Posted on 02/15/2006 11:17:27 AM PST by Mike10542
Also go to
http://www.secureamericasborders.com
There is a survey.
Dole poll ping
I was impressed at the questions that were asked.
The questions acutally allowed you to support a guest worker program, but to oppose amnesty blanket amnesty, and oppose giving those that are currently here working the ability to stay for a limited time.
I don't oppose a guest worker program for people applying from outside the US or for people who are legally in the country.
I do oppose a guest worker program that allows those illegally in the country to apply, because I oppose amnesty.
"I don't oppose a guest worker program for people applying from outside the US or for people who are legally in the country."
I can agree with that, but I also oppose any guestworker program, ie McCain/Kennedy, that allows for a path to citizenship for the guestworkers. In my opinion, that is amnesty.
Ssecondly, it truly amazes me that Ted Kennedy has any say whatsoever about what immigration policy the Congress takes up. His last one was a disaster.
done
As I said I only support a Guest Worker progrma for people applying from outside the country or people already here legally.
The people comming to the US under such a program would be here legally. If they come here and provide a possitive contribution to our society and we end up with measurable evidence that they are productive and alw abiding, why shouldn't that be an avenue toward citizenship.
I also fail to see how it would be any form of amnesty?
done.
A couple of points. Why should people who come here on a "temporary" visa program to work be able to jump infront of the millions of other people around the world trying to immigrate here? Secondly, does that not defeat the purpose of a "temporary" worker program?
I would support a temporary worker program, but that is all. I don't think it is in the best interests of anybody to provide citizenship at the end of the stay. We should be focusing on building up the economies and infrastructure of the Latin American countries before we start bringing in workers on a permanent basis.
besides that point, if you give a worker amnesty at the end of his term, you are essentially giving citizenship to the multiple family members he/she chooses to bring. it would result in, according to some of the numbers I have seen, an addition of some 40 million people after only a few years.
Yep. I doubt there are many people who actually disagree that something needs to be done about illegal immigrants but it quickly breaks down after that.
BTW., just to clear my position up, I have stated on this forum on more than one occasion that I vastly prefer the Kyl/Cornyn Plan(which may or may not be along the lines of what Bush is proposing) to the McCain/Kennedy Plan.
I sent them pretty much the same thing.
The ones with Jorge' on them ? : )
I was just fixing to say that...& yep, you're right: I would have let the NRSC have it! I would have told them where they could put their anti-borders/pro-illegal immigrant policy without hesitation.
People should be allowed to immigrate to the US based on what benefits they bring to our country. There is a wide range of criteria used to determine if someone might be granted residency or citizenship, but having a productive work history, working in the United States, following our laws, should definately be taken into consideration.
I don't think that the term "a path to citizenship" is meant to guarantee citizenship. It's meant that having a good work history under this program and sponsorship of an employer who feels that this worker is a valuable asset to our country should be taken into consideration.
I work with someone who came to the US under a work visa, who is a very tallented and valuable employee. It was a considerable task for him to attain legal residency and eventually citizenship, and our company also had to got through a long process of convincing the government that he really was a valuable employee.
He's not from Mexico. He's also now the company's chief scientist, rather not an unskilled laborer.
I wouldn't expect that we would be granting citizenship to unskilled laborers just because they came under the guest worker program. However, in many companies there is room for advancement for people who apply themselves and have the capability and willingness to learn.
Secondly, does that not defeat the purpose of a "temporary" worker program?
All visa programs are temporary by nature. It means the vast majority will have to return to their home countries when those visas expire. However, it someone comes here on a visa and shows that America is better of by having them here, then it makes sense to take that into consideration.
I would support a temporary worker program, but that is all. I don't think it is in the best interests of anybody to provide citizenship at the end of the stay.
For the majority of the guest workers I agree. A large percentage of those comming here will be comming for jobs requiring unskilled or low skilled labor, and most can be replaced with new workers with a small training curve.
However, among them there will be a few that are smarter, harder working, and more motivated individuals. If they can prove that they are productive. If they can follow our laws and learn our language. If they can show that they will contribute to society considerably more than they will burden it, those are the kind of people we want to immigrate to our country.
besides that point, if you give a worker amnesty at the end of his term,
Amnesty means frogiving them for breaking the law. We aren't talking about doing that. These would be people who are in the country legally, and if they committed anything resembling a serious crime, they should be excluded.
you are essentially giving citizenship to the multiple family members he/she chooses to bring.
It would mean granting citizenship to their spouse and minor children, and if they can't support them they should not be granted citizenship.
it would result in, according to some of the numbers I have seen, an addition of some 40 million people after only a few years.
Providing a possible path to citizenship doesn't mean granting citizenship to every guest worker. I think you misunderstand.
The McCain/Kennedy plan is completely, totally, and entirely unacceptable.
Bush's original plan was also unacceptable.
The Kyl/Cornyn is a big step in the right direction, but still not there yet. It still does grant amnesty to a considerable number.
I definately don't like where the Republican Party started the discourse on this subject, but it's moving in the right direction.
We need to keep the pressure on so that we don't end up with another disasterous amnesty plan.
We also need to count McCain's plan as yet another reason why he should be voted out of office.
which gets us absolutely NOwhere....
Done; I have been telling them "not one penny to the Republican Party until they change their policy regarding illegal aliens".
This issue is killing us and putting the nation at risk.
Yep.
We've been sold out.
OK, perhaps I misunderstood your statements. I was under the impression that you were saying that every guestworker should be put on a path to citizenship. I was also, mistakenly, under the impression that you were supporting the McCain/Kennedy Plan.
If your argument that some of the more highly skilled workers, who could provide a great benefit to American society, and would not take jobs away from willing and able American workers, than I agree.
I think we are also in agreement that McCain/Kennedy would be a disaster. It is a terrible plan, which essentially amounts to a blanket amnesty for millions and millions of people. If Kyl/Cornyn could and would be enforced, I would most definitley support it. I must say, however, there is good reason to fear that it may not be enforced.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.