On May 12, 2006 I sent the following letter to Illinois Senators Dick Durbin and Barack Obama and Senate Majority Leader William Frisk.
According to the Peoria Journal Star, my local newspaper, the Senate will once again consider “Immigration Legislation” next week. I hope that you and the other Senators will not be coerced into allowing a path to citizenship to individuals who have illegally entered our country.
Enclosed is a letter to the editor as published which I wrote. Also enclosed is the original as posted on my blog site:
http://www.christiangunslinger.blogspot.com/
I have no doubt that a majority of the United States citizens does not want Congress to rewrite our immigration laws to allow illegal immigrants to become United States citizens. Please vote accordingly! Thank you.
Only Senate Dick Durbin has responded to my letter at this time. I am posting the body of the letter in its entirety with my comments. The letter was dated May 25, 2006—the same day that the Senate passed legislation providing a method to allow illegal immigrants to become United States citizens. Senator Durbin voted for that legislation.
“Thank you for taking the time to contact me to express your views regarding immigration. I appreciate hearing from you on this important issue.
I understand your concerns about illegal immigration. I support efforts to prevent illegal entry into the United States. I have voted for legislation that has boosted the number of Border Patrol and Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents, strengthened the standards for the issuance of visas, and given the federal government more authority to investigate the smuggling of illegal aliens. I also support efforts to level the playing field for native U.S. workers by bringing the undocumented immigration workforce out of the shadows and requiring employers to comply with immigration, wage, and labor protection laws.
I believe that any immigration reform legislation that emerges from the Senate must provide a comprehensive solution to the complex set of immigration-related problems we face. We must strengthen the security of our borders through the use of advanced detection technology, increase manpower and resources for our Border Patrol, and the targeting of illegal smuggling networks. We also must address one of the root causes of illegal immigration: the willingness of American employers to hire undocumented workers. Comprehensive immigration reform should create an effective electronic verification system for employees, and hold employers accountable when they hire unauthorized immigrants.
While immigration reform must acknowledge that illegal immigrants have violated the law, we cannot ignore the fact that millions of undocumented immigrants in the United States are already part of our communities and our economy. Comprehensive immigration reform must bring these immigrants out of the shadows so we can distinguish those who are contributing members of our society from those who are a threat. We must also provide an opportunity for immigrants who work hard, pay taxes, have no criminal records, and learn the English language to advance on the path toward legal permanent residence and citizenship. In our nation, a path to earned legalization has always been open to immigrants pursuing the American dream.
Finally, our government must protect Americans who provide humanitarian aid and spiritual guidance to their neighbors, including illegal immigrants. I will not support legislation that turns our priests, doctors, and neighbors into criminals because they have helped those around them in times of need.
On March 27, the Senate Judiciary Committee, on which I serve, voted to pass immigration reform legislation drafted by Senator Arlen Specter. Senator Specter’s legislation combines elements of various immigration reform proposals, including the legislation introduced by Senators McCain and Kennedy and a bill (H.R. 4437) passed by the House of Representatives. Senator Specter’s legislation advances many of the goals I outlined above, and it would establish an immigration system that is tough but fair. I voted for the Specter legislation in committee and continued to support its principles on the Senate floor.
There is no doubt that our current immigration system is broken. We must replace it with one that is tough and effective, but that is also fair and consistent with our values. I will continue to support legislation that advances us toward these goals.
Thank you again for sharing your views with me.”
Note that my letter on May 12, 2006 was very specific and addressed only one issue—“Senators will not be coerced into allowing a path to citizenship to individuals who have illegally entered our country.” Senator Durbin in his reply to my letter addresses that specific issue in only one paragraph of his response. In the fourth paragraph he declares “We must also provide an opportunity for immigrants who work hard, pay taxes, have no criminal records, and learn the English language to advance on the path toward legal permanent residence and citizenship. In our nation, a path to earned legalization has always been open to immigrants pursuing the American dream.”
Note that in neither of these two quoted sentences does the Senator use the term illegal immigrants. He also does not use the term undocumented immigrants the “politically correct” term used to soften the concept that these immigrants are not in the United States legally. If he is referring to immigrants who entered the United States legally, I agree. If he is referring to illegal immigrants, I absolutely disagree. First, he is incorrect if he is implying that the United States has always provided a method for illegal immigrants to become United States citizens. Furthermore, although an illegal immigrant may not have a criminal record since the United States has for whatever reason decided not to prosecute him for his illegal acts, by definition; an immigrant in this country illegally has violated our laws. If we know someone has violated our laws should we ignore it just because the government has chosen not to prosecute him? That indeed is a strange way to govern!!!
The Senator declares “We must also provide an opportunity….” My dictionary in defining the word “must” uses such terms as compelled, required, commanded, and obligated. I don’t know of any reason and the Senator does not give any reason why we “must” give citizenship to individuals who knowingly and deliberately violated our laws. In fact, I would argue and do argue the exact opposite. We must not grant citizenship to those who have violated our laws to enter the United States. They began the process illegally. What part of illegal doesn’t the Senator understand?
Let’s take an example the Senator might understand. During the Senator’s next election, the Republican Party nominates a dynamic, energetic, charismatic, rich candidate to run against him in the election. The Senator loses the election to the Republican. It is then determined that the Republican had violated a provision of the United States Constitution because he was only 25 years old at the time of the election and the United States Constitution requires all Senators to be at least 30 years of age. Would the Senator say that the Republican must be our elected Senator since he won the election even though he was illegally elected because of the age requirement? What do you think?
CONGRESS: GOVERNMENT SHOULD NOT REWARD ILLEGAL ACTS! DO NOT PROVIDE A PATH TO CITIZENSHIP TO THOSE WHO DELIBERATELY AND KNOWINGLY VIOLATED OUR IMMIGRATION LAWS!!!!
According to the Peoria Journal Star, my local newspaper, the Senate will once again consider “Immigration Legislation” next week. I hope that you and the other Senators will not be coerced into allowing a path to citizenship to individuals who have illegally entered our country.
Enclosed is a letter to the editor as published which I wrote. Also enclosed is the original as posted on my blog site:
http://www.christiangunslinger.blogspot.com/
I have no doubt that a majority of the United States citizens does not want Congress to rewrite our immigration laws to allow illegal immigrants to become United States citizens. Please vote accordingly! Thank you.
Only Senate Dick Durbin has responded to my letter at this time. I am posting the body of the letter in its entirety with my comments. The letter was dated May 25, 2006—the same day that the Senate passed legislation providing a method to allow illegal immigrants to become United States citizens. Senator Durbin voted for that legislation.
“Thank you for taking the time to contact me to express your views regarding immigration. I appreciate hearing from you on this important issue.
I understand your concerns about illegal immigration. I support efforts to prevent illegal entry into the United States. I have voted for legislation that has boosted the number of Border Patrol and Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents, strengthened the standards for the issuance of visas, and given the federal government more authority to investigate the smuggling of illegal aliens. I also support efforts to level the playing field for native U.S. workers by bringing the undocumented immigration workforce out of the shadows and requiring employers to comply with immigration, wage, and labor protection laws.
I believe that any immigration reform legislation that emerges from the Senate must provide a comprehensive solution to the complex set of immigration-related problems we face. We must strengthen the security of our borders through the use of advanced detection technology, increase manpower and resources for our Border Patrol, and the targeting of illegal smuggling networks. We also must address one of the root causes of illegal immigration: the willingness of American employers to hire undocumented workers. Comprehensive immigration reform should create an effective electronic verification system for employees, and hold employers accountable when they hire unauthorized immigrants.
While immigration reform must acknowledge that illegal immigrants have violated the law, we cannot ignore the fact that millions of undocumented immigrants in the United States are already part of our communities and our economy. Comprehensive immigration reform must bring these immigrants out of the shadows so we can distinguish those who are contributing members of our society from those who are a threat. We must also provide an opportunity for immigrants who work hard, pay taxes, have no criminal records, and learn the English language to advance on the path toward legal permanent residence and citizenship. In our nation, a path to earned legalization has always been open to immigrants pursuing the American dream.
Finally, our government must protect Americans who provide humanitarian aid and spiritual guidance to their neighbors, including illegal immigrants. I will not support legislation that turns our priests, doctors, and neighbors into criminals because they have helped those around them in times of need.
On March 27, the Senate Judiciary Committee, on which I serve, voted to pass immigration reform legislation drafted by Senator Arlen Specter. Senator Specter’s legislation combines elements of various immigration reform proposals, including the legislation introduced by Senators McCain and Kennedy and a bill (H.R. 4437) passed by the House of Representatives. Senator Specter’s legislation advances many of the goals I outlined above, and it would establish an immigration system that is tough but fair. I voted for the Specter legislation in committee and continued to support its principles on the Senate floor.
There is no doubt that our current immigration system is broken. We must replace it with one that is tough and effective, but that is also fair and consistent with our values. I will continue to support legislation that advances us toward these goals.
Thank you again for sharing your views with me.”
Note that my letter on May 12, 2006 was very specific and addressed only one issue—“Senators will not be coerced into allowing a path to citizenship to individuals who have illegally entered our country.” Senator Durbin in his reply to my letter addresses that specific issue in only one paragraph of his response. In the fourth paragraph he declares “We must also provide an opportunity for immigrants who work hard, pay taxes, have no criminal records, and learn the English language to advance on the path toward legal permanent residence and citizenship. In our nation, a path to earned legalization has always been open to immigrants pursuing the American dream.”
Note that in neither of these two quoted sentences does the Senator use the term illegal immigrants. He also does not use the term undocumented immigrants the “politically correct” term used to soften the concept that these immigrants are not in the United States legally. If he is referring to immigrants who entered the United States legally, I agree. If he is referring to illegal immigrants, I absolutely disagree. First, he is incorrect if he is implying that the United States has always provided a method for illegal immigrants to become United States citizens. Furthermore, although an illegal immigrant may not have a criminal record since the United States has for whatever reason decided not to prosecute him for his illegal acts, by definition; an immigrant in this country illegally has violated our laws. If we know someone has violated our laws should we ignore it just because the government has chosen not to prosecute him? That indeed is a strange way to govern!!!
The Senator declares “We must also provide an opportunity….” My dictionary in defining the word “must” uses such terms as compelled, required, commanded, and obligated. I don’t know of any reason and the Senator does not give any reason why we “must” give citizenship to individuals who knowingly and deliberately violated our laws. In fact, I would argue and do argue the exact opposite. We must not grant citizenship to those who have violated our laws to enter the United States. They began the process illegally. What part of illegal doesn’t the Senator understand?
Let’s take an example the Senator might understand. During the Senator’s next election, the Republican Party nominates a dynamic, energetic, charismatic, rich candidate to run against him in the election. The Senator loses the election to the Republican. It is then determined that the Republican had violated a provision of the United States Constitution because he was only 25 years old at the time of the election and the United States Constitution requires all Senators to be at least 30 years of age. Would the Senator say that the Republican must be our elected Senator since he won the election even though he was illegally elected because of the age requirement? What do you think?
CONGRESS: GOVERNMENT SHOULD NOT REWARD ILLEGAL ACTS! DO NOT PROVIDE A PATH TO CITIZENSHIP TO THOSE WHO DELIBERATELY AND KNOWINGLY VIOLATED OUR IMMIGRATION LAWS!!!!
posted by Christian Gunslinger at 11:24 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home