Skip to comments.Splitting the Difference on Illegal Immigration (They can stay, but they can't become citizens.)
Posted on 02/24/2013 8:22:30 PM PST by neverdem
In the controversy over illegal immigration that has roiled our politics for decades, the image of "living in the shadows" has been invoked by all sides. For immigrant advocates, "the shadows" are where the undocumented are harassed by overzealous law-enforcement officers and exploited by unscrupulous landlords and employers. For many other Americans, "living in the shadows" conjures vaguely sinister intruders using public services to which they are not entitled and preying on law-abiding Americans through illicit activities and crime.
Yet regardless of one's views on the issue, this imagery is profoundly misleading. It helps to perpetuate the myths and exaggerations that have made our immigration debate so fruitless. Undocumented immigrants are hardly mere victims of economic or political forces beyond their control. But neither are they dangerous criminals or public charges lurking on the fringes of our society. Rather, they are responsible agents who have made difficult choices in a complicated and risky environment an environment for which all Americans bear some blame.
These choices produce both beneficial and negative consequences for the nation and for the immigrants themselves. And our policies must contend with both sets of effects. If we are to find our way to a solution, we must examine the genuine predicament of the millions of illegal immigrants in our midst without ignoring the legitimate concerns millions of Americans have about their presence.
If we succeeded in removing the hyperbole and stereotypes from the immigration debate, our politics might open itself to a balanced approach to the problem: legalization for as many undocumented immigrants as possible, but citizenship for none of them. Under this proposal, illegal immigrants who so desired could become "permanent non-citizen residents" with no option of ever naturalizing...
(Excerpt) Read more at nationalaffairs.com ...
What part of “illegal” are these people having trouble with?
No, not a good idea. All of them have to be deported.
The argument from the left is that they are difficult to ‘track’.
Newt said it best: “The USPS, FedEx and UPS track 23 million packages per day while the packages are enroute and we can’t find 14 million people?”
I vote for making them very uncomfortable and deporting them when we catch them.
Last summer here in Michigan we ended up giving migrants welfare due to the lack of work caused by the drought. Now the farmers are claiming they need more migrants because the ones who got welfare have scattered.
OK, last time:
THEY DON’T WANT TO BE CITIZENS!!!
The desire of the illegals is to get a paper saying they can stay here legally. That ENDS the process for them. No going back of the line. No paid fines and taxes. CERTAINLY no speeka da Ingles. I would be amazed of .1% of the new recipients of amnesty will even TRY to become citizens.
I will be amazed if fewer than 75% of them DO NOT vote, irrespective of legality.
Just like the did last year.
Oh, and by the way, they want to vote too.
Either way it equates to surrender.
So....they can stay here and not be citizens BUT at the same time the American citizens will pay for their healthcare and every other “free” need they might have!!!
Really, why would they want to become an American citizen and actually have to pay their own way when they can CONTINUE to freeload off from us?
Meaningless...so long as every baby they pop out (and they pop out a ton) are automatically U.S. citizens - making the entire family immediately eligible for a host of social services and welfare, as they are right now.
How long will it take a liberal court to say that second class status is unconstitutional and give them blanket citizenship?
The Democrats and the professional ethnic grievance groups will never accept that. And John Roberts might not either.
Plus, the issue of anchor babies and birthright citizenship would still leave the legalized non-citizens able to produce millions of future Democrats.
But this idea might be worth considering if, and only if, the legalized non-citizens were not allowed to ever sponsor relatives for family-based immigration. That way at least the threads of chain migration wouldn’t be greatly expanded.
How about the opposite...they can become honorary citizens, but they have to return to Mexico...never to return.
Give em a little pin or something.
I give it about 8 months before the Supreme court gets it and rightly makes them citizens.
I say that not because I want it to happen but because I don’t see how the supremes could rule otherwise. Its kind of like the fantasy that they could become non voting citizens.
If they stay, they will become citizens with all the rights of citizens. And in 15 to 20 years we’ll be electing a president for life who prefers to be called “General” like every other marxist latin American hell hole.
"Legal permanent residents are also not eligible for all social programs. For example, since 1996, they have been ineligible to receive Medicaid benefits during their first five years in the United States, after which time their coverage is at the discretion of individual states. Similarly, legal permanent residents who have contributed to Social Security and are otherwise entitled to benefits may have them suspended if they remain outside the United States for more than six consecutive months."
You should have read it. The article didn't mention Medicare, Obamacare or welfare. I don't know where states are getting the money.
Not only deport hem, but refuse to let them mooch welfare and other goodies!
That’s the ticket. Tattoo bar codes on their foreheads.
"Finally, legal permanent residents cannot obtain U.S. visas for immediate family members outside of established quotas."
This country is on national suicide watch and is determined to carry it out.
I don't think anything would pass Congress without addressing anchor babies.