It would appear that over the last week I’ve had done a flipflop on the immigration bill. Nothing could be farther from the truth.

First, lets review. In every post as well as on the MacRanger Show I have been consistent on three points.

First and foremost that we need immigration reform, second that at least we have begun something, and third let’s wait until the full congress is back to allow the debate to begin.

In the meantime I’ve done my best NOT to read what other pundits have written choosing instead to read the drafts myself. I’ve not even paid much attention to the polling because quite frankly the American people haven’t a clue – except through what they are told by the MSM – what this bill contains. It is from that reading of the text that I have begun to have serious reservations about the bill.

Saying that, I have also begun to have serious issues with President Bush – whom you all know I have supported with literally sleepless nights and endless posts of defense. But frankly he’s losing me with the “Let them eat cake” attitude he has developed against any who oppose the bill. When you are losing forty percent of your donation base over one issue you need to pay attention and address your base.

So where does it leave it? Again, the full congress will be back this week and the debate will begin. Hugh Hewitt – who has also read the actual draft says:

“Could the bill be saved? Only if the Republican leadership comes back with a package of amendments which it announces beforehand and insists be voted on serially and all of which must be adopted if cloture is to be invoked on the final amended version. The choice before the Democrats is whether they will accept genuine enforcement (the whole fence first, big hikes in federal law enforcement beyond the Border Patrol, a burden of proof requirement on non-Spanish speaking immigrants from countries with jihadist networks and perhaps even for gang-age Spanish speakers etc.) What happened over the past ten days was a huge shift against the bill so that the amendment package must be real reform of the reform or the dead end will be reached. John McCain knew what he was doing when he demanded a jam down –the bill has lost support with every day of scrutiny.”

It’s not just the usual suspects who have turned against the present bill. Iain Murray – himself an immigrant and working at NRO highlights some of the many issues that simply make worse an already broken system.

For instance, in a email from an immigrant lawyer who is also an immigrant:

“So, my clients want to employ skilled Filippinos, Mexicans etc. on H-2B visas. Even if the shipyards were prepared to employ illegals (which they are not), these people would most probably not have the skills required. Furthermore, when you’re building ships and oil rigs, you have a lot more government involvment, so you do everything by the book.

Getting the H-2B visas is absurd. There is a cap of 140,000 per annum. These are mostly bought up by labor supply companys or massive corporations. I am told anecdotally that Disney gets 10,000 just for Disneyland in California.

The new bill was going to raise this to 400,000 but then lowered to 200,000. America needs more of these people, who are hard working and do mostly intend to return home, once they have made a wad of cash. They then take time off and go off to other construction jobs in, say Saudi Arabia, Russia or Korea, where they also are well paid.

However, under the new bill if they do want to stay, they are penalized for being legal nonimmigrants in contrast would be z visa holders, who can seemingly stay indefinitely. It’s madness.

Higher up to food chain is just as much of a problem. I have a Flippino client who has invested $100,000 in a business here in which he owns 25% of the shares and has an E2 (non immigrant investor visa). He earns a base salary of $90,000. His US tax returns, pay slip and share certificate have all been provided. His wife should qualify for a spousal visa but has now been denied twice because the imbeciles at the embassy in Manila have concluded she is “likely to become a burden on the state”.

The point is that I have decided that as far as I’m concerned I will fight that this current bill will not pass without sufficient measures and amendments to correct the glowing deficiencies it presents.

Let’s hope that both sides can drop the name calling and rhetoric and openly debate the bill to a compromise that all sides can agree to. If not, then the current bill must not become law.