skyrider 0 #1 July 30, 2010 USCIS Memo Details Administration's Plan to Provide Mass Amnesty Through Administrative Actions Thursday, July 29, 2010, 2:35 PM EDT - posted on NumbersUSA http://tinyurl.com/37zdtue A newly revealed memo, obtained by Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) who is leading the fight against amnesty, shows Obama Administration officials offering a detailed plan that would offer actual or de facto amnesty to millions of illegal aliens without Congress ever taking a vote. The 11-page memo, drafted by Chief of Policy and Strategy for U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services Denise Vanison, outlines the various ways to offer a mass amnesty to the nation's 11-18 million illegal aliens through the use of administrative actions. The stated purpose of the memo is to offer "administrative relief options to promote family unity, foster economic growth, achieve significant process improvements and reduce the threat of removal for certain individuals present in the United States without authorization." "The memo proposes 18 different ways for the Obama Administration to essentially eliminate our borders through regulatory fiat and in clear violation of the letter and the spirit of U.S. immigration laws, which Obama swore an oath to faithfully execute," said NumbersUSA's Director of Government Relations Rosemary Jenks. The memo is an alternative plan to amnesty "in the absence of Comprehensive Immigration Reform." In addition to using deferred action and parole, which were previously identified in two separate letters drafted by Sen. Grassely and signed by 11 other Senators (read the first and second letters), the memo outlines ways that USCIS can extend benefits and protections to individuals and groups of people by lessening the standards used in "extreme hardship" cases. Item 4 in the memo outlines ways the Obama Administration can provide amnesty for millions of illegal aliens through the "extreme hardship" provision. It would "encourage many more spouses, sons, and daughters of U.S. citizens and lawful permanent residents to seek relief without fear of removal. It would also increase the likelihood that such relief would be granted." Section 4 reads: Lessen the Standard for Demonstrating "Extreme Hardship" The Act at 212(a)(9)(B)(i)(I) and (II) renders inadmissible for 3 or 10 years individuals who have been unlawfully present in the U.S. for 180 days or one year respectively, and then depart. By statute, DHS has discretion to waive these grounds of inadmissibility for spouses, sons and daughters of U.S. citizens or lawful permanent residents if the refusal to admit such individuals would result in extreme hardship to their qualifying relatives. Generally, the "extreme hardship" standard has been narrowly construed by USCIS. To increase the number of individuals applying for waivers, and improve their chances of receiving them, CIS could issue guidance or a regulation specifying a lower evidentiary standard for "extreme hardship." This would promote family unity, and avoid the significant human and financial costs associated with waiver denial decisions born of an overly rigid standard. This revised standard would also complement expanded use of PIP as set forth in B. In addition to lessening the standard for demonstrating "extreme hardship", the memo details many more options that "have the potential to result in meaningful immigration reform absent legislative action." Other options include: allowing aliens in the United States under Temporary Protected Status to adjust their status to Legal Permanent Resident, extending "grace periods" to leave the country for aliens on temporary work visa, changing the distribution time line for temporary workers on the H-2B visa, and granting up to 240 additional days on applications for employment authorization when the application is filed before the work authorization expiration date. Denise Vanison has been an immigration attorney for more than 18 years. She advised multi-national and domestic corporate clients on employment of foreign nationals in the United States, I-9 employment verification and procurement of passports, visas, green cards and U.S. citizenship. The memo was drafted for Director of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services Director Alejandro Mayorkas. In addition to Denise Vanison, Roxana Bacon from the Chief Councel's office, Debra Rogers from Field Operations, and Donald Neufield from Service Center Operations were also listed as authors of the memo. Read the full memo (PDF) Sen. Grassley's first letter to the Obama Administration (PDF) Sen. Grassley's follow-up letter to the Obama Administration Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #2 July 30, 2010 Link is 404. Have any "proof"?quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rhaig 0 #3 July 30, 2010 QuoteLink is 404. Have any "proof"? available elsewhere. don't know what you require for proof. But the link being 404 doesn't mean much. http://lmgtfy.com/?q=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3D6l1GvDWtccI http://www.sodahead.com/united-states/obama-open-door-policy-to-grant-amnesty-to-millions-of-illegals/blog-388791/ http://www.numbersusa.com/content/files/ExecutiveMemo.pdf-- Rob Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #4 July 30, 2010 QuoteLink is 404. Have any "proof"? Cool.. once they are all amnestied.... they can use all the resources to round up all the conservatives and haul them off to the FEMA Camps for re-education Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #5 July 30, 2010 Quotedon't know what you require for proof. Well, actually being able to read the document in question is the first step. Thanks for finding it. Just reading the first couple of pages doesn't look like a plan but rather options. I don't know if you've ever had to give your boss options on a situation, but I have. I had one boss that wanted to see EVERY option that was available, even some of the more bizarre ones that some other people may have tossed out without any consideration at all. It always seemed like a big pain in the ass to me to have to write something you knew probably wasn't going to happen, but that's the way it is sometimes. I see it kind of like scriptwriting in Hollywood. There are 50,000 scripts registered with the Writers Guild ever year and less than 150 films made by major motion picture companies. To me, that seems like a shit load of inefficiency, but it's the only way the really good ideas surface and bubble up through the process. So, anyway, like I said this looks like options . . . pretty much says so right on page one. Doesn't mean they're going to implement it though.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wayneflorida 0 #6 July 30, 2010 Quote Quote don't know what you require for proof. Well, actually being able to read the document in question is the first step. Thanks for finding it. Just reading the first couple of pages doesn't look like a plan but rather options. I don't know if you've ever had to give your boss options on a situation, but I have. I had one boss that wanted to see EVERY option that was available, even some of the more bizarre ones that some other people may have tossed out without any consideration at all. It always seemed like a big pain in the ass to me to have to write something you knew probably wasn't going to happen, but that's the way it is sometimes. I see it kind of like scriptwriting in Hollywood. There are 50,000 scripts registered with the Writers Guild ever year and less than 150 films made by major motion picture companies. To me, that seems like a shit load of inefficiency, but it's the only way the really good ideas surface and bubble up through the process. So, anyway, like I said this looks like options . . . pretty much says so right on page one. Doesn't mean they're going to implement it though. I think about the patriot act. Shortly after 9/11 congress passed this large bill. I thought at the time somebody had most of this bill in their desk draw just waiting for the right time to get it passed. It scares me to think what is in the draws (desk)of congress of either party. Just waiting for the right time. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
winsor 236 #7 July 30, 2010 QuoteQuoteLink is 404. Have any "proof"? Cool.. once they are all amnestied.... they can use all the resources to round up all the conservatives and haul them off to the FEMA Camps for re-education If some right-wing talking head were to concoct a phony left-wing foil for the purposes of making the opposition seem distasteful by comparison, the "Amazon" persona would be a good model. A bit too over-the-top to be completly credible to be sure, but I have the sneaking suspicion that you are serious in your vitriolic stance. If you want to convey the concept that "progressive" = "poison," you have achieved your purpose masterfully. BSBD, Winsor Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 3 #8 July 30, 2010 She didn't really mean FEMA camps. She meant make them eat quiche and wear sandals with sox. In all candor, Winsor, Shirley you've noticed how the word "liberal" or, better yet, "Libs" gets used regularly, even if completely out of context, on these boards as if it's a disgusting pejorative to be spat out like phlegm into the spittoon. Amazon's the anti anti missile missile. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
winsor 236 #9 July 30, 2010 QuoteShe didn't really mean FEMA camps. She meant make them eat quiche and wear sandals with sox. In all candor, Winsor, Shirley you've noticed how the word "liberal" or, better yet, "Libs" gets used regularly, even if completely out of context, on these boards as if it's a disgusting pejorative to be spat out like phlegm into the spittoon. Amazon's the anti anti missile missile. Quite the contrary - Amazon's posts make the loathing that is engendered by the moniker "liberal" appear to give more credit to the standpoint than is merited. I cannot fathom why one would gleefully pretend to be so completely repellent, but whatever floats your boat... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 3 #10 July 30, 2010 QuoteI cannot fathom why one would gleefully pretend to be so completely repellent Shirley, you've not missed Skyrider's sundry threads and posts, particularly about blacks, Hispanics and Muslims, for but one example. Then again, maybe those aren't examples of pretending. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skyrider 0 #11 July 30, 2010 Quote Link is 404. Have any "proof"? your search engine blown?http://search.aol.com/aol/search?query=Provide+Mass+Amnesty+&s_it=client91_searchbox Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skyrider 0 #12 July 30, 2010 QuoteQuoteI cannot fathom why one would gleefully pretend to be so completely repellent Shirley, you've not missed Skyrider's sundry threads and posts, particularly about blacks, Hispanics and Muslims, for but one example. Then again, maybe those aren't examples of pretending. LOL, glad to see person slams arent; allowed! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #13 July 30, 2010 Cool! Then he'll be like that fascist pig you and yours worships; Fascist Ronnie. Quit demonizing the guy for doing things (if he does that) that other guys you admire did 24 years ago. It really looks partisan silly. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,184 #14 July 30, 2010 In a 2007 U.S. Senate bill that did not become law, a tax amnesty for illegal immigrants was proposed. The proposal was supported by President George W. Bush and his Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff. So amnesties for illegal alien TAX CHEATS are OK in the right wing universe, but not for other illegal aliens. Says a lot about right wing values.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
timmyfitz 0 #15 July 30, 2010 QuoteIn all candor, Winsor, Shirley you've noticed how the word "liberal" or, better yet, "Libs" gets used regularly, even if completely out of context, on these boards as if it's a disgusting pejorative to be spat out like phlegm into the spittoon. Not that the democrats on this site would use similar terms when referring to a republican as if it's a disgusting pejorative to be spat out like phlegm into the spittoon. I don't see the insults from people on this site that much different, no matter which side you support. Just change neo con to lib (or vice versa) and they all sound about the same. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
timmyfitz 0 #16 July 30, 2010 QuoteIn a 2007 U.S. Senate bill that did not become law, a tax amnesty for illegal immigrants was proposed. The proposal was supported by President George W. Bush and his Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff. So amnesties for illegal alien TAX CHEATS are OK in the right wing universe, but not for other illegal aliens. Says a lot about right wing values. It says more about how you don't understand what you are talking about or that you are trying to twist things in your favor. Typical. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #17 July 30, 2010 QuoteIn a 2007 U.S. Senate bill that did not become law, a tax amnesty for illegal immigrants was proposed. The proposal was supported by President George W. Bush and his Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff. So amnesties for illegal alien TAX CHEATS are OK in the right wing universe, but not for other illegal aliens. Says a lot about right wing values. Orwellian "new speak" comes to mind every time one of them opens their pie holes. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,184 #18 July 30, 2010 QuoteQuoteIn a 2007 U.S. Senate bill that did not become law, a tax amnesty for illegal immigrants was proposed. The proposal was supported by President George W. Bush and his Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff. So amnesties for illegal alien TAX CHEATS are OK in the right wing universe, but not for other illegal aliens. Says a lot about right wing values. It says more about how you don't understand what you are talking about or that you are trying to twist things in your favor. Typical. I realize it must sting to have GOP hypocrisy exposed yet again.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
timmyfitz 0 #19 July 30, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteIn a 2007 U.S. Senate bill that did not become law, a tax amnesty for illegal immigrants was proposed. The proposal was supported by President George W. Bush and his Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff. So amnesties for illegal alien TAX CHEATS are OK in the right wing universe, but not for other illegal aliens. Says a lot about right wing values. It says more about how you don't understand what you are talking about or that you are trying to twist things in your favor. Typical. I realize it must sting to have GOP hypocrisy exposed yet again. Twist and spin. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #21 July 30, 2010 Quote In all candor, Winsor, Shirley you've noticed how the word "liberal" or, better yet, "Libs" gets used regularly, even if completely out of context, on these boards as if it's a disgusting pejorative to be spat out like phlegm into the spittoon. I suspect that there are far more negative references against the right, though it's true that it wouldn't be written as "conservative." Instead it would be facist, wingnuts, RW fucks, libertarian, etc. If you removed Amazon and Lucky, the count would drop substantially, of course. We need to provide a grant to one of our unemployed to do the study. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,184 #22 July 30, 2010 QuoteQuote In all candor, Winsor, Shirley you've noticed how the word "liberal" or, better yet, "Libs" gets used regularly, even if completely out of context, on these boards as if it's a disgusting pejorative to be spat out like phlegm into the spittoon. I suspect that there are far more negative references against the right, though it's true that it wouldn't be written as "conservative." Instead it would be facist, wingnuts, RW fucks, libertarian, etc. If you removed Amazon and Lucky, the count would drop substantially, of course. We need to provide a grant to one of our unemployed to do the study. Why do you consider "libertarian" to be a negative reference?... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #23 July 30, 2010 Quote Just waiting for the right time. an election season in a recession is *not* the right time for something like this. I'm not sure there's ever a time where this sort of mass amnesty would be popular. Reactions to fear, like the Patriot Act, are much easier to achieve. Most of the fears of immigration would increase with amnesty, not decrease. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #24 July 30, 2010 Quote Why do you consider "libertarian" to be a negative reference? It's intended as one when Lucky invokes it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,184 #25 July 30, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteIn a 2007 U.S. Senate bill that did not become law, a tax amnesty for illegal immigrants was proposed. The proposal was supported by President George W. Bush and his Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff. So amnesties for illegal alien TAX CHEATS are OK in the right wing universe, but not for other illegal aliens. Says a lot about right wing values. It says more about how you don't understand what you are talking about or that you are trying to twist things in your favor. Typical. I realize it must sting to have GOP hypocrisy exposed yet again. Twist and spin. You simply can't stand to have the hypocrisy exposed, can you? Reagan did it in 1986. G.W. Bush supported a bill to give tax amnesty for illegals. John McCain sponsored a bill to give amnesty to illegals. But if there's a hint that a Dem administration is even floating a trial balloon the right has a conniption. HYPOCRISY.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
