Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Permanent residency allows for applying for citizenship after 5 years. You would have to create a new category which is does not lead to citizenship after 5 years.
Not hard to do that. They could create a "Conditional Permanent Resident" that would confer PR status but the condition would be that it would never qualify for citizenship. The only patch to citizenship for them would be to go home and wait in line for a visa or serve with an honorable discharge from the armed services.
I can tell that you have never lived in the immigrant hellhole of southern California. Immigrants have completely taken over many jobs that americans WILL DO. Construction jobs, plumbing, drywall, restaturant, etc are all jobs that americans would do. Even if they work, their children still qualify for free school, free healthcare, food stamps, etc. Just how much taxes do you think that an immigrant pays to compensate the local and state governments for this largesse? Newt is wrong and is merely pandering. There are too many immigrants in this country, period.
The number of immigrants in the country, legal and illegal, is another issue entirely. I happen to believe that we need a pause in immigration so that those already here can properly be assimilated. That's what happened in the 1920's. Otherwise the very character of our republic will be at risk from people who have no knowledge of our history nor appreciation for the exceptionalism that underlies it.
First of all, you cannot just say, 'you get to stay because you have been here 25 years, you go to church and you are good at a trade or you are skilled at something we need', or 'you have to go back, because you have only been here 10 years and you don't go to church and you're not really good at anything... you just pick peaches or mow yards or something. That would be such a discrimination mess, it would be unreal. It is illogical to think for a minute that would work.
Now, there could be some program for those who have been here and not been in trouble to work toward citizenship while they are productive, but no one that came here illegally should be granted full amnesty or citizenship just because. That is rewarding illegal behavior which is very out of hand. That only contributes to more people coming here illegally and until we secure and seal the border, the whole argument is counteproductive anyway.
There are people from other countries...other than Mexico, who are waiting to get into this country right now that we need in this country to fill jobs that they have expertise in and they can't get in. If we stop all of those crossing the border illegally and slow that train down, we might actually be able to allow more of a diverse population to come here and contribute.
When Newt made his comments he suggested an approach that might work. He cited to the example of local draft boards during WWII that made decisions on the qualifications to serve in the military of those who reached draft age and granted exemptions on a case-by-case basis. The advantage of such a scheme is that the people closest to the people affected make the critical decisions. In other words, it is not a one-size-fits-all solution that we get from federal government diktats.
Here's the problem. "They" (aka the politicians) always say that "this the last amnesty", "we will fortify the border", etc and they never do either. Reagan promised that his 1986 amnesty would be the end of illegal immigration ... guess what? There's more illegals now than ever before.
That being said if Newt made 3 promises I would be inclined to support his proposal:
1) Reduce immigration to less than 100,000/year and return to national quotas.
2) Militarize the US Border Patrol and increase it's size to 50,000.
3) That he would use the US military to defend our borders against Mexican aggression and drug cartels.
3) That he would use the US military to defend our borders against Mexican aggression and drug cartels.
The problem with that approach is our military can't even defeat a bunch of starving 4th world kids armed with naught but a high school level understanding of chemistry and $10 worth of equipment from Radio Shack. They wouldn't stand a chance against an actual armed resistance with largely the same weapons and actual military training.
I have heard that Arizona's unemployment rate is trending down since that law was passed.
Correlation/causation reach here, most states had unemployment rate shoot up because of recession, and since the peak many have slowly trended back down. I don't believe it is quite as simple as pointing at Arizona's unemployment rate and implying it going down is directly caused by any single event. The biggest sector of Arizona's employment recovery was in education and health services.
Quote:
It will be interesting to see what the stricter laws does in Arizona and now Alabama.
What stricter law? If you mean SB1070 the strict/controversial provisions of the bill were blocked by a fed judge before going into effect, then in April of this year the Ninth Circuit upheld that by ruling against Arizona. To date there hasn't been much of anything that has actually gone into effect, and last month the bill's primary sponsor Russell Pierce just became the first state legislator in AZ history to be yanked out of office in a recall election.
Here's the problem. "They" (aka the politicians) always say that "this the last amnesty", "we will fortify the border", etc and they never do either. Reagan promised that his 1986 amnesty would be the end of illegal immigration ... guess what? There's more illegals now than ever before.
That being said if Newt made 3 promises I would be inclined to support his proposal:
1) Reduce immigration to less than 100,000/year and return to national quotas.
2) Militarize the US Border Patrol and increase it's size to 50,000.
3) That he would use the US military to defend our borders against Mexican aggression and drug cartels.
and Reagan believed it but when it didn't work he regretted ever signing the bill.
I have heard that Arizona's unemployment rate is trending down since that law was passed. Also, they just got a grant to retrain some of the workforce for tech jobs that I have a feeling were being done by people here on visas that might have actually expired? It will be interesting to see what the stricter laws does in Arizona and now Alabama.
All the western states surrounding Arizona have been slowing trending down for the past year almost lock step with Arizona.
I don't think the Arizona law had any effect on official unemployment rates in the state. Perhaps some of the people who left worked off the books and would not be counted this way.
Correlation/causation reach here, most states had unemployment rate shoot up because of recession, and since the peak many have slowly trended back down. I don't believe it is quite as simple as pointing at Arizona's unemployment rate and implying it going down is directly caused by any single event. The biggest sector of Arizona's employment recovery was in education and health services.
What stricter law? If you mean SB1070 the strict/controversial provisions of the bill were blocked by a fed judge before going into effect, then in April of this year the Ninth Circuit upheld that by ruling against Arizona. To date there hasn't been much of anything that has actually gone into effect, and last month the bill's primary sponsor Russell Pierce just became the first state legislator in AZ history to be yanked out of office in a recall election.
Russell Pierce lost because of a loop hole in the Arizona voting laws. Democrats were allowed to vote in what was a Republican primary of Pierce and another Republican candidate. Watch for this tactic to be used in the future by both sides
The portions of SB 1070 that still stand targed day laborers. They include a new statewide ban on entering a car when hired to work, and conversely, hiring someone who’s entering a car that would obstruct the flow of traffic. Judge Bolton blocked another part that makes it illegal to seek labor.
Bolton did not enjoin the portions of SB 1070 that allow for the impounding of a car that’s found to belong to a person who’s undocumented or is used to transport people who are undocumented. Neither did Bolton enjoin a section that amends employer sanctions and adds new provisions against transporting and harboring undocumented immigrants. A provision barring cities in Arizona from forming “sanctuary” cities was also allowed to stand.
Russell Pierce lost because of a loop hole in the Arizona voting laws. Democrats were allowed to vote in what was a Republican primary of Pierce and another Republican candidate.
Stuff like Olivia Cortez didn't help, Pierce's recall campaign was so misfit it was almost like there was Benny Hill music in the background.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
