Immigration reform

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • anti-liar Salt Lake City, UT
    Feb. 2, 2013 4:08 p.m.

    If punishing people for wanting to come here and "build better lives for their families" is so mean-spirited and excessively "difficult" for illegal immigrants, why then have "tough," "robust" patrols of borders? Is that any less "mean-spirited?" After all, would-be border crossers likewise are only "trying to make a better life for themselves."

    I sure would like the newspaper to explain the inconsistency and tell the truth about what it really believes. Either it believes in uniform enforcement, or it believes that anyone who "only wants a better life for himself" ought to be allowed to defy this nation's borders, sovereignty, and laws.

    That is why I suspect that those who talk about "better life for themselves" and "tough border patrols" in the same breath really are only giving lip service to enforcement of immigration law in general.

    Of course, the "better life for themselves" line is itself a rationalization. After all, shoplifters and bank robbers only do what they do "in the interest of making a better life for themselves."

    Fascinating, by the way, how for some, "thoughtful" means being concern about "image," and about how one "appears," than about doing what is RIGHT.

  • tenx Santa Clara, UT
    Feb. 2, 2013 9:21 a.m.

    In 1986 the "Amnesty to End All Amnesties" offered amnesty to 1.8 million illegals. 3.2 million showed up and applied. Now, we are offering amnesty to 12.0 million and probably 21.0 million will try to apply. Assumming that no enforcement will be part of THIS amnesty again, we can look forward to year 2037 having 80.0 million illegals and their supporters clamoring for amnesty. Why not try LEGAL immigration? Tweak the number of visas and enforce the law and add E-verify. Too simple? Oh and one other thing - no visas for terrorists!

  • prelax Murray, UT
    Feb. 1, 2013 10:57 a.m.

    The Kansas City Star has the backing of the open border movement. A powerful rich business driven group. In Kansas the conglomerate ranch and farm industry cries for cheap labor that they do not have to pay for. (such as visa workers).

    Two examples of misinformation, in 2011 we gave out 1,789,000 student visas, at a cost to the taxpayer of $6000 each. ($10,734,000,000) That's almost 11 billion dollars already, and we need more?

    As far as the Hispanic vote, over the past 40 years, they have voted Democratic 64%. The argument beats a dead horse. Pro-amnesty, John McCain (R-Ariz.), was rejected by 67 percent of Hispanic voters, 72 percent of Hispanics voted against Bob Dole, 69 percent voted against the elder Bush and 62 percent voted against the younger Bush.

    It's very likely after four more years of Obama, people will be running to the Republican ticket. Making amnesty all about votes is a blue herring. It's all about surplus labor for business and destroying America's labor, and their ability to fight over better wages.

  • wrz Ogden, UT
    Feb. 1, 2013 8:29 a.m.

    "Create a clear and timely path to citizenship for illegal immigrants."

    We already have a clear path to citizenship... fill out the appropriate form(s) and get in line. As for 'timely,' it will take some time because of the millions who want the same thing.

    "Offer more student visas to encourage immigrants with special talents to attend U.S. universities and ramp up the available visas for highly skilled foreign workers."

    Visas for 'special people' is against American principles of fairness. It's also unconstitutional being against the 'Equal Protection' clause.

    "Provide tough security on the border."

    Border security is a red herring. About half of illegals come on legal visas but don't go home upon expiration. Furthermore, the US borders can never be sealed. If we build a 20 foot fence, illegals will get a 21 foot ladder.

    "Thoughtful Republicans don't want the party stuck any longer with the image that it will do whatever it can to make life difficult for illegal immigrants."

    Republicans didn't realize that the number of Hispanics in this country are now large enough to significantly affect elections... the prime reason Mitt lost.