Quantcast

Comments about ‘Letter: Call for amnesty’

Return to article »

Published: Monday, Aug. 11 2014 12:00 a.m. MDT

Updated: Sunday, Aug. 10 2014 11:11 p.m. MDT

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
Emerger
Magna, Salt Lake, UT

Re: "Call for Amnesty"
I agree with the thoughtful sentiment of Eric Samuelson, and with his suggested compromise-solution. Something definitely needs to change with our immigration policy, making it easier to become a U.S. citizen. Either we do something like Eric has suggested, or perhaps it's time to tear down that famous plaque at the Statue of Liberty, with Emma Lazarus' poetic sonnet, New Colossus, welcoming the world's "tired,...poor," [and] "huddled masses yearning to breathe free." This is the same wise philosophy that has served so many years as our nation's great symbol of freedom & opportunity for all who have or will come here, including the ancestors of those who now reject its charitable symbolism.

prelax
Murray, UT

Utefan60

If the people here illegally can't collect it, and the people who own the social security number they stole can't claim it, how does it end up in the social security fund?

If it goes into the regular treasury, it's offset by $113 billion each year. That's the cost to government for services to them. A quick google search shows they contribute $10 billion every year. That's a $103 billion dollar loss, each year. That number does not include unemployment insurance, and welfare to the displaced worker. That's not a silver lining.

If they get amnesty, they will be collecting social security paid over a shortened work life at mostly entry level jobs. How do we pay them?

The Real Maverick
Orem, UT

If following the law is so important then why don't repubs ever get on those American employers who break the law by employing illegal Latinos? Why do they get a free pass while illegal Latino immigrants are thrown the book?

Some consistency would be nice!

SLars
Provo, UT

The plaque on the statue of liberty needs to be enlarged. Before 1976 we allowed 500,000 each year. Now we allow over a million a year. We don't need illegal immigration, our legal immigration is at an all time high, we let in more people than the rest of the world combined. Why do the progressive (ultra liberal) Democrats want more legal and illegal immigration? Because immigrants tend to vote Democratic. Business wants more cheap labor.

America has fought the battle for decades, from Eisenhower deporting over a million people in the 50's, to Cesar Chavez testifying before Congress in 1979 about farm owners sending trucks into Mexico and bringing back cheap labor to break the unions. In 1978 farm workers were making $5.63. That’s equivalent to $20.27 per hour in 2014, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. See how much it's cost Americans? With the cheap labor entering the service, hospitality, construction etc industries, it depressed the middle class considerably.

Business and progressive Democrats, why do you hate America?

Noodlekaboodle
Poplar Grove, UT

@RRB
But many of them don't. Companies and individuals hire illegal immigrants, and know full well they are illegal, and pay them under the table. In those cases they don't have to get a SSN, and don't have to commit any fraud.

Jamescmeyer
Midwest City, USA, OK

"For conservatives, the only issue regarding immigration seems to be illegality."

This is not true. Disease, crime, lack of communication, lack of useful skills, and being unwitting political pawns all factor in addition to their clear willingness to skirt under or hide from the law, at the risk of themselves or their families.

As for amnesty, didn't we already try that? Didn't we already have amnesty and reform decades ago that was supposed to keep this from happening again? I don't think granting free and virtually effortless citizenship for people to pander to and draw in votes to empower more socialist-style big-government policies is the answer.

Not to sound too disinterested in the problems and pleas of others, but we don't have the resources to take care of everyone. What we do have is, though often contested and attacked, a pattern of governance and living best for helping when applied.

tenx
Santa Clara, UT

"Immigrants are a plus for our nation". Naughty, naughty Eric. You are trying to be sneaky by trying to lump all that come here as "immigrants". Now pay attention.....LEGAL immigrants are good for our country. They are generally educated, go through the process of immigration and pay the fees, wait their turn, don't require handouts, assimilate and live by our laws. ILLEGAL "immigrants" on the other hand sneak across the border, jump to the head of the line (very very rude) game the system for about nine times what they pay into it and of course break the law numerous times to get employment, etc. About 84% of Utahan's favor the legal kind. Only the gang of thirteen (cannot list them as I won't get posted) and a few others favor the illegal kind. Viva LEGAL immigration.

Jl
Sandy, UT

@RRB, A comprehensive bill is sitting on a desk today, that is ready for a vote. Guess who is obstructing a vote and it ain't Harry Reid. You repeat the myths about Americans waiting for the jobs but one thing is for sure. Business is drooling for cheap labor.

SLars
Provo, UT

Noodlekaboodle
If they are getting paid under the table then it's tax fraud.

Jl
There are several bills passed by both houses of Congress. Harry Reid refuses to let the House bills onto the Senate floor, and the Senate bill, drawn up by business lobbyists, and voted on without being able to read it, is stuck in the House. On such a divisive issue, is it any wonder Congress is divided, especially with a President that ignores enforcement laws and makes up new ones as he goes?

It's time for the dishonesty in enforcement to end. We need Ike. The Progressive Democrats are the Democrats tea party.

Kora
Cedar Hills, UT

Answer me this question: Should every individual who would like to come to the USA for a better life, of which there are billions, be allowed in?
If not, why should some be allowed but not others? Who would you say should not be allowed?

tenx
Santa Clara, UT

From what I read, the Gov., Chief, Atty. Gen., Chamber, Sutherland, Church1, Church2, DMN, SLT, Luz, Tony, Doug, and the Raza all support amnesty. Wish they would look at how the amnesty of 1986 (Amnesty to end all Amnesties) did not solve the problem and with no enforcement put us where we are today, with between 12 and 22 million illegals to take care of. The rest us sure would like to see our laws enforced, but then we are only here to pay the taxes so the elite can spend them (foolishly).

2 bits
Cottonwood Heights, UT

@Maverick

Re: "why don't repubs ever get on those American employers who break the law by employing illegal Latinos?"...

It's NOT just about illegal "Latinos". It's about illegal "Anybodys". Maybe it's your point of view that focuses on one race, if you really think only Latinos come to America illegally... There are plenty of non-Latinos in our country illegally. They busted a container ship full of illegal immigrants from China not long ago. There are people working illegally in America from Africa as well.

Is the immigration problem REALLY just about Latinos in YOUR mind?? I think it's ANYBODY here illegally...

SoCalChris
Riverside, CA

I support a path to legal status for some illegal immigrants. Some of them came at a time when they were almost tacitly invited and now they have deep roots here. I would make it a path to legal status rather than citizenship because I believe there should be some consequence for coming or staying here illegally and that's a reasonable one. There should also be fines, back taxes, etc.

Politically, that will take the wind out of the sails of the Ann Coulters who think the sky will fall if any illegal immigrant gains the right to vote. It will also force the Dems to put up or shut up. Is their support for immigration reform altruistic or cynical?

I believe most illegal immigrants just want to come out of the shadows, be able to get a drivers license, etc. They don't need the right to vote and they don't need handouts.

Btw, it's odd that "legal versus illegal" seems to make a BIG deal for liberals when it has to do with the UN.

SLars
Provo, UT

SoCalChris

The American people did not invite them, dishonest business and politicians may have. If someone in a gang convinces another to break the law, does it excuse his law breaking? Our laws are based on equal justice under the law, we can't give one group residency over another based on longevity in breaking our laws. And if we did, 5 years down the road, people would be complaining about second class citizenship and demand regular citizenship.

Anything that allows people to stay will end up in citizenship. And it's amnesty being able to stay here and work after breaking the laws.

Vernon Briggs, a Cornell University labor economics professor stated:
"The toleration of illegal immigration undermines all of our labor; it rips at the social fabric. It's a race to the bottom. The one who plays by the rules is penalized... a guest worker program guarantees wages will never go up, and there is no way American citizens can compete with guest workers."

patriot
Cedar Hills, UT

Grant amnesty and open our borders and America ceases to be a nation. Pretty simple. The complete ignorance and lack of understanding plus oversimplification of the issue by the writer is intellectually insulting to be honest. No amnestly is certainly NOT the answer but restoring leadership to the White House and US senate is...for starters!!

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments