au1929 wrote: OK let's hear it from the left. The editorial writer is a bigot as are all the congress people are against giving amnesty to people who criminally entered the US. And believe that the US as a sovereign nation has the right and responsibility to determine who should enter this nation and how.
There is no doubt that some accommodation will be made for those presently in the US. However IMO they should never be accorded citizenship and the right to vote. .
I didn't hear cause to call him a bigot, but I'll grant you some idiocy in his opinion. He seems to think the United States Government will do a less competent job of separating the criminals/terrorists than the Department That Doesn't Exist is doing now. With Amnesty; on would assume that virtually every non-criminal non-terrorist will show up and be counted... leaving only the really bad guys unaccounted for. Now imagine you are the employer who can quickly and accurately identify and report via "new hire reporting" (which already exists) every immigrant you hire. How do those who haven't signed up get hired now? Even the least scrupulous of employers are unlikely to purposely hire an undocumented worker when:
a) The vast majority of ALL potential employees are now documented.
b) He would have to know that the employee in question MUST have something to hide.
I do, however, agree that the bill would be a disaster. Anyone who can't afford a $5,000 fine and a vacation to nowhere they don't need; would end up in the same position they're in now... and that's got to be a large percentage of the illegals. I could understand back taxes being charged, in cases where they haven't already been paid (which I believe to be the majority of the time), but only by way of garnishing future wages.
As for amnesty for bogus documents; he needs to get a clue:
A. It is precisely these documents that allowed them to pay taxes.
B. If that isn't forgiven; a huge segment will be forced to remain underground which would defeat the purpose of the bill in the first place. If security is the issue; any bill written has to be doable for the vast majority or there is no reason to expect them to cooperate. Hence; the only logical thing to do is give a pass to everyone who isn't a security risk; so the
real security risks will stand out in their noncompliance.
