UtahBlueDevilIn the early 1960s, Cesar Chavez successfully prodded
then President John Kennedy to curb the “Bracero” guest-worker
program, which allowed farms to hire low cost Mexican immigrants instead of
American farmworkers. The program was killed by Congress in 1963.The
loss of foreign workers forced farms and food companies to triple the wages paid
to American field workers. The wages rose from $1.77 per hour in 1965, to $5.63
in 1978. That’s equivalent to $20.27 per hour in 2014, according to the
Bureau of Labor Statistics. Since then, farmworkers’ wages has fallen
after inflation, amid a huge wage of legal and illegal immigration.Americans will work those jobs. They have in the past, they will in the
future. It's not government's job to supply cheap labor to business,
or to subsidize their workers with welfare and food stamps. Yet that is what is
happening. One person crossing a fence is much less than 55,000
teenagers and 290,000 adults. A barrier is a deterrent, even if it just a
@WRZ.... you asked "You mean contact Honduras, etc, and get a copy of the
records of immigrants to figure out who are criminals and who ain't? Good
luck."In fact, exactly. We have reciprocal agreements with most
nations to do exactly that. And it is our responsibility to inform those
nations that we have their citizen in custody. Would you expect any thing less
if the tables were turned and it was a US citizen that has been arrested in a
foreign land?Then you ask "What? So they can displace an
American worker and put him/her on unemployment?"Again, if there
was a line of people - US Citizens lining up for these jobs cleaning offices at
night, harvesting crops, processing chickens and pork, cleaning hotel rooms,
perhaps we would have an issue. But for some reason many Americans feel
entitled to better jobs. Kids out here refuse to work fast food as they view it
as work for immigrants - I noticed it isn't so much that way in Utah Valley
- high school kids still work fast food. But there is a wide swath of jobs
"Americans" just don't want.
"Only deterrents will stop people from coming here illegally. If fences
don't work, why are they around the White House?"RBB, your
kidding right? Do you have even the slightest notion the cost of securing the
White House.... and even then a kid made its way through the fence just last
week. I am lost by your analogy. Can you even begin to extrapolate the cost of
securing almost two thousand miles of boarder with anything that comes slightly
close to true high security. For the White House, or even Prisons for that
fact, the cost comes to tens of millions per mile... imagine that cost over
several hundreds of miles. And even then, that will not prevent people from
arriving on tourist visa or general flights from just staying.Why
don't we just toss in jail every American that employees an illegal
alien... that will end the problem real fast.
Let me try to make my position on immigration very very clear...
"Immigration" is good. "ILLEGAL Immigration" is NOT good.Some people on the Left seem to have it the other way around.
@Utefan60:WRZ said that Obama wants the illegals here so they can vote.
Really? They can't vote as they are illegals..."Their
relatives and others of their ethnicity (mostly Hispanic) that are citizens can
vote. And they will vote for the candidate who will give amnesty to their
relatives and friends from back home.Besides, have you not heard
that Obama and his friend AG Eric Holder is pushing for a no voter ID
requirement? Which means anyone can appear at the voting booth without ID and
can vote regardless of citizenship... or how many times they've already
cast a ballot."Our current President is enforcing immigration
laws stronger than the last administration, yet these falsehoods
persist."I wouldn't call the DACA (Deferred Action for
Childhood Arrivals) the enforcing of immigration laws. It's actually the
opposite.@procuradorfiscal:"And, we know Obama knows the
ins and outs of amending the CFR, as he's already done it..."You need to understand what the CFR (Code of Federal Regulations) is.
It's detailed instructions developed by agencies to carry out the
requirements of congressional laws. The president has control over the CFR.
@UtahBlueDevil:"I am not sure anyone is talking about easy access for
terrorist or illegal immigrants."We should be. Islamic
terrorists would love to get into this country and blow up a few more buildings
and kill more Americans." We will never be able to seal off our
southern borders. For immigrants nor terrorist."True. There is
1,900 miles of Rio Grande River counting loops and oxbows. And the border goes
down the center of the river. How is the US supposed to fence something like
that?"The first group who should be immediately repatriated are
those with criminal records."You mean contact Honduras, etc, and
get a copy of the records of immigrants to figure out who are criminals and who
ain't? Good luck."Those who come here seeking asylum
should be given a chance to get their case heard."If they want
asylum they apply at the US Consulate in their native country before they step
foot out of their country."Those who are here for work, we
should give guest visa's too..."What? So they can displace
an American worker and put him/her on unemployment?
Re: "E-verify doesn't punish employers."It was never
intended to. But, by amending the Code of Federal Regulations, making E-Verify
mandatory for every hiring action by any private business [as is already the
case for government agencies], E-Verify would provide the evidence necessary to
sanction offending business under existing law [the Immigration Reform and
Control Act of 1986], either for not conducting the required ID check, or for
knowingly hiring an illegal alien.And, we know Obama knows the ins
and outs of amending the CFR, as he's already done it -- adding scores of
thousands of pages to the CFR [he has nearly 16,000 pending right now].Obama has the tools at hand to solve the immigration problem -- he has simply
made the cynical, political decision not to use them.
So I have a question for you liberals....I see post after post that
the Corporation are the evil in immigration reform. They some how a the bad guys
in all this...So why did the Democrats block the use of EVerify in
several states? They actually threaten a Federal suit against the state.You can not have it both ways.
@The Real MaverickThe House passed a border bill before they recessed, the
Senate was to divided and left without passing one. E-Verify was
passed on a federal level in the 1986 immigration reform. It was never enforced.
However the supreme court has ruled that local government can require it's
use, and pull business licenses, they can also pass a law making it illegal to
rent to people here illegally. With Obama not enforcing laws, we may need to
pass it on a city by city level. @UtahBlueDevilThat will just
increase illegal immigration. Half the world will want to come here to work.
Just how does that solve our immigration enforcement problem? Deporting 12 million, according to a government study done in 2007 by the
Immigrations and Customs Enforcement agency put the cost at 94 billion. This is
a one time cost, that does not include self deportation. The Federation for
American Immigration Reform puts the cost of illegal immigration at $113 billion
per year. When you add in the boost to our economy from putting millions of
Americans back to work, we can't afford not to.
@Maverick 3:06,The "Your side killed bills so we can too"
argument is a 5th grade argument.IMO E-Verify should be a Federal
law (not a suggestion, or a State-by-State decision to enforce it or not).If Utah isn't enforcing it... the Feds should crack down on Utah
and insist they obey Federal Law. When Arizona tried to do immigration
enforcement their own way Obama sued them (for trying to do the Fed's job).
They should do the same with Utah.Businesses should absolutely be
required to do E-Verify (EVERY business... in EVERY State)... Immigration
enforcement is a Federal Issue (Not a State issue).This, "We
don't want to do it so we're not going to do it", is lame. Same
on Federal Laws against Marijuana.A country that doesn't
enforce it's own laws is NOT a country that believes in "Rule of
Law". America has historically been a country that believes in the
"Rule of Law". I want to live in a country that believes and
walks-the-walk on "Rule of Law". Even on Illegal-Immigration and
WRZ said that Obama wants the illegals here so they can vote. Really? They
can't vote as they are illegals and can't prove citizenship. Our
current President is enforcing immigration laws stronger than the last
administration, yet these falsehoods persist.
"But, honestly, there's very little Presidents Eisenhower, Kennedy,
Johnson, Nixon, Ford, Carter, Reagan, Bush I, Clinton or Bush II can do about
today's situation.Nope, not now. You blame Obama for doing
little today. Fair enough. But did you scream as loudly when the GOP
controlled house, senate and president did nothing?That is the
problem. People only complain about the other guy.And, I have
little doubt that, if the GOP wins the next presidency, nothing will be done
either.And the Dems will complain and the Republicans will give them a
pass.Pure politics. As usual.
How dare Harry Reid kill bills that repeal Obamacare or construct the Keystone
pipeline! So it's wrong for Reid to do this yet it's totally ok for
your boy, Boehner to kill job bills and tax increases on the rich? Wow,
that's fair.E-verify is optional in many states (including
Utah). Utah doesn't even require all employers to use it. In fact, most
employers in Utah don't. That's telling, as to what our true
priorities in this state are!E-verify doesn't punish employers.
If illegal immigration is so terrible, why don't repubs pass legislation
stripping employers of their businesses and sending them to the point of the
mountain (with Swallow and Shurtleff) if the the found guilty of employing
illegally?If the right's concern over declining birth rates is
sincere, then why are they upset with illegal immigration? Make up
your minds repubs! The constant flip flop makes it impossible to know exactly
what your platform is!
Utahbluedevil"Those who come here seeking asylum should be given a
chance to get their case heard. Those who are here for work, we should give
guest visa's too... and so long as they are legally employed, pay their
taxes, and keep clean, they can live here 9 months out of the year... they do
not get permanent status."***Giving people visas to work here
circumvents our legal immigration. It rewards wrong doing, and punishes those
who play by the rules. We don't have enough jobs for 3.2 million legal visa
workers (2011), plus all of the people who have chose to break our laws. Only deterrents will stop people from coming here illegally. If fences
don't work, why are they around the White House?
Re: "You were right . . . 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 . . . ."I do.But,
honestly, there's very little Presidents Eisenhower, Kennedy, Johnson,
Nixon, Ford, Carter, Reagan, Bush I, Clinton or Bush II can do about
today's situation.There's plenty, however, that Obama
could do, but won't. As his disingenuous apologists try to cover up his
inaction with intentionally misleading propaganda.That's why
its not just somewhat erroneous [there were some early audits and sanctions --
they died out in the middle of Clinton's second term], but cynical
sophistry to suggest kudos for Obama because he may be trivially
"outdoing" his do-nothing predecessors, on an issue he really could --
and should -- seriously address.He could enforce existing employer
sanctions. He could take meaningful strides towards strengthening border
security. He could partner with local and state officials to leverage and bring
to bear already-available law-enforcement resources. And, most importantly, he
could stop the illegal and feckless immigration amnesty that invites the problem
in the first place.But will he?
The people responsible for the predicament that the world is in, is mainly us.
Business men have robbed and cheated people in foreign lands and we did not do
any thing to stop them. In America we allowed businessmen to have
free rein in their actions on people of other nations and with no holds barred
and a strong military to back them up, our businessmen could bribe, steal and
oppress people as they wished. And what they wished was money.Ordinary Americans, blinded by their phony propaganda, were given the left
over spoils and enjoyed a wonderful life of ease greater than any where else in
the world. But now the supply of wealth in foreign nations of our hemisphere
has run out and the businessmen are not only looking to take back the wealth
that they gave to Americans, but are eying the other hemispheres. Our task, if we care to take the mission, is to bring our capitalistic
businessmen under control and become a world leader for good instead of
"Do you think it is a good idea for terrorists to have easy access to the US
through its southern border?"I am not sure anyone is talking
about easy access for terrorist or illegal immigrants. Listen, the Soviets were
unable to seal their borders. People still sneak into North Korea. Miles of
ocean hasn't stopped people from making it from Cuba to US shores. We
will never be able to seal off our southern borders. For immigrants nor
terrorist.What is in debate is what happens when they get here. The
first group who should be immediately repatriated are those with criminal
records. No chance for anything here. Those who come here seeking asylum
should be given a chance to get their case heard. Those who are here for work,
we should give guest visa's too... and so long as they are legally
employed, pay their taxes, and keep clean, they can live here 9 months out of
the year... they do not get permanent status. While they are home during the
off time, they can get in line and apply for permanent status.There
are humane and sensible ways to deal with this problem.
@Maverick,Border Security is not the job of Big Business...
don't look to THEM to lead, or enforce our borders.It's
the GOVERNMENT's job. And before you blast me for being a "small
government" guy... this is one of the areas I EXPECT the government to fully
take responsibility for (our security)... This is something that IS outlined in
the Constitution as the Federal Government's job... and should NOT be
delegated to Big Business.============Businesses should
not be giving these people jobs, but they should not be expected to lead on
enforcement (that's 100% the Government's job). Part of
"Enforcement" is... insuring that businesses do not give illegals jobs
and attract more to come here illegally. That's also something the
Government SHOULD be doing (but they refuse to do).These businesses
should be punished, and the people hiring should be punished. That's part
of enforcement (at least in Bush's Comprehensive Immigration Reform
Bill).Until we do this (enforcement) the flood will not stop, and
the problem will continue to grow until it collapses our economy and then our
government.Just overlooking it (for votes or whatever) is
dereliction of their duty...
To "LDS Liberal" since you are having problems figuring things out, let
me make it a bit more clear.Since Mexico is a Catholic nation that
means that the prayer rugs are being brought in by Muslims. Since there are
radical Muslim organizations that engage in terror, and want to destroy the US,
that means that terrorists are sneaking into the US along with Jose and
Maria.Do you think it is a good idea for terrorists to have easy
access to the US through its southern border?
LDS LiberalTSA has been profiling Muslims since 2009. That seems
rather foolish since they can walk across our border. And what
Ebola? Someone could come here carrying the disease, and not be stopped because
of Obama's directions to ICE.
Redshirt1701Deep Space 9, UtDisease is only part of the
problem. Along the border they are also finding Muslim prayer rugs,======== What do you want to do? Arrest prayer rugs?!I
did not know being a Muslim made you a suspected terrorist, or illegal alien.Maybe you should form a posse Red, nominate yourself as sheriff,
deputize your friends, and clean up Enterprise Utah -- ala Cliven Bundy.America doesn't agree with you, and neither does the
I see the progressive ultra liberal Democrats are out in full force today. If Obama tries to give amnesty (waivers) to those here illegally, he
will be guaranteeing a Republican held Senate this fall. Already only 31% of
Americans agree with the way he is handling immigration. During his
Presidency, this "recovery" has created new jobs that pay, on average,
15k less than the jobs they replaced. Last thing America needs is 5 million more
people competing with the American worker for the jobs that can't be
outsourced, like service, hospitality, construction, etc. Our U-6 numbers,
workers that are unemployed or working part time, looking for full time work,
stands at 12%. I use to be a Democrat, when they actually cared
about the American worker.
To those that think Obama is deporting more people, you are wrong. Obama
changed the way deportations are counted so that it makes him look good. See
"High Deportation Figures are Misleading" in the LA Times.To
those that think that conservatives want to close the border, please stop
watching your cartoon shows. Conservatives don't want the close the border
and prevent all immigration. Conservatives want all immigrants to come here
legally and in a way that allows us to know who is here.Imagine a
family sneaks in here from Mexico and joins their relatives that are already
here. If one member of that family is ill with measles, mumps, scabies, TB, or
any other infectious disease, and they come and move in to your neighborhood
would you want the children from that family attending school with your
children?Disease is only part of the problem. Along the border they
are also finding Muslim prayer rugs, and have caught some high profile Muslims
that are known terrorists. Do we really want to make the US more vulnerable to
disease and terror?
LIB Your points just don't add up, as we allow over a million in here
every year, not to visit, but to relocate and stay. And the line is long to get
here. I notice you did not address my point about visa violaters. They seem to
want to stay too, not just visit longer. And, if you've ever visited So.
Cal. you'd see ATM machines that allow money to be transferred
internationally from the local 711 to wherever in Central or South America.
There is no need to go home. So they stay. Plus most of the countries you
cited do have a lot of wealth in them in certain places. Mexico for instance
has the 2nd richest man in the world. It is just that many of those countries
overtax the middle class, (for socialist programs) or don't allow a middle
class at all. You must be seeing the world through 3%er rose colored glasses
living there in Farmington.
Kent C. DeForrestHouse Republicans have sent many bills to the Senate,
where Harry Reid has not let them on the Senate floor.SpangsIt's true that most Presidents have not made it a priority, they also
never gave waivers (amnesty) to people without Congressional consent. They also
counted returns at the border separate. Obama's actions speak for
themselves. Esquire50,000 91% are teenagers, it's
expected to be 140,000 next year. What about the 290,000 adults that came here
with them? Obama gave them a notice to appear in court, then released them into
the country. The notice to appear contained no enforcement provisions, less than
1% will show up, since he is not enforcing deportation laws inside the
country.SchneeThe declining birth rate coincides with the
economy. When we fix the economy, the birth rate goes back up. It's
happened many times in history. In 1920 we reached one hundred million people,
by 1970 we hit 200 million, in 2010 we hit 300 million. Immigration is not just
at replacement levels, it's at flood levels.
Obama has spent his administration sending the message that otherwise
law-abiding illegal aliens would not be subject to deportation. When he took
office, he:~ended worksite raids~sued states for their enforcement
efforts~ended No Match letters~ended the Secure Communities
program~nullified 287g contracts (MOUs)~vacated 300,000 standing
deportation orders~began calling port court proceedings deportations (and
tied up ICE in the process)Shall I go on?Obama is not the great
deporter and his lack of interior enforcement has made our country a more
dangerous place.FAIR US has an analysis of his non-actions for the
SCfanclearfield, UT_ _ _ LiberalAll I can say is that
you must be visiting the wealthy people in all those countries. ========= Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos, Mexico, Peru, India, Ukraine, Armenia, -- hardly
wealthy.And they had no desire to move here.Visit? - yes?Work here - temporarily.permananetly re-locate -- not a chance.On the other hand, and since you mentioned it....Sweden, Norway, France, Germany, England, Italy, Chekoslavokia, Canada, Japan, Korea, Israel, Australia, All those "evil" Socialist countries?Same-Same -- Visit? - yes?Work here - temporarily.permananetly re-locate -- not a chance.Ask you illegal Hispanic
friends if they are seeking permant residence.I'll bet 80-90% are
here for a quick buck, and send 1/2 home.When things get
better, they go home.BTW -- Making pennies on the dollar here
in Utah, I do the same thing --- Live in other places, work
for a year or 2, and move back.Flying back and forth M-F.It's called 21st century "communting".
Let's face it. Conservatives make it up as they go. If you think the
immigration problem started in 2009 then you are delusional. Make up some more
facts. I still haven't seen any proposals to stem the tides from these made
up facts. Your political leaders are too cowardly to tackle it, not to mention
their donors are who benefit most by our policies. Reagan is the only amnesty
POTUS and the Bushes didn't touch it. Please for once. Be honest.
You can complain against President Obama all the day long. He won’t
enforce existing laws. He actually encourages illegal immigration for political
purposes. He won’t act. He acts too much.Political
accusations like these are of course grossly distorted and in the main simply
false. But even worse they are a distraction and purposeless. How do they
possibly contribute to a reasonable solution to our immigration crisis?
Constant obstruction and confrontation are not the answer.You might
start by getting a grip on reality.
_ _ _ LiberalAll I can say is that you must be visiting the wealthy
people in all those countries. Do you actually believe that of the millions who
live in poverty and oppression they would not want to come to the U.S. if given
a choice? Then how come we have about about 10% of the Mexican population here
in the U.S. right now. And that's official statistics. I wonder what the
real number is. I doubt Mexico is the worst of places to live compared to many
places elsewhere. I know it is bad in areas, but it also has a lot of wealth.
The only thing that prevents millions of Asians, Indians, Africans, ect. from
coming here is the ocean. And we do see people trying to steal their way here
on planes, ships ect. Plus, we also know that a large percentage of illegals
are visa overstays. If they wanted to be in their countries so much as you
believe, they would just go home.
@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
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.
@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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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!
@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.
@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.]
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.
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?.
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
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.
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.
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?
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.
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?
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 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.