The Candidates
Featured Archives
From the NRO’s Mark Krikorian:
* A politician finally gets it: “They set up a false choice – either we get giant busloads of people tomorrow, and round them all up, or we have to grant amnesty. Attrition by enforcement is what makes the most sense.” – Fred Thompson
From Time Magazine:
Senator Fred Thompson today unveiled a comprehensive border security and immigration enforcement proposal that would make America safer by increasing security at our nation’s borders, enforcing our country’s existing laws to reduce the incentive for illegal immigration and streamlining the legal immigration process.
“A country that cannot secure its borders will not remain a sovereign nation and you cannot have national security without border security,” said Thompson. “It’s not only necessary for any meaningful immigration reform, but border security plays a key role in both the interdiction of illegal drugs and in defending America against terrorist threats. Weak borders allow terrorists and smugglers, as well as millions of illegal aliens, easy entrance to the United States.”
Thompson’s two-pronged plan, which can be found in its entirety at www.fred08.com, is based on two principles: Securing the Border and Enforcing the Law, and Improving the Legal Immigration Process.
Highlights of the proposal include:
• No Amnesty: Amnesty undermines U.S. law and policy, rewards bad behavior, and is unfair to the millions of immigrants who follow the law and are awaiting legal entry into the United States.
• Enforce Existing Federal Laws: Enforce the laws Congress has already enacted to prevent illegal aliens from unlawfully benefiting from their presence in the country including:
A. End Sanctuary Cities by cutting off discretionary federal grant funds as appropriate to any community that, by law, ordinance, executive order, or other formal policy directs its public officials not to comply with the provisions of 8 USC 1373 and 8 USC 1644, which prohibit any state or local government from restricting in any way communications with the Department of Homeland Security “regarding the immigration status, lawful or unlawful, of an alien in the United States.”
B. Deny discretionary Federal education grants as appropriate to public universities that violate federal law by offering in-state tuition rates to illegal aliens without also offering identical benefits to United States citizens, regardless of whether or not they live in the state, as required by 8 USC 1623.
C. Deny discretionary Federal grants as appropriate to states and local governments that violate federal law by offering public benefits to illegal aliens, as prohibited by 8 USC 1621(a).
• Increased Border Security: Doubling Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents handling interior enforcement, increasing the Border Patrol to at least 25,000 agents, and increasing detention space to incarcerate illegal aliens we arrest rather than letting them go with a promise to show up later for legal proceedings against them.
• Attrition through Enforcement: Reduce the number of illegal aliens through increased enforcement against unauthorized alien workers and their employers. Without illegal employment opportunities available, fewer illegal aliens will attempt to enter the country, and many of those illegally in the country now likely will return home. This course of action offers a reasonable alternative to the false choices currently proposed to deal with the 12 million or more aliens already in the U.S. illegally: either arrest and deport them all, or give them all amnesty.
• Maximize Legal Immigration Program Efficiency: Reduce the backlogs and streamline the process for immigrants and employers who seek to follow the law. Also, simplify and expedite the application processes for temporary visas. Caps for any category of temporary work visa would be increased as appropriate, if it could be demonstrated that there are no Americans capable and willing to do the jobs.
• Modernize Immigration Law/Policy: Change the nature of our legal immigration system to welcome immigrants who can be economic contributors to our country and are willing to learn the English language and reduce the scope of chain migration by giving family preference in the allocation of lawful permanent resident status only to spouses and minor children of U.S. citizens, and no one else (no siblings, no parents, no adult children, etc.).
• English as Official Language: Make English the official language of the U.S. to promote assimilation and legal immigrants’ success, and require English proficiency in order for any foreign person to be granted lawful permanent resident status.
• Preference for American Military Service: Place those foreign persons who are lawfully present in the country and who serve honorably in the Armed Forces of the United States on a faster, surer track to U.S. citizenship.
View the full plan linked at Fred08.com
October 23rd, 2007 at 11:54 am
What is his plan when millions of them don’t go back and just stay with Family members or Friends who are legal?
October 23rd, 2007 at 11:56 am
Paul, these are just highlights of it. Let me dig through the whole thing first.
October 23rd, 2007 at 12:17 pm
My point is him, romney, or anyone else of the Attrition crowd does not have one, which is why they plan does not work.
October 23rd, 2007 at 12:52 pm
[...] post by Tommy Oliver and software by Elliott [...]
October 23rd, 2007 at 1:16 pm
This is good stuff. Team Thompson has really nailed this one on the head. Romney and Thompson seem to understand the immigration issue well.
October 23rd, 2007 at 1:24 pm
Fred has a bad record in the Senate with a lot of tangible votes:
http://theradicaltimes.blogspot.com/2007/06/fred-thompson-supports-open-borders-and.html
October 23rd, 2007 at 1:41 pm
#6 Thanks for the link, WiseGuy. People have obviously not looked closely at this guys past.
October 23rd, 2007 at 1:57 pm
Actually I don’t really care much about the issue of immigration (when compared to social-conservative issues like abortion and gay marriage), so Fred’s position neither hurts him or helps him in my eyes.
If Fred really wants to win over social conservatives, he needs to start supporting FMA. Recently, even Rudy has been warming up to FMA.
October 23rd, 2007 at 2:21 pm
i am glad freddy flip flopped his way back into the right direction in regards to immigration.
nice steal from romney about sancturary cities.
October 23rd, 2007 at 2:23 pm
Yes, coming out for something that can’t get pass is the way to go.
October 23rd, 2007 at 2:45 pm
Here’s a comment from Politico regarding FDT’s Release of the Immigration Plan:
One of Thompson’s advisers put this together. Not Fred. If the media wasn’t as foggy as Fred – being in his company for so long ,it’s probably contagious….they would summon the energy to ask him to recite all the details, verbatim, without notes. I guarantee you that he couldn’t. Brit Hume helpfully recited Thompson’s Social Security plan for him , in the form of a question ,during the debate on Sunday night. This gave Thompson the opportunity to answer, after a long pause-that Yes! -he did agree with his own plan. Hume didn’t ask Thompson to actually detail his own plan-guess that would have been too cruel.
Posted By: Yale | October 23, 2007 at 01:59 PM
October 23rd, 2007 at 3:02 pm
beth, when you take comments out of context, you look foolish. I’d suggest you look at the votes he cast that have been cherrypicked. You’ll notice that every republican voted for them.
Read The Campaign spot by Jim Geraughty for the criticism and response.\
Wiseguy,
You can’t be talking about immigration, unless we want to get into an argument about Huckabee calling the Tancredo’s of the world “racist.”
October 23rd, 2007 at 3:04 pm
beth,
And quoting a COMMENT from Politico is laughable. Good grief. Some of you will buy anything. I’ve heard the guy talk off the cuff about his ideas before, and he’s freaking smart as they come.
You’re not one of the “100 Best Lawyers in America” more than once by being an idiot.
October 23rd, 2007 at 5:05 pm
FDT can keep pushing on this issue all he wants – - maybe it will wake people on ALL sides up. (I am still for Rudy).
October 23rd, 2007 at 5:09 pm
“C. Deny discretionary Federal grants as appropriate to states and local governments that violate federal law by offering public benefits to illegal aliens, as prohibited by 8 USC 1621(a).”
Does this mean illegal immigrants should be left to die outside emergency rooms?
Maybe to emphasis the principle, we could get in their face while they die and yell, “Ha! YOU’RE not supposed to be here to BEGIN with!!! Maybe THIS will teach you not to break our laws!!!”
Hopefully life saving measures, fire protection, etc… are not what Fred and the law he cites mean by “public benefits.”