In Congress, a harder line on illegal immigrants

[TigerTeddyBear 26]

Sounds like something straight out of the movies. You should consider living somewhere nicer, your current neighborhood sounds like a dump.

Sounds like something straight out of the movies. You should consider living somewhere nicer, your current neighborhood sounds like a dump.

[TigerTeddyBear 26]

I live where I live. I am not ashamed of it. It is not a "neighborhood". It's A SMALL TOWN IN TEXAS. Sounds like you wouldn't last 5 minutes here. I may be wrong.

[wshc 46]

Look, bub... your black and white summary of my political persuasion is convenient, but flawed. I am a part of VJ because, like you, I have a immigrant loved one who I am trying to spend my life with. I live in a small town in TX and have had my run ins with people who hate my wife because she is a LEGAL immigrant. Fortunately, I also have family and friends who go to the mat for us Everytime. There is nothing like walking into some place with my Asian wife and having a group of drunken rednecks try to "discuss" the ramifications of her being here. Your support for the republicans is equally flawed. I am no supporter of amnesty and, like I said, I agree with much of what you said. I don't subscribe to one political party. There are scum. Then there are lawyers. Then there are politicians. I was just pointing out that in your rantings against the democrats in general, and the Dream act in particular, you left out the part where the other side stands. I have republican family members and friends who support LEGAL immigration, and I am sure there are republicans here who do. In my experience, they are in the minority of their party.

First thing, my name is not bub...

Nothing personal..but as I said, Republicans support legal immigration. Don't confuse druken rednecks with the republican party as so many people do. As a mature Republican I wouldn't go somewhere that druken rednecks go if they are the type that insult other people. And as a mature republican I would (at least try to) kick their butt if they insulted my wife, (oops, my Ronald Reagan cowboy side showing there.)

[Ban Hammer 13,408]

I live where I live. I am not ashamed of it. It is not a "neighborhood". It's A SMALL TOWN IN TEXAS. Sounds like you wouldn't last 5 minutes here. I may be wrong.

you're about 5 miles from where my dad used to live - i've probably driven through there before but can't recall anything about it.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Ok, let's presume “I am ill informed”, it happens. Think about this using the information you already know about the immigration process and the USCIS and the Government in general.

LPR Status has to be earned. What does that mean? Does the person stay here "illegally" or using an intermittent status while that is being earned or taking place? If some temporary status is the case, then how is that fair? Why does the Government tell my wife of 26 years that she is not allowed in the country until her paperwork is finished which was done incorrectly because of an incompetent at USCIS? So we let the illegal stay here illegally while they earn some legal status, while my wife of 26 years, mother of our 7 US citizen children is not allowed entry to the country that she had been issued a Green Card from in 1990. (I will try to remain unemotional but you see I have a solid case for understanding the unfairness and stupidity of this system.)

During this six year period or gaining status they need to attend two years of college. Sound good. Think a little. How will they pay for this? Will they have to work to pay for this? If so, will they be working illegally to pay for this? Will they pay taxes and SS, without a legal SSN number? Will that then make them eligible for SS benefits even though they are not legally in the country yet? Will they be eligible for PELL Grants and financial assistance to pay for college? Who will fill out the paperwork? Will they have to use their parent’s names (as my child would) for the financial forms? Will that put their parents at risk of deportation then or will there be a status for parents that have students in status? What about the nightmare of out of state tuition? That is a road the feds don't even want to go down and are pushing off on the states. Why should USC's have to pay any more out of state tuition when these illegals in some flex status will not?

So they meet these requirements and then they are granted LPR. Why then do they need to be citizens? Fair question. If they do want to be citizens, then using the normal process is fine.

Add the layers of waivers and additional levels of status that will come out of this and the system will not be able to handle it. How about verification? One of the requirements is that the applicant had to enter the country before a certain age. How is that verified without putting the parents at risk, as well as proving the years of residency questions when it come to out of state tuition. The parents will be given a status that allows them to stay in the country. Nobody has mentioned that, but you know it will happen.

And up to age 35? They take a two year course at the community college and everyone here illegally will now be able to use an alternative system which is not available to others. It might be a Dream Act, but it is not a very fair act and it a huge INSULT to everyone in the system going about it legally and suffering the same pain from the waiting game.

It needs to be correctly thought to make it happen.

As part of the consideration of the DREAM act in 2010, the age cap was lowered to 29 (worth noting that the GOP sponsored version of Hatch / McCain had no age cap at all and passed the GOP controlled Senate Judiciary Committee of the 108th Congress by a 16-3 vote). Once meeting the education and/or military service requirements within the conditional period (and no, they would not be illegal in that period but they would not have an immigrant status either) they will be granted LPR if otherwise eligible. Once they're LPR's, they would have to be in that status for 5 years just like any other LPR before being eligible to apply for citizenship. This, interestingly, would be a different kind of citizenship as these citizens would not be able to petition for immigration benefits for family members for another 12 years. The DREAM Act does not address or grant any rights to the parents of the beneficiaries.

If you're in favor of the DREAM Act principally as you have stated previously, the version that the Senate of the 111th Congress considered was most certainly a lot more restrictive than any version of it ever put forth by the party you claim has your interest at heart. There's just no evidence to support the claim that the GOP is doing more right by you than the other side of the aisle on this issue. I don't really care whether or not they ever pass a DREAM Act. It seems right on the surface for those that have been brought here as minors and know this to be their home rather than their parents country. But there are questions - lots of questions - on how this would practically be done. If it is, fine. If it isn't, whatever. I have no horse in this race.

Edited December 28, 2010 by Mr. Big Dog

[wshc 46]

As part of the consideration of the DREAM act in 2010, the age cap was lowered to 29 (worth noting that the GOP sponsored version of Hatch / McCain had no age cap at all and passed the GOP controlled Senate Judiciary Committee of the 108th Congress by a 16-3 vote). usw...

Thanks for the additional information and clarification..as you descirbe, it does not sound too bad, but needs more fine tuning I think..

What concerns me personally, why would these people (applicants) be allowed to stay here under some kind of "not in status - status" but my wife is not. I just don't understand the unfairness of this system.

but like you said, I have no dog in this fight..if they can make it possible for these kids to remain in the US legally, (and I am against a different lower quality status, that is discrimination), then the politicians in Washington need to make it happen. It needs to be for the kids though, and not just for the votes.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Thanks for the additional information and clarification..as you descirbe, it does not sound too bad, but needs more fine tuning I think..

What concerns me personally, why would these people (applicants) be allowed to stay here under some kind of "not in status - status" but my wife is not. I just don't understand the unfairness of this system.

but like you said, I have no dog in this fight..if they can make it possible for these kids to remain in the US legally, (and I am against a different lower quality status, that is discrimination), then the politicians in Washington need to make it happen. It needs to be for the kids though, and not just for the votes.

I don't know your immigration issue but it does seem odd that your spouse of many years would have to wait outside the US for some formalities to be completed. Odd that your Congressperson isn't interested in quering your case with the USCIS. Your frustration is understandable.

My experience over the years has been that the USCIS process overall improved quite dramatically from when I first immigrated back in the 90's (what an ordeal that was) to when my wife immigrated in 2003/2004. I managed to get her over here within 4 months although it would take close to another year and a half for her to become a conditional LPR. Removing conditions two years later was fairly fast and her citizenship process was a breeze that I just couldn't believe - less than 3 months from filing the application to completing the interview. She would have had her ceremony within a 3 month window if it hadn't been for a planned trip of ours that had us out of town on the date of the ceremony that month. So she had her ceremony the following month. It was easy, fast and efficient. I remember citizenship applications taking a couple of years easy in the early 2000's and my application taking over 6 months (which was comparatively fast at the time) as recently as 2003.

So it ain't perfect but it sure has improved a great deal over the last decade.

Edited December 28, 2010 by Mr. Big Dog

[TigerTeddyBear 26]

A "mature independent" backs down from no man or group of men. But I am not about to fight 5 guys and put my wife at risk... either her safety or immigration status. As far as not going there, its my home town. I am known by, and know, everyone. ** those racist rednecks. If they really wanted to fight, I would not have had a choice.

[wshc 46]

I don't know your immigration issue but it does seem odd that your spouse of many years would have to wait outside the US for some formalities to be completed. Odd that your Congressperson isn't interested in quering your case with the USCIS. Your frustration is understandable.

My experience over the years has been that the USCIS process overall improved quite dramatically from when I first immigrated back in the 90's (what an ordeal that was) to when my wife immigrated in 2003/2004. I managed to get her over here within 4 months although it would take close to another year and a half for her to become a conditional LPR. Removing conditions two years later was fairly fast and her citizenship process was a breeze that I just couldn't believe - less than 3 months from filing the application to completing the interview. She would have had her ceremony within a 3 month window if it hadn't been for a planned trip of ours that had us out of town on the date of the ceremony that month. So she had her ceremony the following month. It was easy, fast and efficient. I remember citizenship applications taking a couple of years easy in the early 2000's and my application taking over 6 months (which was comparatively fast at the time) as recently as 2003.

So it ain't perfect but it sure has improved a great deal over the last decade.

It is a long boring story and a case of mistakes on our part based on information from USCIS and on mistakes on their part. The local office told us to do an I-90 to extend or renew her greencard, then that was denied because we were out of the country so long, then file I-130 and start new and the 800 number told us we could travel back to Germany in the summer, than upon reentry the gestapo CBP did not allow my wife to enter because the info that the 800 number told us was not in the computer, although I had a hard copy form the e-mail telling us she could travel. Now that I have been forced more or less to dive deeply in to this immigration stuff I see our mistakes, but the USCIS should have a human side and see there mistakes also. That is what the congressman could help with, but after working with his office for about 6 weeks, they told me there is nothing they could do to expedite the process because they can't move people up in the line. Again, my congressman is one of the main sponsors of the dream act, so what was that about moving people up in line?????

Glad your process went good for you though..

A "mature independent" backs down from no man or group of men. But I am not about to fight 5 guys and put my wife at risk... either her safety or immigration status. As far as not going there, its my home town. I am known by, and know, everyone. ** those racist rednecks. If they really wanted to fight, I would not have had a choice.

Smart man, sure you aren't a republican?