CDZ IMMIGRATION: Not what it is but what it should be.

[Foxfyre]

Request: please keep discussion reasonably civil. And let's make refuge issues a separate discussion, please, and focus only on immigration in this one.

The following list is intended as a PROPOSED immigration policy, not what the law currently is or what any court rulings have been so far. What, if anything, can you agree with and support as immigration policy? Why or why not?

1. All immigrants must enter America legally. No exceptions. Anybody caught entering the USA illegally will be deported and forever banned from legal entry.

2. A border wall will be built to help keep immigration legal. No suggestion is made here of definition of 'wall' or what sort of wall, but we must be able to protect our borders.

3. DACA kids can stay legally but not their illegal family members. However harsh this sounds, the kids have a choice to stay by themselves or go home with their parents or other family.

4. DACA kids leaving with family will not have automatic right of return. They can't have it both ways.

5. New immigrants will be admitted by merit and not by lottery. We are the only developed country in the world that uses a lottery system to determine who gets in. Those admitted should be prepared to support themselves, learn English, and want to be Americans so that they enrich and improve us rather than be a further drain on finite resources.

6. Chain migration re immigrants will be illegal. It is unreasonable for immigrants to be able to import whatever family members they choose and therefore one new immigrant equals sometimes dozens of people.

7. Children of citizen parents will be the only automatic citizens. This one will require a constitutional amendment, but it would stop the anchor baby syndrome in which the mother knows if she can give birth to a U.S. citizen, she will be allowed to stay.

8. Immediate humanitarian aid; otherwise no benefits for illegals. We must stop giving jobs, the equivalent of welfare benefits, free educations, free healthcare, et al to those who are here illegally.

9. There will be a means of issuing short term work visas. This has long been an American tradition in which border states can benefit from Mexican et al labor and the laborers can enjoy the extra money they can legally earn. But when the job is complete, the workers go home.

10. Overstay a visa or come here illegally and you can be forever banned from the USA. There might be a bit of wiggle room if the overstay was inadvertent, i,e, somebody was in the hospital. But as a rule, this will provide a deterrent to those who now are apprehended and deported again and again and again.

The poll includes an option to change your selections should you change your mind.

Thoughts?

 

[rightwinger]

We need to allow for migrant workers the way we used to

Let them stay legally, let them work, let them pay taxes

 

[Foxfyre]

We need to allow for migrant workers the way we used to

Let them stay legally, let them work, let them pay taxes

No. 9 isn't sufficient for that? I wouldn't see that they would need to pay taxes even. Maybe the employer could pay a fee to cover the expense of paperwork and processing the temporary visas.

 

[Syriusly]

2. A border wall will be built to help keep immigration legal. No suggestion is made here of definition of 'wall' or what sort of wall, but we must be able to protect our borders.

That wall along the border with Canada will be mighty expensive.

Which is my point.

I suspect you mean a wall along the Southern Border- but that is a relatively symbolic measure. If we really needed a wall to protect us from illegal immigration- we would need a wall along our Northern border also.

 

[Syriusly]

5. New immigrants will be admitted by merit and not by lottery. We are the only developed country in the world that uses a lottery system to determine who gets in.

The United States uses multiple systems to decide in new immigrants:
a) Employment based- which is what you are speaking of
b) Family sponsored immigration- which you refer to later
c) Refugees
d) Diversity lottery- this is restricted to certain countries

Most countries have some version of these programs.

Merit is a double edged sword- while I agree that we should welcome highly qualified and trained individuals- these are the most likely to compete directly with Americans for the best paying jobs.

On the other side- American employers are having a difficult time finding workers for some of the most basic industries- such as slaughter houses and farms- where immigrants are welcome employees and rarely are competing with American workers.

 

[rightwinger]

5. New immigrants will be admitted by merit and not by lottery. We are the only developed country in the world that uses a lottery system to determine who gets in.

The United States uses multiple systems to decide in new immigrants:
a) Employment based- which is what you are speaking of
b) Family sponsored immigration- which you refer to later
c) Refugees
d) Diversity lottery- this is restricted to certain countries

Most countries have some version of these programs.

Merit is a double edged sword- while I agree that we should welcome highly qualified and trained individuals- these are the most likely to compete directly with Americans for the best paying jobs.

On the other side- American employers are having a difficult time finding workers for some of the most basic industries- such as slaughter houses and farms- where immigrants are welcome employees and rarely are competing with American workers.

I live in Maryland and they can’t find anyone to pick crabs

 

[william the wie]

Repealing the born here automatic citizenship rule would take a constitutional amendment which won't be ratified. Otherwise at least in the ballpark.

 

[Anathema]

I believe JRR Tolkien's character Gsndolf the Grey made the only comment necessary regarding immigration... .

"YOU SHALL NOT PASS!!!!!!!!"

 

[Syriusly]

=
7. Children of citizen parents will be the only automatic citizens. This one will require a constitutional amendment, but it would stop the anchor baby syndrome in which the mother knows if she can give birth to a U.S. citizen, she will be allowed to stay.=

Thoughts? I don't trust politicians of either side to write a Constitutional amendment now- and there isn't a chance in hell of this passing.

A hell of a lot of work just to prevent the mother from staying- when we can legally deport the mother as it is right now. We cannot deport an American citizen- but if the mother can't find someone to keep her child in the United States, then she can either take her child with her when she is deported or she can give up custody to the child to be adopted in the United States.

 

[JoeMoma]

Repealing the born here automatic citizenship rule would take a constitutional amendment which won't be ratified. Otherwise at least in the ballpark.

I think we have enough red states for it to be ratified. Don’t know unless we try.

 

[Foxfyre]

2. A border wall will be built to help keep immigration legal. No suggestion is made here of definition of 'wall' or what sort of wall, but we must be able to protect our borders.

That wall along the border with Canada will be mighty expensive.

Which is my point.

I suspect you mean a wall along the Southern Border- but that is a relatively symbolic measure. If we really needed a wall to protect us from illegal immigration- we would need a wall along our Northern border also.

Maybe but Canada does a pretty good job of keeping the illegals out of their country. And we haven't had a real big problem with being overrun by illegal Canadians. And Canada is not giving its people instructions on how to illegally enter the USA.

 

[Foxfyre]

Repealing the born here automatic citizenship rule would take a constitutional amendment which won't be ratified. Otherwise at least in the ballpark.

Yes it will. But if it was written simply as "People born to at least one parent who is a U.S. citizens in good standing will receive automatic U.S. citizenship. All other persons receiving citizenship status must go through a legal naturalization process", it would easily be ratified. Most developed nations of the world have the same requirement.

 

[Foxfyre]

5. New immigrants will be admitted by merit and not by lottery. We are the only developed country in the world that uses a lottery system to determine who gets in.

The United States uses multiple systems to decide in new immigrants:
a) Employment based- which is what you are speaking of
b) Family sponsored immigration- which you refer to later
c) Refugees
d) Diversity lottery- this is restricted to certain countries

Most countries have some version of these programs.

Merit is a double edged sword- while I agree that we should welcome highly qualified and trained individuals- these are the most likely to compete directly with Americans for the best paying jobs.

On the other side- American employers are having a difficult time finding workers for some of the most basic industries- such as slaughter houses and farms- where immigrants are welcome employees and rarely are competing with American workers.

Number 9 on the poll and the O.P. should remedy the work shortage problem without straining our finite social services.

As for merit, the Canadians have a pretty good list of what would constitute merit. I'm sure we could come up with something as comprehensive:

Immigrate to Canada - Canada.ca

 

[Foxfyre]

5. New immigrants will be admitted by merit and not by lottery. We are the only developed country in the world that uses a lottery system to determine who gets in.

The United States uses multiple systems to decide in new immigrants:
a) Employment based- which is what you are speaking of
b) Family sponsored immigration- which you refer to later
c) Refugees
d) Diversity lottery- this is restricted to certain countries

Most countries have some version of these programs.

Merit is a double edged sword- while I agree that we should welcome highly qualified and trained individuals- these are the most likely to compete directly with Americans for the best paying jobs.

On the other side- American employers are having a difficult time finding workers for some of the most basic industries- such as slaughter houses and farms- where immigrants are welcome employees and rarely are competing with American workers.

I live in Maryland and they can’t find anyone to pick crabs

So, once we get immigration under control with the other measures, we can have a No. 9 by which you can temporarily import some crab pickers and, when crab season is over, you send them home with a pocketful of cash until next season.

 

[Syriusly]

2. A border wall will be built to help keep immigration legal. No suggestion is made here of definition of 'wall' or what sort of wall, but we must be able to protect our borders.

That wall along the border with Canada will be mighty expensive.

Which is my point.

I suspect you mean a wall along the Southern Border- but that is a relatively symbolic measure. If we really needed a wall to protect us from illegal immigration- we would need a wall along our Northern border also.

Maybe but Canada does a pretty good job of keeping the illegals out of their country. And we haven't had a real big problem with being overrun by illegal Canadians. And Canada is not giving its people instructions on how to illegally enter the USA.

but we must be able to protect our borders.

So you don't really mean we must be able to protect our borders- but that you are concerned about protecting our Southern border because more illegal immigrants come across there.

 

[Syriusly]

Repealing the born here automatic citizenship rule would take a constitutional amendment which won't be ratified. Otherwise at least in the ballpark.

Yes it will. But if it was written simply as "People born to at least one parent who is a U.S. citizens in good standing will receive automatic U.S. citizenship. All other persons receiving citizenship status must go through a legal naturalization process", it would easily be ratified. Most developed nations of the world have the same requirement.

Most other developed nations don't have our constitution. I doubt any Constitutional amendment could be 'easily' ratified.

 

[danielpalos]

Request: please keep discussion reasonably civil. And let's make refuge issues a separate discussion, please, and focus only on immigration in this one.

The following list is intended as a PROPOSED immigration policy, not what the law currently is or what any court rulings have been so far. What, if anything, can you agree with and support as immigration policy? Why or why not?

1. All immigrants must enter America legally. No exceptions. Anybody caught entering the USA illegally will be deported and forever banned from legal entry.

2. A border wall will be built to help keep immigration legal. No suggestion is made here of definition of 'wall' or what sort of wall, but we must be able to protect our borders.

3. DACA kids can stay legally but not their illegal family members. However harsh this sounds, the kids have a choice to stay by themselves or go home with their parents or other family.

4. DACA kids leaving with family will not have automatic right of return. They can't have it both ways.

5. New immigrants will be admitted by merit and not by lottery. We are the only developed country in the world that uses a lottery system to determine who gets in. Those admitted should be prepared to support themselves, learn English, and want to be Americans so that they enrich and improve us rather than be a further drain on finite resources.

6. Chain migration re immigrants will be illegal. It is unreasonable for immigrants to be able to import whatever family members they choose and therefore one new immigrant equals sometimes dozens of people.

7. Children of citizen parents will be the only automatic citizens. This one will require a constitutional amendment, but it would stop the anchor baby syndrome in which the mother knows if she can give birth to a U.S. citizen, she will be allowed to stay.

8. Immediate humanitarian aid; otherwise no benefits for illegals. We must stop giving jobs, the equivalent of welfare benefits, free educations, free healthcare, et al to those who are here illegally.

9. There will be a means of issuing short term work visas. This has long been an American tradition in which border states can benefit from Mexican et al labor and the laborers can enjoy the extra money they can legally earn. But when the job is complete, the workers go home.

10. Overstay a visa or come here illegally and you can be forever banned from the USA. There might be a bit of wiggle room if the overstay was inadvertent, i,e, somebody was in the hospital. But as a rule, this will provide a deterrent to those who now are apprehended and deported again and again and again.

The poll includes an option to change your selections should you change your mind.

Thoughts?

All foreign nationals in the US, should have a federal id. Simply coming to and being in the US, is tourism, not immigration. Immigration requires an application and getting in line, with everyone else.

 

[Syriusly]

5. New immigrants will be admitted by merit and not by lottery. We are the only developed country in the world that uses a lottery system to determine who gets in.

The United States uses multiple systems to decide in new immigrants:
a) Employment based- which is what you are speaking of
b) Family sponsored immigration- which you refer to later
c) Refugees
d) Diversity lottery- this is restricted to certain countries

Most countries have some version of these programs.

Merit is a double edged sword- while I agree that we should welcome highly qualified and trained individuals- these are the most likely to compete directly with Americans for the best paying jobs.

On the other side- American employers are having a difficult time finding workers for some of the most basic industries- such as slaughter houses and farms- where immigrants are welcome employees and rarely are competing with American workers.

Number 9 on the poll and the O.P. should remedy the work shortage problem without straining our finite social services.

As for merit, the Canadians have a pretty good list of what would constitute merit. I'm sure we could come up with something as comprehensive:

Immigrate to Canada - Canada.ca

I have no problem with saying that immigrants- other than refugees- should not receive social services- and deporting them if they ask for them.

But I don't see why we should put more emphasis on allowing immigrants into the United States that more directly compete with Americans for high paying jobs- than immigrants who take jobs that Americans do not want.

 

[Foxfyre]

2. A border wall will be built to help keep immigration legal. No suggestion is made here of definition of 'wall' or what sort of wall, but we must be able to protect our borders.

That wall along the border with Canada will be mighty expensive.

Which is my point.

I suspect you mean a wall along the Southern Border- but that is a relatively symbolic measure. If we really needed a wall to protect us from illegal immigration- we would need a wall along our Northern border also.

Maybe but Canada does a pretty good job of keeping the illegals out of their country. And we haven't had a real big problem with being overrun by illegal Canadians. And Canada is not giving its people instructions on how to illegally enter the USA.

but we must be able to protect our borders.

So you don't really mean we must be able to protect our borders- but that you are concerned about protecting our Southern border because more illegal immigrants come across there.

Pretty much the huge lion's share of illegal immigrants are coming across the southern border. If the Canadian border ever becomes a similar problem, then we can deal with that. Right now there is no need to protect our Canadian border.

 

[Foxfyre]

Repealing the born here automatic citizenship rule would take a constitutional amendment which won't be ratified. Otherwise at least in the ballpark.

Yes it will. But if it was written simply as "People born to at least one parent who is a U.S. citizens in good standing will receive automatic U.S. citizenship. All other persons receiving citizenship status must go through a legal naturalization process", it would easily be ratified. Most developed nations of the world have the same requirement.

Most other developed nations don't have our constitution. I doubt any Constitutional amendment could be 'easily' ratified.

That one would be.