress overhauls immigration law this year, Latino organizations in Washington understood exactly what he meant.

After laboring in obscurity for decades, groups such as the National Council of La Raza, the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund, and the National Immigration Forum are virtually being granted veto power over perhaps the biggest domestic issue coming before Congress this year. Organizations that represent what is now the nation's largest minority group are beginning to achieve power commensurate with their numbers.

"There's a real sense that the Latino community is key to the solution in this debate, so now they are reaching out to us more than ever," said Eric Gutierrez, lead lobbyist for the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund, or MALDEF. "Neither party wants to make a misstep politically."

Such groups were practically in the room yesterday, maintaining contact as Democratic and Republican senators tried to hammer out a new immigration bill before a deadline set by Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.) for today before he moved it last night to Monday. The contours began to emerge for a bill that would couple a tightening of border controls with a guest-worker program and new avenues for an estimated 12 million undocumented workers to work legally.
A deal on those tough issues could depend on the assent of Kennedy's "stakeholders," Democratic negotiators agreed. Democratic leaders, who are fighting for the loyalty of the fast-growing Latino electorate, have no desire to embrace legislation that could end up alienating the voters they are trying to woo.

Another Washington Post article takes us behind the scenes into an amazing confrontation between Senator John Cornyn and Senator McCain.

During a meeting Thursday on immigration legislation, McCain and Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas) got into a shouting match when Cornyn started voicing concerns about the number of judicial appeals that illegal immigrants could receive, according to multiple sources -- both Democrats and Republicans -- who heard firsthand accounts of the exchange from lawmakers who were in the room.

At a bipartisan gathering in an ornate meeting room just off the Senate floor, McCain complained that Cornyn was raising petty objections to a compromise plan being worked out between Senate Republicans and Democrats and the White House. He used a curse word associated with chickens and accused Cornyn of raising the issue just to torpedo a deal.

Things got really heated when Cornyn accused McCain of being too busy campaigning for president to take part in the negotiations, which have gone on for months behind closed doors. "Wait a second here," Cornyn said to McCain. "I've been sitting in here for all of these negotiations and you just parachute in here on the last day. You're out of line."

McCain, a former Navy pilot, then used language more accustomed to sailors (not to mention the current vice president, who made news a few years back after a verbal encounter with Sen. Patrick Leahy of Vermont).

"Fuck you! I know more about this than anyone else in the room," shouted McCain at Cornyn. McCain helped craft a bill in 2006 that passed the Senate but couldn't be compromised with a House bill that was much tougher on illegal immigrants.

Ultimately, a deal was crafted and, as McCain suspected, Cornyn did not join in on the final agreement.

By early Thursday afternoon, McCain joined nine other senators and Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff and Commerce Secretary Carlos Gutierrez at a Capitol press conference announcing the deal.

After making a few comments, McCain left the Capitol to head to New York for presidential campaign events. Later that day, McCain missed his 43rd straight vote, this on the $2.9 trillion budget outline.

May I respectfully say to you Senator McCain Fuck you too. It will be a cold day in hell when you get my vote. As Arnold is wont to say, hasta la vista baby. I had written Cornyn and Kay Bailey Hutchison, both my Senators with my concern regarding this legislation and recieved this e-mail in return from Hutchisons office. It is a long letter so I will post the meat of it without all the "I did this" and "I introduced this" stuff.

I believe that granting citizenship or lawful permanent residence status to those who entered our country illegally would only encourage others to break our laws in the future. For these reasons, I opposed amnesty provisions set forth in the Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act of 2006. I voted against S. 2611 because I believe that any legislation addressing immigration must first address the safety and security needs of the United States. In a world where terrorists continue to seek to harm Americans, we must protect our citizens. We have every right to know who is in our country, who has crossed our borders, and the purpose and the length of the visit. We are negligent if we do not know these things.
The Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act of 2006 was passed by the Senate on May 25, 2006, by a 62 to 36 vote. Though S. 2611 passed the Senate, it was not considered by the House of Representatives prior to the adjournment of the 109th Congress. I will keep your views in mind as the Senate continues to consider this important issue in the 110th Congress.

Sadly with the House in control by the Democrats and with the collusion of several Republican lawmakers, this bill will probably easily pass muster in the conference committee unless the voice of the people and their constituents are not loud and persistent. People need to contact their Senators and Representatives, both Republican and "Blue Dog" Democrats in order to get this bill defeated. Security and border enforcement needs to come first, then and only then can we talk about any type of amnesty and guest worker program

George Tenet, instead of a CYA book, finds himself with a shovel.

In order to try to help rehabilitate himself and his reputation and image, Tenet wrote a tell all book. It is a shame it ended up being such an easily reputed sham.His detractors are coming out of the woodwork in droves. Ed Morrissey has several new links that are indeed interesting Remember the "Rule of Holes"? Tenet should have stopped digging but instead he has not only dug himself deeper but handed out shovels for people to finish burying him.

Major Gerd Schoeder Writes an Open Letter to America

He asks a very pointed question. "America, why have you abandoned us?" In The American Thinker, he writes:

My fellow Americans; what have the American Fighting men and women done to cause you to abandon them in a foreign land, surrounded by sinister people that are bent on killing them and all Americans? Do we believe that these people, who think nothing of killing men, women, and children of their own race, culture, and religion, will hesitate a moment if given the chance to destroy us, our families, and our freedoms?

And they know that Congress has cut off spending for our troops.

Where is the sort of overwhelming swell of outrage of the American people that caused the rather benign "Dubai Ports deal" to be killed in less than a month? Why have the halls of Congress and the Whitehouse not been overwhelmed by citizens outraged over the abandonment of our fighting men and women? Is the silence a sign that shock jocks, and dead playmates are more important to American than our soldiers?

While politicians on both sides of the political spectrum have quibbled about timelines, a date for withdrawal from Iraq, and $24 billion in pork to buy votes, the American Soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan have been all but forgotten. The American people's silence is morale-crushing and a betrayal. For whatever purpose we believe our soldiers have gone to war, surely abandonment in a hostile, foreign land was not it.

It would do us all well to read this article as it needs to be read by the Congressional members and leaders.

Update on Milblog ban

As and update of my previous post, Confederate Yankee has this update from one of his sources.

Fact Sheet Army Operations Security: Soldier Blogging Unchanged

Summary:

• America's Army respects every Soldier's First Amendment rights
  while also adhering to Operations Security (OPSEC) considerations to
  ensure their safety on the battlefield.
• Soldiers and Army family members agree that safety of ourSoldiers are of utmost importance.
• Soldiers, Civilians, contractors and Family Members all play an integral role in maintaining Operations Security, just as in previous wars.

Details:

• In no way will every blog post/update a Soldier makes on his or
  her blog need to be monitored or first approved by an immediate
  supervisor and Operations Security (OPSEC) officer. After receiving
  guidance and awareness training from the appointed OPSEC officer, that
  Soldier blogger is entrusted to practice OPSEC when posting in a public
  forum.
• Army Regulation 350-1, "Operations Security," was updated April
  17, 2007 - but the wording and policies on blogging remain the same from
  the July 2005 guidance first put out by the U.S. Army in Iraq for
  battlefield blogging. Since not every post/update in a public forum can be monitored, this regulation places trust in the Soldier, Civilian Employee, Family Member and contractor that they will use proper judgment to ensure OPSEC.
• Much of the information contained in the 2007 version of AR530-1 already was included in the 2005 version of AR 530-1. For example, Soldiers have been required since 2005 to report to their immediate supervisor and OPSEC officer about their wishes to publish military-related content in public forums.
• Army Regulation 530-1 simply lays out measures to help ensure operations security issues are not published in public forums (i.e.,blogs) by Army personnel.
• Soldiers do not have to seek permission from a supervisor to send personal E-mails. Personal E-mails are considered private communication. However, AR 530-1 does mention if someone later posts an E-mail in a public forum containing information sensitive to OPSEC considerations, an issue may then arise.
• Soldiers may also have a blog without needing to consult with their immediate supervisor and OPSEC officer if the following conditions are met:
  1. The blog's topic is not military-related (i.e., Sgt. Doe
     publishes a blog about his favorite basketball team).
  2. The Soldier doesn't represent or act on behalf of the Army in any way.
  3. The Soldier doesn't use government equipment when on his or her personal blog.
• Army Family Members are not mandated by commanders to practice OPSEC. Commanders cannot order military Family Members to adhere to OPSEC. AR 530-1 simply says Family Members need to be aware of OPSEC to help safeguard potentially critical and sensitive information. This helps to ensure Soldiers' safety, technologies and present and future operations will not be compromised.
• Just as in 2005 and 2006, a Soldier should inform his or her OPSEC officer and immediate supervisor when establishing a blog for two primary reasons:
  1. To provide the command situational awareness.
  2. To allow the OPSEC officer an opportunity to explain to the Soldier matters to be aware of when posting military-related content in a public, global forum.
• A Soldier who already has a military-related blog that has not yet consulted with his or her immediate supervisor and OPSEC officer should do so.
• Commands have the authority to enact local regulations in addition to what AR 530-1 stipulates on this topic.

This is either a backdown, a possible inking of sanity, or just a simple clarification. Whatever it is, it is a bit of a bright spot for our military bloggers and e-mailers.I have no idea who or what the source is but I do hope that it is credible.