Matt-

What do you propose we do?

Deport 20 million people?

Arrest 20 million people?

How many violent criminals would we need to parole to make room for all of those horrible immigrants?

Deprive 20 million people of work and food?

Is there really a good way not to allow some of these people to become citizens?

Mark,
I hate to agree with the frawg on this one, but, we cannot deport all of the illegal aliens that are here. And even if we did, what good would it do? Enforcement needs to be against the employers, not the workers.

We need to establish laws that can be enforced, not ones that can never hope to be enforced. Each unenforceable law devalues all other laws. Lets set up a guest worker program, apply stiff fines to employers that currently have illegals based on the illegals who come forward to follow the steps to citizenship.

I doubt I would be here if quotas had been in place when my ancestors fled Russia, Germany and Ireland.

[NOTE: It's Matt, not Mark]

Secure the border NOW. Build the wall. Bring 20,000 National Guard troops to the border until the wall has been constructed and surveillance equipment has been installed. Once the border has been secured, then we'll talk about what to do about the 20 million illegals already here.

I find the debate from both sides to be one-sided and sophmoric at best.

Has anyone asked their representatives about what the root causes of the massive influx of mexicans is? Somehow is the course of 20 years we have seen a 10-fold increase in their numbers, that is staggering, so where does the crux of the problem exist?

It seems to me, while we discuss enforcement of current laws, and the fence which will no doubt end up costing up 5-times the quoted cost, we should be vigorously reassesing NAFTA, and its economic impact not only on mexico's economy, but also on ours. IMO, if we could stem the tide of desperate Mexicans, willing to risk a 60-130 mile walk through some of the harshest terrain in the western hemisphere to pick tomatoes and clean toilets they could be doing just as easily at home, we would be light-years closer to a sustainable policy with our southern neighbor.

Does anyone have any good words for NAFTA, I would love to hear them.

Who sees a pattern here? A two(?) party system controlled by the corporations is going to deliver the same message in unison. Bush,Clinton,bush,Clnton and so on. Why do you think that the Left is trying to dispose of Lieberman the Democrat/Republican? Just trying to make the point for all of the "true believers". Peace

I agree with freedom1, let's stop the leak first and then we can worry about mopping the floor. Once the border is secure we can start addressing the problem of what to do with the ones already in.

I agree with freedom1, let's stop the leak first and then we can worry about mopping the floor. Once the border is secure we can start addressing the problem of what to do with the ones already in.

I'm not sure we could lay the blame souly on any one thing. NAFTA isn't an all bad thing, but it might be a contributing cause.

I'm all for fining those who hire illegals. I'm also all for securing the borders. These things should have happened long ago, but since it wasn't done before it has to be done some time.

For those who are already here I'm actually for a "Perminenant Legal Resident" status. As a PLR you have to pay taxes and follow normal work laws but you don't get to vote and you don't have access to some of the services. (At least according to my coworker who used to be one.) That seems like a happy "middle ground" to me on what to do with those who are here now. Give them a form of PLR that could be a different sub catagory or something that says you were an illegal so this documentation is the end of the road for you. You get to be legal, but no voting rights and a few other services (I think some wierd ones like Earned income credit or some such but mainly just voting).

Should there be a way to become a legal citzen through this method? I'm not sure, the current use of this system takes about ten years I think. Having everyone who gets these things this way hit "reset" and start at zero years might work. I'm not so sure. As I've said before the ones who are here are a part that I think needs further discussion, but preventing more from coming over and reducing the incentives for them to be here should be priorities one and two.

Sorry Matt, I'm at work so I don't always get to catch my mistakes between calls.

Sorry guys, but in a capitalist economy, undocumented workers are a necessary counterbalance against the unions. Until the excesses of unions are completely obliterated, the companies who need that cheap labor and who pay for political campaigns are not going to let their labor supply get shut off. The border staters are allowed to champion tight borders as long as there's no real chance of passage. We are just being shined on here.

Sorry guys, but in a capitalist economy, undocumented workers are a necessary counterbalance against the unions. Until the excesses of unions are completely obliterated, the companies who need that cheap labor and who pay for political campaigns are not going to let their labor supply get shut off. The border staters are allowed to champion tight borders as long as there's no real chance of passage. We are just being shined on here.

Yes, Georgia, we want to round up all the illegals and cram them into cattle cars and ship them back. Yeah, right. Always strive for the most ridiculous possible "point" so you can be smart by pointing out how ridiculous it is.

We all know there are radicals on both sides---one side says "Open Borders" and the other says "Send Them Home". But as radicals seldom have any credibility, why not step toward the center and discuss rational solutions?

Clearly we cannot, and should not, even think of deporting all illegals. The sheer immensity of such an effort would make it impossible. For reasons of both pragmatism and humanitarianism, we obviously must allow most who are here to stay.

But there is a false either/or here. It is NOT either deportation or citizenship.

I suggest that first we make a law giving all illegals 60 days to register. The law would also state that anyone here illegally after that time would be committing a felony.

Result? We get some baseline information on most of the illegals here now. They are registered, in the system, fingerprinted and with a history. Those who do not register probably would not do so because they know their fingerprints are on file for arrests here in this country. Can't do much about that, except that now they are definitely felons, and when picked up again can be held and deported. The sorting out of those would be a slow process, but it would at least give us something to charge them with that would get them out of the country immediately.

Then those who have registered could remain while they are undergoing background checks. Some would be disqualified for various reasons, mostly for criminal backgrounds. These would be deported.

Those qualifying for work permits and with jobs would either get permits for seasonal work, permitting stays of six months at a time for, say, 10 years, or full-time permits for the same period. At the end of that period, the worker would have to either go home or apply for a permanent residency. Those with good work records, no criminal record, good tax records, and so on, would be granted permanent residency, but the permanent residency would be more demanding than it is now, requiring English proficiency and study of American culture, history, and law.

No one under this program would ever be eligible for citizenship.

Those here who want to become citizens would have to return home and start the process there, just like everyone else has.

We would need to have the border secured, of course---that is the obvious first step. We would have to make it a felony to either make, sell, or use false documents. We would have to get rid of the Anchor Baby situation. We would have to make sure there were educationsl programs in place for the guest workers to learn basics of living here---using clinics or doctors instead of emergency rooms for routine medical care, customs such as flushing toilets in public restrooms, etc. (I'm not being a smart-ass---these are two of the main complaints I hear in areas with heavy illegal populations.)

This is not a simple problem. It took us decades to get this deep into it, and it could take another decade to get out.

But the first thing we have to establish, as the baseline for all that follows, is that this is a land of laws, and that those who break the laws do not get amnesty. Citizenship is not only amnesty, it is an insult to every person who respected this country and its laws and worked and sacrificed to EARN citizenship. If we disresepct those efforts, we are making a mockery of our own system.

We can be practical and compassionate at the same time.

Gozer, I was posting while yours came up---good call. Yes, we can create a different status for people here illegally.

The argument for letting them stay is mostly that "They just came here to work, to make a better life for themselves and their families". Fine. We can work with that, acknowledge that, and still refrain from giving them the keys to the country.

We are the country that said it is illegal to come here without permission---but on the other hand, we don't have a penalty for doing so. We tacitly approved of the flood of illegal immigration. We can't simply say that now all who came here are, all of a sudden, felons. But we can give them a choice--register and take the first steps toward a category of legality, or become felons for refusing to do so.

I think a ten year period gives people a chance to decide how badly the want to stay, time to buy a house or farm in Mexico with what they make here, time for most of their children to finish school, time to learn English, time to start to assimilate, to figure out that they have to obey all of our laws to get ahead, time to teach that lesson to their children.

And if you don't think it is important for the children of these illegals to learn, as soon as possible, that breaking the law has consequences, you are not looking into the future.

Almiranta at July 10, 2006 11:10 PM

That reminds me of my favorite Robert Browning poem:

AUTHOR: Robert Browning (1812–1889)
QUOTATION: That low man seeks a little thing to do,
Sees it and does it;
This high man, with a great thing to pursue,
Dies ere he knows it.
That low man goes on adding one to one,—
His hundred’s soon hit;
This high man, aiming at a million,
Misses an unit.
That has the world here—should he need the next,
Let the world mind him!
This throws himself on God, and unperplexed
Seeking shall find him.
ATTRIBUTION: A Grammarian’s Funeral.

So yes, we need to have high standards and goals, but things actually get accomplished in bite-sized chunks. Pursue the achievable, then take it to the next step.

The Mexicans would stop coming if the laws that are ALREADY on the books were enforced against employers who hire illegals. It would be a lot cheaper than building a fence or adding 20,000 guards- all paid for by taxpayers, of course! It would also help to encourage Mexico's new president to develop meaningful job opportunity for the illegals, so there would be less temptation to come here. If the economic incentive were removed, the existing border guards could concentrate on the criminal element and those trying to smuggle drugs into the U.S.

Our dear GW enforced laws against employers only 3 or 4 times last year. Why? Because they are his base-the politically connected-the haves and have mores. Just another example of how Dubya has perverted this nation's legal system!

If clinton wants to praise the president for what he is doing that's fine with me, but I disagree with the part in the article, where it says, that, "many republicans seek to divide America" ain't NO WAY I'm gonna believe such hypocrisy!!

Jeremiah

Personally, it's the "undocumented" part that gets me, not the "illegal" part. I think that there should be a "path to citizenship," but I like Al's idea of the set period where an illegal could register to keep from being deported (I would allow 6 months instead of 60 days, though).

Punishing the illegals is less important to me than knowing who they are.

"Punishing the illegals is less important to me than knowing who they are."

I agree that being able to track them is very important. But I also see a long-term downside in having 20 million or so people in this country who have had it proved to them that they can flout our laws at will, with no penalty. When I think of their children growing up with the example of what you can accomplish if you just ignore the law and do whatever you want to, it's not very pleasant.

On the other hand, punishment has to be realistic. We can't fine them all a hundred thousand dollars, for example.

But a modest fine, which could be applied to filing fees, is reasonable. Right now, they are guilty of a misdemeanor---we should keep that penalty appropriate for a misdemeanor. We can't fairly have a mild law with no penalty suddenly turn, retroactively, into a big law with a big penalty.

And I never hear of any claim that these people came here for any reason other to than to "work and have a better life for themselves and their families". Fine. A permanent residency program lets them do exactly what they said they wanted to do. It is compassionate.

But life is about choices. And I think it is important to start these people thinking about choices. They chose to break the law to come here illegally, and many have broken other laws since then---driving without licenses or insurance, using fake papers, etc. Those bells can't be unrung. But we can draw a line and say that after that date, whenever it is, there WILL be choices.

One would be to register or not to register. One would be to return home after a work visa expires or to apply for a permanent residency, with all the responsibilities that requires. And one would be to remain as a non-citizen or to return home and start the process there.

For one thing, I think it would be a terrible thing to devalue citizenship. It should be something to be worked toward, strived for, and attained. It should be valuable.

And for another, possibly the biggest reason of all, it would be grossly unfair to every single person who respected this country, followed the law, and obeyed the rules, to have those efforts and sacrifices demeaned by making what they worked so hard for available to those who took the easy way out.

Lack of the official status of citizenship is not much of a punishment, not when all the other advantages of residency here are available. It won't change the day to day lives of people. It is more of a symbolic statement. But it is a statement that we value our citizens, and our citizenship, and we respect those who came here with the same respect.