Bullypulpit
Senior Member
<blockquote>3/19/2004
PROPOSED LEGISLATION in Congress goes too far in the name of homeland security.
In the House, a bill going by the acronym CLEAR -- the Clear Law Enforcement for Criminal Alien Removal act -- would compel local police officers to enforce federal immigration laws, including investigating, detaining, and removing illegal immigrants. States where police refused this work would lose federal funding.
Police officers are needed to focus on preventing and fighting crime. If they are also forced to become immigration agents, they could lose a crucial tool: conversation. Communities that are willing to work with police can provide tips and information.
Last year, in a letter to Senator Edward Kennedy, Boston's former police commissioner Paul Evans pointed out that local and state police departments in Massachusetts have worked hard to win the trust of immigrant communities. Evans said that the CLEAR act could threaten this progress by discouraging immigrants to come to police. Police officials across the country have stated similar concerns. They need unimpeded access to immigrant victims and witnesses.
A related concern is that the CLEAR act could lead criminals to prey on undocumented immigrants who would be afraid to report crimes to police. This could create a grim subculture where robbery, domestic violence, and other offenses were accepted as the price of life in America.
The bill also overlooks the fact that many police departments already have responsibilities that outstrip their resources. Enforcing immigration law would add to the burden.
The Senate version, the Homeland Security Enhancement Act, has similar provisions and adds that states should not be allowed to issue driver's licenses to illegal aliens.
States should be left to make this decision based on their own circumstances. California, for example, struggled over the issue of distributing licenses to its estimated 2 million illegal aliens who drive. The disadvantage is that licenses seem to encourage illegal immigrants by making it easier for them to live in the state. The benefit is that California could have more information about drivers and test their skills. It is also a way to acknowledge that even illegal immigrants make substantial contributions to their state economies. Last year, California briefly adopted a system to train, test, insure and license drivers. But the law was repealed, and now state officials are back to debating the matter.
Immigration policies need reform. And 9/11 has left the country with a mandate to increase security. But this work cannot be piled on the backs of local police, and local needs cannot be ignored. - The Boston Globe</blockquote>
Once again Dubbyuh and his merry band show utter disregard for the local needs of American citizens in their blind pursuit of "Homeland Security". Where are the billions he promised to firefighters, police and medical first responders after 9/11? They have not been forthcoming. Why was a bill requiring the petro/chem and nuclear (<i>Not nucyular</i>) industry to tighten security and facilities around the country scuttled? Why was the Administration vehemently opposed to the oversight of funds in the $87 billion spending bill that was ramrodded through Congress? It seems necessary, especially given the excesses of Haliburton and KBR.
It never was about "Homeland Security" a department whose formation Dubbyuh was bitterly opposed to. It was, and is, about lining the pockets of Dubbyuhs pimps and johns
PROPOSED LEGISLATION in Congress goes too far in the name of homeland security.
In the House, a bill going by the acronym CLEAR -- the Clear Law Enforcement for Criminal Alien Removal act -- would compel local police officers to enforce federal immigration laws, including investigating, detaining, and removing illegal immigrants. States where police refused this work would lose federal funding.
Police officers are needed to focus on preventing and fighting crime. If they are also forced to become immigration agents, they could lose a crucial tool: conversation. Communities that are willing to work with police can provide tips and information.
Last year, in a letter to Senator Edward Kennedy, Boston's former police commissioner Paul Evans pointed out that local and state police departments in Massachusetts have worked hard to win the trust of immigrant communities. Evans said that the CLEAR act could threaten this progress by discouraging immigrants to come to police. Police officials across the country have stated similar concerns. They need unimpeded access to immigrant victims and witnesses.
A related concern is that the CLEAR act could lead criminals to prey on undocumented immigrants who would be afraid to report crimes to police. This could create a grim subculture where robbery, domestic violence, and other offenses were accepted as the price of life in America.
The bill also overlooks the fact that many police departments already have responsibilities that outstrip their resources. Enforcing immigration law would add to the burden.
The Senate version, the Homeland Security Enhancement Act, has similar provisions and adds that states should not be allowed to issue driver's licenses to illegal aliens.
States should be left to make this decision based on their own circumstances. California, for example, struggled over the issue of distributing licenses to its estimated 2 million illegal aliens who drive. The disadvantage is that licenses seem to encourage illegal immigrants by making it easier for them to live in the state. The benefit is that California could have more information about drivers and test their skills. It is also a way to acknowledge that even illegal immigrants make substantial contributions to their state economies. Last year, California briefly adopted a system to train, test, insure and license drivers. But the law was repealed, and now state officials are back to debating the matter.
Immigration policies need reform. And 9/11 has left the country with a mandate to increase security. But this work cannot be piled on the backs of local police, and local needs cannot be ignored. - The Boston Globe</blockquote>
Once again Dubbyuh and his merry band show utter disregard for the local needs of American citizens in their blind pursuit of "Homeland Security". Where are the billions he promised to firefighters, police and medical first responders after 9/11? They have not been forthcoming. Why was a bill requiring the petro/chem and nuclear (<i>Not nucyular</i>) industry to tighten security and facilities around the country scuttled? Why was the Administration vehemently opposed to the oversight of funds in the $87 billion spending bill that was ramrodded through Congress? It seems necessary, especially given the excesses of Haliburton and KBR.
It never was about "Homeland Security" a department whose formation Dubbyuh was bitterly opposed to. It was, and is, about lining the pockets of Dubbyuhs pimps and johns
