Apparently you fighting with yourself and making ignorant alarmist points based on nothing of what the bill made by the gang of 8 say.
Then there will be no problem with amendments that clarify being proposed by the Republicans and supported by Sen. Rubio.
There is, as mentioned we can not trust anything of what you are reporting.
Even if I’m wrong, the Republicans are concerned enough to be proposing amendments to clarify what the Gang of Eight already claims to support and is supposedly in the bill. Rubio supports these efforts. There shouldn’t be any problem with improving the bill to address the defects Republicans believe are there, even if they are not.
It only counts as improving if the defects actually exist. If they don’t exist, it’s needless churn, and additional complexity, in a law that is already complicated.
Republicans have a new motto “If it ain’t broke, fix it.”
It’s not complexity, it just clarifies what supposedly is already there. Although really what it does is remove the wiggle room that would allow the law to be defanged in the interpretation.
For example, the part about back taxes is just nonsense. It only requires immigrants who owe taxes from documented work to pay them. The vast majority, however, did under the table work. They must pay their obligation to society, or else you’re granting them a special privilege not available to citizen workers who work under the table.
You’re going to get slivers under your fingernails grasping at straws the way you do. How much of an effort is being put out going after citizens that work under the table? There is always going to be some of that and some attempt at enforcement is warranted, but if this is what’s holding up a bill it seems like the tail wagging the dog.
So, Rubio supports making changes that he believes are already present to the bill he supports, to turn it into a bill he’d support. Got it.
[QUOTE=GIGObuster]
And here is evidence that in reality you have no clue about what was in the bill.
[/quote]
I placed this entire dialogue in one post not to pick on adahar, but to illustrate quite clearly the ways in which the immigration debate casually shifts among conservatives. Also note that the original “learn English” request was thrown out on a whim as (presumably) yet another requirement the right wants to have fulfilled before immigration reform is acceptable.
IMO it illustrates quite clearly the problem with immigration reform and the Republican party: No proposal will ever be good enough to appease the base. If the Dems agree to 90% enforcement, the GOP will say that 100% is required. If the Dems agree to 100%, the GOP will demand 110% (ridiculous, I know, but they do have a history of denying reality).
This is a serious problem for Republicans “leaders” who seem too frightened by electoral math to call out their base for anything they say/believe. I truly believe Rubio wants some kind of immigration reform, but when the choice is to be a leader or pander to the base, he becomes a political contortionist while clowns like Sessions start driving the debate.
Payment of back taxes is part of the sales job for the bill. If Democrats don’t intend to follow through, they shouldn’t use it as a selling point. That’s the deception I’m complaining about.
The impression they give is that all the illegals who didn’t pay taxes will have to settle up before getting permanent residency. Tough, but fair, voters like that. But the reality is that the only illegals who will have to pay are the 1% or so who the IRS already knows owe money for whatever reason.
When iffinitis aguda is needed to make a deception a reality, one should take Republican’t[sup]TM[/sup] for that condition, accept no substitutes. 
And how exactly do you propose we enforce anything against those we don’t know owe money?
It’s not that hard. The first thing applicants have to do is prove that they’ve been here since at least 2011. Those who came since 2012 are headed for Deportation City. They also have to prove they’ve been working to be eligible.
Once they have to prove employment, then you’re most of the way towards verifying whether or not they paid taxes.
There’s also the employer side of it. If the employer hasn’t been paying payroll taxes, we can recover that money too.
And there is once again, many times the payroll taxes are paid, but many immigrants do not seek any returns. That money goes to the government. Of course that is ignored to make the point more alarmist.
Hmmm, if only the IRS had some way of finding out if people paid their taxes.
Since applicants will have to verify employment, it’s going to be very easy to figure out if they paid taxes. If they are owed refunds, great, it can be applied to the fines and application fees.
You think the Republicans are worried about the employer-side taxes?
Hahahahahahahahaha!!!
Those are “job creators” you’re talking about there. They are sacred and not to be touched.
Of course that means that you never got what I told you was my experience, but you know what? I consider all that money that I **never **got back my payment to America.
Your experience was part of a failed policy. This time we’re going to get it right.
You are clueless again, and freighting concern, the point was that it also makes a mockery of you point of the immigrants not paying enough for your taste. And when the Republicans just voted to kick the Dreamers, your defense of the Republicans is not just reaching silly levels, but your points to defend them are going into even more unsavory territories, so you do need to think carefully before you post again.
To break even the penalty would have to be at least $130,000.
That was the net fiscal cost of each low skill immigrant according to the National Research Council.
It’s pretty funny watching the US act in such an irrational manner from a distance. I suspect there will be much for future historians to ponder over. 