Rep. Steve King on Amnesty


The Amnesty Papers: Restoring the American Republic

(Discussion #3 – Take it away, Steve)

It’s Monday, so we’re back discussing Restoration, here at TheRightScoop! I’ve forked the Liberty Amendments Mondays discussions into two paths. We will still be bird-dogging the progress of the Article Five Convention activity with somewhat regular Monday articles on The Liberty Amendments. But the second path will be direct discussion of two critical issues that are threatening to swamp our republic before we can even get a chance to establish Amendments to the Constitution. Those two issues are Amnesty, and the rising wave of increasingly medieval tactics by the left to shut you up and end all debate. So look for more Liberty Amendments Mondays articles, interspersed with occasional articles in The Amnesty Papers series, and a new series called Shut Up, They Explained

Title panel - The Amnesty Papers

Today’s article is more of a bit of housecleaning, and a way to let you know we’re still working to keep heat on the debate over restoring the Constitution. I’ve been working on a long-form article about Amnesty for the past few weeks, but I’m still working on a few details and presentational issues to make it worthy of posting. (Also, work’s been a bit intense, so dig we must.)



As I wrote in the box above, The Amnesty Papers series will continue for the time being. The sole intent of the series is to focus Constitutional conservatives and libertarian-minded Republicans on a coherent definition of amnesty that complies with the rule of law, the Constitution, and our needs for healthy immigration policy. In short, we need a definition of Amnesty that has meaning.

As much fun as it is to yell, “No Amnesty, deport them all!” into these discussions, the problem with that negative definition of Amnesty (i.e., “what amnesty isn’t”) is that it’s essentially meaningless, provides no room for logistical problem solving (telling law enforcement to “handle it” is not a policy), and provides no basis for how to deal with the illegal aliens that are still flooding across the border. Nor does it address the illegals that have managed to achieve varying degrees of grey-area legality, such as having so-called “anchor babies.”

To that end, I envision at least two more articles in the series. So until the series wraps up, I invite folks to review the first two articles, which are linked below. Feel free to participate in the discussion, but stay on topic.

Meanwhile, I’ll leave you with an interview with Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa’s 4th Dist.) from this past December. Rep. King is the Vice Chairman of the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Immigration Policy and Border Security. He’s been working to make sure he prevents an Amnesty bill from happening, and for that he has been targeted by several large PACs on the left (notably Mark Zuckerberg’s FWD.us website). This critical subcommittee must continue to have someone like Steve King to make sure Amnesty doesn’t come out of Congress in some backroom deal, so I recommend people watch King’s re-election bid with interest).

More recent video from Steve King is over at WND’s website, but I need the keys from Scoop to embed those here. I recommend you especially watch the part of the interview where King explains what it was like having to “force” a Special Conference and how much the Leadership is working to ramrod the immigration issue right past objections from Conservatives.

Recent articles in The Amnesty Papers series:

Discussion #2 – Take back the language
Discussion #1 – Amnesty. What does it mean?

Recent articles in The Liberty Amendments series:

Discussion #24 – (but really #25) Can We Really Do This?
Discussion #24 – No, Not The Hamburger Chain
Discussion #23 – Because the Internet, that’s why
Discussion #22 – Just the Video

The first article in the Liberty Amendments Mondays series:

Discussion #1: Zombie Doctrine, Tactics, and the Liberty Amendments

Comment Policy: Please read our comment policy before making a comment. In short, please be respectful of others and do not engage in personal attacks. Otherwise we will revoke your comment privileges.