• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Cornyn Amendment

YoungConserv

DP Veteran
Joined
May 13, 2012
Messages
3,083
Reaction score
601
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
The amendment the senator offered is simple and straight to the point but is causing some argument in DC. I looked it over and did not see anything rnherientltly wrong with it, take a look and tell me what you think?


(A) not earlier than 9 years and 6 months after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary and the Commissioner of United States Customs and Border Protection jointly submit to the President and Congress a written certification, including a comprehensive report detailing the data, methodologies, and reasoning justifying such certification, that certifies, under penalty of perjury, that –
(i) the Secretary has achieved and maintained full situational awareness of the Southern border for the 12-month period immediately preceding such certification;
(ii) the Secretary has achieved and maintained operational control of the Southern border for the 12-month period immediately preceding such certification;
(iii) the Secretary has implemented the mandatory employment verification system required by section 274A of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1324a), as amended by section 3101 of this Act, for use by all employers to prevent unauthorized workers from obtaining employment in the United States; and
(iv) the Secretary has implemented a biometric entry and exit data system at all airports and seaports at which U.S. Customs and Border Protection personnel were deployed on the date of the enactment of this Act, and in accordance with the requirements set forth in section 7208 of the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 (8 U.S.C. 1365b)
 

Oceandan

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 9, 2013
Messages
1,482
Reaction score
699
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Have you read the 1000 pages plus, bill?? The fact we have "non democrats" offering amendments to make it more palatable is carrying water for a HORRIBLE piece of legislation.
 

YoungConserv

DP Veteran
Joined
May 13, 2012
Messages
3,083
Reaction score
601
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Have you read the 1000 pages plus, bill?? The fact we have "non democrats" offering amendments to make it more palatable is carrying water for a HORRIBLE piece of legislation.
No doubt but if its gonna get shoved down our throats we might as well limit the damage
 

jamesrage

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 31, 2005
Messages
34,507
Reaction score
16,298
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
The amendment the senator offered is simple and straight to the point but is causing some argument in DC. I looked it over and did not see anything rnherientltly wrong with it, take a look and tell me what you think?


(A) not earlier than 9 years and 6 months after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary and the Commissioner of United States Customs and Border Protection jointly submit to the President and Congress a written certification, including a comprehensive report detailing the data, methodologies, and reasoning justifying such certification, that certifies, under penalty of perjury, that –
(i) the Secretary has achieved and maintained full situational awareness of the Southern border for the 12-month period immediately preceding such certification;
(ii) the Secretary has achieved and maintained operational control of the Southern border for the 12-month period immediately preceding such certification;
(iii) the Secretary has implemented the mandatory employment verification system required by section 274A of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1324a), as amended by section 3101 of this Act, for use by all employers to prevent unauthorized workers from obtaining employment in the United States; and
(iv) the Secretary has implemented a biometric entry and exit data system at all airports and seaports at which U.S. Customs and Border Protection personnel were deployed on the date of the enactment of this Act, and in accordance with the requirements set forth in section 7208 of the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 (8 U.S.C. 1365b)
And after the 12-20 million plus illegals have their legal status the Cornyn Amendment and any other enforcement measured gets revoked or neutered and in twenty years from now our illegal immigration problem has tripled while the same traitorous scum in office propose another sucker the American people into another amnesty just like they did with the Reagan Amnesty.
 

YoungConserv

DP Veteran
Joined
May 13, 2012
Messages
3,083
Reaction score
601
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
And after the 12-20 million plus illegals have their legal status the Cornyn Amendment and any other enforcement measured gets revoked or neutered and in twenty years from now our illegal immigration problem has tripled while the same traitorous scum in office propose another sucker the American people into another amnesty just like they did with the Reagan Amnesty.
That's the whole point of the amendment the security comes first they have to show control of the border for a year befor legalization can take place.
 

jamesrage

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 31, 2005
Messages
34,507
Reaction score
16,298
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
That's the whole point of the amendment the security comes first they have to show control of the border for a year befor legalization can take place.
And once they have legal status then that border control can be revoked or neutered. Its not the before part people should worry about, it the after part people should worry about.Its like little Timmy telling little Suzie he will leave her alone if she gives him her cookie.All little Timmy has to do is leave little Suzie alone until he gets her cookie.Because once he gets her cookie and eats it then there is absolutely nothing in the world Suzie can do to prevent little Timmy from picking on her because that cookie is gone.I do not see pro-illegal immigration or even anti-illegal immigration politicians revoking legal status just because border security and any other enforcements provisions were removed or neutered.
 
Last edited:

Heebie Jeebie

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 8, 2013
Messages
5,016
Reaction score
1,290
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Have you read the 1000 pages plus, bill?? The fact we have "non democrats" offering amendments to make it more palatable is carrying water for a HORRIBLE piece of legislation.
1000 pages? Well that makes it only 1/2 as bad as Obamacare. :)
 

Deuce

Outer space potato man
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 6, 2010
Messages
75,648
Reaction score
33,246
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
No doubt but if its gonna get shoved down our throats we might as well limit the damage
You could try reading the bill instead of just regurgitating GOP catch phrases, it might give you some insight.

This amendment has an impossible standard: "full situational awareness" in anything is impossible.

Do you know what the "biometric entry and exist system" would entail?
 

Deuce

Outer space potato man
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 6, 2010
Messages
75,648
Reaction score
33,246
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
That's the whole point of the amendment the security comes first they have to show control of the border for a year befor legalization can take place.
No, that is not the point of the amendment. The point of the amendment is to set an impossible standard that people will be forced to vote against.
 

Cyrylek

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 27, 2013
Messages
3,467
Reaction score
1,715
Location
Boston
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
The amendment the senator offered is simple and straight to the point but is causing some argument in DC. I looked it over and did not see anything rnherientltly wrong with it, take a look and tell me what you think?
I see plenty wrong with it, regardless of your position on the "amnesty".

So, there is a plan to provide a long, slow "path" to permanent residency - and, eventually, citizenship - for the "illegal immigrants". And then - correct me if I am wrong - after all the efforts, the permanent status can be denied to all the applicants if following criteria are not met: 100 percent surveillance of the border (only the one on the south), 90 percent apprehension of newly crossing illegals, a biometric ID system at points of entry, and E-Verify nationally.

First, this is illogical and unethical, because it makes fates of millions dependent on something they have no control over. They can't even vote for more spending on border infrastructure projects, not being citizens.

Second, Sen. Cronyn is either disturbingly naïve about the workings of government or (more likely) playing games here.

There's no such thing as 100% surveillance of anything, anywhere. You always can claim that surveillance was only 88 or 95%, and torpedo the status change for all these people.

And how on earth do we determine that "90%" had been caught? 90% of what? We have to know the exact number of people who attempted to cross the border illegally in the first place, which is not really possible.

And "E-Verify nationally" - basically, making the Social Security Administration into a NSA-like agency spying on the whole workforce and every business - sure needs to be discussed on its own merits (and soundly defeated, in my opinion), not tucked sidewise into a behemoth of another legislation.
 

Oceandan

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 9, 2013
Messages
1,482
Reaction score
699
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
You could try reading the bill instead of just regurgitating GOP catch phrases, it might give you some insight.

This amendment has an impossible standard: "full situational awareness" in anything is impossible.

Do you know what the "biometric entry and exist system" would entail?
Have you read the bill??? It's unworkable as written. It's a LIE forced upon us by four democrats, two rino's and a couple of Senators who've lost their minds.
 

YoungConserv

DP Veteran
Joined
May 13, 2012
Messages
3,083
Reaction score
601
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Is love to see him attach this to every bill from now untill it's out.
 

donsutherland1

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 17, 2007
Messages
11,818
Reaction score
10,197
Location
New York
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
The amendment the senator offered is simple and straight to the point but is causing some argument in DC. I looked it over and did not see anything rnherientltly wrong with it, take a look and tell me what you think?

...
The Amendment is much lengthier than what is quoted. It is 134 pages in length. For those who are interested, the full text of the Cornyn Amendment can be found at: http://www.cornyn.senate.gov/public/?a=Files.Serve&File_id=d5686d39-7ca9-4cbc-a8be-7fd6f63a98e7

The benchmark achievement of “full situational awareness” may be impractical. Situational awareness is measured by an “effectiveness rate” that is calculated as follows: the number of illegal border crossers who are apprehended or turned back divided by the total number of illegal entries. According to that metric, full situational awareness entails 100% of total illegal entrants being apprehended or turned back. That would be tantamount to stating that 100% of criminals are apprehended (some percentage escape no matter how intrusive law enforcement efforts are) or 100% of illegal drugs are interdicted (some smuggling efforts are successful no matter how meticulous narcotics enforcement efforts are).

The Amendment also prohibits any naturalization of the undocumented immigrants for at least 9 ½ years and bars it unless full situational awareness has been achieved for a 12-month period. In effect, the Amendment locks the undocumented immigrants into a provisional status while failing to define exactly what the “registered provisional” status entails. Without a shorter time frame, a more realistic benchmark, and a concrete definition of “registered provisional” status, this amendment could, in terms of substance, wind up locking in a situation that differs little from the status quo that most parties to the immigration debate find unacceptable.

Ideas for improving border security and introducing metrics are helpful, in general. However, they need to be realistic. That’s where this Amendment might fall short. Needless to say, opponents of immigration reform might well describe this amendment as aiding “amnesty” as it leaves a theoretical opening for undocumented immigrants to become naturalized, even if its criteria are very unlikely to be fulfilled.
 
Top Bottom