Dave Brat On What His Shocking Win Means For The GOP

I think the term "amnesty" is too loosely used.

All here would, I think, agree that the current situation is unacceptable and we just can't do nothing.

How about this:
- the borders need to be properly controlled to prevent further illegal immigration
- the legal immigration system is a mess and needs to be fixed
- those illegal immigrants on welfare and other government programs must return to their homelands
- those in the US who are working and self-supporting get temporary work permits. If they want to stay long-term, they must get in line to apply for legal immigrant (green-card) status along with everyone else in the world who wants to immigrate to the US.

If you wish to call that amnesty, then I am in favor of it and ask "What is your solution?"

If you wish to call that amnesty, then I am in favor of it and ask "What is your solution?"

I like what you have suggested, other than I think that "controlling the border" is impossible, in practicality. It's too large, and the incentive for sneaking across it is too large. They will always find a way.

The only way to "close" the border is to stop providing incentives for crossing it illegally. Cut off the freebies (including medical care and education), and make it as difficult as possible to get a job, rent a house, drive a car, etc. and the incentive dries up. Unfortunately, completely eliminating the freebies would require a change in the Constitution, or at least a reinterpretation of the 14th amendment to eliminate "anchor babies".

I understand the appeal of "guest workers", but we have plenty of people that would like entry level jobs. Yes, there are many that don't want to work that hard, but without the illegal immigrant flood, wages will go up. There was an article a few days ago noting that entry level jobs at Wal-Mart were paying $17/hour in North Dakota, because it was the only way they could get applicants. Of course, we would risk more inflation, because they can't raise wages without raising prices. But, that money would stay in the US, rather than being remitted to Mexico.

The other suggestion I would make: no green card or guest worker permits if you are already in the US illegally. You go home and apply for one. If you are caught in the US while waiting for approval, you are excluded -- permanently.

I do because I understand why people would want to be in America. To seek the safety and prosperity, the opportunities, the health that is here. It is so important that yes, people follow the rules so that people can be treated equally and fairly in this country.

I have a problem with this line of rhetoric. This means that we are to become a majority Latino country at some time in this century. How is this construed as a good idea? If my immigrant grandfather wanted to go to Latin America, or wanted me to become a Latin America, or wished our family to live without the benefit of the English law, why then, that's where he would have gone. Millions did, you know?

To fundamentally change the demographic of the nation in less than 100 years will be to destroy it as a Republic. We cannot assimilate a new population that outnumbers us. We can be assimilated after a while by a new majority.

¿Es que no comprendeis os?

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.