Veterans are highly skilled, dedicated individuals who bring to the civilian workforce those same qualities. However, transitioning from the battlefield to civilian life can be difficult. The panel of veterans and philanthropists at Heritage’s Protect America Month event, “Serving Those Who Serve,” gave some insight on how communities can help.
Different veterans need different kinds of help. Some have serious physical injuries, others have psychological wounds still others experience post-traumatic stress disorder (PPST), and others have traumatic brain injuries. Some families have been destabilized through one member’s military service.
Are you ready for this news? We hope so; subsequently if you are not prepared for the data espoused please do as we have done and contact your local Veteran’s Administration. Please understand that the following story is true.
Ike joined the Army at age 18 in 2008. In Afghanistan in 2009, he was hit by multiple bomb blasts, including one that threw him across a road like a horse-shoe. Sophisticated armor helped him escape with just bruises, but the blasts battered his brain. Ever since, he has been hit with heart spasms and seizures.
Ike is in many ways the typical modern disabled veteran. He survived combat with barely a scratch but later was diagnosed with what have become the most common wounds of a decade of war — traumatic brain injury and post-traumatic stress disorder, which together likely affect more than half a million veterans of Iraq and Afghanistan, the Department of Defense said.
What happened when he came home is increasingly typical, too. At Fort Carson, the damaged soldier racked up punishments for being late to formation, missing appointments, getting in an argument, and not showing up for work. All of these alleged offensives are quite typical in a military environment where one is making the transition between a “war-time Army and a peace time Army.”
It only gets worse for Ike so stay with us. These behaviors can be symptoms of TBI and PTSD, and Army doctors recommended Ike go to a special battalion for wounded warriors. Instead, his battalion put him in jail, and then threw him out of the Army with an “other-than honorable discharge” that stripped him of veteran’s benefits. He was sent packing without even the medicine to stop his convulsions.
After the longest period of war in American history, more soldiers are being discharged for misconduct than at any time in recent history, and soldiers with the most combat exposure are the hardest hit. A Gazette investigation based on data obtained through the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) shows the annual number of misconduct discharges is up more than 25 percent Army-wide since 2009, mirroring the rise in wounded. At the eight Army posts that house most of the service’s combat units, including Fort Carson in Colorado Springs, misconduct discharges have surged 67 percent!
All told, more than 76,000 soldiers have been kicked out of the Army since 2006. They end up in cities large and small across the country, in hospitals and homeless shelters, abandoned trailers and ratty apartments, working in gas fields and at the McDonald’s counter. The Army does not track how many, like Ike, were kicked out with combat wounds.
To us this hard-line attitude amongst the cadre to all fellow soldiers is unconscionable. This is bringing up some very painful decisions made by politicians, such as the amount of tours of duty a soldier is allowed to serve.
This sure made me start thinking when I heard a soldier interviewed about tenured service whereby he was just starting his fourth combat tour and according to him, it was to be his last. Well he did make it miraculously through two additional tours before being medically returned to the United States.
Have you ever gone around shirking any kind of resemblance to a quiz, test, or other big jargon like an exam when it comes down to what it is that we know in and from the U.S. Constitution? So many of us simply take it for granted that the Constitution is really the preamble “We the People”, in conjunction with those first ten or so amendments. Believe it or not, that is remarkably what it states about the importance of Americans Founding Documents for the Naturalization Test or basically any of the websites that offer quizzes.
As far as we are concerned there are three rudimentary questions that must be addressed if we are to survive as a people – a nation.
1 – Why is America so unique in world history; 2 – Why the Constitution (and the underlying principles on which it is based) enabled America to become the freest, most prosperous nation in history; and 3 – Why the key to making America great again is to restore the Constitution as the supreme law of the land.
To do this, “We the People” must elect a government that will respect rather than violate or ignore the Constitution. Subsequently the only way to make this happen is if the American people learn about and understand the Constitution, and it underlying principles of individual rights and limited government.
There are many, many sites available that will openly encourage each of us to take a small quiz. The Pew Research Center, the International Scholastic Institute, and of course, the Naturalization Test that regardless we ask each of you to at least take a look at what real dumbing-down is and consequently grade inflation.
There are many institutions that actively teach the Principles of the Constitution as well as American heritage which are so critical to preserving liberty in America.
We are fully convinced that the only way to counter the assault on the Constitution and to restore liberty in America is to educate American citizens and our elected leaders on the Constitution and its underlying principles.
There is a reason that the Founders debated and went through the ratification process to ensure we had a Constitution. The principle reason is that the Constitution does not allow the government to do what it wants – a reason that it established a federal government with specific, enumerated powers. That reason is to ensure that the federal government does what it must to preserve liberty, and does not become tyrannical.
The Constitution does not authorize Congress to create the massive bureaucracy today that results in a fourth branch of government. And with the passage and enactment of Obamacare, that branch will grow even larger.
The Founders understood the need for a Constitution to limit the power of the federal government to protect civil and religious liberty. It is well-known today that if our political leaders actually followed the Constitution, one estimate suggests that the federal government would be about one-third the size it is now.
Furthermore, most of the day-to-day governing in America would take place at the state and local level. Instead our leaders are ignoring or actively opposing the limits on government established by the Constitution, literally enslaving future generations with unsustainable debt.
Unfortunately, far too many Americans today don’t even know what the Constitution says – which is why America is in such dire straits. Most Americans have never even read our Declaration of Independence, which sets forth the principles of liberty and limited government more clearly than any document ever written.
Please do not forget about our poll just over to the right…please participate!
What kind of administration would go to the lengths…
What can you say about an administration that lies systematically about events leading up to the torture-murder of one of its ambassadors, U.S. military personnel and other U.S. citizens in Benghazi?
That can you say about an administration that uses drones to spy on its own citizens and to kill them overseas without due process. Has there ever been a time in the history of the U.S. where anyone remotely had domination complex?
What can you say about an administration that monitors the phone records of the largest news-gathering organization in the world – and one of the friendliest to that administration?
The only fair assessment is that it is a rogue administration. One that represents a frightening departure from any previous historical precedent in its authoritarian nature, one out of touch with the rule of law, one that is revealing itself to be prone to tyrannical policies and one that has committed so many impeachable offenses it’s becoming difficult to count them all.
And please don’t mind…but it is us who have stood by and done nothing whatsoever to stop this thug with his thuggery. (Please click here for further attribution.)
Almost on a daily basis now the police-state tactics of the Obama White House are on display. They no longer need to be ferreted out by a handful of independent journalists and the citizen blogosphere. Even the Big Media that have coddled Barack Obama and shielded him from scrutiny for nearly five years are shocked by what they see. (Please see this link.)
The latest abuse was revealed by the Associated Press – which was also the victim.
The lead says it all: “WASHINGTON (AP) – The Justice Department secretly obtained two months of…
The shocking report goes on to explain both work and personal phone records were seized and scrutinized.
“In all, the government seized the records for more than 20 separate telephone lines assigned to AP and its journalists in April and May of 2012,” the report continued. “The exact number of journalists who used the phone lines during that period is unknown, but more than 100 journalists work in the offices where phone records were targeted, on a wide array of stories about government and other matters.”
AP is, of course, outraged – and today sent a letter of protest to Attorney General Eric Holder, who, I predict, will not finish out his term in office.
“There can be no possible justification for such an over-broad collection of the telephone communications of the Associated Press and its reporters,” said the letter. “These records potentially reveal communications with confidential sources across all of the news-gathering activities undertaken by the AP during a two-month period, provide a road map to AP’s news-gathering operations and disclose information about AP’s activities and operations that the government has no conceivable right to know,” wrote AP President and Chief Executive Officer Gary Pruitt.
Obama rose to power suddenly and, with the help of friendly media like the AP, was unstoppable in his bid for a second term. But he may be the cause of his own political undoing. Nobody likes what they are seeing in Washington today – not the left nor the right nor the mushy middle, not the so-called “mainstream media” nor its burgeoning alternative, not conservative legal watchdogs nor the American Civil Liberties Union.
The Obama administration is running out of cheerleaders.
This is big.
It’s a game-changer.
Obama is fighting off too many scandals – Benghazi-gate, IRS-gate and now Press-gate.
If this were almost any other president in American history, he would already be writing his resignation letter.
“What would the Founders say or do”?
Like most of the founding generation there existed two major features: First, America should generously welcome people from many nations and religions. Second, the numbers and kinds of immigrants may need to be limited with a view to the qualities of character required for democratic citizenship.
Let’s look at these two preconditions with a measured degree of critical thinking. First, we need to look at who is immigrating to the country and for what reasons. Yet even before examining these various reasons, what we need to do is to take a brief look or perception of what the world looked like during that period in history.
Let there be no mistake about it – many modern day scholars and academia’s have been tirelessly annoyed with the silences and the contours of the U.S. Constitution. In other words, very typical of humankind when an answer is sought yet there is little to be found addressing it, legal minds and history chroniclers’ attempt to establish wording that makes meaning acceptable to their need of the moment.
Having any individual albeit within the Founding generation or years later to try and put forth politically correct argument into the Constitution is abhorrently in error trying to install an original meaning of the founders. We can however look to different events, epochs, and times throughout history to assist us in making an informed conclusion.
Therefore let’s do that – let’s look and see what was going on during the last half of the eighteenth century – that would make a person sell themselves as indentured servants, prostitutes, or slaves simply to get here. The prevailing thought during that time, as well as the Constitution is produced, were expressions of the Enlightenment.
The Age of Enlightenment or simply the Enlightenment is the era in Western philosophy, intellectual, scientific, and cultural life, centered upon the 18th century, in which reason was advocated as the primary source for legitimacy and authority. Developing simultaneously in France, Great Britain, Germany, the Netherlands, Italy, Spain, Portugal and the American colonies, the movement was buoyed by Atlantic Revolutions, especially the success of the American Revolution, when breaking free of the British Empire.
Most of Europe was caught up, including the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, Russia, and Scandinavia, along with Latin America in instigating the Haitian Revolution. The authors of the American Declaration of Independence, the United States Bill of Rights, the French Declaration, of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen, and the Polish-Lithuanian Constitution of May 3, 1791, were motivated by Enlightenment principle.
The “Enlightenment” was not a single movement or school of thought, for these philosophies was often mutually contradictory or divergent. The Enlightenment was less a set of ideas than it was a set of values. At its core was a critical questioning of traditional institutions, customs, and morals, and a strong belief in rationality and science.
Some historians also include the late 17th century, which is typically known as the Age of Reason or Age of Rationalism, as part of the Enlightenment; however, most historians consider the Age of Reason to be a prelude to the ideas of the Enlightenment.
According to Jack N. Rakove, the very distinguished historian as well as Professor of History at Stanford University espouses in his best-seller Original Meanings that there can be no question that the framers and many of their contemporaries were familiar not only with the great works as such luminaries as Locke, Hobbes, Montesquieu, Hume, and Blackstone. Yet these individuals thrived on self-education in areas of English politics, the moral philosophy, and social science of the Scottish Enlightenment, as well as religious undertakings in the Netherlands, the discord in the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth as well as Russia and the Scandinavians’.
Having established that it is therefore essential to understand that most of the settlers were not in the lower classes. To understand the Enlightenment within the American colonies people were driven to work out of necessity and this attitude was very much a part of their glorious lifestyles. And it would be a save bet to know how much they appreciated it.
Interestingly before making the leap is to note that government existed for the many and especially to protect that liberty, property, and equal rights of the citizen.
This was the America that lured immigrants. Whilst other places in the world were in utter ruin things especially after the American revolution sure looked mighty nice to many.
Here is what the Federation of American Immigration Reform (FAIR) posits to the general public as the five most corrupting, offensive, true, and what needs to be looked at with regard to immigration reform brought forth by the infamous Gang of Eight, Barack Obama, Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL). In addition, these five issues also deal with ultimate changes to the American Electoral College albeit, not one word has been said about it.
We encourage that each person visit their website, FAIR, to see how intricately they uphold words. There is no ostensible political correctness on their site. Furthermore, we encourage that you read (it’s almost impossible not too!) some of the comments that their readers make.
Gang of Eight Breaks Promise on Back Taxes
A close analysis of the Gang of Eight’s amnesty bill (S.744) shows that illegal aliens will in fact not be required to pay back taxes in order to receive legal status, which the bill calls ‘registered provisional immigrant’
Judge Says Obama Unilateral Amnesty Likely to be Blocked
A court challenge by federal immigration agents seeking to block President Barack Obama’s deferred-deportation initiative will probably succeed, a judge said.
Rubio’s Charm Offensive on Immigration Misrepresents the Facts, and His Own Past
Senator Marco Rubio (R-Florida) keeps telling the American people that the Gang of Eight’s bill is not amnesty, despite the fact that virtually every illegal alien in the country will receive amnesty…
Amnesty Would Reshape Electoral College
The immigration proposal pending in Congress would transform the nation’s political landscape for a generation or more — pumping as many as 11 million new Hispanic voters into the electorate a decade from now.
Jeff Flake Plays Russian Roulette with Terrorists
How do you carry out meaningful background checks on 11 million people? The Gang of Eight has repeatedly offered assurances to the American public that illegal aliens seeking amnesty under their bill would have to undergo rigorous background checks.
We are not precisely sure whom it is that these eight U.S. senators are trying to pull this nonsensical piece of legislation on; however, these senators need to understand that there are people who care about the rubbish they are peddling.
We are in the process of reading the proposed legislation (bill) and we encourage our readers, friends, associates, colleagues, and acquaintances to do the same. We only ask that you suggest doing the same with all of those who are around you.
Quite openly it is not a difficult task; however, what has been time consuming is the amount of idiosyncrasies where one needs to stop and admit openly and honestly, “promises, promises…, and we have all heard this before…so what is different now.”
We can assure you that the only differences that exist are those which grant opportunity, amnesty, and/or entitlements to those people who have broken our system of laws and are being rewarded for their deeds.
Since the birth of our nation, the United States has recognized the vital role of lawful immigration, as it brings important economic and cultural benefits. We have always been, and will continue to be, a nation of immigrants.
We are also a nation of laws. The “Gang of Eight” bill introduced in the U.S. Senate violates the very rule of law principle that creates opportunity for immigrants and makes America a beacon of hope for the world.
Giving legal residency to the 11 million people who came here illegally has one definition: amnesty. Amnesty rewards unlawful behavior and diminishes opportunity and prosperity for lawful immigrants and all Americans.
The Senate bill imposes significant costs on taxpayers. At a time of trillion-dollar deficits and $17 trillion in debt, the cost of implementing amnesty and the strain it will add to already fragile entitlement and welfare programs should be of serious concern for everyone.
USA Today: Understanding the costs of amnesty
After decades of empty promises on immigration enforcement, Congress simply lacks credibility to keep its promises. A comprehensive amnesty bill was tried before and it failed. In 1986 we had about 3 million unlawful immigrants. Congress granted them legal status with a promise to control our borders and fix our legal immigration system.
Lawmakers who supported the 1986 bill promised in grand speeches that amnesty would never happen again. Now there are 11 million unlawful immigrants in America because amnesty was immediate but the border wasn’t secured, workplace laws were not enforced, and our legal immigration system was not fixed. The result of amnesty is clear — it encourages more unlawful immigration in hopes of future amnesties.
This new bill is much the same as the last: immediate amnesty in the form of provisional status within months and lofty promises of “strategies” and “plans” for enforcement years later.
Read the bill: Full text of the Senate legislation
Rather than rewarding the 11 to 19 million who broke our laws, Congress should first consider how to make the immigration system work for the more than 4 million people waiting patiently outside our borders to come to our country legally. A rational system would make it easier to follow the law than to break it.
Instead of passing another incomprehensible comprehensive immigration bill, Congress should debate and develop understandable reforms in a transparent systematic process that addresses all of the immigration issues. This will build trust with the American people and unite the country rather than divide it.
In a controversial resolution released on Friday, the group proposed lifting its ban on gay scouts–a significant shift in policy for one of the nation’s largest and most prominent youth development institutions–while still maintaining its current position excluding gay adults as potential leaders. If approved, the policy would take effect on Jan. 1, 2014.
“No youth may be denied membership in the Boy Scouts of America on the basis of sexual orientation or preference alone,” read the proposal released on Friday by the Boy Scouts of America, whose roughly 1,400 National Council members plan to vote on the change at a meeting next month. But as for its adult leadership standards, the organization will “not grant membership to individuals who are open or avowed homosexuals, or who engage in behavior that would become a distraction to the mission of the BSA.”
The Scouts’ policy shift, which aims to strike a middle ground between positions held by gay rights advocates and those of its more conservative sponsors, immediately drew fire from LGBT advocates, who argued that the proposal did not go far enough.
We find that this is thoroughly constant behavior on the part of LGBTQ advocacy groups. Unfortunately, these groups as well as “immigration amnesty groups” and just about everything American about the nation, not matter how one is ruled – that ruling will never be enough for these types.
Just a bit more from the advocacy groups:
“Until every parent and young person have the same opportunity to serve, the Boy Scouts will continue to see a decline in both membership and donations,” said Rich Ferraro, a spokesman for the gay-rights watchdog group GLAAD.
Chad Griffin, president of the Human Rights Campaign, voiced similar disappointment: ”What message does this resolution send to the gay Eagle Scout who, as an adult, wants to continue a lifetime of Scouting by becoming a troop leader?” he said.
On the other side, the Scouts’ proposal of inclusion (however incomplete) could run the risk of alienating its conservative supporters, such as the Mormon Church and the Roman Catholic Church, which together sponsor groups enrolling about one-fourth of all scouts.
We begin to wonder how much capital any single LGBTQ organization has put into this youth organization. Despite what gay-rights advocacy groups would want anyone to believe, the fact remains they just don’t conduct business and/or organizational activities fair.
Trying to do any legitimate negotiating or business with any of the LGBTQ supporters is fruitlessly inconvenient. Now that they have infiltrated our military, churches, schools, and the Boy Scouts of America; let us not forget their actions on same-sex marriage, DOMA, to the point of conspiring against Elaine Huguenin, what’s the point anymore?
The point is folks — America by definition is a Judeo-Christian aligned nation. Even after all of the founding fathers quotes, logical arguments, people are still falling for the lazy way out of “acceptance and tolerance.” James Madison would be a real mess because of a little faction of America who continues to want, want, and want…
As tempting as it might be for anyone in Washington to find some way to spin the tragic events of the Boston bombings to advance their legislative agenda on Capitol Hill—and as mentioned in yesterday’s article they will indeed; however, they ought to think twice. That particularly goes for all sides in the immigration debate.
We are irked, therefore, that some of the bill’s supporters are making the case that the bombings in Boston demonstrate that we need the bill so “we can know who’s here.”
Washington should not get ahead of the facts, and it will take some time before we understand all sides to the events in Boston. From what we know so far, it appears law enforcement has conducted a textbook investigation into the bombing at the Boston Marathon.
They gave us the factual information they had, when they had it, and when they could share it. When it comes to tweaking the measures we use to prevent terrorist travel and foil plots, it is far too premature based on what they have told us to draw any conclusions on how to be more efficient at fighting terrorism.
America has had over a decade of experience in battling both transnational and “home-grown” terrorism. There is already plenty of experience to draw conclusions on how to keep this nation safe, free, and prosperous. When it comes to counterterrorism, the single most effective tool is finding the terrorists and stopping them before they kill. That has been the key to success to foiling most of the 54 frustrated plots by Islamist terrorists against America.
Good immigration and border security policies play an important, but supporting role. Generally, the rule is if you have good policies that facilitate legal immigration and travel while providing for public safety and security — they will serve well to help thwart terrorist travel.
In fact, the bill promises “new security” by demanding the government have an electronic system to ensure that we can check out every foreign visitor leaving the country. The problem is the federal requirement to do that is not new— it has been on the books at least 17 years and ignored by three different Administrations. It is still not in place. There is a vigorous debate over if “building this system is worth the security or immigration enforcement benefits it may provide.”
There are national security problems with the bill that we hope to be able to debate at length.
The Boston bombings were a stark reminder that terrorism is still a real security threat. The seriousness of that threat requires we react carefully and thoughtfully in debating key issues to
ensure we do what’s right to solve immigration reform and border security.
Therefore, we contend that we should make ALL MATTERS OF IMMIGRATION REFORM coming from or endorsed by the U.S. Senate be scrutinized to the inth degree. As time continues on we become far more
aware that we do not have a fence — built and completed before they started up again with immigration reform. Furthermore, let’s not forget about the Border Patrol officers, police, law enforcement personnel, and the lot who have paid the ultimate price, with their lives, ensuring our safety.
For example allow us this question: Would you willingly allow Senator’s Schumer, Lindsey Graham, John McCain, or Dick Durbin and many others your PIN numbers to the bank account? Or giving any one of them the keys to your house for a week or month? Sorry folks, I just don’t trust them at all!
Remember our (USA) Principles and Priorities…Let Boston be your Guide….
This site is not and hopefully will never, ever become one of those politically correct – manipulation of words in language – site that as we are witnessing in the press. It is extremely important to identify issues, matters, and/or things as they are in reality and we encourage the “heck with it” attitude and if someone is carrying a homemade bomb and as evidence has led us to believe, that the same individual did seek to train, or even to advance in his knowledge of “Radical Islamic Jihad” well we wonder why all of the brouhaha as to whether refer to this crazy person as a “Terrorist” or a “Bomber.”
The entire line of questions is only confusing the proper use of English. Seems to us that the word Terrorist is a noun used to identify a person, their ideological, religious, and/or radical behavior whereas when one attends to a Bomber this appears to be where translation is lost with word meanings.
According to The American Heritage Dictionary and the Collins Online Free Dictionary there is a word choice differential that is interesting yet logical. Bomber is used in most cases in militaristic terms such as a particular aircraft, squadron, or what a person does.
So logically it appears to us that in this particular case of the Boston Marathon the brothers planned a terroristic attack that both was to kill and maim as many individuals as possible.
There so far exists evidence that one of the brothers traveled to Russia, as well as Chechnya to perhaps meet up with radicals.
Nevertheless what was inherent with the older brother is that communication with radical Islamic Jihadists, ideological and religious beliefs may have influenced his judgment. Although for the importance of the word usage is this following question:
What was the intent of these brothers? Where and how did they learn to make bombs capable of the carnage the bombs created and left on those in the immediate area (blast area, Boston, surrounding cities, and America) and the nation as a whole.
When one considers what their reasons were does that really matter in lieu of their offensives?
This definition and clarification aspect of this article is but to warn other individuals who may get caught up within the forthcoming spin that the U.S. government and all agencies thereof will try amount.
One other warning is that of the press and other forms of media. As a fundamental action we must be cautious not to let the press and their machinations of information seize this opportunity for their own ends – by creating a story that may or may not be true.
With our hearts and prayers going to those who suffered the greatest loss, to those who have lost body parts, to those whose lives have been forever changed by the demonstrative actions of some radical, arrogant brothers we will – with all diligence continue to pray for the people of Massachusetts.
If there is any valuable hope to be found in this tragic event let us all focus in on the tributes rendered at Fenway Park, the streets of Boston, and the compliance of the general public with those within law enforcement.
We cannot close with anything other than to hat-tap to the governor of Massachusetts, the mayor of Boston, and their staffs, as well as the “Colonel,” (the chief-of-police), and to every single person in Boston for showing the rest of America how it is supposed to be done.
Here is what the Gang of Eight is proposing to the Senate members. Do you know that feeling when you realize that something needs to be pointed-out so as not to repeat our lessons of the past? Being a gentlemen, all we have to say on this matter of Comprehensive Immigration Reform as brought to the Senate first then the American people is nothing more than what has been tried before. And keeping with the goose-stepping government we believe, that this is the best they can do – hapless and hopeless.
This is but an extension on the entire proposal. In yesterdays submission we had a space allocation of approximately 700 words. What we’ve done is broken this proposal down with a human side asking questions and offering suggestions to better this proposal.
LEGALIZATION OF UNDOCUMENTED RESIDENTS
* Foreigners living in the United States illegally could apply to adjust their status to “registered provisional immigrant (RPI) status” within 180 days after enactment, provided the secretary of Homeland Security submits to Congress a strategy for securing U.S. borders. From our understanding as far back as 2006 a secure border has been promised and paid for…just not completed.
* Only those who arrived in the United States before December 31, 2011 could apply and they would have to pay a $500 fee and back taxes. Those convicted of felonies or three or more misdemeanors would not be eligible.
* Immigrants who win RPI status could work for any employer and would be allowed to travel outside the United States. How does a person win RPI status?
* RPI status would last for six years and can be renewed.
* After 10 years, those with RPI status can adjust to a permanent resident status if they are working regularly and speak English. Permanent residents are among those who under current law may apply for citizenship. This is perhaps the best place to start the “English Skills” of the new immigrant. Regular people who are to talk with these individuals on a daily basis.
* Two groups would be put on a faster track to permanent resident status: children brought into the United States illegally and certain farm workers. They could get “green cards” in five years. The children would be eligible for citizenship immediately after getting green cards. (Ridiculous!)
* About 40 percent of employment-based visas would be allocated to professionals with advanced degrees to work in the United States in the sciences, arts and other professions, including certain people with foreign medical degrees. Those holding graduate degrees in engineering, mathematics, science, and technology from U.S. universities also would be included.
* Employment visas for skilled workers and certain professionals would be increased to 40 percent of the total. And a new visa would be created for foreign entrepreneurs who want to start their own companies in the United States.
* The “V visa” would be expanded to help unify families by allowing foreign relatives to live in the United States and for certain other family members to visit the United States for up to 60 days per year.
* Immigrant visas for siblings of U.S. citizens would be repealed 18 months after the date of enactment.
* A backlog for family and employment-based immigrants would be eliminated.
* A merit-based visa would be created the fifth year after enactment and would award points to individuals based on education, employment, length of residence in the United States and other considerations. There would be 120,000 such visas available annually, with the number rising by 5 percent per year if demand exceeds supply and the U.S. jobless rate is below 8.5 percent. It would be capped at 250,000 visas.
* Employers would have to use an “E-Verify” system to ensure that they are hiring legal workers. It would be phased in over a five-year period.
* A new “W-Visa” for low-skilled workers would be created and spouses and minor children of those workers would be allowed to accompany them to the United States. The number of visas would be capped for the first four years at 20,000, 35,000, 55,000, and 75,000 respectively.
* A new government bureau would determine changes to limits on such visas and devise methods for determining domestic labor shortages in regions.
* Wages for low-skilled immigrant workers would be dictated by either the wage paid to other employees with similar experience or based on a prevailing wage level for occupations in geographic regions, whichever is higher.
* Current undocumented farm workers would be able to win legal status if they have made a “substantial prior commitment” to farm work in the United States. A new agricultural guest worker visa program would be created to ensure an adequate workforce.
As for our consideration of this not so qualified “Proposal” it is but a waste of time and effort and we expect far more from Senator’s than this rubbish.