Today, the Bush White House is trying to take a different path to amnesty. Over the past year, they heard that the People want a serious commitment to law enforcement. They heard that we want an end to illegal immigration through employer sanctions and border security before any discussion of legalization takes place. The thinking from the supporters of law enforcement is that once we make the United States unwelcoming to those wishing to come illegally, the illegal alien population will reduce slowly over time. After about a decade of serious enforcement and the creation of secure borders, then -- and only then -- should we discuss a possible legalization for those remaining in the country.
The White House interprets this "attrition" policy as an opportunity for amnesty. In an announcement from the loudest amnesty advocates -- Bush, Commerce Secretary Carlos Gutierrez, and DHS Secretary Michael Chertoff -- it was promised this morning that the White House would actually do its job of enforcing immigration laws. What they don't realize is that they come across as dishonest con artists; it's pretty much impossible to believe any of them. Their promised enforcement is available in English -- and Spanish -- on the White House website, here.
The transcript from the press conference is most revealing. It is clear that they are begrudgingly enforcing the law with the goal of amnesty. It also appears their plan is to haphazardly enforce our immigration laws and create as much fear, confusion, and economic strife so that in six months the White House can announce: "See, enforcement-only is a failure; we need an amnesty now!" Look for this announcement Spring 2008.
Multiple times during the conference, Chertoff lamented the failure of the amnesty bill and basically foreshadowed its return:
"We're obviously disappointed in the fact, as is the President, that Congress has not chosen to act on our comprehensive solution... Our hope is that the key elements of the Senate bill will see the light of day at some point."
"Now, let me make it clear that under the Senate bill, which did not pass, we would have actually made enrollment in E-Verify mandatory for employers..."
"Of course, because Congress didn't pass the comprehensive immigration measure, we don't have all the tools we'd like to have..."
Open-border Gutierrez echoed Chertoff's sadness:
"...we had hoped to get comprehensive reform passed on Capitol Hill..."
"Ultimately - ultimately, Congress will have to pass comprehensive immigration reform. Without reform, we're going to end up with a patchwork of laws nationwide."
"This issue is not going to go away; Congress needs to act."
THEN, these two amnesty advocates showed their true plan: make the enforcement-only approach appear to fail by creating fear and confusion via "the sky is falling" statements:
They claim they will "clamp down on employers" and "come down on them like a ton of bricks."
They claim that "there's going to be an economic consequence to tough law enforcement," which must mean complete economic failure, of course.
Apparently, "Without reform, we will also see many of our agricultural products coming from overseas. And without reform, small businesses and farmers are going to go out of business."
Considering how difficult is it to buy "Made in America" produce already, I don't think an amnesty is going to make much of a difference.
Chertoff then threatened Congress, claiming it would be their fault when the United States falls apart: "...at the end of the day, the enforcement of the law is going to have some consequences. The one thing I think we've tried to do from the very beginning is to be really up front and transparent about what the consequences of these decisions are. We don't get a vote in Congress. We can't make Congress pass it. But we can be very sure that we let Congress understand the consequences of the choices that Congress makes."
Then Gutierrez repeated these tired lines: "We do not have the workers our economy needs to keep growing each year" and, "comprehensive immigration reform...is essential for our nation's future security and prosperity."
The true goal of this proposal, of course, is to provide pro-slavery businesses and open-border advocacy groups with talking points while encouraging them to scream and yell and cry so that Bush can claim that enforcing our laws is impossible. A secondary goal is to prepare the media to craft sob stories.
One can already predict the type of articles the New York Times, Los Angeles Times, and Washington Post will be publishing over the next six months from the questions that were asked at the press conference:
"The AFL-CIO is saying that they're afraid that legal immigrants may suffer discrimination because of this. And the Chamber of Commerce is saying we're afraid businesses are going to get sued because of that; they're both talking about challenging these regulations in court. Your reaction?"
and... "How about the likelihood here that you're going to drive a lot of employers and employees underground?"
and... "Where are [the workers] going to come from?"
and... "Won't this be disruptive to agriculture?"
The Bush White House has already proven that it useless when it comes to immigration enforcement. Bush is simply gearing up for another shot at amnesty in early 2008. We must prevent it once again and hope that the next inhabitant of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue will listen to the People. The next White House is our only hope.
FOLLOW UP: On September 12th, be prepared for a White House photo-op as celebrity illegal alien Elvira Arellano comes out of hiding to demand amnesty in Washington, D.C. You might recall she was working illegally at the Chicago-O'Hare airport when arrested by ICE in 2002. Shortly thereafter, she found sanctuary in a church and has been evading the rule of law ever since. The Washington Post reports that Arellano "knows she could be arrested during next month's planned trip," but that if ICE comes to arrest her, they'll "find [her] praying." The Bush White House must be elated. Both Bush and the Post understand that this will be a PERFECT photo-op to discredit law enforcement. Bush could have directed ICE to deport her any time over the past five years; but now, she can be used to create even more sob stories which Bush hopes will soften the public's stance on deportation. But he is miscalculating as most people will likely applaud her deportation.
"We now believe in security (wink, wink)..."