Catholic interview of Romney

[Archaea]

http://www.catholic.org/politics/sto...d=26298&page=2

I disagree on his immigration policy of NOT implementing amnesty, as I see no feasible way of addressing those who've been here so long.

[malapert]

Originally Posted by Archaea

http://www.catholic.org/politics/sto...d=26298&page=2

I disagree on his immigration policy of NOT implementing amnesty, as I see no feasible way of addressing those who've been here so long.

If it is feasible to collect and evaluate tax returns from over 100 million filers, methodically forcing 12 million law breakers to live by the rule of law is feasible.

[Archaea]

Originally Posted by malapert

If it is feasible to collect and evaluate tax returns from over 100 million filers, methodically forcing 12 million law breakers to live by the rule of law is feasible.

Reviewing documents submitted voluntarily where less than one percent are reviewed in total, versus physically verifying documentation for moving human beings?

Jee I see the connection.

You would experience a huge human cost. And let's point out that we as a society apparently demand and benefit from their presence here. If there were no motivation for their cheap services, would employers continue to persue them?

We have large sections of the construction industry and agriculture which depend upon these workers. We need a sensible way of determining how many, and amnesty for those here who have been here and given birth to children who know no other country, and then sensible border control. But ejecting 12 million undocumenteds is not feasible or humane.

[jay santos]

Originally Posted by Archaea

Reviewing documents submitted voluntarily where less than one percent are reviewed in total, versus physically verifying documentation for moving human beings?

Jee I see the connection.

You would experience a huge human cost. And let's point out that we as a society apparently demand and benefit from their presence here. If there were no motivation for their cheap services, would employers continue to persue them?

We have large sections of the construction industry and agriculture which depend upon these workers. We need a sensible way of determining how many, and amnesty for those here who have been here and given birth to children who know no other country, and then sensible border control. But ejecting 12 million undocumenteds is not feasible or humane.

The politicians are being incredibly stupid on this illegal immigration issue. Apparently most Americans favor a policy that would send our economy to a screeching halt, chaos that we haven't seen in our economic history. The Republicans are telling the people what they want to hear, but there's no way anything like that would be implemented.

[MikeWaters]

the new buzzword in conservative circles is "attrition". You send home the offenders that you catch, and gradually through that, and punishing employers, the numbers decrease.

But there is a third way that rejects this false choice, and it is the only approach that can actually work: Shrink the illegal population through consistent, across-the-board enforcement of the immigration law. By deterring the settlement of new illegals, by increasing deportations to the extent possible, and, most importantly, by increasing the number of illegals already here who give up and deport themselves, the United States can bring about an annual decrease in the illegal-alien population, rather than allowing it to continually increase. The point, in other words, is not merely to curtail illegal immigration, but rather to bring about a steady reduction in the total number of illegal immigrants who are living in the United States. The result would be a shrinking of the illegal population to a manageable nuisance, rather than today's looming crisis.

http://www.cis.org/articles/2005/back605.html

[Archaea]

None of the politicians are handling this issue correctly, and they're likely to botch it up even worse. I hope I only have another fifty years to live.

[UtahDan]

Originally Posted by Archaea

You would experience a huge human cost. And let's point out that we as a society apparently demand and benefit from their presence here. If there were no motivation for their cheap services, would employers continue to persue them?

We have large sections of the construction industry and agriculture which depend upon these workers. We need a sensible way of determining how many, and amnesty for those here who have been here and given birth to children who know no other country, and then sensible border control. But ejecting 12 million undocumenteds is not feasible or humane.

This is all true but I think the slippery slope argument is apparent. Lets say we give them amnesty and adopt a much broader, more expansive guest worker program that in the future lets 10x as many people in. Those who don't qualify as guest workers are still going to flood across the border because they know one day they will get amnesty too.

The point is that no matter how you reform immigration policy, if you don't penalize the law breakers you might well not have a policy because it will be ignored.

Now I do think there is force to the argument that it is hard to round up 12 million people. Okay I agree its hard. But if we were talking about 12 million terrorists we would find the will and the resources. I am not saying that it is remotely the same, just pointing out that it is not impossible.

I would even be happy with true amnesty if the same day a wall went up and any new illegals were aggressively sought out and deported. There HAS to be an enhanced enforcement component to what we do, even it if it is only going forward. Otherwise, we might as well just dissolve INS and open up our borders. That isn't hyperbole, I don't think. I don't think a carrot exists that will keep illegals out. It has to be a stick.

[Archaea]

Originally Posted by UtahDan

This is all true but I think the slippery slope argument is apparent. Lets say we give them amnesty and adopt a much broader, more expansive guest worker program that in the future lets 10x as many people in. Those who don't qualify as guest workers are still going to flood across the border because they know one day they will get amnesty too.

The point is that no matter how you reform immigration policy, if you don't penalize the law breakers you might well not have a policy because it will be ignored.

Now I do think there is force to the argument that it is hard to round up 12 million people. Okay I agree its hard. But if we were talking about 12 million terrorists we would find the will and the resources. I am not saying that it is remotely the same, just pointing out that it is not impossible.

I would even be happy with true amnesty if the same day a wall went up and any new illegals were aggressively sought out and deported. There HAS to be an enhanced enforcement component to what we do, even it if it is only going forward. Otherwise, we might as well just dissolve INS and open up our borders. That isn't hyperbole, I don't think. I don't think a carrot exists that will keep illegals out. It has to be a stick.

Every one of our politicians is cowardly. And it won't get done correctly.

But it seems the most logical manner would be this,

Amnesty for those who've been here a while.

A reasonable quota system.

Secure borders.

We do not have the intestinal fortitude to do it correctly.

[Insensitive PAP]

I'm fine with letting illegal aliens stay in the US as long as they have paid all taxes due and they only count as 3/5ths of a vote in elections.