1
   

Proposed immigration legislation.

 
 
au1929
 
Reply Sat 14 May, 2005 09:20 am
Enter McCain-Kennedy



Saturday, May 14, 2005; Page A20



IMMIGRATION legislation introduced Thursday by Sens. John McCain (R-Ariz.) and Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass.) is not the first, and may not be the last, attempt to forge a realistic, comprehensive and bipartisan national immigration policy. In the last Congress, Sen. Chuck Hagel (R-Neb.) and Senate Minority Leader Thomas A. Daschle (D-S.D.) also tried it, and others have introduced bills containing similar elements. But there are reasons to hope that this bill will move further. The authors have struggled, with one another and with widely varying advocates, to find compromise answers to some of the more difficult immigration issues.

The bill requires new investment in border security and technology. But it also allows employers to hire foreigners under a temporary visa program if they can prove they are unable to hire American workers for the same job. Visa-holders will be able to change jobs (which the discredited bracero guest-worker programs of the past did not allow); will be able to apply to stay (eliminating a potential source of new illegal immigration), and will be issued tamper-proof identity documents (ending the use of faked Social Security numbers).

Most controversially -- but ultimately sensibly -- the bill allows illegal immigrants already here to regularize their status, but not easily; they would have to go to the end of the line, and that only after paying a hefty fine, staying employed for a prescribed period and paying back taxes. The bills' authors argue that this is not an amnesty, because it requires a recognition of wrongdoing. They also argue that establishing the temporary visa will prevent a new pool of illegal immigrants from arriving because it will become politically realistic to fine employers who continue to employ illegals. Most of all, this provision for illegal immigrants makes sense because any legislation that does not deal with the approximately 10 million illegals will ultimately result in more lawbreaking.

Although the politics of immigration are convoluted -- this is an issue that divides both parties -- this law has some political points in its favor. While the White House may not want to pile immigration onto its plate next to Social Security, the McCain-Kennedy bill does resemble the policy the president outlined more than a year ago, so it should attract his support. Border state politicians are clamoring for change, because smuggling and trafficking have contributed to lawlessness and a real sense of crisis along the border. Politicians from states that never had major immigration issues in the past, including Maryland and Virginia, have lately struggled with everything from the question of driver's licenses for illegals to the need for seasonal workers on the Chesapeake Bay: They want change, too. Most of all, though, pressure is coming from security agencies and law enforcement. The illegal immigrants' underworld is a source of illegal documentation and criminality, and the de facto open borders are an invitation to terrorists.

There are legitimate concerns about the long-term impact of a law such as this on American workers. But the economic impact is more complicated than some immigration opponents claim: Experience has shown that immigration creates jobs and growth over time, and countries with low immigration, such as Japan, aren't exactly an advertisement for their policies. There are also legitimate concerns about social cohesion. But legal workers are much easier to assimilate than illegals, and the proposed bill requires would-be citizens to know English and civics. This is a case where common sense and hard-nosed security concerns point in the same direction, and this bill could lead the way.


Is this the way to solve the US illegal immigration problem?
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 1 • Views: 604 • Replies: 12
No top replies

 
JustWonders
 
  1  
Reply Sat 14 May, 2005 09:24 am
Mexico furious at tough US law on migrants

By John Authers in Mexico City and Edward Alden in Washington
Published: May 13 2005 19:27 | Last updated: May 13 2005 19:27

Mexico has reacted furiously to a bill signed into law by the US this week that would fund a border wall and prevent illegal Mexican migrants from obtaining US driving licences.

President Vicente Fox said he would lodge a diplomatic complaint, and was considering complaints to multilateral bodies if Mexico could not unable to resolve the problem bilaterally.

In the US, leaders of the Mexican community threatened to strike to send a message to US employers that they could not survive without cheap Mexican labour.

Santiago Creel, Mexico's interior secretary, said the "Real ID" law was "negative, inconvenient, and obstructionist".

"Building walls doesn't help anyone build a good neighbourhood," he said. "Taking away the possibility of obtaining driving licences for people who are working in legal jobs, who pay their taxes there, who send remittances home here, seems to us to be an extreme measure, particularly given the new understanding that we thought we had after the re-election of President Bush."

Andrés Manuel López Obrador, mayor of Mexico City, supported Mr Fox's stance. He said the problem of growing immigration could be "resolved by encouraging development in Mexico and Central America, not by building walls and using the border control".

Since 2002, Mexico has adopted a popular policy of issuing undocumented labourers with consular identity cards, which are accepted as proof of identity by many US states for issuing driving licences, and for opening bank accounts. Under the new law, this would no longer be possible. The immigration provisions approved by Congress were attached by House Republicans to a bill that will provide more than $80bn for the war in Iraq this year, giving lawmakers little choice but to support it.

The White House, which at first opposed the new restrictions, supported them when it became clear they would pass Congress in spite of administration opposition.

President George W. Bush has said he wants to deal with illegal immigration by creating a temporary guest worker programme. But many Republicans are using the anxiety about terrorism to push for a crackdown on illegal immigrants.

http://news.ft.com/cms/s/bf6dcbe2-c3da-11d9-a56d-00000e2511c8.html
0 Replies
 
au1929
 
  1  
Reply Sat 14 May, 2005 09:35 am
Quote:
Building walls doesn't help anyone build a good neighbourhood,” he said. “Taking away the possibility of obtaining driving licences for people who are working in legal jobs, who pay their taxes there, who send remittances home here, seems to us to be an extreme measure, particularly given the new understanding that we thought we had after the re-election of President Bush.”



How can they be working on legal jobs when they are working with false papers and are employed illegally?
I can understand the Mexican officials concern. Since the remittances sent is one of Mexicos "biggest industries"
0 Replies
 
roger
 
  1  
Reply Sat 14 May, 2005 11:14 am
I like it, actually, and I don't like anything from Edward Kennedy. It has the advantage of making illegals with a proven record eligible, without actually rewarding illegal behavior.
0 Replies
 
tommrr
 
  1  
Reply Sat 14 May, 2005 12:58 pm
It may not be the best idea, but at least there is now an idea. Up until now, the only plan was to ignore it and hope it goes away.
0 Replies
 
au1929
 
  1  
Reply Sun 15 May, 2005 07:20 am
May 15, 6:05 AM EDT
Mexican President's Remark Criticized By MORGAN LEE
Associated Press Writer


Quote:

MEXICO CITY (AP) -- President Vicente Fox came under criticism Saturday after saying Mexicans were willing to take jobs "that not even blacks want to do in the United States."Fox's remark Friday came a day after Mexico announced it would formally protest recent U.S. immigration reforms, including the decision to extend walls along the border and make it harder for illegal migrants to get driver's licenses.

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/M/MEXICO_RACIAL_COMMENT?SITE=1010WINS&SECTION=INTERNATIONAL&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT

Who the hell gave the Mexican president a vote.
Imagine the uproar if an american politician had made such a statement.
0 Replies
 
squinney
 
  1  
Reply Sun 15 May, 2005 07:36 am
I like it, too. Seems sensible, fair and would finally hold illegals and employers responsible for breaking the law.

I don't get this part though:

Quote:
Andrés Manuel López Obrador, mayor of Mexico City, supported Mr Fox's stance. He said the problem of growing immigration could be "resolved by encouraging development in Mexico and Central America, not by building walls and using the border control".


How bout Mr. Mayor and Mr. Fox dealing with development and job growth in their own country rather than demanding the US do it? When did that become our problem?
0 Replies
 
ebrown p
 
  1  
Reply Sun 15 May, 2005 07:43 am
roger wrote:
I like it, actually, and I don't like anything from Edward Kennedy. It has the advantage of making illegals with a proven record eligible, without actually rewarding illegal behavior.


As one from the other side of this issue from roger... I also like this plan. It would address the impossible choices that immigrants now face and allow them a reasonable way to continue their lives legally.

If Roger and I can agree on this issue, when we are generally so far apart... there may be hope for our country after all.
0 Replies
 
ebrown p
 
  1  
Reply Sun 15 May, 2005 07:45 am
au1929 wrote:

Who the hell gave the Mexican president a vote.
Imagine the uproar if an american politician had made such a statement.


Imagine that! They have a president who sometimes makes ill-advised statements that offend citizens of another country...

(somehow that sounds familiar).
0 Replies
 
JustWonders
 
  1  
Reply Sun 15 May, 2005 07:56 am
squinney wrote:
I like it, too. Seems sensible, fair and would finally hold illegals and employers responsible for breaking the law.

I don't get this part though:

Quote:
Andrés Manuel López Obrador, mayor of Mexico City, supported Mr Fox's stance. He said the problem of growing immigration could be "resolved by encouraging development in Mexico and Central America, not by building walls and using the border control".


How bout Mr. Mayor and Mr. Fox dealing with development and job growth in their own country rather than demanding the US do it? When did that become our problem?


Because by allowing their problem to become the problem of their neighbor means it's no longer a big problem for them and therefore they don't have to fix it.
0 Replies
 
au1929
 
  1  
Reply Sun 15 May, 2005 09:41 am
ebrown_p wrote

Quote:
Imagine that! They have a president who sometimes makes ill-advised statements that offend citizens of another country...

(somehow that sounds familiar).

Does that excuse it? Where is that indignant cry of racism that one would normally hear?
0 Replies
 
ebrown p
 
  1  
Reply Sun 15 May, 2005 10:04 am
Of course not.

In my opinion (and incidently in that of the Mexican part of my family) President Fox is an idiot. This particular remark smacked of racism.

Incidently Fox did gain points in my book when he had los huevos to stand up to Bush about the Iraq war.

What was the point again?
0 Replies
 
roger
 
  1  
Reply Sun 15 May, 2005 01:30 pm
Actually, ebrown, we're probably not as far apart as it seems. It just doesn't show up on the forums.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Proposed immigration legislation.
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 07/16/2025 at 06:02:05