Current Immigration Law

[jwoodie]

Requires that persons who are in the U.S. illegally must return to their home countries and wait ten years before applying for a visa. Since deporting 10+ million people is not feasible, why not require registration and proof of ten years of self support before eligibility for any government programs (children exempted)? Failure to register would result in deportation, and illegal return to the U.S. after deportation would become a felony. What say you?

 

[Jlaurencee]

Actually, President Reagan in 1986 was quite reluctant to sign the Simpson-Mazzoli Amnesty Bill. He was convinced by the backers, however, that the provisions therein would be strictly followed - i.e., employers having to contact a toll-free number to verify social security numbers of job applicants, and also the imposition of a $2,000 fine for each and every illegal employed on a consistent basis....

Therefore, are the GANG OF EIGHT and all others in favor of yet another AMNESTY FOR ILLEGAL ALIENS flouting the current laws and PRESIDENT REAGAN'S WISHES? Indeed, indeed!

If Republican backers of the Amnesty for Illegal Aliens believe they are going to boost GOP chances to win the next presidential elections, they are absolutely wrong! In fact, every member of my family and relatives are so disgusted with the Gang of Eight, et al, that if the 11 million (oops! I mean in another 10-15 years that figure should become at least 30 million, in that relatives - young and old - will be legally allowed to join the amnestied). are legalized, NEVER - for at least the next several elections - WILL WE vote for a Republican presidential candidate, or at least won't cast our ballots either way....

We are already quite disgusted at the phony hypocrites who are gladly catering to lawbreakers (albeit in false hopes of gaining future votes) at the expense of American citizens and the future of our Great Nation.

Yes, when the 1986 Simpson-Mazzoli Immigration Bill became law by President Reagan reluctantly signing it, within 10 years almost TWO MILLION AMERICAN CITIZENS were displaced by the heretofore illegals, although in '86 only three million (3m.) were legalized. Therefore, it's obvious that once legalized, these "hardworking" illegal aliens will have no reason to do any more menial work for a few dollars an hour when cushier jobs with higher pays will become available to them, not to mention welfare and disability benefits.... Some will also willy-nilly become eligible for welfare and disability benefits. Furthermore, more billions of dollars will be depleted from our economy as they're sent away to the illegals' countries of origin.

Consequently, we will be back in the same position as today - because farmers and other greedy U.S. employers will once again be seeking cheap labor for greater profits...and hence the Southern Gates will again become wide open for yet another generation of illegals, mostly from Central and South America, as well as pseudonymous invaders so eager to destroy everything we and the West have shed blood and treasure for.

Finally, if the GANG OF EIGHT and their supporters are really concerned about the future of this Great Nation, they will instead enforce the 1986 Immigration Law, thus going after employers hiring illegals, fining them, and hence discouraging illegals from remaining in this country for lack of employability. And, if some crops rot, why not go into other industries that open jobs for our own folks. It's time to focus more on INVENTIONS, TECHNOLOGY, as well as MANUFACTURING, rather than growing fruits and veggies. Yes, even higher wages to our own citizens would mean greater purchasing powers and regeneration of newer industries. It's also time to discourage illegals and newer immigrants from depleting our economy in billions of dollars a year by sending most of their incomes back to their own homelands....

 

[Sunshine]

Man, before you all start posting all about immigration law, you should at least go buy the Nutshell on it. That's not enough to teach you ALL about it, but it would help quell some of your lame misconceptions.

 

[jwoodie]

Man, before you all start posting all about immigration law, you should at least go buy the Nutshell on it. That's not enough to teach you ALL about it, but it would help quell some of your lame misconceptions.

Why don't you enlighten us instead of posting lame criticisms?

 

[Polk]

Requires that persons who are in the U.S. illegally must return to their home countries and wait ten years before applying for a visa. Since deporting 10+ million people is not feasible, why not require registration and proof of ten years of self support before eligibility for any government programs (children exempted)? Failure to register would result in deportation, and illegal return to the U.S. after deportation would become a felony. What say you?

You realize that immigrants aren't eligible for public benefits under the proposals being discussed, correct?

 

[antiquity]

Requires that persons who are in the U.S. illegally must return to their home countries and wait ten years before applying for a visa. Since deporting 10+ million people is not feasible, why not require registration and proof of ten years of self support before eligibility for any government programs (children exempted)? Failure to register would result in deportation, and illegal return to the U.S. after deportation would become a felony. What say you?

You realize that immigrants aren't eligible for public benefits under the proposals being discussed, correct?

I have a feeling that liberal will put some loop hole into the law that will allow just that. Remember it all about the votes that the democrats could gain if illegal can vote.

 

[jwoodie]

Requires that persons who are in the U.S. illegally must return to their home countries and wait ten years before applying for a visa. Since deporting 10+ million people is not feasible, why not require registration and proof of ten years of self support before eligibility for any government programs (children exempted)? Failure to register would result in deportation, and illegal return to the U.S. after deportation would become a felony. What say you?

You realize that immigrants aren't eligible for public benefits under the proposals being discussed, correct?

Yes, I do, key word being "proposals." My suggestion would require paying Social Security taxes with NO accrued benefits, as well as providing for one's own health coverage. Do you have any constructive comments, or is it all about carping from the sidelines?

 

[Polk]

Requires that persons who are in the U.S. illegally must return to their home countries and wait ten years before applying for a visa. Since deporting 10+ million people is not feasible, why not require registration and proof of ten years of self support before eligibility for any government programs (children exempted)? Failure to register would result in deportation, and illegal return to the U.S. after deportation would become a felony. What say you?

You realize that immigrants aren't eligible for public benefits under the proposals being discussed, correct?

Yes, I do, key word being "proposals." My suggestion would require paying Social Security taxes with NO accrued benefits, as well as providing for one's own health coverage. Do you have any constructive comments, or is it all about carping from the sidelines?

Your suggestion isn't really constructive either. People shouldn't be asked to pay in to the Social Security system if you're not going to count the time worked toward the hours requirement, and they shouldn't be required to buy health insurance unless they are also eligible for subsidies or are exempt if the cost above a certain percentage of income.

 

[antiquity]

Your suggestion isn't really constructive either. People shouldn't be asked to pay in to the Social Security system if you're not going to count the time worked toward the hours requirement, and they shouldn't be required to buy health insurance unless they are also eligible for subsidies or are exempt if the cost above a certain percentage of income.

Do include illegals in that equation?

 

[Vel]

Requires that persons who are in the U.S. illegally must return to their home countries and wait ten years before applying for a visa. Since deporting 10+ million people is not feasible, why not require registration and proof of ten years of self support before eligibility for any government programs (children exempted)? Failure to register would result in deportation, and illegal return to the U.S. after deportation would become a felony. What say you?

You realize that immigrants aren't eligible for public benefits under the proposals being discussed, correct?

I have a feeling that liberal will put some loop hole into the law that will allow just that. Remember it all about the votes that the democrats could gain if illegal can vote.

The loophole is already there. Call your senators and ask them if those heads of households receiving welfare benefits in the name of their "citizen" children will qualify for amnesty under this bill. Remember that Rubio says they have to meet the public charge rules. Are you considered a public charge if the public is supporting your children?

 

[longknife]

The ONLY problem with the current Immigration law is the failure of this - and other administrations - to enforce it!

 

[Polk]

Your suggestion isn't really constructive either. People shouldn't be asked to pay in to the Social Security system if you're not going to count the time worked toward the hours requirement, and they shouldn't be required to buy health insurance unless they are also eligible for subsidies or are exempt if the cost above a certain percentage of income.

Do include illegals in that equation?

Yes, since they're a subset of "people".

 

[Polk]

You realize that immigrants aren't eligible for public benefits under the proposals being discussed, correct?

I have a feeling that liberal will put some loop hole into the law that will allow just that. Remember it all about the votes that the democrats could gain if illegal can vote.

The loophole is already there. Call your senators and ask them if those heads of households receiving welfare benefits in the name of their "citizen" children will qualify for amnesty under this bill. Remember that Rubio says they have to meet the public charge rules. Are you considered a public charge if the public is supporting your children?

Why the scare quotes around citizen? If you're born in the United States, you're a citizen. Full stop.

 

[Vel]

I have a feeling that liberal will put some loop hole into the law that will allow just that. Remember it all about the votes that the democrats could gain if illegal can vote.

The loophole is already there. Call your senators and ask them if those heads of households receiving welfare benefits in the name of their "citizen" children will qualify for amnesty under this bill. Remember that Rubio says they have to meet the public charge rules. Are you considered a public charge if the public is supporting your children?

Why the scare quotes around citizen? If you're born in the United States, you're a citizen. Full stop.

So should illegal mom and dad qualify for RPI status under Rubio's Reward program if they can't feed their children without taxpayer help?

 

[Polk]

The loophole is already there. Call your senators and ask them if those heads of households receiving welfare benefits in the name of their "citizen" children will qualify for amnesty under this bill. Remember that Rubio says they have to meet the public charge rules. Are you considered a public charge if the public is supporting your children?

Why the scare quotes around citizen? If you're born in the United States, you're a citizen. Full stop.

So should illegal mom and dad qualify for RPI status under Rubio's Reward program if they can't feed their children without taxpayer help?

Yes, because the aid isn't for the parents, it's for the children.

 

[jwoodie]

Why the scare quotes around citizen? If you're born in the United States, you're a citizen. Full stop.

So should illegal mom and dad qualify for RPI status under Rubio's Reward program if they can't feed their children without taxpayer help?

Yes, because the aid isn't for the parents, it's for the children.

Is your sole purpose to derail any intelligent conversation on this topic? First, you claim illegals aren't eligible for any public assistance, then you say they should be eligible for Social Security benefits, then you argue they should receive aid for their children. What, exactly, is YOUR plan?

 

[Polk]

You seem to live under this false belief that they and their children are the same people.

 

[Vel]

You seem to live under this false belief that they and their children are the same people.

Hypothetical. If a potential immigrant were to apply for a visa to the U.S. and it was determined that they didn't have the financial resources to provide for their family, under the public charge laws, would that immigrant be allowed a visa?

 

[Polk]

Once again, children are not their own parents.

 

[Vel]

Once again, children are not their own parents.

Why can't liberals directly answer a simple question? Would the immigrant get a visa if they don't meet the income levels to provide for the family? A simple yes or no is all that is required.