A reader writes:
Are you aware that the 2006 bill—Senate Immigration bill 2611—had a whole section requiring an impact report? It was pretty detailed and thorough—just one problem—it was only required “Not later than 90 days after the date of enactment of this act. Pretty cute. I am sure that the point of an impact report is to have it done before legal action is taken!
Here's the text of Sec. 401 of the 2006 immigration legislation. This may have gotten amended out at some point, and its confused post-hock nature was perhaps deliberate sabotage, but this is perfectly reasonable text to be reused in a bill calling for an Impact Statement before any new amnesty or guest worker program:
SEC. 401. IMMIGRATION IMPACT STUDY.
(a) Effective Date- Any regulation that would increase the number of aliens who are eligible for legal status may not take effect before 90 days after the date on which the Director of the Bureau of the Census submits a report to Congress under subsection (c).
(b) Study- The Director of the Bureau of the Census, jointly with the Secretary, the Secretary of Agriculture, the Secretary of Education, the Secretary of Energy, the Secretary of Health and Human Services, the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development, the Secretary of the Interior, the Secretary of Labor, the Secretary of Transportation, the Secretary of the Treasury, the Attorney General, and the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, shall undertake a study examining the impacts of the current and proposed annual grants of legal status, including immigrant and nonimmigrant status, along with the current level of illegal immigration, on the infrastructure of and quality of life in the United States.
(c) Report- Not later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Director of the Bureau of the Census shall submit to Congress a report on the findings of the study required by subsection (b), including the following information:
(1) An estimate of the total legal and illegal immigrant populations of the United States, as they relate to the total population.
(2) The projected impact of legal and illegal immigration on the size of the population of the United States over the next 50 years, which regions of the country are likely to experience the largest increases, which small towns and rural counties are likely to lose their character as a result of such growth, and how the proposed regulations would affect these projections.
(3) The impact of the current and projected foreign-born populations on the natural environment, including the consumption of nonrenewable resources, waste production and disposal, the emission of pollutants, and the loss of habitat and productive farmland, an estimate of the public expenditures required to maintain current standards in each of these areas, the degree to which current standards will deteriorate if such expenditures are not forthcoming, and the additional effects the proposed regulations would have.
(4) The impact of the current and projected foreign-born populations on employment and wage rates, particularly in industries such as agriculture and services in which the foreign born are concentrated, an estimate of the associated public costs, and the additional effects the proposed regulations would have.
(5) The impact of the current and projected foreign-born populations on the need for additions and improvements to the transportation infrastructure of the United States, an estimate of the public expenditures required to meet this need, the impact on Americans' mobility if such expenditures are not forthcoming, and the additional effect the proposed regulations would have.
(6) The impact of the current and projected foreign-born populations on enrollment, class size, teacher-student ratios, and the quality of education in public schools, an estimate of the public expenditures required to maintain current median standards, the degree to those standards will deteriorate if such expenditures are not forthcoming, and the additional effect the proposed regulations would have.
(7) The impact of the current and projected foreign-born populations on home ownership rates, housing prices, and the demand for low-income and subsidized housing, the public expenditures required to maintain current median standards in these areas, the degree to which those standards will deteriorate if such expenditures are not forthcoming, and the additional effect the proposed regulations would have.
(8) The impact of the current and projected foreign-born populations on access to quality health care and on the cost of health care and health insurance, an estimate of the public expenditures required to maintain current median standards, the degree to which those standards will deteriorate if such expenditures are not forthcoming, and the additional effect the proposed regulations would have.
(9) The impact of the current and projected foreign-born populations on the criminal justice system in the United States, an estimate of the associated public costs, and the additional effect the proposed regulations would have.
Good questions.
Posts
14 comments:
We must think about the power. In the end, it will not be decided by merit but by power and who has it.
And Jews have the momentum.
Take 'gay marriage' issue. Jews and gays got the power, money, connections, and institutions.
One by one, we see cons switching and coming out for 'gay marriage', but we don't find a single pro-'gay marriage' liberal changing his/her mind and opposing it. Slowly, the gop turns more pro-gay whereas the dem seems only to turning EVEN MORE gay.
Imagine two trees bearing fruits.
One tree doesn't lose a single fruit while the other tree keeps losing fruits one by one. gop is the tree that keeps losing fruits.
In politics, opportunism rules among politicos who gradually go where the power, influence, and money are.
Same with amnesty. It's not about what we think but what the powerful folks moneypulate.
But Section 401 does not apparently prohibit regulations flowing from Amnesty if the report finds harmful effects outweigh benefits, or litigators can show that it should have found harmful effects outweigh benefits or can convince a judge that more study is needed to determine if harmful effects outweigh benefits, or that insufficient alternatives to the proposed regulations have been considered, which is how EIS gridlock works.
My understanding is that all the water we saved by giving up our high volume toilets back in the 90's has been more than used up by all the new immigrants.
that 90 day stipulation makes so much sense. it's like stabbing yourself in the face then compiling together a list of reasons 3 months later why having done so may not necessarily have been the best idea.
To paraphrase Nancy Pelosi,
"But we have to pass the bill so that you can find out what (it will do)."
So was that report ever completed and submitted? Anyone know where we can get a look at it?
Oh, disregard my question above, the bill didn't pass. Duh.
We sort of have a rolling amnesty now since the US born children of the illegals are American citizens.
Will we get a neutral study?
Will Congress act on it in a bona fide fashion?
Sooner the system collapse the better... You don't really believe that there's a political solution to inevitable Brazilification of the US?
Anon, no, I don't disagree; stick a fork in her, the USA is done. All that's left is the decomposition.
But I gain a certain satisfaction in solving the problem(s) on the back of a paper napkin in a straightforward way while TPTB sink the ship. Nothing wrong with disabusing the rubes of their delusions. They don't get to say "nobody could have foreseen this" to me.
If this is anything, it's a sop to someone or other.
My local public high school is being affected by immigration in a way I would have never contemplated.
Our baseball fields at the high school are being used/abused by peoples from the land of the former British Raj to play cricket. The baseball coach complains that the cricket players are messing up the field and leave trash all over the place.
BTW, adult Mexican immigrants hog up the local soccer fields so that native children can not use them.
Orange County's rates are lower than the state as a whole: 3.0 for Asian Americans, 5.7 for whites, 13.9 for African Americans and 41.2 for Latinos. The county's rate overall is 21.4 births per 1,000 girls and young women ages 15-19. Having babies notice that OC would have a European teen birth rate without Hispanics, Hispanics need to really dropped.
Post a Comment