SB 2016-050 - Come Out Of The Shadows Act (Back to House)

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I take it the joint session did not resolve this?

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Assuming I got my dates right and such, I am assuming that Scott is now the Senior most Senator. My recommendation would be for him to proceed with votes on these Senate bills. Clyde can just sign off afterwards. The rules say Senator appointed by PPT, shall preside in the PPT's absence.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I will not sign any immigration "reform" bill that doesn't include a fully funded visa entry/exit system. 50% of illegal immigration comes from visa overstays.

1d. While I understand the importance of due process and innocent until proven guilty, if a illegal is presently being prosecuted for a serious crime like murder or something of that nature then they should not be automatically granted anything until the trial is concluded. Certainly not any permanent status or status extending beyond the time of the trial.

5. I am dubious about granting fixed numbers of visas irregardless of the economic situation, especially in low skilled workers where the impacts of the economy have the most impact. Adding a substantial number of workers when the economy is contracting is only going to worsen the labor market for the poorest citizens, including a larger percentage of minority workforce. My preference is to have either a formula pinned to economic indicators or flexibility to the Department of Interior to determine the level based on economic factors.


The real root cause of illegal immigration is the irresponsibility of the government in failing to enforce its laws and constantly putting us in a position having to legalize the next group of illegal aliens. Therefore the priority should be towards ensuring that no future such amnesties are necessary and the appropriate levels of enforcement and legal immigration policies are implemented here to obtain that goal.

That said I am fine with Sections 2 and 3 and would not be opposed to the general goal of Section 1 if properly structured with a Section 4 containing sufficient enforcement.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Basically you have a computer system that tracks visa holders. They cards are changed to include biometric data and they are scanned at ports of entry (Airports and harbors). They are scanned when they enter and scanned when they leave (hence entry/exit).

It was passed by Congress in 1996, and signed by President Bill Clinton. He of course failed to implement it. In 2001, some of the 911 hijackers had over stayed their visas leading to the 911 commission including its implementation as one of its recommendations. President Bush and President Obama likewise failed to implement it, despite the Democrats campaigning on implementing the 911 commission report in full, in 2006.

The cost was estimated by the Center for Immigration Studies at just under a billion dollars. I am trying to find another study of the cost.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

The bill does allocate 1 billion for improving border security at points of entry already, so we could probably just add a clause to that saying that includes upgrading equipment to do the visa entry/exit program.  

I did some looking around and found a study from the bipartisan policy center (headed by people like Bob Dole, Olympia Snowe, and Byron Dorgan) that said the reason why it hasn't been implemented isn't for lack of wanting to but because we basically don't have the necessary equipment for exit checks at the Mexican border. (Of course Congress would pass a bill that nobody in government actually knows how to enforce.   ).  So part of the funds for border security in this bill could go to upgrading our equipment and researching to find an efficient way to do that process.  If you think we need more resources to make that upgrade, we could increase the number.

Yea I ran across that study this morning. Previous reports had been vague but implied basically the same idea, lack of appropriated funds, they just didn't narrow down the specific area. They also generally have been from immigration hard liners, which is why I wanted a more reliable source. The bill does include a similar amount but my concern in this case would be that $700-$800 million would wipe out the bulk of that and not leave enough for border agents, drones and all the other tools that are desperately needed to stop the flow of drugs and guns, as well as illegal immigrants.

So yea, probably more resources to both handle the other stuff and finally and entry/exit system up and running.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I still would like some kind of provision for consideration of economic factors when it comes to the level of low skilled immigration in section 5.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Come on, there are a lot of smart people in this Senate. The math couldn't be that complex.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I think you take it by sector, make a determination by % relative to a base level of immigration depending on the contraction or expansion of that sector.

One of the biggest to consider is construction, which is very volatile, particularly in tough economic times.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I agree with PiT, the employment numbers should be used instead since that is the whole point in having it pegged to begin with is concerns about troubled fields to sustain such increases.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Maria Cantwell just got done speaking about the need to cooperate with foreign countries to encourage the implementation of "biometric standards" to reduce the thread of people hoping several countries and creating fake ideas and identities before coming to America. That is something I am going to try and encourage as well.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I am satisfied with the progress on this bill so far.


I look forward to the house ruining it, after all our hard work.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I don't know when the change over occurs for the Northern Senate seats, but I'll vote Aye just in case it hasn't happened yet.

I am fairly certain it would March 03, 2017.

One of the decisions made in July was to provide for a uniform date in which they take office.

Though the date of the election is entirely up to the region.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I don't know when the change over occurs for the Northern Senate seats, but I'll vote Aye just in case it hasn't happened yet.

I am fairly certain it would March 03, 2017.

One of the decisions made in July was to provide for a uniform date in which they take office.

Though the date of the election is entirely up to the region.

Senator Scott told me that I should swear in immediately upon election, and I have. If that's not correct, then I apologize. If I am sworn in, I vote Aye

Okay, need to look into this.

Edit: This says those elected in "federal" elections, so Scott is probably right since the Regional Senators are elected and administered by the regions, unless there is another law somewhere I am missing.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Yeah ftr in October LLR took my Senate seat the Monday after election weekend

Considering all the years I sought to try and regionalize the Regional Senate elections, one would think I would not only be aware of this, but would celebrate it daily.

The simple fact of the matter is I remember a conversation with Tmth about trying to regularize the whole process of swearing in for Senators to a set date and for some reason thought that he had passed that.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Yeah ftr in October LLR took my Senate seat the Monday after election weekend

Then again, I didn't even make it to the next Monday, so maybe I'm a bad example

and that's where I came in
The way that I counted votes when I was PPT was to count the seat as voting (ie. Northern Class A) rather than the individual at the times when seats are going to change hands. So if the seat changes hands during a vote, the new Senator could 'replace' the vote for their predecessor.

So did I, except half my chamber was At-Large and succession for At-Large was always rather complex, particularly when multiple seats changed hands.