Monday, December 13, 2004

Immigration Security - Follow-up

As I promised in Immigration Security I will share my immediate thoughts. I wanted to thank you for the thoughts via e-mail I received Thursday and Friday.

Well the first story I will discuss advised President Bush vows to help House Republicans enact tighter immigration-security controls. However, this cannot happen until the next year. I believe this is a late and have so stated. Yes, I support President Bush but his administration has been sorely lacking in this effort, in my opinion - of course, we (The Republicans) wanted the Hispanic vote! F. James Sensenbrenner Jr. (R - Wisconsin) did step up to the plate and acknowledge this could be too late, stating of immigration provisions, "they are vital". These new immigration-security controls will not be easy to enact, Nancy Pelosi (D - California) called the reform "egregious" and "extraneous"!

The after the above story we get this story advising "House to see new bill on immigration-security"... The article identifies the problem passing this new bill will be, as expected in the Senate. The bill calls for driver's license reform, tightening asylum laws, and completing the fence on California's border. All right, let us stand and cheer - is this enough? What has been the hold up in the three years following 9/11 or the eleven years since WTC 1 - I mean all the experts(?) say better driver's license control would have impaired the enemy's plan. I personally do not believe this bill will go far enough and will only be a token to appease people like me - if they can even get it through the Senate.

What is the big deal? I hear people concerned about having a "country ID" - give me a break, it controls driver's license better - you know the thingy you are only supposed to have one of and show every time you right a check, are pulled over by law enforcement, or give a copy for employment. What is the big deal, you already have a "country ID" we simply want to control it better and I say that and the other two proposed reforms ain't enough!

No comments: