August 02, 2005

The Cornyn-Kyl Bill (S. 1438)—The Same Old Arizona Amnesty Sham!

By Juan Mann

[Also by Juan Mann on the amnesty onslaught:

08/11/03 - The Arizona Amnesty Bill—Two Disasters In One!

01/19/04 - The Bush Betrayal And The Arizona Amnesty Connection

08/30/04 - Amnesty Betrayals Past And Present —A Handy Reference Guide]

Beware the "temporary" worker, the "departing" illegal alien, and smoke-and-mirrors ploys of feigned immigration law enforcement.

Beware of S. 1438—the "Comprehensive Enforcement and Immigration Reform Act of 2005" [PDF]—introduced by Senators John Cornyn (R-Tex.) and Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.). The bill conceals a slickly-packaged rehash of the failed Arizona amnesty plan of two years ago concocted by the Arizona trio: House members Jim Kolbe and Jeff Flake, and Senator John McCain.

Though the names have changed, the Cornyn-Kyl bill and the 2003 Arizona amnesty plan both contain the same deadly one-two punch against America. I identified the key treasonous components to watch out for in August, 2003:

The 2003 Arizona amnesty plan tried to accomplish these nation-destroying goals through the use of proposed non-immigrant visas, which I dubbed "The Foreign Worker Importation Act of 2003" (H-4A visa) and "The Illegal Alien and September 11^th Hijacker Adjustment Act of 2003" (H-4B visa).

While the legislative packaging is different now, the concepts remain unchanged.

The Cornyn-Kyl incarnation now uses an outright "non-immigrant temporary worker program" (Title V) and a hare-brained scheme called "deferred mandatory departure" (Title VI).

This "departure" scheme gives the immigration agencies of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) a new excuse not to deport illegal aliens, while handing out all the same benefits of lawful permanent resident status under-the-table to outright illegal aliens and visa-over-stayers.

Though masked behind some tough-sounding "enforcement" provisions in the Cornyn-Kyl bill, the same non-deportation and job destruction schemes are still there. So don’t be fooled, as were National Review and the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR).

Regarding the temporary worker importation scheme, NRO editorialized that "allowing an unlimited number of foreign workers to work for a maximum of six years . . . would not be an amnesty." And referring to the "departure" scheme, they stated that "the bill’s grace period for illegal aliens to pack up and leave is too long . . . [a]lthough the idea of such a grace period is sound."

The NRO editorial also quoted Dan Stein of FAIR, stating that S. 1438 "is a serious proposal that merits consideration and we are giving it careful review."

But let’s take a reality check here.

Under S. 1438, more foreign nationals and going to be allowed to come into the United States to take Americans’ jobs for cheaper wages, and more illegal aliens are not going to be deported in order to allow them to find those jobs too.

So in order to avoid taking the same old Arizona amnesty bait from Congress, ask yourself this question about any immigration bill: will the aliens be inbound or outbound?

Bottom line: follow the aliens!

The charade of "deferred mandatory departure" in S. 1438 is a perfect example of an illegal alien non-deportation program pretending to be enforcement. The truth is that it is permission to stay, rephrased as "not going".

In classic immigration bureaucracy style, there will be nothing "mandatory" about the Cornyn-Kyl bill’s DHS-approved "deferred mandatory departure." As long as the aliens are out on the streets of the United States—not detained, that is—why would they ever leave? Are any illegal aliens really leaving now?

If illegal aliens and criminal alien residents are already absconding in droves from orders of removal, what makes Congress think that any aliens will actually leave the United States under any DHS program that doesn’t involve physical detention and transport?

And what does Congress think has changed in the minds of illegal aliens to make them suddenly want to go back where they came from on their own . . . just because the program is called "mandatory?"

The fact is the "deferred mandatory departure" sham isn’t designed to get illegal aliens to leave at all.

It’s really a stealth welcome wagon for illegal aliens so the DHS can make their stay in the United States more comfortable, and allow them enough time to find a "willing employer" to file an application for an I-140 (employment petition) or even for "temporary worker" status.

Under S. 1438, "deferred mandatory departure" is available for illegal aliens and visa over-stayers who have been living and working illegally for a year prior to its enactment.

Under the guise of "departure," the bill hands out these goodies to illegal aliens (S. 1438—Title VI):

So where’s the departure?

It is amnesty season again in Congress, and analyzing immigration bills makes one feel like a broken record. As I wrote two years ago about the Arizona amnesty bill:

"Unfortunately, non-deportation of aliens in the federal immigration bureaucracy is nothing new. The H-4B visa [now resurrected as "deferred mandatory departure"] is just one more below-the-radar amnesty program, and yet another get-out-of-jail-free card in the ongoing permanent amnesty that is the Justice Department’s EOIR [Executive Office for Immigration Review] Immigration Court."

Under the Kyl-Cornyn bill, illegal aliens wouldn’t ever see the EOIR Immigration Court, because the DHS would hand-out the free non-deportation pass before the EOIR could get involved. 

And of course, if these "deferred mandatory departure" aliens ever commit crimes to make them really deportable under the Immigration Act, or just fail to "depart," they could still fall back on the EOIR litigation bureaucracy anyhow—and file an application for asylum.

Then, the never-ending EOIR "removal" process would begin . . . adding years of employment in the United States to the so-called "departure" period all over again.

So beware the "temporary" worker, and the "departing" illegal alien.

And remember this new VDARE.com litmus test for all future immigration legislation: will the aliens be inbound or outbound? . . . and does the bill deport (preferably summarily) illegal aliens and criminal alien residents?

[VDARE.COM comment: But don’t forget the other VDARE.com litmus test: What about the 14^th Amendment misinterpretation? Any "reform" envisaging the presence of immigrants which does not propose ending the birthright citizenship/anchor baby scandal is another effort to transform this country to the detriment of the native-born. Where is that in Cornyn-Kyl?]