What kind of immigration bill would you support?

[Bruno]

Would half a trillion dollars (cost of war in Iraq) help physically secure the borders?  Heck 2000 miles at 5 million per mile is only 10 Billion if my math is correct..  Wire the Canadian border as well!..

Can make very cheap and use method that history have show to be effective...

In Europa, during the soviet time, a wall was build... and it have work very good... in several decenia, very few was able to breach it... 5000 escape between 1961 and 1989...

Now, Israel use a similar method... some portion are made of beton, some other from eletronic fence... and the more cheaper are from metal panel... take a look at the photo below... why not build something similar to stop illegal immigration from Mexico ?



If some people find so wall ugly... maybe some artwork on it can give a illussion of freedom !!!



And you have already the "tortilla" wall... only 14 miles long but with good result :

"...apprehensions along the region with a security fence dropped from 202,000 in 1992 to 9,000 in 1994."

After so positive result, in September 2006, , the U.S. Congress voted The Secure Fence Act of 2006 which authorized spending $1.2 billion to build 700 miles (1,100 km) of additional fencing on the southern border facing Mexico.

http://www.rules.house.gov/109_2nd/text/hr6061/1092nd_hr6061.pdf

Since the delay allowed for the "action" is 18 month... maybe some construction will begin around January 2008... when finish, if result are similar to the "tortilla" wall, mexican immigration will drop... almost 95% lower immigration !!!

A wall is simple, cheap and it work !!!

[TigerPaws]

Bruno,

 One problem with a wall or fence is that the ILLEGALS want to get into the U.S. so badly they will tunnel under it, several such tunnels are so big that a large tractor trailer truck is able to drive through. Now a fence or wall would work if the U.S. placed guard towers within sight of each other as was done with the old iron curtain, that coupled with a shoot on sight order would stop much of the ILLEGALS.

Honestly that will not happen (unfortunately) until the U.S. has been hit with massive causalities numbering in the millions from a terrorist attack which came across our southern border and that will happen sooner or later.

TigerPaws

[jb]

Yesterday I received a response to a comment I'd written to Senator Kay Bailey Hutchinson, (R-TX).  I thought you guys might enjoy reading what one US Senator thinks about a workable immigration plan. 

I'm sorry, I can't post a link to my e-mail.

Thank you for contacting me regarding comprehensive immigration reform. I welcome your thoughts and comments on this issue.

Texas is a state that uniquely benefits from the contributions of legal immigrants, but it is also uniquely vulnerable to the dangers of illegal immigration. Since I was first elected to the U.S. Senate in 1993, my principles have been clear and consistent: we must secure our borders while discouraging illegal behavior. As a member of the Senate Appropriations Committee, I have worked to appropriate funds for border security, which includes new Border Patrol agents, Immigration and Customs Enforcement investigators, detention officers, and detention beds. We have ended catch and release and accelerated the deportation process. I strongly supported provisions for an additional $1.9 billion in immediate funding for border security to cover the first 1,000 of 6,000 new Border Patrol agents hired this year and in 2008. These funds, as provided in the fiscal year 2006 Emergency Supplemental appropriations bill, will assist with the temporary deployment of up to 6,000 National Guard troops aiding the Border Patrol with surveillance and logistics. Yet, more needs to be done to secure our borders, and I continue to seek additional emergency spending to immediately address this national security issue.

On May 9, 2007, Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid of Nevada introduced S. 1348, the Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act of 2007. Initially, the bill consisted of the same language from S. 2611, the Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act of 2006, which the Senate considered last year. On May 19, 2007, Senators Harry Reid and Ted Kennedy (D-MA) introduced a substitute amendment, S. AMDT. 1150, to the bill. The amendment replaced the original text of the bill with new language to be considered. The new language was negotiated over several months between the Bush Administration and a small group of senators.

The legislation addressed several key issues of comprehensive immigration reform. First, the bill concentrated on border enforcement by mandating the hiring, training, and deployment of 20,000 border patrol and immigration enforcement agents; the construction of 370 miles of border fencing; the completion of 300 miles of vehicle barriers; and, the deployment of 4 Unmanned Aerial Vehicles. The bill also would have provided for 105 operational ground-based radar and camera towers on the southern border and authorized that 31,500 detention beds must be available so that apprehended aliens can be detained. All other provisions of the bill were contingent upon these security provisions first being met.

Second, the bill sought to strengthen workforce enforcement through the use of an electronic employment verification system (EEVS). When the EEVS was in place, the Administration predicted that within 18 months, illegal aliens would find it extremely difficult to gain any legitimate employment. Under the bill, illegal workers would not only have been subject to removal from the country but would have been permanently barred from any U.S. immigration program, and employers who knowingly hired illegal workers would have faced stiff penalties.

The bill aimed to overhaul the current U.S. immigration system by enacting a merit-based immigration system or “point system.” Under such a system, immigrants to the U.S. would have garnered points through various characteristics they possess. Examples of these characteristics would have included, but were not limited to, job skills deemed helpful to the U.S. economy, level of educational attainment, and degree of English language proficiency. Once a hopeful immigrant reached a certain point threshold, they would have been eligible to enter the country with a visa, subject to numerical limitations, background checks, and public health screenings.

The fourth component of the bill was the enactment of a temporary worker program where individuals would have been able to come into the United States for a period of two years. At the end of the two-year period, the worker would have been required to return home for at least one year. Eligibility of such a worker for this program would have spanned a total of three cycles (totaling six working years within the U.S. with one year out of the country between each term). Proponents claim that Americans would have been given the first opportunity to fill the jobs, and market forces would have determined how many foreign workers were needed.

The final element of the bill attempted to address those who are currently in the United States illegally. Through the creation of a Z-visa category, current illegal immigrants would need to meet several criteria prior to being considered for legal status or U.S. citizenship. They would first have to pay a $1,000 fine, with an additional $500 fine per dependent. These individuals would also be subject to strict work requirements. All Z-visa holders would have to remain employed in order to prevent their deportation. After a period of eight years, non-immigrant workers would have been eligible to leave the country, pay an additional $4,000 fine, and apply for lawful permanent resident status in the United States, or they could opt to remain on the Z-visa indefinitely, subject to background checks.

Some of the beneficial features in S. 1348 included provisions to increase border security, which must be our number one goal. The bill sought to secure our borders by increasing border fencing, vehicle barriers at the Southern border, the size of the Border Patrol, and installing ground-based radar and camera towers along the Southern border. I believe that any legislation addressing immigration must first address the safety and security needs of the United States, and there were benchmarks that were finite for border security within the bill and were required to be reached before any temporary worker program, or dealing with the backlog of people who are in our country illegally, could begin. Nevertheless, I think the security provisions within the bill could have been made stronger through the amendment process. For this reason, I supported amendments to strengthen border security and remove illegal immigrants convicted of aggravated felonies from the United States.

In addition to border security measures, the bill also contained provisions for a temporary worker program. Temporary work visas play an important role in ensuring U.S. companies have the workers they need to succeed in an increasingly competitive global marketplace. A temporary worker program is also essential to border security. If we do not have a way for people to legally come into this country and fill the jobs where labor is in critical demand, then we will never be able to control our borders. By incorporating the use of an EEVS, we would greatly enhance the success of our efforts to hold companies accountable for employment activity, ensure fair treatment of temporary workers, and make certain those who legally enter our country abide by our laws. A tamper-proof biometric identification card should also be incorporated into any worker program.

While I supported many of the provisions of S. 1348, I also had serious concerns with some parts of the bill. I was very concerned at how this bill could affect the Social Security system, which we all know is on the brink of failure. In 2017, Social Security will start to pay out more than it receives. By 2041, the trust fund will be exhausted. I do not think it is fair to grant credits while illegally working in our country, especially when the solvency of Social Security is in question. To this end, I introduced an amendment that would have disallowed credits into our Social Security system for work performed by persons without lawful status. My amendment addressed both those who came into our country illegally and those who have overstayed their visa. My amendment, which would protect the integrity of the Social Security system, was agreed to by the Senate.

Another concern I had with the bill was found within Title VI of the legislation. Namely, I opposed the amnesty provisions that would have allowed people who came to this country illegally to never have to return to their home country. For this reason, I offered an amendment that would have required all adult illegal immigrants to leave the U.S. before they could apply for legal permanent status. I believe that granting citizenship or legal non-immigrant status to those who entered our country illegally would only encourage others to break our laws in the future. Unfortunately, my amendment was tabled by a 53-45 vote; thus, I could not support the bill as offered and voted against cloture. Ultimately, the cloture vote to end debate failed in a bipartisan 46-53 vote, and Majority Leader Reid pulled the bill from the Senate floor.

I believe an issue as important as immigration should be debated openly and freely and subjected to due consideration and review with time for senators to hear the concerns of their constituents. We have a broken immigration system that is not fair to those who are waiting to enter the country through the legal channels, or to the American people who live by the rule of law. It is the responsibility of the federal government to fix the broken immigration system and to secure the borders of our great nation. This is a duty that I take very seriously.

I have heard the concerns from my constituents regarding this issue, and you may be certain I will keep your views in mind as I continue to work to improve the flaws in our current immigration system.

I appreciate hearing from you and hope you will not hesitate to keep in touch on any issue of concern to you.


Sincerely,
Kay Bailey Hutchison

[Wayne B]

Sounds like Senator Hutchison is well informed on what we need to do now, about our border problems

[jb]

Wayne,

I'm a believer in voicing my concerns to Congress.  I'm also quite sure the response I got is a canned letter sent out by staffers and Senator Hutchinson never read my original letter.  However, I also suspect the staffers are instructed to keep a tote board on key issues so that the Senator knows which way the wind is blowing at the grassroots level.  This is why I bother to write about issues which concern me and my State.  I heartily recommend everyone bookmark their Congressional Representative's web sites, and take the time to write a brief note now and then just to let them know how you feel about the job they are doing.  If you feel strongly about something, say so in as few words as possible, short notes are more likely to be read than an essay.

[I/O]

They would first have to pay a $1,000 fine, with an additional $500 fine per dependent. These individuals would also be subject to strict work requirements. All Z-visa holders would have to remain employed in order to prevent their deportation. After a period of eight years, non-immigrant workers would have been eligible to leave the country, pay an additional $4,000 fine, and apply for lawful permanent resident status in the United States

I gotta say, this "Pay to stay" clause makes a whole lot of sense to me.  One, there is a price and two, it probably discourages the export of some monies to families or friends back home.  It also offers employers an opportunity if they are so keen to keep these workers. I would've thought, if the bill had got up, the initial 1K was a little on the light side, but some injection back into the national economy is much fairer than a free ride in.

I/O

[William3rd]

Pay to stay will not work. Look what happened in 1986. Amnesty and no enforcement. Then came "delayed" amnesty and then "delayed" amnesty part II. And still no enforcement.

What will happen is that once the money part kicks in and the aliens dont pay, then we will hear about how sad it is and how they just cant make it and pay the fine. And Congress will stop fining them. Will anybody go home? Hell no.

Hutchinson sounds like a fine presidential candidate. Good principles.

Build the fence and start to Enforce IRCA. Then- Amnesty to allow EWIs to go home within 6 months or be permanently barred from immigration benefits. Next- Accelerate the family preference categories and limit future beneficiaries. Next- No credits to illegals for SS payments made. THEN set up a program to bring the illegals back from their country in lawful status.

But-each step must be operating before the next step may be started.

Will we do it? Nope.

[Wayne B]

  This is why I bother to write about issues which concern me and my State.  I heartily recommend everyone bookmark their Congressional Representative's web sites, and take the time to write a brief note now and then just to let them know how you feel about the job they are doing.  If you feel strongly about something, say so in as few words as possible, short notes are more likely to be read than an essay.

  jb, evidently many people did just that...to have this latest immigration bill shut down...this tells me that the majority of voters do not want amnesty in the bill..but, they want the problem of illegal immigration to begin getting under way...and soon.

[BC]

I think the US could benefit from:

The Bill, The whole Bill, and nothing but the Bill.

A bill should be passed, or not, on it's own merits, without the influence of earmarks and riders.

Too many votes are simply bought, sold and traded - many for personal gain.

[ScottinCrimea]

Corruption?  In the US?  What do you think this is, Russia?

[BC]

Corruption?  In the US?  What do you think this is, Russia?

Scott,

Over the years I have noticed a trend with role-reversal in many areas.

Maybe it's the perspective.. There is no place on this planet I have felt safer from the mafia than in Italy.

Strange world we live in.

[Kuna]

Wayne,

I'm a believer in voicing my concerns to Congress.  I'm also quite sure the response I got is a canned letter sent out by staffers and Senator Hutchinson never read my original letter.  However, I also suspect the staffers are instructed to keep a tote board on key issues so that the Senator knows which way the wind is blowing at the grassroots level.  This is why I bother to write about issues which concern me and my State.  I heartily recommend everyone bookmark their Congressional Representative's web sites, and take the time to write a brief note now and then just to let them know how you feel about the job they are doing.  If you feel strongly about something, say so in as few words as possible, short notes are more likely to be read than an essay.

jb,

Just a comment on your letter writing...

In Oz about a decade ago I know the television stations treated a single written complaint as 40,000 unhappy viewers...  Ten letters (not phone calls) was enough to bring about change!

Lot's of people will sit back and grumble but not many take the time to get off their butts.

Oh a side note I know many American men here are opposed to IMBRA but I wonder how many have actually put pen to paper?

Kuna

[BillyB]

BillyB, You continue to ignore any and all studies and statistics, as well as the experience and opinions of the majority of the people in the US.  Sometime go visit one of the border states, talk to the people who are most affected by illegal immigration, and see what they think. They certainly dont' need statistics to see there is a problem, and You'll be hard pressed to find anyone who agrees with your ideas of a solution.

Scott, you consistantly ask me to get real life experiences and then you seem to discount every one of my real life experiences with immigrants. Not only have I visited every border State near Mexico, I've lived in two of them. I've also crossed the border twice, walked over once and drove thousands of miles into Mexico all the way down past Alcupulco and even been through Mexico City. Nobody here was surrounded by more Mexicans at any one time than me. But I didn't go around and tout my experience as you have to prove to people I know what I'm talking about. One doesn't need to have experience to figure out how to solve illegal immigration the cheapest way. I have my ideas on what's most practical to solve the illegal immigrantion problem. And remember, I'm not against enforcement.

Since the media and government doesn't like to give us exact and total $ amounts to what illegals give to this nation, then we'll create our own. This 2005 article gives us SS benefits and medicare benefits and based on that, we could figure out the money they give for federal withholding. There are two pages to this article so don't forget to read the second page.
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/04/05/business/05immigration.html?ex=1270353600&en=78c87ac4641dc383&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland

7 million Illegals provide medicare $1.5 billion and SS $6.5 billion and based on federal withholdings which is about 3 times more than SS, they would provide $19.5 billion dollars for a total of $27.5 billion dollars.

Since there are 12 million illegals, they would be giving up over $47 billion a year to the government in taxes, SS, and medicare.

If there are 20 illegals as some suggested, they are giving up $78.6 billion a year.

You have the $ amounts for SS and medicare, you can calculate the percentage of federal withholdings yourself by looking at your pay stub. That is why your government doesn't see it as much of a problem becasue they do pay, not just take.

Like you, most illegal's taxes pay for their children's public education. God forbid the government telling "you" your children is costing this nation money. Education is an investment. 

But unlike you, illegals will not collect SS and medicare when they retire. They have forfeited their retirement for the benefit of yours. Anytime a politician or media scares you about babyboomers bankrupting SS, don't believe them. The illegals are taking care of the problem.

Don't be angry with me showing you the benefits of illegal immigration, you asked for it. Be mad at the media, talk radio and special interest groups for not giving the full details of the situation. They think the general public is dumb and will believe everything they hear. Like men who married foreign women, it'll be difficult to hear a good word come from media and special interest groups pertaining to illegal immigration.

I think anyone who favors illegal immigration and granting them amnesty would do a 180 degree turn in attitude if this was their daughter, even someone so firm in their beliefs as BillyB.  Here is a case where, if the borders had been closed and immigration law properly enforced, this child would be alive today.  Is it worth the cost of even one innocent life?

Scott, you and others should be ashamed of yourself for using the death of a Ukrainian girl by an immigrant to beat your drum. That is no different than the feminists taking the death of Anastasia King and pushing IMBRA.

The Thai immigrant came over legally and no amount of border patrols and walls along Mexico would've prevented this tragedy. The immigrant did commit a sexual crime years ago but the answer is not deportation immediately as you insist, the answer is what I've been saying all along, use our tax money to keep murders and rapists in prison longer or even forever. Your solution does not stop the root of the problem, the criminal himself. You may sleep well thinking a Ukrainian girl wouldn't have been raped if the sexual predator would've been deported from the US on his first charge and you may not care that another child would be raped instead in another country where laws are weaker pertaining to sex with children such as Thailand, but I do care and don't sleep well when child predators are on the loose anywhere. Keep him here and in jail.

[TigerPaws]

BillyB,

 I believe there is one thing we can agree on, the people we are talking about are in the U.S. illegally and therefor have broken the laws of this country, it dose not matter if the laws are right or wrong it is still the law.

Additionally a case can be made that it would be very difficult to deport all 15 to 20 million people who are in this country illegally. The problem is giving them amnesty is not a viable option so what do we do?

Suggestion:

Those that are illegal may come forward but they will be required to be photographed, fingerprinted and placed in a data base forever forfitting any access to citizenship or social services or social security. In return they will be allowed to stay and work in this country under a biometric coded visa which is subject to yearly verification. Any criminal offense no matter how small (except infractions) and they will be deported and forfeit any possible reentry to this country forever.

Those who already have any criminal history no matter how small (again except infractions) will be deported immediately forfeit any possible reentry to this country forever.

Employers will be held criminally responsible to verify the work status of their employees, with a minimum prison terms of 1 year and fines of $100,000.00 dollars per employee. 

Of course this is inclusive with sealing our borders with strict enforcement, maybe the concrete fence with guard towers?   

Something like this might have a possibly of being sold to the American public but remember many people no longer believe our government about much of anything so any program will need to be sold with proof that the program will actually work and more of the same old rhetoric.

TigerPaws   

[ScottinCrimea]

Scott, you consistantly ask me to get real life experiences and then you seem to discount every one of my real life experiences with immigrants. Not only have I visited every border State near Mexico, I've lived in two of them. I've also crossed the border twice, walked over once and drove thousands of miles into Mexico all the way down past Alcupulco and even been through Mexico City. Nobody here was surrounded by more Mexicans at any one time than me. But I didn't go around and tout my experience as you have to prove to people I know what I'm talking about. One doesn't need to have experience to figure out how to solve illegal immigration the cheapest way. I have my ideas on what's most practical to solve the illegal immigrantion problem. And remember, I'm not against enforcement.

The only experience you cited before this was working with them over 2o years ago. Okay, you want to compare experience, here we go.  I've spent time in all of the border states and lived in three of these states for a total of over 20 years, at one time within 5 miles of the border.  I lived in South America for two years.  I worked in an environment that was predominantly Hispanic for over 15 years, communicating in Spanish.  I've traveled extensively throughout Mexico, covering nearly the entire country. I can't count the number of times I have crossed the border.  I have relatives who are Hispanic.  I have spent countless hours discussing this and other topics with people from all over Mexico, Central and South America.  I love the people and encourage LEGAL immigration such as was done by some of my own relatives.  I think you are wrong to say that you don't need to have experience to figure out how to solve illegal immigration. Unless you truly understand their reasons for coming, their expectations and their views of America and its current laws, you aren't going to be able to create a program that will deal with all of this.  You are forced to rely on studies and statistics by others, often with ulterior motives, and I think we both agree that these are flawed.

Since the media and government doesn't like to give us exact and total $ amounts to what illegals give to this nation, then we'll create our own. This 2005 article gives us SS benefits and medicare benefits and based on that, we could figure out the money they give for federal withholding. There are two pages to this article so don't forget to read the second page.
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/04/05/business/05immigration.html?ex=1270353600&en=78c87ac4641dc383&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland

7 million Illegals provide medicare $1.5 billion and SS $6.5 billion and based on federal withholdings which is about 3 times more than SS, they would provide $19.5 billion dollars for a total of $27.5 billion dollars.

Since there are 12 million illegals, they would be giving up over $47 billion a year to the government in taxes, SS, and medicare.

If there are 20 illegals as some suggested, they are giving up $78.6 billion a year.

You have the $ amounts for SS and medicare, you can calculate the percentage of federal withholdings yourself by looking at your pay stub. That is why your government doesn't see it as much of a problem becasue they do pay, not just take..

     While I firmly believe, in direct contrast to you, that illegals hurt the economy, I think a debate about whether illegals put in to the economy more than they take out should not be the prevailing argument.  As a comparison, no one will deny that the drug cartels in Colombia contribute more to that nation's economy than they take, but at what price?  Is it moral and right to ignore the nation's laws in the name of cash flow?  Why not just legalize what these drug lords are doing.  Then there would be no need for enforcement, drug wars, the expense of arresting them and prosecuting them, etc.

Like you, most illegal's taxes pay for their children's public education. God forbid the government telling "you" your children is costing this nation money. Education is an investment..

Have you spent time in any of the schools and neighborhoods in the border states?  Let me tell you what has happened.  In homes where there were once American families with 2 children, there are now Mexican families with 5-8.  Often two or three families of the same size will share one house.  So we lose the taxes of one upper middle class family and the cost of educating two children and gain the taxes of 1-3 families at poverty level (No state or federal income taxes paid due to low income and high number of dependents) and gain 5-15 children that must be educated.  By law they also must be provided with Spanish speaking teaching assistants and translators, and all forms must be duplicated in Spanish, essentially doubling the cost.  Because their English level is not the same as US citizens, subjects are covered more slowly and less indepth.  In first grade, my son was in a class where only he and one other student were native English speakers.  Spanish was the predominate language spoken by teachers and students and he was the one left out.  I have witnessed first hand California's educational system go from what was one of the best in the nation to one of the worst.  this is not the only reason, but a very significant one. Educating lllegals is not only costing this nation in money, but in the school experience that those who are here legally deserve.  God forbid this nation telling me that I must pay for illegals to be educated and that my own son must suffer for my cost.  You're right, education is an investment, and when I pay to educate my son I want the best return on my investment. You wouldn't run a business this way, why would you allow a school system to be run this way?

But unlike you, illegals will not collect SS and medicare when they retire. They have forfeited their retirement for the benefit of yours. Anytime a politician or media scares you about babyboomers bankrupting SS, don't believe them. The illegals are taking care of the problem.

Tell me, aren't those who were granted amnesty before now fully eligible to collect SS and medicare?  Are we to believe that any new bill would be different?  Think about it, even if they were to deny these benefits to those they grant amnesty to, what would they do when these people reach old age?  You know they wouldn't be left to starve and die.  Some government agency would have to step in and care for these people, at our expense.

Don't be angry with me showing you the benefits of illegal immigration, you asked for it. Be mad at the media, talk radio and special interest groups for not giving the full details of the situation. They think the general public is dumb and will believe everything they hear. Like men who married foreign women, it'll be difficult to hear a good word come from media and special interest groups pertaining to illegal immigration.

I'm certainly not angry with you, a little frustrated, yes, but not angry.  I find it interesting that you now praise  the "benefits of illegal immigration".  So does that mean that there should be no enforcement at all and that illegal immigration should be in fact encouraged because there are so many benefits?  According to you it makes financial sense.

Scott, you and others should be ashamed of yourself for using the death of a Ukrainian girl by an immigrant to beat your drum. That is no different than the feminists taking the death of Anastasia King and pushing IMBRA.

The Thai immigrant came over legally and no amount of border patrols and walls along Mexico would've prevented this tragedy. The immigrant did commit a sexual crime years ago but the answer is not deportation immediately as you insist, the answer is what I've been saying all along, use our tax money to keep murders and rapists in prison longer or even forever. Your solution does not stop the root of the problem, the criminal himself. You may sleep well thinking a Ukrainian girl wouldn't have been raped if the sexual predator would've been deported from the US on his first charge and you may not care that another child would be raped instead in another country where laws are weaker pertaining to sex with children such as Thailand, but I do care and don't sleep well when child predators are on the loose anywhere. Keep him here and in jail..

No, I don't feel ashamed for bringing this up.  It provides a very personal example of only one problem with not securing our borders.  This idea of "let them come in, then when they commit a crime lock them up here at our expense" is literally locking the barn door after the horse has already escaped.  Wouldn't it be better to secure our borders and tighten enforcement so that these criminals do not get here in the first place?  Sure some will still get by, but at least we can say that we're doing our best to protect our citizens.  You're right, it won't protect the whole world from these criminals, but we can't be importing criminals just to protect the rest of the world.  Maybe if we showed the example of how a government should protect its citizens others might catch on.  I may not sleep so well knowing that these types of persons are out there in the world, but I will sleep better knowing that my own children are safer.

[BillyB]

Okay, you want to compare experience, here we go. 

I don't want to compare and I've never asked you or anyone else to tell me their qualifications/experience around immigrants or put their opinion down because of the lack of. You are the one who thinks experience makes you an expert pertaining to illegal immigration in America but you are not a fair man. You did not challenge the experience of members who are against amnesty and the Aussies in this thread who gave their opinions. Just me.

Unless you truly understand their reasons for coming, their expectations and their views of America and its current laws, you aren't going to be able to create a program that will deal with all of this.  You are forced to rely on studies and statistics by others, often with ulterior motives, and I think we both agree that these are flawed.

Immigrants come because they want a better life. Simple. They know they are not here by invitation and know they need to avoid cops because they are illegal. That's the only view of American law they truly understand.

Tell me, aren't those who were granted amnesty before now fully eligible to collect SS and medicare?

Yes, but they lost everything they put into medicare and SS when used fake info. But wasn't you the one to make a point to everyone in this debate to talk about illegal immigrants and not to mix them up with legal?

Think about it, even if they were to deny these benefits to those they grant amnesty to, what would they do when these people reach old age?  You know they wouldn't be left to starve and die.  Some government agency would have to step in and care for these people, at our expense.

How can government give free health care to these people if hospitals continue to close as you claimed. You still haven't found me how many opened during the same time frame. Also you have claimed many of these immigrants send money back home to family. They will take care of their old here too. But whether or not legal or illegal immigrants are working the farm, these people will make significantly less than the norm and will wear their bodies out faster. Both legal and illegal immigrants will utilize social benefits more than the average person. There won't be much difference in cost to you.

I find it interesting that you now praise  the "benefits of illegal immigration".

Scott, I'm finding you a very ungrateful person. A few pages ago you challenged people to find you any info about how the illegals are benefiting this nation. I supplied them and now you claim I'm singing praises instead of thanking me for enlightening you. Here's a tip, never criticize your wife for doing something you asked for. If I feel I'm debating against a person that's not sensible, I walk away but a wife can walk away from a marriage.

[quote author=ScottinCrimea link=topic=5233.msg94107#msg94107 date=1184539077So does that mean that there should be no enforcement at all and that illegal immigration should be in fact encouraged because there are so many benefits?][/quote]

You obviously did not read my last post pertaining to my thoughts about enforcement.

I will sleep better knowing that my own children are safer.

Most sex predators in this nation are from this nation. We have our fair share. As a matter of fact, they often go to Thailand to get off. If you want your child safer, just don't target immigrants, target all who commit these types of crimes.

This idea of "let them come in, then when they commit a crime lock them up here at our expense" is literally locking the barn door after the horse has already escaped.

As far as costs goes, when America has a serial killer that committed crimes in multiple States. When caught, States fight over the right to try him and lock him up first. If someone broke into your home and violated your family, are you going to hold back justice because of the cost involved? If he was an immigrant, there is no guarantee he will see punishment in the country he's to be sent back to. You do want to see, in a court of law or through a barrel of a gun, punishment applied to the person who violates your family? I certainly wouldn't complain about the cost of justice or bullets.

Tigerpaws,
I'm all for kicking out immigrant criminals forever whether or not they came here legally or illegally. But your suggestion for amnesty will never be approved by government. Telling illegals, if they came forward, they will be allowed to stay and they forfeit any access to citizenship, social services or social security. Most don't care or expect citizenship but most are paying towards social services and SS when their employers take it out of their paycheck to send to the government. It would be as if the government is now stealing money from people since those people can't collect the benefits they're paying for. We can't have a "do as I say, but not as I do" mentality when it comes to law. The better man sets the example, not be the example. Also, one must look at the human side of all this. I'm sure, in the past, some farmers denied medical attention to the very black slaves that worked for them because they might have felt they aren't going to get good value for return against the cost of medical attention for an elderly slave. Of course illegal immigrants aren't classified as slaves, but most do work for you.

If amnesty is to be, the best thing would probably make the illegals pay a fine or monthy/yearly fee for the right to be here.

[TigerPaws]

BillyB,

Like it or not there will not be any amnesty this time around or some small fine, the American people have already spoken and it will not happen in any future I can see. So we better find a way to stop the tide of illegals and do something about those who are already here.

TigerPaws 

[Jet]

Yes, but they lost everything they put into medicare and SS when used fake info.

IMHO a very, very, small price to pay considering the crimes they had to commit to gain the income those fees were taken from.

Both legal and illegal immigrants will utilize social benefits more than the average person.

I sure would like to see something to back that statement up, as my own anecdotal evidence strongly suggests the contrary.

If amnesty is to be, the best thing would probably make the illegals pay a fine or monthy/yearly fee for the right to be here.

Care to speculate what the fine might be? I've heard the number $5000 batted around with strong opposition from the democrats saying that's unfairly inflated.
By the end of this year we'll have paid $4170.00 in ADDITIONAL fees doing it the legal way and we're not done yet.

[BillyB]

I sure would like to see something to back that statement up, as my own anecdotal evidence strongly suggests the contrary.

Jet, people who are at an economic disadvantage, whether they are illegal or legal immigrants or white or black, simply use social services more than the average citizen. Even if they work, they can't pay their medical bills all the time and apply for free housing and food stamps and thus the taxpayer has to pick up the tab. My own relatives when first coming to the States were not very employable and got free government assistance and financial aid for higher education. Now they're all engineers for Boeing comercial, space and defense divisions or working for the federal government's nuke programs. They are contributing way more in taxes than the $'s in assistance they received and now they are not classified as economically disadvantaged.  Education may seem like a waste of taxpayers dollars for some people but you have to give it to all people to find out who's going to make the most out of it.

Like it or not there will not be any amnesty this time around or some small fine, the American people have already spoken and it will not happen in any future I can see.

It doesn't matter to me. I told you guys how Congress works. There's give and take and if enough Congressmen want amnesty, it's going to be in the next bill if enforcement is going to be passed.

The easiest way to catch most illegals is for authorities to wait at farms who's crops are ready to harvest. Hispanics travel farm to farm to pick the various crops when time. They constantly mobilize where the work is and could easily be caught by having authorities waiting there. Of course crops will go to waste and those that didn't will go up in price. People will starve in other nations as they rely on free food we send them. Taxpayers will have to pick up the tab on numerous farmers who go out of business. On a lessor scale, the authorities could raid all construction sites when landscaping is about to happen and restaurants and food manufacturing plants. Of course if the landscaper of one of the schools I'm working on has his workforce depleted, the school will not finish on time and the taxpayer must pay to move all teachers, supplies, furniture and bus all students to temporary facilities. If you are a Congressman, you have a responsibility to do things in a sensible manner and all out enforcement is going to hurt your fellow American. Also hunting illegals is expensive and they must be replaced with new workers anyway who may or may not be trained to be efficient or motivated to move every few months to a new farm for work. I'm sure the agriculture industry has a big say pertaining to immigration.