How would you "legalize" the Illegals? (certificate, born, illegal aliens)
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.
Now first, this isn't for the "I wouldn't!!" crowd. We all know your position. I want to discuss compromise or "reform" with those in favor of it. And they haven't said in these other threads, even when asked. So....
lvmensch said:
"I want the illegals reduced to a level that can be maintained by our immigration forces. I am simply looking for a way to accomplish that. We are not going to deport them for a number of reasons the primary being the huge costs involved.
And of course there are benefits to having a cheap work force available. It is stupid to deny the obvious. On the other hand this should have no impact on gaining control of the illegal alien population.
And I do think the only sensible way out of this mess is to legalize most of the illegals. Do not like that solution but I see no other. I would also increase the size of the immigration forces and implement a reasonably tight version of eVerify."
I have asked:
1. when you say "legalize most of the illegals", is it reasonable to draw some deadline from sometime in the past?
2. Would you require 10 years continuous in the US? Would you go to the DACA date?
3. Would this only apply to families (ie, spouses, and if they had children when crossing), or even all the single males that long have crossed illegally and knowingly? Any single females?
And any other issues of "compromise" or "reform" or "legalizing them" you'd like to discuss.
Now first, this isn't for the "I wouldn't!!" crowd. We all know your position. I want to discuss compromise or "reform" with those in favor of it. And they haven't said in these other threads, even when asked. So....
SNIP
I have asked:
1. when you say "legalize most of the illegals", is it reasonable to draw some deadline from sometime in the past?
2. Would you require 10 years continuous in the US? Would you go to the DACA date?
3. Would this only apply to families (ie, spouses, and if they had children when crossing), or even all the single males that long have crossed illegally and knowingly? Any single females?
And any other issues of "compromise" or "reform" or "legalizing them" you'd like to discuss.
I would suggest we set up a criteria set that cover somewhere around most of the better illegals. Certainly includes criminal records. And I would think a time constraint would be included. The problem with the time constraint is those not included have to be dealt with some other way. And if we do not do it well that group will grow into another illegal crisis. So deciding how we deal with the group not legalized will be part of the decision as to the criteria.
For the details of the legalization would be for some time like 5 years with a renewal available for another 5.
After 10 years or such the congress can decide how to proceed. No need for built in citizenship path. Leave that until we see how it has worked.
I would think all who came across as minors would be included.
1. came to the United States under the age of sixteen;
2. has continuously resided in the United States for a least five years preceding June 2012.
3. is present in the United States on the date of this memorandum (which seems redundant given the "continuously resided")
4. is currently in school, has graduated from high school, has obtained a general education
development certificate, or is an honorably discharged veteran of the Coast Guard or
Armed Forces of the United States;
5. has not been convicted of a felony offense, a significant misdemeanor offense, multiple
misdemeanor offenses, or otherwise poses a threat to national security or public safety;
6. is not above the age of thirty.
So, DACA had a criminal "history" criteria. Personally, I have some concerns about the "conviction" part, since there are many anecdotes about sympathetic prosecutors/judges in certain large states that recognize the person's illegal status and act as sanctuaries.
Now first, this isn't for the "I wouldn't!!" crowd. We all know your position. I want to discuss compromise or "reform" with those in favor of it. And they haven't said in these other threads, even when asked. So....
.
LOL
So you want to compromise and only discuss it with people who aren't as bothered that the country is being flooded with illegal aliens by the hundreds of thousands.
Sure as for the moon and then compromise.
Naturally the (D's) want to make illegals legal, so they can win elections. Can you imagine if the shoe were on the other foot. They like the hypocrites they are would be screaming bloody murder.
All the people who approve of it, are slapping those in the face waiting to legally immigrate. They are learning American values, paying money, and will for the most part contribute to our society.
But they see people breaking are laws with the blessing of the government, then going on the public dime no less.
Many are ignorant, unskilled and will become dependent on the American taxpayers. They will overcrowd our schools, hospitals, EMS services, prisons, etc., etc., etc.
Frankly I would care who they would likely vote for if made citizens, so long as they do not get rewarded for illegally crossing our border, while more deserving immigrants wait in line trying to do it the right way.
Just imagine standing in line, ready to spend money and work for what you want, and seeing a bunch of people just pour in while you stand in line like a sap.
They should not be let in, and most should be deported. For those worthy of staying, they should not be allowed to vote, otherwise they can vote more free stuff for themselves from cradle to grave. Don't forget the famous quote - "when the people find that they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic".
That is the trajectory people like you have put us on.
Is that really your goal, to end our constitutional republic as we know it?
So you want to compromise and only discuss it with people who aren't as bothered that the country is being flooded with illegal aliens by the hundreds of thousands.
Sure as for the moon and then compromise.
Naturally the (D's) want to make illegals legal, so they can win elections. Can you imagine if the shoe were on the other foot. They like the hypocrites they are would be screaming bloody murder.
All the people who approve of it, are slapping those in the face waiting to legally immigrate. They are learning American values, paying money, and will for the most part contribute to our society.
But they see people breaking are laws with the blessing of the government, then going on the public dime no less.
Many are ignorant, unskilled and will become dependent on the American taxpayers. They will overcrowd our schools, hospitals, EMS services, prisons, etc., etc., etc.
Frankly I would care who they would likely vote for if made citizens, so long as they do not get rewarded for illegally crossing our border, while more deserving immigrants wait in line trying to do it the right way.
Just imagine standing in line, ready to spend money and work for what you want, and seeing a bunch of people just pour in while you stand in line like a sap.
They should not be let in, and most should be deported. For those worthy of staying, they should not be allowed to vote, otherwise they can vote more free stuff for themselves from cradle to grave. Don't forget the famous quote - "when the people find that they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic".
That is the trajectory people like you have put us on.
Is that really your goal, to end our constitutional republic as we know it?
`
None of them should be given amnesty. If they are so-called worthy then they should be required to return to their homelands first and apply to come back by following the legal process to come here while waiting in line behind immigrants who have already applied to come here legally. We must not nullify our annual quotas for legal immigration by increasing them to accomodate illegal aliens already within our borders either. Another amnesty will not gain American jobs back, it will not alleviate the overcrowded conditions they have created and will only encourage more illegal aliens to come here. It just makes a mockery out of our immigration laws. What's the point of having laws if they aren't enforced and are rewarded for breaking them instead?
Now first, this isn't for the "I wouldn't!!" crowd. We all know your position. I want to discuss compromise or "reform" with those in favor of it. And they haven't said in these other threads, even when asked. So....
lvmensch said:
"I want the illegals reduced to a level that can be maintained by our immigration forces. I am simply looking for a way to accomplish that. We are not going to deport them for a number of reasons the primary being the huge costs involved.
And of course there are benefits to having a cheap work force available. It is stupid to deny the obvious. On the other hand this should have no impact on gaining control of the illegal alien population.
And I do think the only sensible way out of this mess is to legalize most of the illegals. Do not like that solution but I see no other. I would also increase the size of the immigration forces and implement a reasonably tight version of eVerify."
I have asked:
1. when you say "legalize most of the illegals", is it reasonable to draw some deadline from sometime in the past?
2. Would you require 10 years continuous in the US? Would you go to the DACA date?
3. Would this only apply to families (ie, spouses, and if they had children when crossing), or even all the single males that long have crossed illegally and knowingly? Any single females?
And any other issues of "compromise" or "reform" or "legalizing them" you'd like to discuss.
My personal stance is that immigration SHOULD be tightly regulated in that we know who is coming into the country and why, and that people are only permitted to be here legally. But it hasn't been, and the current process is a bureaucratic morass, and there are so many exploitative aspects to the system (both openly and underground), so there needs to be a fair approach to sorting out the people who are already in the US but do not at present have legal residency, for whatever reason.
First to me is a no-brainer - I'd allow anyone who can demonstrate they were brought to the US as a minor to apply for expedited citizenship, without all the usual hoops to jump through. They didn't choose to be here and it's the only home they've known. This is just basic decency.
Secondly, if I were a god-king...I'd snap my fingers and declare that anyone in this country AS OF THIS MOMENT is being offered amnesty to immediately apply for legal residency. Upon maintaining a squeaky clean record for a reasonable period of time (maybe 10 years, with the opportunity to reduce it by joining the military or doing service work?) they may apply for citizenship. Anyone who screws up during their residency period, or who doesn't come forward during the amnesty window, is subject to deportation.
Thirdly, the system for gaining legal residency very much needs reformation. A person from any country and any SES status should be able to complete a simple application and hear back within a reasonable timeframe, and if accepted should be able to follow a very predictable, stable, pathway toward retaining that residency and/or moving on to apply for citizenship. It shouldn't come down to the caprice of an employer or a lover. The pathway can be strict and demanding, but it needs to be fair.
Employers who profit off illegal immigration should face harsh consequences.
Illegal behavior should NEVER be rewarded. If you choose to do so, you will just get more of the behavior that you are trying to discourage.
No immigration action should ever be created by executive order. The Supreme Court already ruled it unconstitutional. Sorry by protection from deportation should be removed from all categories of the unwantumented.
Our benevolent, legal migration policy should allow us to cherry pick who gets in. That is in the best interests of all Americans. Both native born and naturalized citizens.
It's past time to hold employers of illegals accountable. Time to deport any illegals. Well past time to penalize any official that creates a sanctuary situation. End birthright citizenship.
So you want to compromise and only discuss it with people who aren't as bothered that the country is being flooded with illegal aliens by the hundreds of thousands.
That is the trajectory people like you have put us on.
Is that really your goal, to end our constitutional republic as we know it?
I am pro-enforcement aka anti-illegal.
the point I was trying to make is - the "predominant" side on this subforum has about exactly 1 answer. "Get rid of them all!!!!!"
The other side talks "reform" etc .... so I wanted to find out their ideas, and discuss it like adults. And even when I've asked the questions in other threads, they've been glossed over or even lost in the rampage of the OG's of the world.
It is instructive that after several days, I got no specific proposals, though I thank lvmensch for at least responding.
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.
