Show your support by purchasing VDARE.com merchandise. 
VDARE.com's Amazon connection has been restored! Remember to enter Amazon via the VDARE.com link and we get a commission on any purchases you make—at no cost to you!
How would creating an i.d. card for foreign workers prevent illegals, using forged documents, from posing as U.S. citizens? Why should employers require someone who seems to be a citizen to show a "foreign worker" card? (Presumably the idea isn't that employers will doubt the U.S. citizenship of any job applicant who looks "foreign.")[Are Conservatives Cheap Dates? Item 2]
Senator Cornyn (R-TX) introduced an amendment that would prevent those applying for temporary guest worker visas from becoming what are essentially, permanent residents...or even citizens.
(Those who wish to become permanent residents or citizens can voluntarily leave the country and apply for these visas from their home country...also known as, the way everybody else has to do it.)
Senator Sessions (R-Alabama) made an excellent point by asking one, simple question:
"Has anybody asked America if this is what they want? This bill has major flaws and they are going to be even madder at us when they see it."
I have no idea what Senator Sessions would do with immigration given his druthers but one thing is for certain--he is the only member of the Senate who has bothered to acknowledge that another group of people exist in this nation: Americans
Senator Clinton (D-NY) and Senator Cornyn (R-TX) both introduced amendments that would provide state and local governments with federal funding for health and education expenses related to immigration.
The difference between the amendments is the Cornyn version takes the funds from a surcharge on illegal immigrants applying for legal status--the Clinton version takes the funds from the usual source: American Taxpayers
Cornyn amendment passed YEA 64 NAY 32
The Salazar amendment passed a few minutes ago...
This amendment makes English the "national language" but does not punish those who do not speak English.
So the citizenship requirement of English proficiency which passed just moments before may be null and void. Denying citizenship to someone because they do not speak English (as the previous amendment would do) I am sure will be considered "punishment."
Hmm...I guess I was wrong. I said it would be Kennedy who killed the amendment and I gave him until tomorrow.
Hard to believe it would take an act of Congress but...the Inhofe Amendment passed.
It was basically a party-line vote but English will be our "national language" and new citizens must pass an English proficiency test.
(Yeah, the odds that Kennedy will NOT introduce an amendment tomorrow repealing this amendment are roughly the same as Pat Buchanan signing onto the Hilary 08 campaign.)
Now it's Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nevada) talking about the Inhofe Amendment which would establish English as the official language of the United States and require new citizens to pass an English proficiency exam.
He actually said, "I am not saying that Senator Inhofe is a racist but this amendment certainly is."
Well, the "R" word had to come up at some point I suppose...
He also claims the amendment is unconstitutional and un-American.
And there he goes again...talking about his father-in-law coming from Russia.
Barbara Boxer (D-CA) is talking about the proposed amendment by Senator Inhofe (R-OK) which would establish English as the official language of the United States and require new citizens to pass an English proficiency exam.
"Of course English is our language--if we have to say it's our language then fine...but I want to do it in a way that unifies us, not in a way that sets us up for unintended consequences" said Boxer.
For reasons I will never understand, our allegedly conservative Senators are taking the "damage control" approach rather than the "let's kill this ridiculous amnesty bill" approach.
Today we had an amendment from Senator Ensign (R-Nevada) which would prevent illegal aliens (or new guest workers as it were) from collecting social security benefits accumulated prior to the date they became legal workers.
Mickey Kaus also liked the proposal, by a reader signing himself "An Economist" [send him congratulatory mail]that illegals be given sixty days to leave the country if they ever want to be citizens.[Today’s Letter: Go Home Now! An Economist Reader Provides The Speech Bush Should Give—But Won’t]
Kaus writes: