John & Andy Schlafly: No bill on immigration is worth supporting unless Rep. King is on board
Phyllis Schlafly’s sons urge President Trump to reject House Amnesty proposals
Washington, D.C.- In case you missed it, Townhall has published a column today in which Phyllis Schlafly’s sons, John and Andy Schlafly, urge President Trump to “stand firm” against Amnesty legislation that could be considered in the House this week. In fact, the Schlafly brothers, who continue to lead the Phyllis Schlafly Eagles organizations, also suggest a litmus test that President Trump should use when determining whether immigration legislation should be supported:
“No bill on immigration is worth supporting,” they write, “unless Representatives King and Barletta are on board.”
King is a nationally recognized leader on the subject of immigration policy, and he is a steadfast champion of the Rule of Law. King opposes both of the Amnesty bills lame-duck Speaker Paul Ryan is currently attempting to ram through the House, as they repeat the mistakes of 1986 by granting Amnesty to illegal alien lawbreakers. The Schlafly’s are exactly right: “Amnesty would merely encourage more illegality.” As currently drafted, the proposed House legislation fails the King/Barletta test articulated by John and Andy Schlafly.
The Schlafly’s are an influential voice in the Conservative movement, and Republicans in the House of Representatives would do well to read this column. Phyllis Schlafly’s early endorsement of President Trump is viewed by many as a pivotal moment in his run for the presidency.
Americans opposed to the House passage of an Amnesty program dreamed up by lame-duck Speaker Paul Ryan are encouraged to call their Member of Congress (202-224-3121) to express their opposition.
Excerpts from “Trump Should Stand Firm Against Illegals”
“The push for amnesty for illegal aliens is turbo-charged by stories of separating children from their parents at the southern border. But children are often separated from lawbreaking and even law-abiding American parents, so it is curious why liberals and others would suddenly complain when it happens to families for entering our country illegally.
The critics do not provide an alternative to the current policy of prosecuting lawbreaking parents while allowing their children to go free. If we had a border wall then these separations would not occur, and the critics of Trump are the same ones who oppose building the wall.”
. . .
“The timing is suspicious for this media campaign about separating children from parents. The push for an amnesty bill has reached a fever pitch for more than a million young adults, who are euphemistically called “childhood arrivals” because many of them crossed our border illegally while teenagers.
These migrants would be wonderful assets to their homelands, and they have more relatives back home than they do here. Amnesty would merely encourage more illegality.”
. . .
“In 1986, President Ronald Reagan signed into law an immigration bill that granted amnesty and created the incentive for more illegal immigration. Far from solving a problem, amnesty induces more illegal immigration in the future.
So to attract support by President Trump, the House compromise amnesty bill includes funding for construction of a border wall, to the tune of $25 billion. But funding a wall is not the same as building a wall, because liberals run to court to block almost anything Trump does related to immigration.”
. . .
“Lame duck House Speaker Paul Ryan, who is stepping down at the age of only 48 rather than fight for the Trump agenda, has long given priority to the agenda of the pro-illegal immigration lobbyists. But their goals are not those of the American people who elected Trump as president.”
. . .
“Both oppose the compromise bill being pushed on President Trump, and no bill on immigration is worth supporting unless Representatives King and Barletta are on board.”