Roy wrote:
"Instead, though, we have nearly all of our national religious leaders and the leaders of the U.S. Congress promising an amnesty for illegal aliens already here. They say the way to end illegal immigration is to give U.S. citizenship to the Illegal aliens already here -- and then start enforcing immigration laws."

I remember these recycled promises from 1986. Remember the “employer sanctions, as the cornerstone” to the amnesty of 1986. Only if you will please, please pass amnesty.

What a crock that turned out to be. The line in the sand, our last amnesty EVER. Hmmmm. Sure.

Roy also wrote: "P.S. When NumbersUSA sent a tweet about the poll showing an amnesty would increase illegal immigration, a person identifying as an immigration attorney responded: "Unlikely because amnesty provisions usually have residency length requirements to qualify."

Yes, this is true, but that was also true of the 1986 IRCA. Personally, I absolutely believe many people will “crash the borders” thinking they can get in on any current amnesty, once serious amnesty discussions start..

I still have two articles in a file of many other articles on the subject. These two articles were written in 1989 by Roberto Suro for the NY Times.

The headline of the articles were (1) “Alien amnessty program is rife with fraud” (Sub:thousands who falsified papers will gain legal status in U.S. (2)Thousands becoming citizens fraudulently (sub: Many aliens lied on amnesty applications to gain resident resident status, INS says”

The jest of the articles is that there so many fraudulent applications for amnesty under the “Special Agriculural Worker Amnesty” that the INS could not investigate them all so they (INS) ended up approving them all. They simply did not have the resources (manpower nor money) to investigate all the suspected fraudulent appoications. And this despite a more than generous requirement that the illegal immigrant agriculteral worker need to show 90 days of farm work done between 1 May 1985 and 1 May 1986.

And by the way, guess who was “an author” of the agricultural amnesty program (of 1986); none other than Rep.. Charles E. Schumer, D-N.Y.. He said “that in retrospect the program seemed too open and suspceptable to fraud”. It is easy to apoligize once you have what you wanted to begin with.

So despite the assurances of the “immigration attorney” concerning the residency requirement, I suspect it would not stop a single illegal alien, even if he had crossed the border just last week, from applying. I can imagine a business will emerge to provide IAs with all the papers needed to meet any residency requirements outlined in an amnesty bill. How many IAs are using stolen and counterfeit ID information to get jobs? And who knows just what might be require to show the appropiate residency here in the U.S.
Perhaps something as simple as a utility bill.

Just one more thing about promises made by congress. They have a way of making promises and failing to fund them in the future. For example Schumer stated in 1989 (same interivew as above) "Funding for the INS has been cut by the White House in each of the last three years even though everyone agreed when the bill was passed that greater INS manpower was essential to make it work."

The number of fraudulent applications was extimated between 250,000 and 600,000. Remember there were 3 million people included in that 1986 amnesty. Let's use the low number and you will see it was suspected that one tenth of the approved applications were fraudulent.

Thank you Roy and all of your staff for your service.

I just faxed this message in to my three reps:
-----------------------
It is impossible to even think of any kind of amnesty. What do you think you could possibly say to 17 million unemployed Americans?

Mexico, by far providing the most illegal immigrants, is a nation of 100 million people! They must grow their own economy, and may no longer illegally use us for their own benefit.

No amnesty for illegal aliens, they must return home and ask our permission first.