We have illegal immigrants living among us here in Texas. We like them and greatly appreciate their contribution.
Like them? They are lawbreakers who have violated multiple laws including entering this country illegally, ID theft, working illegally, driving illegally, using phony or stolen SSNs, income tax evasion, and a host of other crimes. The number of criminal aliens in federal prisons is 55,000 (FY 2010) or 27% of the total federal inmate population. GAO estimates that the criminal aliens had an average of 7 arrests, 65 percent were arrested at least once for an immigration offense, and about 50 percent were arrested at least once for a drug offense. Immigration, drugs, and traffic violations accounted for about 50 percent of arrest offenses.
Nationawide, there were about 296,000 aliens in state and local jails including 25,000 for homicide. In Texas, the number is around 40,000. In FY 2008 there were 10,000 criminal aliens in the Texas state prison system with 900 being held for homicide. The incarceration costs are in the billions of dollars nationwide. Since 9/11 an estimated 50,000 Americans have been killed by criminal aliens.
We want to provide an assimilation process for qualified people, and must somehow face the realities of the situation.
We have a legal immigration system that brings in 1.2 million legal immigrants a year--more than the intake of all the other countries in the world combined. There are currently 4.5 million intending immigrants waiting overseas for their turn to enter, some for many years based on the various categories of immigration. They have completed all the paperwork, background investigations, paid the fees, had physicals, etc. Immigration to America is a privilege, not a right. We decide who comes in using a legal process. We don't allow people to self-select by entering illegally. It is an issue of the Rule of Law, the very foundation of this Republic, and a matter of fairness.
But illegality must be punished appropriately. And, we should make a practical distinction between those who are here only to work, and those who are here to work and to integrate into American society. Here is my plan.
We have immigration laws that cover illegal entry and the punishment required. In sum, it is deportation. There is no distinction among lawbreakers who come here just to work or to integrate into American society.
Non U.S. citizens could apply for a Work Visa whether they reside in a foreign country or are already in America illegally—no distinction. (Realistically, why should place of residence be an impediment to application?) Aliens residing in the U.S. have no priority over applicants from outside the U.S. However, they can be penalized.
We have an extensive system of work visas now. There are approximately 2 million people here at any one time on temporary work visas. They must go through a series of checks and be sponsored by an employer.
The idea that lawbreakers can enter illegally and then apply for work permits is ludicrous. And if they are not given any preference over those who applied legally overseas, what do you do with them while they are waiting in line? Are they allowed to stay here while their temporary work visa is being processed? We have 23 million Americans looking for fulltime employment. Illegal aliens already hold about 8 million jobs. We are bringing in 125,000 legal foreign workers A MONTH now.
To be receive the Work Visa they must meet certain basic criteria of literacy and a clean record. Those who apply for the Work Visa as illegal aliens residing in the U.S. and are accepted would pay a tax penalty over several years, probably as an income tax penalty. So they do not get off scott free as in an amnesty program.
Allowing people to stay and work here is an amnesty. You can't change the meaning of words. And what kind of message does this send to those who are applying for work visas the rigtht way? Or to people contemplating entering the US illegally and then apply for a work visa? When you reward something, you get more of it. We had a one-time amnesty in 1986. The USG estimated that one million would apply but the true number turned out to be 2.7 million. It was a process rife with fraud. It was supposed to solve the illegal alien problem. Now we have 12 to 20 million illegals waiting for a second amnesty.
Would your plan allow for these workers to bring in their families? How do you determine if they have a clean record--just in the US or back in their home country? We have an estimated 2 million criminal aliens in the US. What is their incentive to apply for a work visa?
Further, they would be paying into the system rather than merely sucking benefits from the system. All those who have a Work Visa will also have a long term path to citizenship if they work toward that goal.
Are you suggesting that work permits are now part of the permanent immigration quota? How many legal immigrants a year do you want to bring into this country? What are the long term impacts on US national identity, electoral politics, culture, etc.? These are human beings, not units of labor. By paying into the system, I gather you mean SS and Medicare. Paying in means they will be entitled to benefits along with their families. Will they qualify for Obamacare and Medicaid?
The U.S. adds one international migrant (net) every 36 seconds. Immigrants account for one in 8 U.S. residents, the highest level in more than 90 years. In 1970 it was one in 21; in 1980 it was one in 16; and in 1990 it was one in 13. In a decade, it will be one in 7, the highest it has been in our history. And by 2050, one in 5 residents of the U.S. will be foreign-born.
Currently, 1.6 million legal and illegal immigrants settle in the country each year; 350,000 immigrants leave each year, resulting in a net immigration of 1.25 million. Since 1970, the U.S. population has increased from 203 million to 310 million, i.e., over 100 million. In the next 40 years, the population will increase by an additional 130 million to 440 million. Three-quarters of the increase in our population since 1970 and the projected increase will be the result of immigration.
This is not amnesty and enforcement would be rigorous.
It is an amnesty. Amnesty, from the same Greek root as "amnesia," forgives past crimes and removes them from the record for future purposes. In the context of immigration, amnesty is commonly defined as granting legal status to a group of individuals unlawfully present in a country. It overlooks the alien's illegal entry and ongoing illegal presence and creates a new legal status that allows the recipient to live and work in the country.
The Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986: The textbook example of an amnesty. The 1986 law's path to citizenship was not automatic. The legislation stipulated several requirements to receive amnesty, including payment of application fees, acquisition of English-language skills, understanding of American civics, a medical exam, and registration for military service. Individuals convicted of a felony or three misdemeanors were ineligible. No one disputes that this act provided amnesty.
Employers who hire people who do not have the Work Visa are fined. Those workers caught here who have not at least filed the application for the Work Visa can be deported and perhaps become subject to penalties in other ways more harshly than now. Those people caught here without having filed an application for the Work Visa are no longer eligible to apply.
The 1986 amnesty also required strict enforcement including penalizing employers who hired illegal aliens. We have the E-Verify system that was upheld by SCOTUS. AZ has mandatory E-Verify and it is working. We just need to make E-Verify mandatory nationwide.
Undocumented workers who have filed the paperwork to get into the system would then be documented and trackable to be sure that they are virtuous. To file the application no requirement of literacy is necessary, but to receive the Work Visa they must have a minimum level of English proficiency. If they do not have an adequate education and English skills, they would be required to go to night school at their own expense. (Private institutions might fund this education.) This system therefore moves these people along into our society or discriminates against them if they do not participate in the path to integrate fully.The 1986 amnesty had such a requirement. One can just imagine the administrative nightmare to enforce such a system. More government at a time when we are bankrupt. Would you eliminate the various laws requiring ballots in languages other than English? Right now, 25% of the adult legal immigrants lack even a high school degree. Each year we are importing hundreds of thousands of high school dropoouts who will be a net drain on our system to the tune of about $20,000 a year. 57% of immigrant headed households with children are on at least one major welfare program.
• Citizenship is no longer automatically conferred upon children born in the U.S. to non-citizen parents.
I agree, but ending birthright citizenship will be a long legal slog that will probably require a Constitutional amendment after all is said and done. First, Congress would have to pass a law changing it--no small hurdle given the fate of many bills that have tried to do it.
• Illegal aliens do not qualify for taxpayer funded social services.
At the federal level they don't now, but their Amcit children do. Many states, e.g., CA do provide such benefits.
• Hospitals are not required to give care to non-citizens.
SCOTUS says they are for emergency treatment. In a practical sense, how can an ER turn away someone who needs treatment, especially if it is life-threatening? Far better we have fewer illegal here, the source of the problem. The same holds true for schools that must accept the foreign born children of illegal aliens (Plyler vs Doe)
• A fence along the southern U.S. border should be built
Agree we need to secure our border, but that only solves part of the problem with illegal aliens. 40% of the illegal alien population came here legally and overstayed their visas. We need implement a system to track them and deport them when their visas expire. We have about 50 million visitors a year. There are over 900,000 foreign students in our universities.
• Applicants would be accepted only from approved countries that provide us necessary information about the candidates.
Would that include China? And we also take in hundreds of thousands of refugees and asylum seekers.
Let me give you an example of a man I know. He was brought here by his parents when he was 9 years old. He graduated from high school with good marks. He married an American girl and they have 3 kids. He would like to go into the dental field but because of his undocumented status his tuition would be higher than he can afford. He would like to become a citizen but he is stuck in no-man’s land. This is the kind of person we want here. But the current system has shut him off.
First, we have ways to deal with individual cases. What Obama is doing with his backdoor amnesty Dream Act is a blanket amnesty for anyone brought here while a "child" up to the age of 30. 1.8 million will receive legal status and work permits.
What about someone living out of state? Should he be granted in-state tuition? Or the native born citizen who is living in the state and can't get into the university or college because an illegal alien in occupying it? There are other schools that the person you mentioned could to that are out of state. Or he could work illegally as many of them do until he has enough money to go to school. I thought that Texas had in-state tutition for illegal aliens, at least according to Rick Perry.
My plan may not satisfy everybody. Details would have to be worked out. But it comes to grip with reality. It honors the law. It is faithful to our founding concepts and our natural instincts of compassion.
LOL. No, it violates our laws and is a slap in the face of the people who came here legally. It just invites more illegal immigration. And there is a real question of exactly how many immigrants, legal and illegal, that this country can absorb. Immigrants are depressing American wages and becoming a bigger and bigger drag on our social welfare system.
The number of legal immigrants we bring in has no correlation with our jobs and skill needs. In the decade ending in 2010, 13.9 million immigrants entered the US, the highest number in our history. During that same period we had a net loss of jobs.
Here are factoids on the real impact of immigration, not the romanticized version that is perpetuated by our schools and the MSM;
Poverty
• In 2010, 23 percent of immigrants and their U.S.-born children (under 18) lived in poverty, compared to 13.5 percent of natives and their children. Immigrants and their children accounted for one-fourth of all persons in poverty.
• The children of immigrants account for one-third of all children in poverty.
• Among the top sending countries, poverty is highest for immigrants and their young children from Mexico (35 percent), Honduras (34 percent), and Guatemala (31 percent); and lowest for those from Germany (7 percent), India (6 percent), and the Philippines (6 percent).
Health Insurance Coverage
• In 2010, 29 percent of immigrants and their U.S.-born children (under 18) lacked health insurance, compared to 13.8 percent of natives and their children.
• New immigrants and their U.S.-born children account for two-thirds of the increase in the uninsured since 2000.
Public Schools
• There are 10.4 million students from immigrant households in public schools, accounting for one in five public school students. Of these students, 78 percent speak a language other than English at home.
• Overall, one in four public school students now speaks a language other than English at home.
Housing Overcrowding
• In 2010, 13 percent of immigrant households were overcrowded, compared to 2 percent of native households.
• Immigrant households account for half of all overcrowded households.
Educational Attainment
• Of adult immigrants (25 to 65), 28 percent have not completed high school, compared to 7 percent of natives.
• The share of immigrants (25 to 65) with at least a bachelor’s degree is somewhat lower than that of natives — 29 vs. 33 percent.
• The large share of immigrants with relatively little education is one of the primary reasons for their lower socioeconomic status, not their legal status or an unwillingness to work.
• At the same time immigration added significantly to the number of less-educated workers, the share of young, less-educated natives holding a job declined significantly. The decline began well before the current economic downturn.
Progress Over Time
• Many immigrants make significant progress the longer they live in the country. However, on average even immigrants who have lived in the United States for 20 years have not come close to closing the gap with natives.
• The poverty rate of adult immigrants who have lived in the United States for 20 years is 50 percent higher than that of adult natives.
• The share of adult immigrants who have lived in the United States for 20 years who lack health insurance is twice that of adult natives.
• The share of households headed by an immigrant who has lived in the United States for 20 years using one or more welfare programs is nearly twice that of native-headed households.
• The share of households headed by an immigrant who has lived in the United States for 20 years that are owner occupied is 22 percent lower than that of native households.
I have a real plan if you are interested. Your amnesty plan would be a diaster for this country.
Any legislation that legalizes the status of those who broke our laws by entering our country illegally and allows them to stay and work here is amnesty. We must not only prevent the Democrats and some moderate Republicans from hijacking the meaning of the word amnesty, but the public must be made aware about the true impact of an amnesty. The Heritage Foundation concluded that the cost of amnesty would be $2.6 trillion just for increased entitlement program costs. And the number of additional LEGAL immigrants who would join those who were the recipients of amnesty through chain migration, i.e., family reunification, would approach 70 million over a 20-year period, assuming there are only 12 million illegal aliens. We cannot assimilate such numbers. An amnesty would destroy the United States of America with the stroke of a pen.