{"id":25108,"date":"2021-10-08T13:17:43","date_gmt":"2021-10-08T17:17:43","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/?p=25108"},"modified":"2021-10-08T13:17:44","modified_gmt":"2021-10-08T17:17:44","slug":"senate-blocks-amnesty-lobby-immigrationreform-com","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/2021\/10\/08\/senate-blocks-amnesty-lobby-immigrationreform-com\/","title":{"rendered":"The Pro-Amnesty Lobby Throws Temper Tantrum Over Reconciliation"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

Senate Parliamentarian Elizabeth MacDonough recently ruled<\/a> \u2013 twice \u2013 against Democratic attempts to implement the largest amnesty in American history using the reconciliation process, correctly noting that the impact of amnestying millions of illegal aliens far outweighs budgetary concerns. Meanwhile, two Democratic senators \u2013 Joe Manchin of West Virginia and Kyrsten Sinema of Arizona \u2013 have been critical of the extremely high price tag of Joe Biden\u2019s $3.5 trillion \u201cBuild Back Better\u201d spending package, in which the Democrats attempted to include mass amnesty. However, the ever-persistent pro-amnesty lobby is not taking \u201cno\u201d for an answer. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Left-wing pro-illegal-alien activists have been harassing the two senators, with kayakers (including CASA activists<\/a>) protesting outside of Manchin\u2019s houseboat, and pro-amnesty agitators harassing Sinema on a plane<\/a> and even following her into the restroom<\/a> at Arizona State University, where she teaches\u00a0 courses on social work. And President Biden downplayed<\/a> and trivialized the tactics as not \u201cappropriate,\u201d but something that \u201chappens to everybody.\u201d If the activists\u2019 goal was to demonstrate extreme entitlement and a complete lack of basic manners or courtesy, then their mission is undoubtedly accomplished.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Pro-amnesty, leftist academics meanwhile penned a letter to Vice President Kamala Harris and the Democratic leadership demanding that they override the Senate Parliamentarian\u2019s ruling and\u00a0 ram through amnesty anyway. As The Hill<\/a><\/em> puts it, \u201c[t]he 92 scholars called on Harris, Senate Majority Leader Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) and Senate President Pro Tempore Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) not to \u2018overrule\u2019 Parliamentarian Elizabeth MacDonough, whose rulings are non-binding, but for the presiding officer of the Senate to issue a ruling contrary to her advice.\u201d <\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Hill<\/em>\ngets to the crux of the matter, observing that \u201cmany immigration advocates\nbelieve the current political climate grants a unique opportunity for reform on\nthe issue, which might not repeat itself in years.\u201d In other words, the amnesty\nlobby is desperate and feels it is running out of time. As such, it wants to\npull a fast one on the American people and sneak through legislation that would\nadd millions of foreign nationals who came to the U.S. illegally to the citizen\nbody, voting rolls, and legal workforce \u2013 all during a major pandemic and\nborder crisis \u2013 without the necessary and honest national debate that the issue\nmost certainly deserves. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

The letter<\/a> by the 92 left-wing academics argues that \u201cthe outlay and revenue effects of extending LPR status to 8 million people are sweeping\u201d and that there is \u201cno basis in law or precedent for concluding that these outlay-related effects are \u2018merely incidental\u2019 to LPR status.\u201d The letter argues that amnesty would result in higher tax revenues, but admits that the amnestied population would also become eligible for a broad array of benefits and services (in fact, most of the fiscal impact bullet points in the letter are about what amnesty beneficiaries would become eligible for). Thus, the economic impact is not an argument for amnesty \u2013 as the signatories of the letter would have it \u2013 but rather an argument against<\/em> amnesty.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In 2016, the Heritage Foundation estimated<\/a> that amnesty (for 10 million illegal aliens, slightly higher than the 8 million figure) would either necessitate a $1.29 trillion immediate tax increase, or would cost $3.6 trillion if spread out over 75 years. The numbers might be slightly smaller for the reconciliation amnesty for 8 million illegal aliens, but we are undoubtedly still talking about hundreds of billions if not trillions. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

No matter how obnoxious\nor aggressive the temper tantrum, amnesty remains a horrible and harmful idea.\nAnd the amnesty lobby\u2019s fanatical stubbornness on this issue shows that the\nfight against amnesty is far from over, and that Americans should resist the\ntemptation to become complacent.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Senate Parliamentarian Elizabeth MacDonough recently ruled \u2013 twice \u2013 against Democratic attempts to implement the largest amnesty in American history using the reconciliation process, correctly noting that the impact of amnestying millions of illegal aliens far outweighs budgetary concerns. Meanwhile, two Democratic senators \u2013 Joe Manchin of West Virginia and Kyrsten Sinema of Arizona \u2013<\/p>\n

Read More<\/a><\/div>\n","protected":false},"author":76,"featured_media":14524,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_monsterinsights_skip_tracking":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_active":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_note":"","_monsterinsights_sitenote_category":0},"categories":[11885],"tags":[1497,1056,1524,141],"yst_prominent_words":[12327,6286,2019,2015,2380,7870,12325,2013,2008,2520,2306,3053,12326,12124,12330,12329,1942,3231,2399,8327],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/25108"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/76"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=25108"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/25108\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":25109,"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/25108\/revisions\/25109"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/14524"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=25108"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=25108"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=25108"},{"taxonomy":"yst_prominent_words","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/yst_prominent_words?post=25108"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}