First you say this.
The bottom line is that we must make it easier to for Mexican workers to be legal than not.
Then you say this.
No "guest worker" program has a prayer of working unless it is combined with some "stick" component that will make that balance work.
Which is it?
Do you want to make it easier or harder? Do you want something done about people who break the law or not?
You say we should ignore the 10 million illegals who broke existing law to get into this country but then say we should pass another law with different restrictions and that would solve the problem.
That doesn't make much sense to me. Why would they recognize and comply with another another law when they ignored the first one?
Comparing people who want to require people from other countries who are in our country illegally to leave until they can enter in a lawful manner, to Nazis putting Jews on a death train does not seem very rational either.
I don't think we can have some law that says we can deport or jail some Arab or South American that we think might be a terrorist or international gang member because they are here illegally and then say that other illegals can ignore it because they are another race and we think they are here to work.
I'd like to hear your idea on a law that will establish control on who comes,goes and stays in the country.
I would like to hear how you would enforce it or how you would get aliens to comply with it.
Perhaps I've not worded it well there, but I'm saying the same thing. People will always take the easiest course, just like water will always flow downhill. That means we must make it easier for them to be legal, than to be illegal.
That can be done by either drastically improving border security (which will do nothing about those people who are here). Or making it very very easy to be legal (it's already easy for them to be illegal, so anything more than signing a piece of paper probably won't be easy enough). Or the best idea, which I think Senator Jon Kyl is proposing, some combination of both.
Why would they recognize and comply with another another law when they ignored the first one?
Because we make the new law easier to comply with than avoiding it.
Comparing people who want to require people from other countries who are in our country illegally to leave until they can enter in a lawful manner, to Nazis putting Jews on a death train does not seem very rational either.
I'm just trying to get the attention of the folks who just yell "throw them out". My point is that it just ain't possible to throw out that many people without huge disruptions on both sides of the border. Just sending 10 million people on a trip back and forth would be headache enough. And back to my original point. If we make it hard for these people to be legal, then we must make it even harder for them to remain illegal. Otherwise, as I pointed out above, they will do the easiest thing, and if that means they stay hidden, and illegal, then they will. It's just common sense.
The bottom line. It must be easier for illegals to comply with the law than not. Almost any combination of making it easier to be legal, and making it harder to be illegal will work. But we must tip the balance of the scale where people seek to be legal on their own, because the time, effort, and money required to force so many people to comply with the existing law just isn't physically possible to do.