Replies

I have a question. Since "Immigration Reform" has taken on a blanket connotation like "Climate Change", what does one need to call the process of closing the borders and dealing with illegals?

Let's just call comprehensive immigration reform amnesty and move on from there.

I'd also wager that many here would be pissed at him once they realized that we can't put every last one of them on buses and dump them in landfills on the other side of the border.

You are using the argument of the pro-amnesty crowd. They offer the false choice between mass deportation or a blanket amnesty. There are other solutions. It is called attrition thru enforcement. We know it works from our experiences in AZ and AL. The lawbreakers didn't get here overnight and they won't leave overnight.

When you reward something, you get more of it. We had a one-time amnesty in 1986. The proponents said there would never be another one and that amnesty would solve the problem. The government estimated 1 million would apply, but the true number turned out to be 2.7 million. 28 years later there are many of the same people calling for another amnesty, only this time the government estimates that 12 million are eligible.

In 1986 there was a surge of illegals once an amnesty was announced, many of them coming here on tourist visas as well as across the border. We will see a similar surge once Obama announces his executive amnesty. It won't matter what restrictions are placed on who gets legalization. In 1986, phony document mills were set up blocks from the processing centers.

Any legislation that allows the lawbreakers to stay and work here is amnesty period. This crap of paying fines, learning English, and getting to the back of the line and saying that this is not amnesty, are just using language to fool and deceive. At least, the 1986 amnesty was called amnesty.

The Heritage Foundation estimates that an amnesty will cost $6.3 trillion if only 12 million are given amnesty. And who are these lawbreakers who will be legalized? 50% of them lack even a high school degree. They will receive more in government benefits than they contribute in taxes. HOw stupid are we as a nation to give these lawbreakers work permits to compete legally against American workers for jobs while we have the lowest labor participation rates since 1977?

And electorally, immigrants vote more than two to one Dem. 87% of the 1.1 million legal immigrants who enter annually are minorities as defined by the USG.

I agree with mush that you said. While many consider their version of immigration reform to be blanket amnesty, the use of the words "immigration" reform do not always equate.

My point was that if Ted Cruz used the words "immigration reform", many here would assume he meant blanket amnesty despite the fact that he has not expressed that in any of his statements/actions. Reform must happen but it must happen correctly - start with closing the borders then going your attrition route. Some here will not be satisfied with any solution that doesn't involve doing the impossible by purging our Nation of those already here en-masse. I would love to see it, but am pragmatic enough to know it will be a long-drawn process no matter how we go about it. The words "immigration reform" will be used widely, but it's the content of the plans/actions that define what it really is.

USA needs to learn from Singapore. There are 3.5 million citizens and 2 million foreign workers in Singapore. Foreign workers get 2 year work visa’s, and they are very happy to obey laws because of the job benefits. They do not receive Singapore citizenship based on work visa.

Result is a very prosperous country of Singapore where every 6th citizen is a millionaire.