Amnesty? What amnesty? Critics substitute fear for facts

[one...two...tree 2,762]

I'm not going to drag this out any further, but I just don't see any well thought out, reasonable solution other than offering temporary work visas. The idea that you propose will never be implemented by our Federal Gov't. - I'd bet you a six pack on that.

i'm sure nothing here will be implemented. after all, the big business which you've been all up in arms about is in bed with the government over this.

I agree, that's a big factor. Granting temporary work visas could actually prevent further exploitation.

And since exploitation is what illegal migration is really all about, if work visas will indeed prevent expoitation (which, in fact, they will not as they will create a class of people totally dependent on their employer) then no number of work visas will ever curb illegal migration. What an amnesty will do for sure - as we have seen - is trigger more illegal migration. In 2025 or thereabout, we'll be having debates abouts legalizing 30-50 million illegals because we can't send them home and for sure then the government is going to get really, really serious about enforcing the laws on the books and cracking down on this, that and the other.

How naive one must be to buy into the same ####### over and over again...

If we established an ongoing temporary work visa program for low skilled laborers, then those who come here for work aren't doing it illegally. You're assuming that those who come here want to stay here permanently. Most of them send money back home - and many maintain that home. It's a misnomer that Mexican's hate their country so much, they want to abandon all ties to come and live in this country - again, they are motivated economically.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Every discussion of illegal immigrants that we have seems to get reduced down to simplistic, emotionally driven answers rather than well thought out solutions. And everytime a rational solution is offered, the argument goes back to, "they don't deserve to be here." That's when all chances of having a reasonable discussion fly out the door. If people want to drive these discussions solely on that slogan, then it's fruitless to continue this discussion.

You confuse the refusal to capitulate and surrender to a lawless crowd with being closed off to a reasonable discussion on this issue. Amnesty is not the answer to the problem but rather makes the problem a bigger one - we've learned that over the course of the last 20 years. Most of us have.

[Donna A 4]

so when the temporary visa expires they just pick up and go home by themselves? no...they just stay here illegally again.

if given US citizenship then they no longer need to work low paying jobs because now they dont have to.

while here on temp. visa's they have more anchor babies...are they going to go home? no.

this is a loose/loose situation.

good by illegals. saudi arabia ships them out...it works for them why cant it work for us.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Every discussion of illegal immigrants that we have seems to get reduced down to simplistic, emotionally driven answers rather than well thought out solutions. And everytime a rational solution is offered, the argument goes back to, "they don't deserve to be here." That's when all chances of having a reasonable discussion fly out the door. If people want to drive these discussions solely on that slogan, then it's fruitless to continue this discussion.

You confuse the refusal to capitulate and surrender to a lawless crowd with being closed off to a reasonable discussion on this issue. Amnesty is not the answer to the problem but rather makes the problem a bigger one - we've learned that over the course of the last 20 years. Most of us have.

I would like to believe that most people understand that there are gray areas within our laws and that not all issues pertaining to legal matters is black and white.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

I'm not going to drag this out any further, but I just don't see any well thought out, reasonable solution other than offering temporary work visas. The idea that you propose will never be implemented by our Federal Gov't. - I'd bet you a six pack on that.

i'm sure nothing here will be implemented. after all, the big business which you've been all up in arms about is in bed with the government over this.

I agree, that's a big factor. Granting temporary work visas could actually prevent further exploitation.

And since exploitation is what illegal migration is really all about, if work visas will indeed prevent expoitation (which, in fact, they will not as they will create a class of people totally dependent on their employer) then no number of work visas will ever curb illegal migration. What an amnesty will do for sure - as we have seen - is trigger more illegal migration. In 2025 or thereabout, we'll be having debates abouts legalizing 30-50 million illegals because we can't send them home and for sure then the government is going to get really, really serious about enforcing the laws on the books and cracking down on this, that and the other.

How naive one must be to buy into the same ####### over and over again...

If we established an ongoing temporary work visa program for low skilled laborers, then those who come here for work aren't doing it illegally. You're assuming that those who come here want to stay here permanently. Most of them send money back home - and many maintain that home. It's a misnomer that Mexican's hate their country so much, they want to abandon all ties to come and live in this country - again, they are motivated economically.

Presumably, you're talking about the same people that are here illegally that would, all of a sudden, follow the law somehow. You know as well as I do that no number of work visas will ever satisfy the appetite out there. Those that can't get one will come either way, as they always have, knowing that after x years, they will be rewarded for doing whatever they felt they wanted to do regardless of what the law says they can or cannot do. Rather than being the land of the free and the home of the brave, America will soon be known as the land of the fools that reward lawless aliens.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Every discussion of illegal immigrants that we have seems to get reduced down to simplistic, emotionally driven answers rather than well thought out solutions. And everytime a rational solution is offered, the argument goes back to, "they don't deserve to be here." That's when all chances of having a reasonable discussion fly out the door. If people want to drive these discussions solely on that slogan, then it's fruitless to continue this discussion.

You confuse the refusal to capitulate and surrender to a lawless crowd with being closed off to a reasonable discussion on this issue. Amnesty is not the answer to the problem but rather makes the problem a bigger one - we've learned that over the course of the last 20 years. Most of us have.

I would like to believe that most people understand that there are gray areas within our laws and that not all issues pertaining to legal matters is black and white.

What gray areas are you referring to? The deportation orders that illegal aliens have evaded? Maybe that's why these folks evaded the orders because the courts have really not meant for them to actually leave. Are you drinking this early in the morning, Steve?

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Every discussion of illegal immigrants that we have seems to get reduced down to simplistic, emotionally driven answers rather than well thought out solutions. And everytime a rational solution is offered, the argument goes back to, "they don't deserve to be here." That's when all chances of having a reasonable discussion fly out the door. If people want to drive these discussions solely on that slogan, then it's fruitless to continue this discussion.

You confuse the refusal to capitulate and surrender to a lawless crowd with being closed off to a reasonable discussion on this issue. Amnesty is not the answer to the problem but rather makes the problem a bigger one - we've learned that over the course of the last 20 years. Most of us have.

I would like to believe that most people understand that there are gray areas within our laws and that not all issues pertaining to legal matters is black and white.

What gray areas are you referring to? The deportation orders that illegal aliens have evaded? Maybe that's why these folks evaded the orders because the courts have really not meant for them to actually leave. Are you drinking this early in the morning, Steve?

No, but I'm feeling dizzy with these circular arguments.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Every discussion of illegal immigrants that we have seems to get reduced down to simplistic, emotionally driven answers rather than well thought out solutions. And everytime a rational solution is offered, the argument goes back to, "they don't deserve to be here." That's when all chances of having a reasonable discussion fly out the door. If people want to drive these discussions solely on that slogan, then it's fruitless to continue this discussion.

You confuse the refusal to capitulate and surrender to a lawless crowd with being closed off to a reasonable discussion on this issue. Amnesty is not the answer to the problem but rather makes the problem a bigger one - we've learned that over the course of the last 20 years. Most of us have.

I would like to believe that most people understand that there are gray areas within our laws and that not all issues pertaining to legal matters is black and white.

What gray areas are you referring to? The deportation orders that illegal aliens have evaded? Maybe that's why these folks evaded the orders because the courts have really not meant for them to actually leave. Are you drinking this early in the morning, Steve?

No, but I'm feeling dizzy with these circular arguments.

Then quit making them.

[Caladan 19]

With the current number of judges we have authorized to sign deportation orders, it would take roughly 72 years to deport everyone here illegally. Do the math (courtesy of a friend):

"Even the immigration hawks are only willing to shell out $ for fences, border patrol agents, and prisons, but not, say, to do anything about the fact that we have 230-odd immigration judges who are supposed to sign off on every deportation in America other than an "expedited removal" of someone caught at a border or port of entry. Let's see, 12 million divided by 230 = 52174 cases per judge. Let's say you deal with an average of 3 a day per judge (a little less than the current goal--but one that it is only possible to ever meet because of the number of people who no-show for their hearings & get ordered deported in absentia). Okay, so that leaves 17391 work days per judge, divided by approximately 240 work days per year per federal employee, equals....72 years per judge to deal with the backlog of cases if immigration services rounded up everyone tomorrow."

"Round 'em up, deport 'em, ban 'em" is about as realistic as "let's solve the national debt by praying for the magical My Litlte Ponies of wealth."

[one...two...tree 2,762]

With the current number of judges we have authorized to sign deportation orders, it would take roughly 72 years to deport everyone here illegally. Do the math (courtesy of a friend):

"Even the immigration hawks are only willing to shell out $ for fences, border patrol agents, and prisons, but not, say, to do anything about the fact that we have 230-odd immigration judges who are supposed to sign off on every deportation in America other than an "expedited removal" of someone caught at a border or port of entry. Let's see, 12 million divided by 230 = 52174 cases per judge. Let's say you deal with an average of 3 a day per judge (a little less than the current goal--but one that it is only possible to ever meet because of the number of people who no-show for their hearings & get ordered deported in absentia). Okay, so that leaves 17391 work days per judge, divided by approximately 240 work days per year per federal employee, equals....72 years per judge to deal with the backlog of cases if immigration services rounded up everyone tomorrow."

"Round 'em up, deport 'em, ban 'em" is about as realistic as "let's solve the national debt by praying for the magical My Litlte Ponies of wealth."

Thank you...I was starting to question my sanity.

[Caladan 19]

Deportation's the right answer only if it's done immediately. It wouldn't even be a humanitarian issue if, say, the penalty for working illegally was that after three weeks in the U.S., you were caught and shipped home. It's what to do with someone who's been here for years and years that's the question.

And while we could increase the number of judges a hundredfold, and quintuple the resources ICE has for chasing down people, and maybe institute a national ID card, both financially and politically, it's too high a price to pay for me. I don't want my taxes to skyrocket to deport eleven million people. I don't want to live in a society where I have to carry ID to conduct business. (This is America, dammit.) I don't want that many government agents swarming around me and C. around every step of AOS (after all, any immigration change hits the law-abiding people harder.)

Some sort of 'amnesty', though every politician avoids that word, is pretty much the only way. Make 'em pay a fine to get a two-year renewable work permit, and let them adjust status on their own after five years or so. We get the money to finance it from the fees and fines instead of pretty much a sunk cost. Any otherwise inadmissible person should be deported. And here on out, we should work to secure the border or eliminate the desire for people to come here.

[prpplague 0]

over whether giving them temporary work visas is granting them amnesty - that's at the heart of the argument here.

As for deportation:

- Aside from the costs, how do you round up 11 plus million people and deport them? What airplanes? Whose airplanes? Are you thinking this would be some military operation? Could our current military handle such an operation? Where are you going to put them? What about children? Do you separate them from the parents?

I can't believe that reasonably intelligent Americans can't see past the screen of emotions to recognize just what deportation would mean.

one at a time! every time one gets pulled over for a traffic violation, every time they show up at work sites, every time they go to send money back to their country of origin. it doesn't have to be done all at once. back in 1942, the federal government was able to round up 120,000 japanese americans in just a matter of weeks. shouldn't be that hard for the federal government 60+ years later in the age of computer technology with expanded communcation lines to coordinate monthly "shipments" of 120,000 illegals back to their country of origin.

hate to burst that bubble, but back then the aclu wasn't as powerful

my comment about the japanese americans was not a "right or wrong" judgement of what occured, simply stating that over 60 years ago the government was able to round up 120,000 people in a matter of weeks. there is no reason that this couldn't be done once a month or even once every three months. its not like the police catch every person that speeds or that the IRS catches every person who cheats on their taxes. it's done one case at a time. get as many as you can, and move on. everyone treats it like you'd need to deal 12 million people at once. no reason they can't say, " ok if you are here illegally, we are giving you a free pass to leave in the next 90 days, after that we are coming for you, it might not be the first month or second month, but we will eventually get you"

after the first four or five round ups, i think the illegals would start getting the picture.

too many people believe that there is a magic bullet that solves all the immigration issues, instead its gotta be a coordinated attack of many solutions at once.

A) make it easier to "do the right thing" by getting a visa legally

B) enforce the laws that currently exist by deporting illegals, i.e. allow local/state police to question a person immigration status

C) punish those who help illegals stay here, be it landlords or business owners

D) increased protection and inspection at the borders i.e. follow up on visa overstays

without each aspect of the problem being addressed, the problem continues:

if getting a legal visa is too difficult, a person might weigh the consquences entering the US illegally.

[natty bumppo 297]

this guy needs to let the dead issue ... dead

http://www.click2houston.com/politics/13472884/detail.html

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

With the current number of judges we have authorized to sign deportation orders, it would take roughly 72 years to deport everyone here illegally. Do the math (courtesy of a friend):

"Even the immigration hawks are only willing to shell out $ for fences, border patrol agents, and prisons, but not, say, to do anything about the fact that we have 230-odd immigration judges who are supposed to sign off on every deportation in America other than an "expedited removal" of someone caught at a border or port of entry. Let's see, 12 million divided by 230 = 52174 cases per judge. Let's say you deal with an average of 3 a day per judge (a little less than the current goal--but one that it is only possible to ever meet because of the number of people who no-show for their hearings & get ordered deported in absentia). Okay, so that leaves 17391 work days per judge, divided by approximately 240 work days per year per federal employee, equals....72 years per judge to deal with the backlog of cases if immigration services rounded up everyone tomorrow."

"Round 'em up, deport 'em, ban 'em" is about as realistic as "let's solve the national debt by praying for the magical My Litlte Ponies of wealth."

Thank you...I was starting to question my sanity.

I still am. Questioning your sanity, that is.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

With the current number of judges we have authorized to sign deportation orders, it would take roughly 72 years to deport everyone here illegally. Do the math (courtesy of a friend):

"Even the immigration hawks are only willing to shell out $ for fences, border patrol agents, and prisons, but not, say, to do anything about the fact that we have 230-odd immigration judges who are supposed to sign off on every deportation in America other than an "expedited removal" of someone caught at a border or port of entry. Let's see, 12 million divided by 230 = 52174 cases per judge. Let's say you deal with an average of 3 a day per judge (a little less than the current goal--but one that it is only possible to ever meet because of the number of people who no-show for their hearings & get ordered deported in absentia). Okay, so that leaves 17391 work days per judge, divided by approximately 240 work days per year per federal employee, equals....72 years per judge to deal with the backlog of cases if immigration services rounded up everyone tomorrow."

"Round 'em up, deport 'em, ban 'em" is about as realistic as "let's solve the national debt by praying for the magical My Litlte Ponies of wealth."

Thank you...I was starting to question my sanity.

I still am. Questioning your sanity, that is.

Mom always said you were the emotional one.