What should be done about illegal immigration?

http://www.pollingreport.com/immigration.htm

Results of polls by major polling organizarions regarding the American public's views on disposition of illegal alien question.

0 Replies

au1929 wrote:

http://www.pollingreport.com/immigration.htm

Results of polls by major polling organizarions regarding the American public's views on disposition of illegal alien question.

The polls are all over the map and I think the respones are often skewed and/or colored by how the question is phrased.

If the question is phrased:

Provided that the system is reformed to provide a temporary work program for noncitizens that could include a path to citizenship, what would you prefer?

a) All illegals currently in the United States could stay under the new program provided they meet certain requirements (no criminal record, payment of fines or back taxes, etc.)

b) All illegals currently in the United States should be given opportunity to leave and return via the new program provided they have no criminal record, etc. and only then would they be eligible to get in line behind evertybody else who wants permanent status or citizenship.

c) Anybody in the country illegally now should be deported without option for return.

I think the overwhelming majority of Americans would opt for "B".

When the question is phrased with options:

a) Deport all illegals

b) Allow all illegals to stay provided they pay fines/back taxes, etc.

I think many will then choose "b" as the less destructive of two impossible choices.

Give the American people opportunity to enforce reasonable laws versus allowing people to thumb their noses at the law, and I think most people will say enforce the law.
_________________
--Foxfyre

I shall be telling this with a sigh
Somewhere ages and ages hence:
Two roads diverged in a wood, and I?-
I took the one less traveled by,
And that has made all the difference.

0 Replies

I think the polls are pretty consistant (and surprisingly, Foxfyre, I think you are pretty close in your interpretation). All of the polls say that a majority of Americns think that people here illegally should be allowed to stay and become citizens when they have met "certain conditions". (Of course, these certain conditions are where the battle lines will be drawn.

The USA Today/ Gallup poll phrases the question in a manner very similar to to the way Foxfyre phrases it...

The options were

a. Leave and not return - 14%

b. Leave and temporarily return - 6% (I find this results interesting)

c. Leave, return and become citizens - 42%

d. Remain and become citizens - 36%

e. Unsure - 2%

This seems to be a very good place to start working out a compromise. Of course the debate will be over the conditions of a path to citizenship

0 Replies

There remains no good reason to go from point A to point B if point A is your destination. The majority of people living in America can't afford an extended vacation to Mexico, so to suggest illegals can is pure idiocy. Who's going to pay for it? And why?

0 Replies

OCCOM BILL wrote:

There remains no good reason to go from point A to point B if point A is your destination. The majority of people living in America can't afford an extended vacation to Mexico, so to suggest illegals can is pure idiocy. Who's going to pay for it? And why?

maybe. but then the majority of people living in america are either natives or here legally, bill. if it's determined that illegals need to go home and come back, it's gonna be up to them to pay for it.

america is first and foremost a nation of laws. so, i really am surprised by your position on this stuff, bill. you were one of the people who were so quick to say "why do you hate america ?" over the last few years. what gives?

not attacking you, just puzzled, dude. :wink:

0 Replies

For that matter, I don't know a LOT of illegals, but those I do know go home regularly. Frequently when I was taking care of an illegal who was going to be on workers compensation for awhile, they would invariably ask if they could go home to Mexico until their next doctor's appointment. We always gave them permission. Some never came back. Most did.

Any illegal who can afford to pay a coyote anywhere from $1000 to $3000 to get across the border can afford to go home for awhile for other reasons as well.

And why would it need to be an extended vacation if we have a temporary work program in place? Their employer should be able to have them back in a few days.

For the few who wouldn't be able to afford to go home for awhile, I vote for O'bill and ebrown to provide the seed money to start a voluntary welfare fund to tide them over. I don't imagine anybody would object to that.

0 Replies

DontTreadOnMe wrote:

OCCOM BILL wrote:
There remains no good reason to go from point A to point B if point A is your destination. The majority of people living in America can't afford an extended vacation to Mexico, so to suggest illegals can is pure idiocy. Who's going to pay for it? And why?

maybe. but then the majority of people living in america are either natives or here legally, bill. if it's determined that illegals need to go home and come back, it's gonna be up to them to pay for it.

That's clever. Pay for a trip they don't need, with money they don't have. This is obviously not going to happen. So what then? Then we call them criminals for not complying with a new law that requires them to spend money they don't have on a trip they don't need. That sounds like a solution to you?

DontTreadOnMe wrote:

america is first and foremost a nation of laws. so, i really am surprised by your position on this stuff, bill. you were one of the people who were so quick to say "why do you hate america ?" over the last few years. what gives?

not attacking you, just puzzled, dude. :wink:

I don't see a contradiction. Our current immigration laws include the moronic inclusion that you must leave the country to alter your immigration status. It didn't make sense when it was written, it doesn't make sense today, and it damned sure wouldn't make any sense to apply it to 12 to 20 million more people who can't afford it. Who benefits from this idiocy? The travel industry? Hence, I oppose it by exercising my freedom of speech and yesterday even my right to assemble. I also oppose our moronic policies against drugs, gambling, prostitution and euthanasia... so what? Where do you see a contradiction?

0 Replies

Someone recently made an interesting observation. Those who are pro-illegals are the corporations, and wealthy owners and officers, that are making a lot of money off of the illegals. These people then leave it to the public sector to pay the cost of this illegal invasion. The public sector, of course, is composed of the ordinary taxpayers of this country.

0 Replies

Bull Advocate!

I am not a corporation, nor an owner, nor an officer nor wealthy for that matter.

I am a progressive liberal. And, progressive liberals throughout history, on many issues, have put compassion and human rights in front of strict enforcement of the law and nationalism.

Many in the immigrants rights movement, these are the people you saw marching yesterday, are working class American citizens.

0 Replies

I've seen lots and lots of posts (no facts) about how illegals cost the american citizen taxpayer $$$ because they are here. To this I say "show me the facts or shut up."

0 Replies

SOME FACTS

SOME MORE FACTS

HERE TOO

HERITAGE FOUNDATION

0 Replies

Facts by "the Federation for American Immigration Reform, a Washington, D.C.-based group that promotes stricter immigration policies", "the Center for Immigration Studies (CIS), a Washington-based group that supports more immigration restrictions" and by Robert Hector from the Heritage Foundation quoted in the NRO.

Totally convincing neutral facts. Thanks.

0 Replies

I didn't comment on whether they were neutral. They are facts however. I am quite sure if they are incorrect facts, somebody will provide rebuttal from a neutral source.

0 Replies

You are so right, Foxfyre.

I just looked up how much my ´forthcoming visit to the USA will cost you as taxpayer and US-citizen (Homeland Security, customs, airport facilities, infrastructure etc).

I feel deeply ashamed. Embarrassed

0 Replies

Showing facts that illegals cost money doesn't prove they present a net cost. I started to (but decided not to bother because I know Fox will just bob and weave anyway) rebut the sources, that I suspect once again she didn't read. Anyway, the first says they cost California 9 billion, but then goes on to explain 2/3s of their 28 billion dollar AG industry (alone) is staffed by illegals. Isolated facts make for pretty crappy conclusions. Basic economics suggest an extra 12 to 20 million contributors to our economy is probably not a bad thing. Bigots will no doubt continue to ignore the contributions in favor of attempting to paint their presence in a negative light. No surprise there.

0 Replies

ebrown_p wrote:

Bull Advocate!

I am not a corporation, nor an owner, nor an officer nor wealthy for that matter.

I am a progressive liberal. And, progressive liberals throughout history, on many issues, have put compassion and human rights in front of strict enforcement of the law and nationalism.

Many in the immigrants rights movement, these are the people you saw marching yesterday, are working class American citizens.

I was speaking in generalities. Moreover, the polls support my view. But I guess you, and a lot of other good people, have been duped.

Your statement reminds me of those of MM, who might say, e.g., the nation's economy is good because he had a good year.

0 Replies

Advocate, I think it is you who has been duped... and there are basic contradictions in your position that suggest this.

First of all, you say you are against corporations, but your solution to this is to make life more difficult for workers.

The fact remains that any workers who don't have rights (and can be exploited) hurts wages and conditions for all workers. This is the whole idea behind unions. Workers that are separated and pitted against each other can be easily manipulated and exploited.

0 Replies

Browne
As long as you and people like you continue to protect and advocate citizenship for the illegals arriving daily from Mexico this smuggling will continue. Shall we offer them amnesty as soon as they successfully make it across or wait a few years and start crying about breaking up families?

House held 160 illegal immigrants
So-called "stash houses" or "drop houses" are all over Phoenix, Arizona. These are buildings that human smugglers use to hide illegal immigrants.

I've come here to meet Alonzo Pena, the special agent in charge of the Immigration and Customs Enforcement office in Phoenix. We're about to take a drive around the city to see some of these stash houses.

But first, Agent Pena shows me a city map with little red dots showing where these houses are located. The map is peppered with so many dots that it looks like it's been used in target practice at a firing range. In the first four months of this year, authorities say they have discovered nearly 80 new stash houses.

This highlights a disturbing trend in how human smugglers, or "coyotes," as they are often called, are operating these days. Coyotes are no longer just a border phenomenon, according to federal law enforcement authorities. They're organized like drug cartels and getting more viscious and lethal. And they're moving further north into the United States. (In Houston, one person was killed and two others wounded in a recent midday shootout; federal authorities say rival coyotes may have been fighting over a carload of illegal immigrants.)

Agent Pena says these smugglers fight each other over "loads" of immigrants mostly because there's big money at stake. Coyotes charge Mexican nationals a $1,500 smuggling fee, according to law enforcement officials and immigration activists. For people south of Mexico, the fee ranges from $3,000 to $5,000. Of course, coyotes will often "renegotiate" later, and that's when things can get really ugly.

Agent Pena and I pull up to a beautiful stucco home with a Spanish tile roof. You would never suspect the house was used by smugglers. "I wouldn't mind living in a house like this," Pena says. His agents found 160 illegal immigrants stashed in this house.

-- By Ed Lavandera, CNN Correspondent

0 Replies

ebrown_p wrote:

Advocate, I think it is you who has been duped... and there are basic contradictions in your position that suggest this.

First of all, you say you are against corporations, but your solution to this is to make life more difficult for workers.

The fact remains that any workers who don't have rights (and can be exploited) hurts wages and conditions for all workers. This is the whole idea behind unions. Workers that are separated and pitted against each other can be easily manipulated and exploited.

You must be desperate to so misquote me. I never indicated I was against corporations or unions. In fact, the opposite is true. However, either of these could be wrong occasionally.

0 Replies

Advocate wrote:

ebrown_p wrote:
Bull Advocate!

I am not a corporation, nor an owner, nor an officer nor wealthy for that matter.

I am a progressive liberal. And, progressive liberals throughout history, on many issues, have put compassion and human rights in front of strict enforcement of the law and nationalism.

Many in the immigrants rights movement, these are the people you saw marching yesterday, are working class American citizens.

I was speaking in generalities. Moreover, the polls support my view. But I guess you, and a lot of other good people, have been duped.

Your statement reminds me of those of MM, who might say, e.g., the nation's economy is good because he had a good year.

Just like I dont think the nations economy is bad if you had a bad year.

As for illegal immigrants and citizenship,I have a solution.

When they arew caught,the males between 18 and 40 get put on a bus.
They are taken to army basic training and given a choice.
They can serve a four year hitch,and when they get out they are citizens.

If they refuse,they get deported.

As for the illegals already in this country,we offer them the same thing,with one exception.
If they refuse,that starts a 90 day clock.
During that 90 days,they need to sell whatever assets they might have,because on day 91 we are going to seize ALL of their assets and deport them.

0 Replies

What should be done about illegal immigration?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know