I agree that it would be sane - if they weren't already here. I don't see any way to establish control without, to some extent, their cooperation. The carrot is a work permit; the stick is that after that point (since most will apply for the work permit) the ones who have not applied, possibly because they have criminal records or possibly simply because they think they can get away with it, should be arrested, along with their employers. It will be a much smaller group, and easier to identify because the legal guest workers will have a new, definitive form of ID (I hope with biometric technology). I have a family member in the police in a Western city, and when they arrest someone there, the arrestee's pockets are stuffed with ID cards - some fake, and some genuine, obtained from states with lax standards.
Also, I think it's important to get Mexico to cooperate on criminal matters, on watching its own side of the border, etc. Some arm-twisting is in order, but that would be easier if there is also a carrot for Mexico: a certain number of legal immigrants. I also think we should be billing Mexico for the expenses for the health care and education of their illegal emigrants, but I guess that's beyond the scope of this discussion.
The 1986 amnesty was just that. It was an amnesty, not a guest worker program. Most of the folks who benefitted in New York, btw, were Irish illegals, who had come there in droves because Ireland had a terrible economy at that point. They were literate and skilled and they actually were taking well-paid jobs from Americans.
I think the crucial thing is to get a grip on the problem now and have a plan for dealing with it, not the Clinton approach, which was legalize them all and then hope things will just kind of work themselves out. But of course that was Clinton's approach to everything, the easy way out.
Most of the folks who benefitted in New York, btw, were Irish illegals, who had come there in droves because Ireland had a terrible economy at that point. They were literate and skilled and they actually were taking well-paid jobs from Americans.
"Over 3 million individuals, including 2.3 million Mexicans, were granted legal permanent resident status under
IRCA."
http://www.frbatlanta.org/filelegacydocs/wp0119.pdf#search='1986%20IRCA%20and%20mexican%20illegal%20immigrants'
Do Amnesty Programs Encourage Illegal Immigration? Evidence from IRCA
At the time of its passage in 1986, the Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA)
marked the biggest change in U.S. immigration policy in decades. IRCA granted amnesty to
undocumented immigrants who met specific provisions, required employers to verify workers’
eligibility to work legally, and increased funding for the Border Patrol. Over 3 million
individuals, including 2.3 million Mexicans, were granted legal permanent resident status under
IRCA. Opponents of the law claimed that it would encourage future illegal immigration,
notwithstanding tougher border enforcement, because it set a precedent for granting amnesty.
The bottom line is, the mexicaan govt. NEEDS to reform. Period. Or nothing will ever change for the poor mestizos, or the American taxpayer.
That's interesting. Because if you look at a graph of the size of SSA's Earnings Suspense File (ESF) there was a spike in the 1980s.
The downside of the spike was after the amnesty. I always assumed that the workers became legal and got valid SSNs and the SSA was able to purge the phony (unmatched to master files) SSNs.
CONGRESSIONAL RESPONSE REPORT, Social Security Administration Benefits Related to Unauthorized Work A-03-03-23053, page 20.
The graph on page 20 is showing the explosive growth of the Earnings Suspense File (ESF) that began in the late 1990s. The spike is almost straight up by 2000. It's still going up, I bet.
But hey! Never mind that the employers' names (tens of thousands of employers) are recorded along with the almost ten million phony SSNs.
Some insist that we need a shiny new law for business and government to ignore.