Immigration Reform: Why We Need It, Why It Won't Happen

Discussion in 'Archive: The Senate Floor' started by Jabbadabbado, May 14, 2010.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Lowbacca_1977 Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jun 28, 2006
    star 6
    Re: swine flu... there were some articles on the risk of illegal immigration in the spread of that: http://www.cbs8.com/Global/story.asp?S=10267847

    Here's the difference, in legal immigration, in letting them come to the country, we accepted that. In illegal immigration, we, by way of the government, didn't have any say in it. The cost was imposed upon us, on top of the cost that comes with having crime spread in.


    My stance.... I consider immigration by legal means to be the life blood of America. That said, I think having it in a fashion that can be regulated, that allows us to make sure that we can screen the people coming in for crimes, for diseases, etc, is a vital step. The current immigration system NEEDS to be made simpler, and I think the path to coming here legally should be strict, but not unnecessarily complex, expensive, or tedious. Just enough to check what needs to be checked, and I can accept having some limit on numbers so that it's not one immense wave. But I'd think some countries quotas need reassessing, and Mexico comes to mind. I'd also have no problem with guest worker programs that would allow temporary workers to come in, which could work with some that are said to come to the US to work for a while then head home within the illegal immigrant category.

    However, with an open system comes the expectation that those who cheat the system don't get away with it. And that leads to how to deal with those here illegally, and I think promoting a "path to citizenship" for them is unethical, both in that there are people that aren't here right now because they ARE trying to come here the right way, and I think it's unfair to them and sends the wrong message, and because those "path to citizenship" ideas rarely include the immigrants living in America LEGALLY that are prohibited from becoming a citizen, and that seems to be a second unfair bias that those that came here legally under set terms are withheld citizenship per those terms and those that ignored our laws to come here are given that option.
    I think the simple option is to make it so that, for illegal immigrants, and illegal immigrants only, the quality of life here is destroyed. I do think that a simple check, like eVerify, which uses an employee's name and date of birth, SSN, and proof of identification is not an overbearing amount, and should quickly turn up who has legal status and who does not. I don't think it should become a police state, but this is already information that businesses collect to verify that someone can work, and so checking it through the system is not, I think, an overbearing step. I would also support making sure immigration status is checked at a few other key points, such as following being charged for a crime, getting a driver's license, and a few other key spots in life. Not so that it's a day to day fear that would expand to legal immigrants, but at key points like getting a job where it's enforcement would directly limit the ability for illegal immigrants only to find work. I would also say that the punishments for businesses that knowingly hire illegal immigrants, or are recklessly negligent (and making eVerify a mandatory step would mean any that don't use that system) should be treated as criminal.
    You
  2. farraday Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Jan 27, 2000
    star 7
    Except they've done exactly as you describe as your case one and still not been shot 44. Tackled to the ground by secret service is what actually happens.

    Also Lowie, there are concerns with the illegal community that you're going to have a hard time vaccinating them. That article was written in late April by which time there were widespread cases in the US as well as Nova Scotia, Scotland, and Spain, New Zealand, and Austria.

    Beyond that your entire post fails on the theory of containment and prohibition, which, the next time it works will be the first. Now I'll grant you it is a common pipe dream, but I see no point in pretending "this" time if we clap hard enough it'll work.

    Feel free to find an example of it working. Hell the Soviets couldn't prevent cross border illegals. Are you willing to emulate them to reduce it as far as you can? Walls aren't enough and everyone should know it. It will require making life backbreakingly unpleasant here for illegals and people simply being accused of being illegals, because nothing breeds that so helpful fear you're relying on like a Type one error rate you don't give a **** about.

    Presuming, of course, that you still want to keep it that you have to be shown to be illegal instead of illegal until proven otherwise.

    But hey, it's only fair.
  3. Lowbacca_1977 Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jun 28, 2006
    star 6
    Since you brought it up, could you cite how much illegal immigration into the Soviet Union was happening at that time, both in terms of number of people and population of the Soviet Union at that time?

    And well, if you'd prefer, we skip that and do workplace raids and check people that way and deport them and arrest the employers, and just keep those up with enough frequency to keep things interesting.
  4. farraday Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Jan 27, 2000
    star 7
    Yes, Nationwide workplace raids.

    It's the only fair solution. Advocates?

    And you know very well the Soviet Union was attempting to prevent emigration, which amounts to the same problem realistically.

    However, since it's come up, lets look how the most furiously guarded border was working.

    Cite

    Oh but you don't understand, if you shoot people they'll totally stop trying. Hah.

    But anyways, highly effective! Lets do that. So, who here is for strapping directional mines to the border fence and throwing land mines on common entry paths? I think Sweetpea is a given, anyone else?
  5. Master_SweetPea Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Nov 18, 2002
    star 4
    Okay since you are an expert,
    If the legal ports of entry were completely opened, WHY would someone still try?


    About the whole- "immigrants aren't vectors" thing.
    I'm talking about basic precautions, like the ones I have to take before entering an orange grove etc.

    Maybe that's just on my mind because of all the biohazard stuff I had to study during finals week..
  6. farraday Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Jan 27, 2000
    star 7
    I can't speak toward the procedure for orange groves. Here's what I do know. With food production you're generally talking about vast monocultures that are at risk for diseases where a single pathogen can wipe out vast quantities of product.

    To combat that you try and clamp down on things traveling sideways between various monocultures, and people/workers are a major concern. The economic integration of the world makes that realistically impossible.

    As for why anyone would "risk" trying to trespass into your Festerung America if there were open ports. First, even under your idea of the open door policy you've created exceptions to entering. As long as there are exceptions there will be people who are refused entry and therefore creating a need for illegal entry. Any barrier, be it ever so minor, creates an implicit need to go around for those who can't make it over. For example, you said "anyone who wants to work" so does that mean they can't bring their children? Or parents? What about, for the sake of an example, a husband and wife where the wife is going to be expected to remain at home?

    How elastic is your concept of open?

    Second, the major port of entry creates a massive strain on local governments. The size of San Fransisco's Chinatown can be directly related to the use of Angel Island as a clearing house for Asian immigration. Similar expansion of immigrant populations in New York can be seen from the use of Ellis Island to concentrate minorities. Of course doing so also helps re enforce tendencies towards isolation among non native speakers in the host populations by concentrating them into communities which can reinforce past cultural associations and language use.

    It goes almost without saying that many illegals also rely on such associations/clusterings.

    None of this, of course, addresses the fact that changing immigration policy on the level of openness is much easier than creating Festerung America, which is to say with both in place it's far more likely we'd change immigration policy and end up raising the barrier at some point placing more strain on your Maginot line.
  7. Lowbacca_1977 Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jun 28, 2006
    star 6
    No, no it isn't.

    Particularly as I'm not saying we have to prevent immigration, I'm just saying that we should only allow legal immigration, but that it should be easy to do so. I'm not saying "we have too many Mexicans", I'm saying we need better channels for legal immigrants, period.

    Beyond that, the reason the two situations aren't the same is that the Soviet Union could only control the border, because once they were out, they were out. Such is the nature of emigration. However, for illegal immigration, because they're coming into the country, we can take measures internally and we don't have to just focus on the border. I'm not talking about border enforcement, I've been talking about internal enforcement.
  8. LtNOWIS Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    May 19, 2005
    star 4
    Isn't that essentially the same as the Castle doctrine that's active in a couple dozen states?
  9. farraday Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Jan 27, 2000
    star 7
    Castle Doctrine doesn't allow you to shoot anyone who trespasses on your land, instead it generally requires actual threat or perceived threat, sometimes of physical violence, sometimes simply of further threat to your property.

    I am unaware of any Castle doctrine which says "well they're on your land without your permission so you can shoot them, which is what shooting illegal immigrants at the border is.

    Second, Lowie I'm blessed tired of having to fight two or more different arguments between people who want to ban all immigration, lock down the border, or favor enforcement inside the country by undisclosed means. You know perfectly well there are those here who are suggesting fortress America. If that doesn't adequately describe your beliefs note it as such and respond to the parts that do instead of simply focusing on other arguments and saying they fail to match your concerns.

    You want workplace raids? Fine. The ICE raid in Laurel Mississippi netted roughly 600 illegal immigrants. Congrats, you've grabbed middle age adults from their workplace. Now all you have to do is figure out what to do if they have children, who obviously aren't at the workplace. Well they attached anklets to women with kids and sent them home. Of course you might grab both parents or you might grab one parent and break up the family by deporting half.
    Remind me again, is a broken family a major predictor of crime rates amoung teenagers?

    Since you're ICE you're not letting much communication from your detention center and even if you were other illegals are hardly going to be sending in stamped envelopes of their location to try and get in contact with separated family members.

    Hopefully there's a good community organization or church that can get involved because they're simply not going to trust the government. Speaking of not trusting the government they're going to pull their kids out of school because they're terrified they'll be grabbed to. Remind me again, how important was education in creating people who are tax benefits and not burdens?

    And that's presuming the child isn't an American citizens to begin with. Remind me again, what's your policy toward anchor babies?

    Your entire position is that if we make it ***** enough for them they'll leave. Well okay, that's why they left their home country in the first place. So all we have to do is make it *****-er than Mexico and we're set.

    A massive recession was a big help, what else do you plan on doing. I have to tell you though crappier than their home situation is going to be a bit of a hurdle for you to clear.

    It should be interesting though, by making them afraid enough of dealing with any position of authority you'll make them even more open targets for crime. Rape an illegal? Who are they going to report it to?

    Fear. Fear will keep the illegals out. Fear of the rampant crime and corruption we'll engender by ensuring they have no de facto protection in our society.

    Don't be so coy. Your plan is basically to make their situation here so untenable they'd rather be starving in their own country. At least have the guts to admit it and you're planning on the backlash from the general knowledge they're disposable to help your cause.

    The side effects this will have among legal immigrants and shared ethnicites is apparently something you're willing to ignore. Presumably you're hoping that all of them feel the illegals cheated and will feel no solidarity at all.

    And surely it will pay for itself. I mean yes ICE's detention budget has more than doubled in the past 5 years and if you're serious will have to increase even more, not to mention the hiring and legal costs, but I'm sure we can keep pouring billions of dollars into ICE to round up those illegals. Money well spent. I'm also sure the fines on companies will surely pay for the problem since it's a well known fact companies never engaged in drawn out legal battles to prevent from having to pay fines.

    Really, is this whole thing a jobs program? Capture illegals so real Americans get those jobs back and hire a bu
  10. Lowbacca_1977 Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jun 28, 2006
    star 6
    You know, if you've no interest in reading my statements, you could at least be up front about that.
  11. farraday Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Jan 27, 2000
    star 7
    I have read your statements. You only seem interested in quoting one line of mine and ignoring the rest though so why are you bothering posting?

    Job raids cause immediate hiring or people who I assure you aren't illegal because the illegals are hiding from ICE at the moment. It is an obvious transfer of job form illegal to legal and if you're just pissed because I used the moniker "real americans" you can swap that out for legal workers and get off your little self righteous indignation pony.
  12. Lowbacca_1977 Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jun 28, 2006
    star 6
    I can go through more of the rest, however when you feel like saying I'm making arguments like "they're stealing our jobs" when I'm not, and that I want them starving in their old country, ignoring that I've said we need to make it easy and simple for those that want to come here and are willing to do so legally is a blatant mischaracterisation to remove any nuance from what I'm saying.
    To go through it in greater detail, however...

    I would think that I noted my difference from banning all immigration with my many comments about how we need to make legal immigration a simpler process and open it up more. Border security is something that is useful to pay attention to so that people who shouldn't be coming in aren't, but I think that the focus on that is a bit out of place as the motivations should be addressed. While I can understand the issue of having to argue different points with different people, that doesn't justify attributing the views of other people to me just because.

    I would say, it should also end with the guys who hired 600 illegal immigrants being taken away in handcuffs. Which is the other part I think is key, is breaking up the system of hiring them where that is a benefit. Such as Wal-Mart being sued because they hired illegal immigrants and after being raided, some of those illegal immigrants sued because Wal-Mart was violating labour laws by not paying things like worker's comp, their overtime, social security, or withholding taxes. I can't offhand find a verdict on the suit, but if that was true they absolutely deserved to win and win big. It highlights that illegal immigration is preferred by business not because legal workers, American-born or foreign-born, won't do them, but by hiring people that are outside of the legal system, the companies can get away with abuses and derelictions of duty that they wouldn't be able to legally do with legal workers. It is why I do consider, in large part, support for illegal immigration as support for the ongoing abuses that they face that are in violation of labour laws and legalising those that are here just means that they'll get fired and new illegals will get hired to be abused and the cycle of exploitation continues.
    I'd also say I'm not arguing chase the others down using letters and the like, like you're suggesting. I would also say that I believe most countries do have immigration rules that mean if you're married to someone you get through the immigration process. Additionally, at least as it relates to kids, most countries have laws that you are have citizenship at birth if you were born abroad to parents that were citizens. So, any children would be ab
  13. farraday Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Jan 27, 2000
    star 7
    Sorry Lowie you decided to respond to something I didn't say. Since you're only arguing with me this is slightly less intelligible then when I'm arguing with 4 people at once having various destructive immigration policies.

    What I said is that those living in the Us with shared ethnicites of the illegals you're persecuting will feel solidarity with them and not necessarily your own preference of not caring what happens to them because they broke the law. So your accusation amounts to a call of racism because I said illegal immigrants will have ethnicities. Illegal immigrants are almost uniformly ethnic minorities. Tying to pretend I said being an immigrant is an ethnic minority only makes sense if you think I'm an idiot who randomly types words into a computer because they are long.

    If you start cracking down on Russians here illegally there will be a backlash from any Russian expat community you're hitting since illegal immigrants often set up in places with existing home culture support units. That same is true of other cultural/national identities.

    You can claim nuance all you want, but you are literally saying that the way to make the illegals leave and prevent more from coming is to make lives of illegals so crappy here that doing so leaves them no better off, and possibly worse, than their home. Tying to ignore that reality by saying you'd be happy to treat them better if they came legally is nothing more than a smokescreen to hide the fact you want to treat the roughly 10 million or so illegals like crap until they give up and go away.

    To commit a metaphor, you don't want to beat your child, they just didn't do their homework so it's really your child's own fault you're beating them. Maybe we work our way up to "stop hitting yourself".

    To this end you're willing to throw billions of dollars at the problem until it goes away. A tactic that has been quite successful in the past of making sure people have a monetary reason for continuing the problem.

    Problematic with your walmart claim is that walmart gets away with labor abuse an violations of legal workers, citizen and non citizen. They don't hire people and then treat them like crap if they're illegal, they treat workers like crap and end up hiring illegals because they're more willing to put up with it since they have fewer options. Hell if you look back at the last few years who will see multiple multiple million dollar, and tens of million of dollar, walmart settlements. Anyone think they're a better place to wok now that refuses to hire illegals and cares about their work force?

    More fines! Bigger fines! More lawsuits! And in 5 years when the court battle is over and walmart settles out of court things will be better then. I'm sure. Treating workers like crap is an endemic problem that is not resultant of illegal immigration.

    I'm also unimpressed with your belief that this is a short term thing. Even if we were to accept your best case scenario of their life here goes to hell so they leave and then can come back almost immediately as legal immigrants, your entire goal becomes to spend billions of dollars just to make them go home and come back out of some idea that this is fairer then not spending that money and giving them a way to become legal in situ.

    "Look, I realize sending you back to Nigeria so you can apply for a green card, which I assure you is totally easier now, seems like a waste of time and money, but you have to understand we're just tying to be fair to people who haven't got a green card ye, even though we're pretending it's totally easier, doing it this way is going to cost us billions of more dollars, and you're already paying taxes here whereas they are not."

    If you seriously intend to open immigration, throwing out resident illegals is mindless, expensive, bureaucratic cruelty.
  14. Alpha-Red Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Apr 25, 2004
    star 5
    Just my two cents here, but I think the impetus behind border security should be less on fairness (legal vs illegal immigrants) but more on pragmatism (we can't let millions of people into our country). Yes it's "unfair" that someone chose to cross the border illegally, but guess what....they're desperate and they don't care, and this should be recognized. If someone is starving to death and they steal a loaf of bread, it's illegal and it weakens society's framework of property ownership, but it's also understandable. That's why amnesty exists, not to give people a free pass to break the law, but simply as acknowledgment that they acted out of desperation rather than malice and that there's no need to penalize them to the fullest extent of the law.

    We should be taking in more immigrants if we can....it's etched into the Statue of Liberty. The only thing that needs debating is what to do when we can't take in more people.
  15. Jabbadabbado Manager Emeritus

    Member Since:
    Mar 19, 1999
    star 7
    The problem is simple: our economy creates a huge demand for/supply of low-paying service jobs that our domestic labor can't fill, but our immigration policy seeks to block most unskilled labor providers from entering the country legally to work.

    The economic upheavals that would be caused by really, sincerely blocking unskilled illegal laborers from entering the country would be interesting to witness.
  16. Ender Sai Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Feb 18, 2001
    star 8
    Dude, I'm actually thinking you're the only one who has made sense so far.

    Yes I'm late, what of it? I don't visit much anymore.

    [face_love] farrie.

    ES
  17. Faces of Silas Jedi Knight

    Member Since:
    Jul 11, 1999
    star 2
    There is an interesting phenomenon taking place and it involves pushback in a big way. First there were those states amending their constitutions to prohibit gay marriage. I believe the current number is twenty-seven. Forty-one states have statutes prohibiting the same offense. DOMA was perceived to be threatened and the predictable defensive mechanisms materialized.

    Then we had states filing law suits to fight a recent Health Care Bill. This Bill had little to do with actual health care, but had everything to do with a federal government take over and control of the institutions involved in health care. Those states filing law suits total twenty-five at last count.

    Now there are a number of states considering ?immigration enforcement? laws similar to the one signed by Jan Brewer in Arizona. The count is up to ten states in the short time since the brouhaha unfolded.

    A pattern has developed and will continue so long as the federal government chooses to cram unwelcome regulation and laws unto the public. The same ?actors? apparently exercise repeat performances when it comes to displaying seeds of rebellion among the states. The seemingly ultimate slap in the face to State?s Rights is a complete disregard for existing federal law by the current Administration while repudiating a state that passed a law mirroring the federal law in most meaningful respects.

    For every action (or inaction as in the case of Arizona) by the feds, there has become an equal and opposite reaction. The repulsions started small, then became elevated with each transgression. This is only fitting and should not come as a surprise to Progressives. I am not in favor of mob rule to counter radical movements like Progressivism. The Framers of the Constitution specifically warned against mob rule. However, I am just as certain that the Framers would have wanted the people to use every tool at their disposal to fight for the established freedoms created by the Constitution to thwart any effort to undermine its principles.

    It should have become abundantly clear that the following philosophy is prevalent and outlined in a specific order of address relative to the occupation of the United States by illegal aliens:
    Build the fence.
    Secure the borders.
    Then we?ll talk.
  18. Espaldapalabras Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Aug 25, 2005
    star 5
    I tried posting this in the JCC, but didn't include the correct amount of outrage.

    Utah Minutemen are working to remove their leader after he came out against employees with the State of Utah using their access to databases to post the names, addresses, SSNs, and other personal information of purported illegal immigrants.

    One story here.
  19. Lowbacca_1977 Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jun 28, 2006
    star 6
    They posted that list? I'd not heard too much about it, but I'd thought it was turned over mainly to some politicians. Has the list been made public?
  20. Fire_Ice_Death Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Feb 15, 2001
    star 7
    Outraged that he did that or outraged that he's going to be removed?

    In other news: Apparently Arizona is looking more and more screwed. At least according to the guvnah.

    Linky

  21. Espaldapalabras Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Aug 25, 2005
    star 5
    As much as it pains me, I think the extreme immigrant bashing has become a worse problem than the illegal immigrants. I still support a wall and serious border security, but police don't have the time or resources to search for illegal immigrants. And attempting to do so only harms their ability to provide support for other more important public safety issues. If in the course of a stop for another reason they run some type of check, especially if they are driving, that seems perfectly reasonable to me. But it scares me to see that so many support using fear tactics and breaking the law.

    The list was sent to a lot of people, and clearly was a breach of privacy laws.

    Well outrage in general, but I guess I'm not that outraged that he is being removed because it is probably a good thing they have a leader and unreasonable as they are.
  22. Lady_Sami_J_Kenobi Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jul 31, 2002
    star 6
    I've noticed that one reason the anti-illegal immigration people constantly give is that "It's Illegal, what part of illegal don't you understand?"

    Well, over the weekend, I was thinking about the stuff that legal American citizens do every day that's illegal, but they get away with most of the time.

    One: Running stop signs, stop lights.

    Two: Speeding

    Three: cheating on taxes

    There's a lot more, but you get the idea.

    While I'm against illegal immigration, I do feel it is something the feds need to deal with. Yes, they could do a better job.

    I also wonder how many of us would like to pay the prices we'd have to pay for fresh produce if all the illegals were suddenly deported?

    California is running a jobs program for people on General Assistance and those who have been unemployed for a long time--offering them jobs in agriculture (i.e., picking crops). Haven't had too many takers as of yet.

    The real threat to American jobs (i.e., the high-paying jobs that most Americans really want) is from legal immigrants from India and other countries who are college-educated and computer literate and/or hold higher degrees in engineering, etc.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.