Little Consensus on Immigration Policy

[Sean]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20051201/...E0BHNlYwN0bWE-

From building a fence to keep them out to passing a law to help them stay, members of Congress have lots of ideas on how to respond to President Bush's challenge to take on the problem of illegal immigrants. There's a will to act but so far not much consensus. The first stab at the problem could come in the next two weeks, when the House may vote on legislation to strengthen border security. That's the easiest of the three legs of immigration reform. The others, enforcing workplace hiring rules and setting up a guest-worker program that might incorporate illegal immigrants, are far more divisive. In the Senate, Majority Leader Bill Frist plans to bring up a border security bill in February, and use that as a starting point for broader reform. "We must boldly address the challenges of border security first," Frist, R-Tenn., said this week as Bush toured the Texas-Mexico border to stress the need for both tougher border controls and a guest-worker program. The House bill will likely come from Judiciary Committee Chairman James Sensenbrenner, R-Wis., with the focus on tighter borders and some elements of workplace enforcement. His spokesman, Jeff Lungren, said it could contain a proposal by Rep. Ken Calvert (news, bio, voting record), R-Calif., to expand a program for verifying employee records with the Homeland Security Department and the Social Security Administration, and another by Rep. David Dreier (news, bio, voting record), R-Calif., to make Social Security cards more tamperproof. But there are lots of other proposals to choose from. The Homeland Security Committee this month approved a bill by its chairman, Rep. Peter King (news, bio, voting record), R-N.Y., that would add border patrol agents, make use of new monitoring technology including unmanned aerial vehicles and end the "catch and release" practice for non-Mexican illegals. Dozens of other border security bills have been introduced, many by conservatives and border state lawmakers fed up with the government's failure to stop the flow of illegal immigrants.

[Rainbow]

Some U.S. lawmakers either like to play with the U.S. immigration policy, or manifest a lack of common sense with concern to the one. U.S. needs less-legal immigrants, despite of the officialy claimed by U.S. governing bodies stance.
The main point is to : control and/or monitor that process, at least.

[CoffeeSaint]

Yes, but how? Tougher penalties for illegal immigrants? Tougher security on the border itself? More enforcement of the restrictions on people who hire illegal immigrants? What do we do first?

My vote would probably be the enforcement on the employers who hire illegal immigrants. That's generally the impetus for immigration, isn't it? And the illegals get exploited, and the American workers lose jobs, and only the employers benefit. So crack down on them, first.

Man, I never thought I'd say something like that. You people are going to get me thrown out of the Liberal Glee Club.

[leftcider]

Quote by: CoffeeSaint And the illegals get exploited

By our standards they are, but by their standards they are making enough money to make it worth it.

Nevertheless, the problem needs to be dealt with.

[pubmanager]

More attention should be paid to the causes of migration.

Maybe the solution lies not in fences and getting tough on the people who employ illegal workers; using the cheapest available labour is good bussiness sense.

Why not concentrate on the elieviation of the factors that lead to economic migration occuring?

http://www.afsc.org/trade-matters/is...-migration.htm

[bishop]

i'm not sure how we could really enforce immigration laws at various businesses.. that seems like a pretty gargantuan task..

mexico's gotten lots of aid over the years, and their inept government has successfully made inequality even worse. frankly, mexico's problems are not our fault and we shouldn't have to accept millions of illegal immigrants. the mexican government has been reported several times of actually assisting illegal immigrants - encouraging them to come here.

one of the most basic of all government's responsibilities is to defend the nation's borders. another is to be able to account for the people within your borders. this was laid down since westphalia.. immigration's fine - i just want it to be legal. in the meantime, i think the fence is an excellent idea.. a border where millions of illegal immigrants cross every year is a serious national security issue - who only knows what else could slip through that border.

[brien]

Quote by: Sean http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20051201/...E0BHNlYwN0bWE-

Immigration policy?????? The US has an immigration policy????? :confused:

So, pray tell, what is wrong with securing the entire border of both Mexico and Canada and then FORCE the immigrants to enter through legal ports of entry? Perhaps, it is often only the illegal immigrant who attempts to avoid the LEGAL port of entry, because in many cases he or she has something in their past that will exclude them from LEGAL entry. I have read that a full 25% of all illegals in this country were in legal trouble in Mexico end up in AMERICAN jails for a crime committed here on US soil. Just what we need, more overcrowding of already overcrowded jails. Just what we need, to support prisoners, who number in the thousands of illegals, in prisons at a cost to an already over burdened taxpayer.

Oh, I know what's wrong: to channel immigrants through legal ports of entry would be the correct thing to do, and wouldn't be fair to the people, who for example, use the desert in Mexico, along with water fountains for their relief, to enter the US, as compared to the people who do conduct themselves in a legal manner when entering the country. We have to be fair to the irresponsible illegals and treat them the same way we do those who act responsibly and enter legally. :rolleyes:

Then why bother with the legal ports of entry? Close them down, and just throw open the border, in a free for all. It is a shameful situation that will eventually have deadly consequences sooner, rather than, later. The politicians are fiddling while Rome burns, my friends.

[deedee]

Quote by: Sean http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20051201/...E0BHNlYwN0bWE-

Thanks for the info! I need this!

[RickSp]

The great but tragic irony of America is that we are indeed a nation of immigrants who always want to slam the door behind us. It has always been thus.

Franklin complained about the Germans "overrunning" Pennsylvania, the "KnowNothings" wanted to stop the Irish, another generation feared the "Yellow Peril." Nativism and xenophobia peaks and subsides, without ever leaving. It seems that we are facing a new wave right now. A pity.

[Nono]

It's the same everywhere: everybody wants to slam the door behind them and pull up the ladder after them. And none are more chauvinistic than recently naturalized citizens. I should know. :)

The problems come when you have a group of immigrants that are ahh.. assimilation-challenged. The Germans, the Irish and the still more exotic Asians have all integrated pretty well into the countries they've emigrated to, and opprobrium has passed to the next wave of immigrants. Everyone in the States has eventually made it into the mainstream (except Blacks and Indians -- for obvious historical reasons).

Anyway, enough digression. What with relative ease of travel (A Peruvian colleague just spent a week in Seoul and was stunned: "The place is full of Peruvians!") immigration is today a huge issue throughout the rich (and "rich") world. Certainly here in Europe. And the more jobs are exported while cheap labour is imported, the more you can expect a nasty backlash. It's our primitive, tribal selves.

[RickSp]

Quote by: Nono The problems come when you have a group of immigrants that are ahh.. assimilation-challenged. The Germans, the Irish and the still more exotic Asians have all integrated pretty well into the countries they've emigrated to, and opprobrium has passed to the next wave of immigrants. Everyone in the States has eventually made it into the mainstream (except Blacks and Indians -- for obvious historical reasons).

The "they won't assimilate" claim is overblown. The actual rate of assimilation in America today is much higher than it was a hundred years and the importance of speaking English is appreciated more today than ever in history. Most claims about immigrants reflect the fears of those who have already arrived. Nothing new there either.

[shield772]

I have an idea that seems to be a good compromise, build a wall all around the US to keep out future Illegal immigrants and give clemency to the ones that are allready here.

[Clarence]

Quote by: shield772 I have an idea that seems to be a good compromise, build a wall all around the US to keep out future Illegal immigrants and give clemency to the ones that are allready here.

What if an American wants to leave for vacation?

[pubmanager]

How do you account for the many people who enter the USA as tourists.

Couldn't they get inside the wall on a holiday visa and disappear? You country is quite big!

[shield772]

well thats when ins comes in, and planes can get over the wall and we can have checkpoint openings

[pubmanager]

I think we can all see how it is possible to check who's comming in, what I'm asking is how you make sure they leave.

[shield772]

get tougher and pay better attention

[pubmanager]

How?

[shield772]

I have never claimed to have all the answers, just the ideas. Way to much detail, I'm a big picture guy.

[CoffeeSaint]

The big picture has already been set: we do not want to throw open the country to immigration. We want to limit and control it.

As for building a wall, the wall is not the problem: the guards are the problem. You couldn't realistically build a wall big enough to keep people out without guarding it, and guarding it would take too many men, and too much money. Sure, you might be able to build a wall across the Mexican desert, and it would probably help the problem even without guards; but then, all someone needs is a boat, and they can make it around the wall. So what did we just spend billions of dollars on the wall for?

Building a wall all around the country? As pubmanager said, this is a big country. And let alone tourists: what about Alaska and Hawaii? Do they get cut off completely? Do we build corridors connecting them to the mainland? And even if we could build all of this, do you really think there's nowhere better we could spend our money, as a nation?