A timely post from http://www.vdare.com about Donald Trump's immigration speech. This follows this post about the allegations about Donald Trump doing housing discrimination. This follows this post about rap songs referencing Donald Trump.
You can follow me here.

<

Trump’s Great Immigration Speech–If It Doesn’t Save America, Nothing Can

---

Washington Watcher

After two weeks of speculation of whether he would soften his stance on immigration, Donald Trump gave an amazing, astounding, detailed and rock solid speech outlining his patriotic immigration reform agenda. Trump reaffirmed his pledge to secure the borders, oppose any Amnesty, restrict refugee admissions, and enact tough interior enforcement measures. Additionally, he supported strict enforcement of E-Verify and laid out principles for legal immigration reform which unmistakably implied lower numbers and high quality immigrants.
In this piece I will answer three questions:

• Did Trump backtrack?
• Why did he seem to be waffling before the speech?
• Will this help him win?

The short answers: No; I’m not sure; and—almost certainly, yes.
Did Trump Backtrack?
Trump clarified and, in some cases, finessed his previously bluntly-stated positions. However, he did not alter the substance away from patriotic immigration reform.

• No wiggle room for Amnesty: Even some of Trump’s supporters have worried that he would support some form a “touchback” Amnesty, whereby illegal aliens would have to leave the country, but could immediately re-apply for citizenship. But Trump in his speech said specifically that the “one route” for illegals to obtain legal status is “to return home and apply for re-entry like everybody else, under the rules of the new legal immigration system that I have outlined above.”

Touchback amnesty plans–like the one Mike Pence proposed in 2006–include a special visa under which the illegals are to re-apply, or simply greatly increase legal immigration numbers so they can quickly gain re-entry. Trump, however, made clear that illegals “will not be awarded surplus visas, but will have to apply for entry under the immigration caps.”
Trump concluded that we would not have any “discussion” to “consider the appropriate disposition” of the remaining illegal aliens until “several years” after “illegal immigration is a memory of the past.”
In other words: well into Trump’s second term, after all the bulk of the illegal aliens have been deported or left on their own, Trump might—might—consider giving Amnesty to the few that remain.

• Deportation priorities: Trump said he would “set priorities” for those he would deport, specifically “removing criminals, gang members, security threats, visa overstays, public charges.”

It’s noteworthy that “visa overstays” constitute around 40% of the illegal population–including 60% of recent illegals, and Trump cited a Center for Immigration Studies paper that found that 62% of illegal alien households received welfare.
Of course, the Obama administration has always justified its non-enforcement of the law by saying it was prioritizing removal of terrorists, gang members, and violent criminals. But unlike Obama, who uses prioritizing enforcement against terrorists and violent criminals as a euphemism to mean he won’t deport anyone else, Trump clarified that under his administration “anyone who has entered the United States illegally is subject to deportation.”

• Deportation Force to Deportation Task Force: Probably the biggest buzz over the last couple of weeks was whether Trump would drop his call for a “deportation force.”

In his speech, Trump stated that “within ICE I am going to create a new special deportation task force focused on identifying and quickly removing the most dangerous criminal illegal immigrants in America who have evaded justice.” This is not what the Main Stream Media really had in mind by “deportation force.” But of course, ICE is supposed to be a deportation force to begin with.
Actually, Trump never proposed a deportation force. When Mika Brzezinski asked him  “Are you going to have a massive deportation force,” Trump just let her put words in his mouth he would support it without elaborating. [Trump: You’re Going To Have A “Deportation Force,” They’ll Be Humane, by Tim Haines, Real Clear Politics, November 11, 2015]

• Muslim Ban to Country Ban: Trump stated he would suspend “suspend the issuance of visas to any place where adequate screening cannot occur,” specifically singling out Syria and Libya.

This differs from his previous statement that he would suspend all Muslim immigration. This is not news, as he had modified this statement earlier. As I’ve written, there are pros and cons to each approach, but his fundamental premise—that excluding potential terrorists, even if that means keeping out some perfectly innocent babies in the toxic bathwater, is the most effective way prevent terrorism– remains
So what was going on?
Trump and his campaign manager Kellyanne Conway have been giving mixed signals over the last few weeks, implying he was “softening,” might be open to some limited Amnesty or would really back off of deportations. Ann Coulter was so annoyed that she said she might cancel the publicity tour for her excellent new book In Trump We Trust if Trump embraced Amnesty [Trump’s immigration pivot a buzzkill for Coulter’s book tour, CNN, August 26, 2016]
So why did Trump give all of his most dedicated supporters heartburn worrying he would back down? I have no inside information, but here are a few possibilities:

• Trump was making Beltway immigration patriot arguments poorly. Black MSNBC reporter Joy Reid tweeted

ADVERTISEMENT

Non nobis domine! In our modest opinion, Trump’s speech sounded distinctly more like NumbersUSA’s Roy Beck, Center for Immigration Studies’ Mark Krikorian and other herbivorous Beltway immigration patriots, who have emphasized that we do not need massive deportations to get the illegal population to return to their home country. Krikorian calls this “attrition through enforcement”—combining E-Verify, cutting off welfare, and increasing interior enforcement through cooperation with state law enforcement.  [Pew Report Shows Attrition of the Illegal Population Is Possible, By Mark Krikorian, CIS.org,  November 2015]
Prior to the speech Trump rarely discussed immigration enforcement beyond deportations—something I criticized way back in November 2015. Now he has finally adopted the more sophisticated attrition approach, citing CIS and using its buzzwords like “jobs magnet.”
But while Beck and Krikorian are good at making pretty strong policy proposals sound much less tough than they actually are, this requires them to use words very carefully. Trump, we must concede, does not choose his words carefully. Thus Trump could take Roy Beck’s argument that “we aren’t going to deport everyone, most illegals will return on their own if we remove the jobs magnet” without mentioning E-Verify and it would sound like amnesty.

• Internal debate: Still, Trump’s trumpeting does not fully explain the “softening” stories. Obviously, some of his more precise surrogates did prepare the MSM for a pivot.

The campaign recently replaced the relatively establishment Paul Manafort with Breitbart chief Stephen Bannon as campaign CEO and pollster Kellyanne Conway as campaign manager. Conway was the main voice suggesting that Trump might soften his tone ahead of the speech, telling Face the Nation “he is not talking about a deportation force, but he is talking about being fair and humane.” Bannon and former Jeff Sessions aide Stephen Miller wrote the Arizona speech (though that was always the plan). It’s possible that there was an internal struggle with Conway, which they won.
However, it’s worth noting that Conway has been pretty solid on immigration long before Trump and she may have simply been pushing the aforementioned clarifications as the “fair and humane” policies. Indeed, as I noted, Trump even called the “Deportation Force” humane. Conway also took the fight to Clinton’s “Full Merkel” Amnesty/ Immigration Surge proposals, as Trump did in his speech. [Kellyanne Conway: Clinton camp made ‘grievous error’, By David Wright, CNN, August 22, 2016]

• 3D Chess: If nothing else, Trump knows how to manipulate the media. Could that be what he was doing here?

The MSM would probably have paid no more attention to Trump’s speech than to his other recent strong statements (here and here and here) if they thought he would just give a few extra details to the same policies he’s promoted the entire campaign. However, because there appeared to be a big chance he would flip-flop on his signature issue, it became his most anticipated speech since the Convention.
Maybe that’s what Trump wanted the whole time. As it is, Trump’s rumored flip flop ended up further cementing hardline immigration patriotism as the centerpiece of his campaign.
But will it help Trump win?
The MSM is predictably claiming that immigration patriotism will doom Trump’s chances. The Washington Post’s James Hohmann, typified this conventional wisdom:

Republicans facing four more years in the wilderness will long recall the raucous rally in Phoenix as a low point of the Trump campaign, perhaps even as the moment that he definitively extinguished his hopes of becoming president.
[Trump triples down on a losing immigration position in Phoenix, September 1, 2016]

Hohmann goes on to bring up the spectre of Proposition 187 and the damage it supposedly caused the Republican brand.
And Trump had (ill-advisedly) allowed pro-amnesty consultants like Alfonso Aguilar onto his National Hispanic Advisory Council. The original rumors that he would flip flop came from this Council and now many members are withdrawing their support [Several Hispanic Trump surrogates reconsider support, by Katie Glueck & Kyle Cheney, Politico, September 1, 2016]
VDARE.com has repeatedly debunked the myths about Proposition 187 and the Hispanic Vote. Without repeating all the arguments, it’s notable that less than half of Hispanics are eligible to vote, that they are concentrated in non-swing states and that they turn out at the lowest level of any other group [Why Hispanics Don’t Have a Larger Political Voice, by Nate Cohn, New York Times, June 15, 2014]. Even though Trump is the first Republican Presidential nominee to run on a true immigration patriot position, Hispanic apathy persists, with recent polls showing they are less worried about the outcome of the election than any other ethnic group [In U.S., Hispanics Least Worried About Election Outcome, Gallup, July 13, 2016]
That being said, of course not every single white voter is an immigration patriot. Furthermore, Hillary Clinton is running on an openly anti-American immigration policy and making it central to her campaign. The more cautious course would have been for Trump to focus on 80-20 proxy-type issues like Administrative Amnesty, Official English, and sanctuary cities to turn out the White Vote.
Still I think Trump made the right decision. Had he focused on these popular, but ultimately peripheral issues, immigration would not be central to the campaign. And American voters have not only never had a choice to vote on immigration patriotism—they have never heard the arguments for it.
Take total immigration levels. Polls show about half of Americans support reducing legal immigration levels, while 15% think it should be increased, and 34% think it should stay the same [U.S. Public Has Mixed Views of Immigrants and Immigration, Pew Research Center, September 28, 2015]. If Trump had simply said immigration should stay the same while focused on attacking Hillary for increasing legal immigration, 85% of the country would agree with him more than her.
Yet after hearing Trump say “legal immigration to serve the best interests of America and its workers,” and we should “select immigrants based on their likelihood of success in U.S. society, and their ability to be financially self-sufficient,” I believe there is every chance that reducing immigration will become an 80-20 issue.
Perhaps I am putting too much faith in the common sense of the American people. But if Trump’s great speech in Phoenix cannot convince them to save their country, it is already lost.
Washington Watcher [email him] is an anonymous source Inside The Beltway.

An interesting article from www.numbersusa.com about sanctuary cities. This follows this post about indictment for harboring illegal aliens. Remember, “Amnesty” means ANY non-enforcement of existing immigration laws! This follows this comment and this post about how to Report Illegal Immigrants! Also, you can read two very interesting books HERE.
Please follow me here.

IG: Sanctuary Policies Violate Federal Law 

 https://www.numbersusa.com/sendfax

The Department of Justice’s Inspector General has released a memorandum that finds that the practices of sanctuary jurisdictions violate federal law. This report was only made public after the Senate voted down Sen. Toomey’s bill that would have ended sanctuary practices.
The IG report showed that sanctuary jurisdictions who inhibit police from cooperating with ICE detainer requests are in violation of federal law yet have received millions in federal Justice grants. According to the report 10 out of the 155 jurisdictions examined by the IG were given over $342.1 million in Justice grants or about 63% of funds available to all American cities.
“The Inspector General’s decision is sound and firmly settles the question. Now, the law and the American people demand that this Administration cease its acquiescence in this illegality. The Obama Administration must immediately take action to withhold significant federal law enforcement funding for these offending jurisdictions,” Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.) wrote in a press release.
The report was finished two months ago but was wrongfully marked ‘Law Enforcement Sensitive’ and so was not made available till after the Senate voted down Sen. Patrick Toomey’s (R-Penn) bill, The Stop Dangerous Sanctuary Cities Act (S. 3100).
The bill would have defined a "sanctuary city" as any state-level jurisdiction that fails to communicate with federal immigration officers or comply with a detainer request. The bill sought to block community and economic development grants to jurisdictions that fit the definition and protect local police from liability if they act on behalf of federal immigration agents. The bill only gained 53 of the 60 votes needed to pass.
In response to the bill’s defeat Rep. John Culberson (R-Texas) sent a letter to Attorney General Loretta Lynch warning her that if she did not take specific actions to stop sanctuary jurisdictions from receiving federal grants he would use his position as Chairman of the Commerce, Justice, and Science Subcommittee on Appropriations to remove her ability to move money around within the department. Lynch has taken the actions outlined in Rep. Culberson’s letter.
Read more on this story at The Washington Examiner.

 

 

A timely post from http://www.vdare.com about victims of immigrant crime. This follows this post about Donald Trump's acceptance speech. This follows this post about the murder of police officers and the denial of due process to them.This follows this post about rap songs referencing Donald Trump.
You can follow me here.

Candidate Clinton chose the Spanish-speaking Senator Tim Kaine as her Vice President. He is also a big amnesty supporter and promised action in the first hundred days.

<

Trump’s Convention Featured Victims Of Illegals, Hillary’s Will Feature The Illegals Themselves

---

Brenda Walker

At the GOP Convention, victims of illegal aliens were given a forum to tell their stories of preventable crime, and candidate Trump highlighted those families in his acceptance speech. The point was made that illegal immigration brings suffering and death along with cheap workers.
But Democrats have a different idea about law and borders: for their convention, illegal aliens are being showcased as honored guests rather than job-stealing welfare-abusing moochers.
Hillary & Co. are happy to shred American sovereignty and the safety of citizens in order pander to Hispanics to the maximum degree. The US political system is based around responsible, engaged citizens but Democrats see the globalist borderless model as being more advantageous for them because many people on earth live under a big government and expect even more freebies from Washington. Immigrants routinely leave their socialist homelands for the better opportunities in the United States, but after their arrival they like politics working remake the US into a big government behemoth like the places they left. The foreigners don’t seem to grasp that the opportunity they sought arises from free markets being allowed to function.
Such people are perfect Democrat recruits. They want lots of free stuff and hope that somebody else will pay the taxes required.
As a result, Democrats are rolling out the red carpet for “our nation’s brave undocumented youth” and adults. One Bolivian illegal is serving on the credentials committee — who says Democrats don’t have a sense of the absurd?

Undocumented immigrants given roles at Democratic convention, Reuters, July 22, 2016
The Democratic Party has selected a handful of undocumented immigrants for official roles at next week’s Democratic National Convention, in a bid to highlight the gaping policy divide on immigration between White House hopeful Hillary Clinton and Republican rival Donald Trump.
Clinton is hoping to drive Latino voters to the polls on Nov. 8 to shore up her chances against Trump, who has campaigned on a promise to crack down on illegal immigration by building a wall along the Mexican border and deporting millions of undocumented foreigners if elected.
“Our nation is a nation of immigrants that believes in being inclusive, and that’s exactly what we will continue to work toward,” said Leah Daughtry, the chief executive officer of the committee organizing the July 25-28 convention in Philadelphia.
“The voices of our nation’s brave undocumented youth will be heard loud and clear,” Daughtry added.
The picks include two members of the convention credentials and platform committees, as well as several speakers. The positions are unpaid, officials said.
Trump’s campaign, which has argued that unchecked immigration hurts American workers and undermines national security, criticized the move.
“Apparently speaking at Hillary Clinton’s convention is just one more job Hillary Clinton thinks Americans won’t do,” a Trump campaign aide said in an emailed statement. “She should have instead invited unemployed Americans, or victims of crime, or law enforcement.”
The selections are legal because of a “deferred action program” adopted by President Barack Obama’s administration, which postpones deportations and provides work authorization for some immigrants brought to the United States as children. The Supreme Court blocked efforts to expand those protections last month.
The nominations mark the first time a major U.S. political party’s convention has featured so many undocumented workers among its ranks. While there was an undocumented speaker at the 2012 Democratic convention, the party has not previously tracked the immigration status of its committee members.
“It changes the whole conversation when you have someone directly affected at the table,” said Cesar Vargas, a Mexican immigrant chosen for the party’s policy platform committee.
Hareth Andrade, 23, an undocumented immigrant from Bolivia who was approved under a deferred action program, was picked for the credentials committee. The convention will also feature at least two undocumented immigrant speakers, Astrid Silva and Francisca Ortiz.
Clinton already has overwhelming support from minorities. Some 70 percent back her, compared with 9 percent for Trump, according to recent Reuters/Ipsos polling, suggesting that she could have a strong chance in states like Florida, Nevada and Colorado that swing between voting Democratic and Republican in presidential elections.
However, voter turnout among Latinos has traditionally been low, hitting only about 40 percent in 2012, meaning her challenge is to get more of them to cast ballots this year.
Luis Fraga, co-director of the Institute for Latino Studies at the University of Notre Dame, said showing a commitment to progressive reform of U.S. immigration policy could help Clinton do that.
He called immigration a gateway issue for minority voters that can help engage them. That’s especially so because even Latinos born in the United States are often not far removed from family members who are immigrants themselves.
“Although it’s not their individual experience, it is their family’s experience,” Fraga said.

A timely post from http://www.vdare.com about Donald Trump's acceptance speech. This follows this post about the murder of police officers and the denial of due process to them.This follows this post about rap songs referencing Donald Trump.
You can follow me here.

<

The Amount Of Immigration Patriotism In Donald Trump’s Speech Is Amazing!

---

James Fulford

The amount of immigration patriotism in Donald Trump’s speech is amazing. I’ve selected a couple of sections and added emphases, but you should probably read and watch the whole thing. (Quotations below are from the Politico version of the speech as prepared.)The take from MSNBC’s Chris Hayes:
Yes!

The number of new illegal immigrant families who have crossed the border so far this year already exceeds the entire total from 2015. They are being released by the tens of thousands into our communities with no regard for the impact on public safety or resources.
One such border-crosser was released and made his way to Nebraska. There, he ended the life of an innocent young girl named Sarah Root. She was 21 years-old, and was killed the day after graduating from college with a 4.0 Grade Point Average. Her killer was then released a second time, and he is now a fugitive from the law.
I’ve met Sarah’s beautiful family. But to this Administration, their amazing daughter was just one more American life that wasn’t worth protecting. One more child to sacrifice on the altar of open borders.

Trump’s reference of the Sara Root killing has the Five Fast Facts people at Heavy.com actually including immigration status as a “Fast Fact”:

Sarah Root: 5 Fast Facts You Need to Know

1. Eswin Mejia’s Blood Alcohol Level Was 4 Times Over the Legal Limit, According to Cops
2. In a Congressional Testimony, Root’s Mother Said Mejia’s Bond Was Less Than the Cost of Her Daughter’s Funeral
3. Root Graduated From Bellevue University the Day Before Her Death
4. Mejia Is Now on the ICE’s Most Wanted List But Authorities Don’t Want to ‘Focus’ on His Immigration Status

More from Trump:

My plan will begin with safety at home – which means safe neighborhoods, secure borders, and protection from terrorism. There can be no prosperity without law and order. On the economy, I will outline reforms to add millions of new jobs and trillions in new wealth that can be used to rebuild America.
A number of these reforms that I will outline tonight will be opposed by some of our nation’s most powerful special interests. That is because these interests have rigged our political and economic system for their exclusive benefit.
Big business, elite media and major donors are lining up behind the campaign of my opponent because they know she will keep our rigged system in place. They are throwing money at her because they have total control over everything she does. She is their puppet, and they pull the strings.
That is why Hillary Clinton’s message is that things will never change. My message is that things have to change – and they have to change right now.

This is great, and he not only talks about illegal immigration, but the negative effects of legal immigration–a thing that has been known to cause neoconservatives to turn purple with rage.

My opponent has called for a radical 550% increase in Syrian refugees on top of existing massive refugee flows coming into our country under President Obama. She proposes this despite the fact that there’s no way to screen these refugees in order to find out who they are or where they come from. I only want to admit individuals into our country who will support our values and love our people.
Anyone who endorses violence, hatred or oppression is not welcome in our country and never will be.
Decades of record immigration have produced lower wages and higher unemployment for our citizens, especially for African-American and Latino workers. We are going to have an immigration system that works, but one that works for the American people.
On Monday, we heard from three parents whose children were killed by illegal immigrants Mary Ann Mendoza, Sabine Durden, and Jamiel Shaw. They are just three brave representatives of many thousands. Of all my travels in this country, nothing has affected me more deeply than the time I have spent with the mothers and fathers who have lost their children to violence spilling across our border.
These families have no special interests to represent them. There are no demonstrators to protest on their behalf. My opponent will never meet with them, or share in their pain. Instead, my opponent wants Sanctuary Cities. But where was sanctuary for Kate Steinle? Where was Sanctuary for the children of Mary Ann, Sabine and Jamiel? Where was sanctuary for all the other Americans who have been so brutally murdered, and who have suffered so horribly?
These wounded American families have been alone. But they are alone no longer. Tonight, this candidate and this whole nation stand in their corner to support them, to send them our love, and to pledge in their honor that we will save countless more families from suffering the same awful fate.
We are going to build a great border wall to stop illegal immigration, to stop the gangs and the violence, and to stop the drugs from pouring into our communities. I have been honored to receive the endorsement of America’s Border Patrol Agents, and will work directly with them to protect the integrity of our lawful immigration system.
By ending catch-and-release on the border, we will stop the cycle of human smuggling and violence. Illegal border crossings will go down. Peace will be restored. By enforcing the rules for the millions who overstay their visas, our laws will finally receive the respect they deserve.
Tonight, I want every American whose demands for immigration security have been denied – and every politician who has denied them – to listen very closely to the words I am about to say.
On January 21st of 2017, the day after I take the oath of office, Americans will finally wake up in a country where the laws of the United States are enforced. We are going to be considerate and compassionate to everyone.
But my greatest compassion will be for our own struggling citizens. My plan is the exact opposite of the radical and dangerous immigration policy of Hillary Clinton. Americans want relief from uncontrolled immigration. Communities want relief.
Yet Hillary Clinton is proposing mass amnesty, mass immigration, and mass lawlessness. Her plan will overwhelm your schools and hospitals, further reduce your jobs and wages, and make it harder for recent immigrants to escape from poverty.
I have a different vision for our workers.

Read the whole thing.

GOP Immigration Platform focuses on American Workers and Enforcement

An interesting article from http://www.vdare.com about the Immigration policies of the GOP. This follows this post about candidate Trump among Hispanics. Remember, “Amnesty” means ANY non-enforcement of existing immigration laws! This follows this comment and this post about how to Report Illegal Immigrants! Also, you can read two very interesting books HERE.
Please follow me here.

GOP Immigration Platform focuses on American Workers and Enforcement

 https://www.numbersusa.com/sendfax

The immigration section of 2016 Republican Platform calls for a system that serves the national interest of the United States, focuses on protecting the American worker, opposes amnesty for illegal aliens, and promotes E-Verify, interior enforcement, and border security. The Party's platform, approved on Monday, states that immigration "must protect American working families and their wages, for citizens and legal immigrants alike, in a way that will improve the economy."
Outside of the immigration section, the Platform also recognizes states' rights to enforce federal immigration laws and connects the importance of immigration enforcement to national security.
Here's the immigration section of the 2016 Republican Platform in its entirety:

Our party is the natural home for those who come in search of freedom and justice. We welcome all to the Great Opportunity Party.
The greatest asset of the American economy is the American worker. Our immigration system must protect American working families and their wages, for citizens and legal immigrants alike, in a way that will improve the economy. Just as immigrant labor helped build our country in the past, today’s legal immigrants are making vital contributions in every aspect of national life. Their industry and commitment to American values strengthens our economy, enriches our culture, and enables us to better understand and more effectively compete with the rest of the world. We are particularly grateful to the thousands of new legal immigrants, many of them not yet citizens, who are serving in the Armed Forces and among first responders. Their patriotism should encourage all to embrace the newcomers legally among us, assist their journey to full citizenship, and help their communities avoid isolation from the mainstream of society. We are also thankful for the many legal immigrants who continue to contribute to American society. To that end, we both encourage the preservation of heritage tongues and support English as the nation’s official language, a unifying force essential for the advancement of immigrant communities and our nation as a whole.
America’s immigration policy must serve the national interest of the United States, and the interests of American workers must be protected over the claims of foreign nationals seeking the same jobs. With all our fellow citizens, we have watched, in anger and disgust, the mocking of our immigration laws by a president who made himself superior to the will of the nation. We stand with the victims of his policies, especially the families of murdered innocents. Illegal immigration endangers everyone, exploits the taxpayers, and insults all who aspire to enter America legally. We oppose any form of amnesty for those who, by breaking the law, have disadvantaged those who have obeyed it. The executive amnesties of 2012 and 2014 are a direct violation of federal law and usurp the powers of Congress as outlined in Article I of the Constitution. These unlawful amnesties must be immediately rescinded by a Republican president. In a time of terrorism, drug cartels, human trafficking, and criminal gangs, the presence of millions of unidentified individuals in this country poses grave risks to the safety and sovereignty of the United States. Our highest priority, therefore, must be to secure our borders and all ports of entry and to enforce our immigration laws.
That is why we support building a wall along our southern border and protecting all ports of entry. The border wall must cover the entirety of the southern border and must be sufficient to stop both vehicular and pedestrian traffic. We insist upon workplace enforcement of verification systems so that more jobs can be available to all legal workers. Use of the E-verify program — an internet-based system that verifies the employment authorization and identity of employees — must be made mandatory nationwide. We reaffirm our endorsement of the SAVE program — Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements — to ensure that public funds are not given to persons not legally present in this country. We demand tough penalties against those who engage in identity theft, deal in fraudulent documents, and traffic in human beings. The Department of Homeland Security must use its authority to keep dangerous aliens off our streets and to expedite expulsion of criminal aliens. Gang membership should be a deportable offense. Any previously deported illegal alien who continues to show a lack of respect for our borders and rule of law must be penalized. This is why we support stiffer penalties, such as a mandatory minimum sentence of five years, for any illegal alien who illegally re-enters our nation after already having been deported.
Because “sanctuary cities” violate federal law and endanger their own citizens, they should not be eligible for federal funding. Using state licenses to reward people in the country illegally is an affront to the rule of law and must be halted. In light of both current needs and historic practice, we urge the reform of our guest worker programs to eliminate fraud, improve efficiency and ensure they serve the national interest.
In light of the alarming levels of unemployment and underemployment in this country, it is indefensible to continue offering lawful permanent residence to more than one million foreign nationals every year. The Supreme Court has correctly recognized that states have the constitutional authority to take steps to reduce illegal immigration. We condemn the Obama Administration’s lawsuits against states that are seeking to reinforce federal law. We support the right of the states to enact laws deterring illegal aliens from residing within their states.
From its beginning, our country has been a haven of refuge and asylum. That should continue — but with major changes. Asylum should be limited to cases of political, ethnic or religious persecution. As the Director of the FBI has noted, it is not possible to vet fully all potential refugees. To ensure our national security, refugees who cannot be carefully vetted cannot be admitted to the country, especially those whose homelands have been the breeding grounds for terrorism.