Published: Wednesday, Aug. 13 2014 12:00 a.m. MDT
I disagree.The problem doesn't stem from lack of leadership.
There has been great leadership on display... From big business.Illegal immigration has been a problem for years. Yet, big business has
successfully lobbied and defeated legislation to help fix this problem. They
have even managed to keep themselves out of the blame game. Look at the debate
today: build a fence, call in the troops, deport families who have lived here
for years, etc. Why don't anyone mention new legislation to
punish big business? Why do businesses that employ illegally get a free pass? If
businesses stopped hiring these laborers then illegal immigration would go away
for the most part.All of this is due to great leadership. Leadership
from those who pay Congress the most. After all, bribery is free speech. A
conservative justice said so.
In a commencement speech at Notre Dame, actor Martin Sheen said, "We are hearing a great deal of anti-immigration rhetoric these days, and
some of it...disturbing. But what is far worse are the many unchallenged,
swaggering, arrogant, immigrant-bashing voices across the land, and those voices
need to be reminded that arrogance is ignorance matured."America
is the oldest country in the world because it was the first to enter the 20th
century, which was made possible in large measure because for the first 200
years of our history, America opened its doors wider and kept them open longer
than any other nation on earth. The immigration issue is a vastly complex one
that is worthy of an honest, intelligent, and compassionate debate, not blame,
angry resentment, or the cowardly irresponsible bluster that so currently
dominates so much of the popular media. And I think from time to time, we all
need a very gentle reminder of how this great experiment in democracy got
started."“Give me your tired, your poor,Your huddled
masses …”When we "close our borders" are we, at
the same time, closing our minds?.
I'am speaking not as a Mormon, but from a political science point of view
on this issue. Of the 6 some billion people living today, I'd guess some 5
billion would come to the U.S. if they could. Imagine what the U.S. would be
like if even 1 billion more were to come here in the next 25 years. Take a
look at other billion population countries. China, India. Do we really want to
take the country there? To keep our standard of living, we need to control
immigration in both numbers and who comes here. Importing more people who have
English skills and education is much better than having more non English
speaking and low education people coming in. May seem harsh to judge people in
that fashion, but reality bites. As for Obama and the border. The
unspoken truth is, Obama is the responsible person for most of those children
coming here. And therefore responsible for the tragedy happening to many of
them trying to make the journey. All he would need to do is put out a public
service statement in those countries to stop sending them here. Why won't
he do that?
I agree with the letter writer. Those of us who oppose amnesty are considered
heartless for not opening our borders wider, yet we already allow about a
million new green card holders a year, mostly because they are related to
someone already here. And the rate at which they naturalize is pathetic. Do they
really want to become Americans? Or are they just here for the standard of
living?We struggle to provide good schools and social services for our
own, and yet some want us to reward millions of illegals with amnesty. We are
surrendering our sovereignty when we legalize millions whose first act was to
disregard our laws.
Re: "I disagree."No doubt.But, it's
interesting that you agree with the basic premise -- something must be done to
deal with something we all agree is a serious problem.You suggest
employer sanctions. You won't get much disagreement from real America on
that. In fact, there's already a law in place -- eVerify. It's just
not being enforced by the Obama regime. So, let's agree, we'll push
employer sanctions on politicians. Liberal and conservative. Starting here.
Starting now.Politicians -- are you listening?But,
what's wrong with the belt and suspenders approach? Let's also secure
our borders. It's not particularly hard. Most nations do it. We could, too.
And, in addition to the unsustainable load of illegal immigration, it would
protect us from the non-state terror actors, as well.It's long,
long overdue. And would have been implemented long ago, but for venal, cynical
opposition from liberals.So, liberals -- we agree with your employer
sanctions scheme. How about communicating to your Congressional representatives
that you're dropping your opposition to a real border security solution?
The Mexico border is 1,933 miles long. The Canadian border is 3,987 miles long.
Securing the borders is a nice idea, but how realistic is it? What would it
cost to close the borders tighter than at present? Are you willing to have your
taxes increased enough to cover the cost? I don't see Congress increasing
the allocation of resources for border security any time soon. They just
complain that the administration isn't doing more with the existing
resources. All talk, no action.
Jesse, you are right. There are good reasons for immigrations laws. The
problem is that we are not enforcing them. No matter how compassionate we may
want to be about the poor living in other countries and wanting to come to
America, we must enforce the laws we have set in place.To do
otherwise is contrary to protecting the value of American citizenship and
maintaining the sovereignty of this once great country.There is an
orderly and lawful way for people to immigrate to this country.
And to follow up, yes, I think that the day an employer is taken to court and
either given a heavy fine, or jailed for violating immigration laws by hiring
illegals is the day the problem begins to be fixed. I hope that happens with
the next President, and I don't care if the employer thrown in jail is the
owner of Hobby Lobby, or Chick -Fil-A. We need a harsh example made of some
employer who looks the other way and hires illegals. And they have ways of
getting around the law by using the temp agencys. I once worked at a
manufacturing company where we had the same temp workers who were there for
years. And paid less money than citizen employees. A bad system all around
that needs to be changed. Both Democrat and Republicans are equally
What's the source of the crazy myth that Obama is "not enforcing"
the immigration laws? Fact: Obama is running the toughest
enforcement system in history. Under Obama deportations have risen to record
levels and immigration is now at a net zero, the lowest ever. Somebody's pants are on fire (Fox News?.
Sure, lets throw the employers in jail. We have way to many employers in this
country anyway, and there is always food stamps. How about the Govt. just doing
its job, then employers would not have to be concerned over who they are hiring.
@SCfanclearfield, UTI'am speaking not as a Mormon, but from a
political science point of view on this issue. Of the 6 some billion people
living today, I'd guess some 5 billion would come to the U.S. if they
could. [I'm speaking not as a Mormon, but from the point of
view of someone who has spent over 40 years visiting some of those 6 billion
people in other countries...MOST of them have no desire to leave their
countries anymore than you do yours.But I do agree with about those
hiring illegal labor, The reason they break the laws is for the jobs.Eliminate the source of the "problem", and address THAT,
and you have found the cure to it.]
@Curmudgeon:"The Mexico border is 1,933 miles long."The Rio Grande River is about 1,900 miles long counting all the loops and
oxbows. and the border goes down the center of the river. How you gonna build
a fence down the middle of the river?The border along the Rio Grande
will never be secured. The only way to discourage illegal immigration is to
enforce laws prohibiting non-citizens from getting jobs... and that would be to
enforce E-Verify.Will that ever happen? Not while Barack Hussein
Obama or any other Democrat is in the White House. They love immigrants from
south of our border. It increases their voter base by millions and increases
the chances they will stay in control of our government for many years to come.
Never mind the fact that uncontrolled borders will lead to the death of America.
Some of the comments here have mentioned that business, especially agri-business
is entirely dependent upon immigrant labor, and much of this illegal labor. My father worked for UDOT for years and watched as Utah road
construction companies hired legal and illegal immigrants and made them kick
back part of their salary every month. How could they protest? The
reality is, we can't afford to militarize our borders and immigrants will
continue to come. The real way we stop illegal immigration is to stop our
complicit employment of these folks. If they can't get a job, they
won't come. Huge fines for companies that hire illegals is the
only rational solution. Try legislating that!
When people like Martin Sheen talk about immigration of old, are they aware that
before 1976 we averaged 500,000 per year? Now we are allowing over one million
people? Progressive liberals prey on America's sympathy and try to create a
guilt trip to get what they want. Amnesty just creates more problems
down the road, when people here illegally are sent home, and tell others they
were deported, it's the best deterrent we have. Paying $5-10,000 dollars to
come here, and being sent back, removes all the financial incentives. Obama claims people being turned away from the border as being deported,
unlike all the other Presidents who count them separate. If you count just his
true deportations he has the worst record since they started tracking them.
Re: "Fact: Obama is running the toughest enforcement system in
history."Sophistry. Outdated, inaccurate sophistry, at that.
First off, there is no history of serious immigration enforcement. Secondly,
Obama's deportation numbers reflect feckless immigration policy, not
serious enforcement.Real fact: Obama ordered his ICE not to deport
-- to give amnesty to -- several classes of illegal aliens.Real
fact: In nearly all recent immigration cases, Obama's policy is to
slow-walk prosecutions and give defendants -- 600+ guilty of serious felonies --
useless, unenforceable notices to appear, and an opportunity to disappear
forever into the crowd.Real fact: The IRCA  authorizes
employer sanctions. Some administrations conducted employer audits under the
Act, but, due to Congressional opposition, enforcement declined, then
disappeared about 1999. Obama has done nothing to re-invigorate employer
sanctions.Real fact: Under the provisions of Section 287(g) of the
Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996, the Justice
Department previously entered into agreements with state and local agencies to
assist immigration-law enforcement. Obama's clone, Holder, revoked several
of those agreements, stripping local law enforcement of any ability to staunch
the flow of illegals.
This is obviously a complex problem, but when the Republican House refuses to
even consider it, we can draw several obvious conclusions. It is apparently much
better politically to point fingers and spread misinformation than to actually
meet with the Democrats and discuss a real solution to a very real problem. This
Congress is the most useless in the history of that prostituted institution.
Under the 1986 immigration reform, people received amnesty, which further fueled
the illegal immigration into this country. Also enforcement provisions were
passed. A triple fence, with razor wire, e-verify with penalties, interior
enforcement, and more judges and law clerks. We never saw the enforcement
provisions carried out. In 1996 we passed immigration reform also, it provided
the US with a visa entry-exit system. We still don't have one. Immigration reform is meaningless until we have leaders willing to carry out
the enforcement provisions. We should not be giving anyone amnesty until we have
several years of honest enforcement. How many are aware that amnesty
for the individual also means amnesty for business? It's no wonder business
lobbyists are pouring billions into this fight.
@procuradorfiscal,Your real facts, although interesting, don't
refute the "fact" that Obama may or may not be running the toughest
enforcement system in history. You were right in your first paragraph that
there is no history of serious immigration enforcement. That being
true you might as well blame any other American president for the same thing,
especially GWB. Truth is, Obama is a paralyzed president. He can't act
effectively on much of anything without Congress. Blaming him is like blaming a
paraplegic for kicking your ball over the fence.
I have to wonder if the letter writer is a little like my sister in California
who complains about all the illegal immigrants and then hires them....In any case, if we can spend a trillion dollars on a couple of wars on the
other side of the world, I think we can easily absorbed 50,000 children, most of
whom will be staying with family already here.And finally, all you
on the right, do you think the immigration issue started with Obama? My, that
is ill-informed and perhaps duplicitous partisanship.
@SLars"are they aware that before 1976 we averaged 500,000 per year?
Now we are allowing over one million people? "That's good
news for all the people who think declining birth rates are a major problem in
this nation. Unless it makes a difference to them which kind of people are being
DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.— About comments