Posted on 07/01/2006 7:15:40 AM PDT by kellynla
Think the immigration debate is mainly about giving amnesty to the 10 million illegals already here? Think again. Amnesty is a drop in the bucket. The real issue is the staggering increase in legal immigration hidden in the Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act, recently passed in the Senate. By a ratio of about 4-1, U.S. voters would prefer less immigration, not more. But the Senate bill would do just the opposite. The original bill would have allowed as many as 100 million people to legally immigrate to the United States over the next 20 years. We're talking about a seismic shift of unprecedented proportions.
Facing criticism, the Senate has amended the bill - which now would allow "only" 61 million new immigrants. That still more than doubles the current legal immigration rate, from 1 million a year now to 2.5 million.
Current law would let 19 million legal immigrants enter the United States over the next 20 years; the Senate immigration bill would add an extra 42 million.
Why such extraordinary growth? Consider how the new law would work.
Under the Senate bill, immigrants could enter or attain lawful status within the country through nine channels. In each channel, immigrants would gain permanent residence and the right to become citizens:
(Excerpt) Read more at rockymountainnews.com ...
MNJohnnie would gladly tell you these numbers on Tuesday if you agree with his point today.
Why are you assuming they'd all come from Mexico? Central/South America are quite populous, and are Africa, Pakistan, India, etc. This open invitation is to the entire third world, not just Mexico.
the Senate bill would "allow" 61 million over the NEXT 20 YEARS...
and there are illegals from all over the world in America, not just ol' Mexico...
Tony's an idiot.
>I guess they realized that the 200 million number was a bit over the top since the population of Mexico is only 107 million. I would hate to be a mindless boob that always had to start barking at the moon when manipulators threw out "processed" red-meat.
What bunch of idiotic statements! Hello, Rector is obviously talking about immigrants from all over the world!! From Ghana to Bangladesh, from Burma to Egypt, from Peru to Turkey. Pull your heads out of your a**es. Mexico is obviously not the only country in the world from which we take immigrants.
Certainly. I'm dispatching a green+white helicopter to hover over your house right now.
You forget about entire Latin America. And whoever else wishes to walk through southern border.
It is that simple, but so few can see it coming.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Well, we ain't so smart down at the sawmill but ain't it dang nigh a' accomplished fact a'ready?
All other wages will plummet
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Well, shucks, at air's a'done been goin' on aroun' heer!
(If I have to go back to a plantation economy I may as well go back to the speech pattern of a muleskinner.)
However, to note, the second largest nonEnglish language (not including ebonics) after Spanish is German. And the Germans largely came over a century ago, and could easily blend in and assimilate into the majority society (they looked similar).
This seems to suggest that the quota system should be reconsidered, but if so, they should try to not make it racist. With a sizeable but sufficient amount of people from a country, they can be assimilated into American society more easily if making media and communities of their ethnicity is more difficult. They can be encouraged/pressured to adopt American culture.
***BINGO***, we've got a winner!
Assimilation is key. As things are, American society generally is not trying hard enough to assimilate Latinos (or Asians, Europeans, Africans, etc.), as multiculturalism has to some degree taken hold. Also, if a group of people from one country are able to settle into a large enough community, they could foster poor assimilation because they could create an environment in which they would not have to necessarily use English or interact with many other Americans (as the descendants of these immigrants would be Americans, hence other). This could happen even though these immigrants could not have any strong animosity toward American society and culture, but have the crutch of their old culture and society to lean on.
This additional immigrant vote (predominently Hispanic) will be a huge boost to democratic fortunes in future elections.
immigration should be more evenly distributed by country, though. Too many from one country (including, hypothetically to United Kingdom or Canada or other countries of the Anglosphere) could lead to the decline of the nation. Small, assimilable amounts of people from various countries could be relatively easy to absorb into American society.
After the borders are under control and employer sanctions proven to be effective, a temporary guest worker program with no possibility of permanent status should also be explored.
America continues its demographic suicide.
I always said that we needed to solve our illegal immigration problem before we begin to have a national discussion about the proper levels of legal immigration.
I was wrong. The OBL is making it necessary to begin that discussion sooner rather than later.
it's generally rude to insult a person behind their back (figuratively, in this case).
But I thought we were only against illegal immigration and amnesty and that we were for legal immigration.
(BTW I'm not for increases in legal immigration so don't anybody ping me and say that I am, based on my above statement.)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.