Bullet list in order of nothing:
- I have no beef with anyone who wants to come to this country to work, pay taxes, etc. Have a set of standards for immigrants to meet, open the door and get the Hell out of the way. The Devil's in those standards, of course, and PeeCee can't have a seat at the table when they are drawn.
- I am a second-generation American myself (father's side), so everyone should get the same opportunity my Grandfather Phillip got: the right to survive with and on his own initiative, with no-one behind him to catch him if he fell, which he did (great earthquake in Frisco in 1906 wiped him out totally and then the Depression again 19 years later). His new synagogue in Portland set him back on his feet in 1906 with minimum assistance, for a minimum time, in return for work.
- It seems that the Rio Grande Compromise has these basic underpinnings, but it also seems to me that the basics won't buy votes, so let's take a broad guess at how they will "have" to be modified to make them into vote-buying material. BTW, you can use my title, Chuckie. It's the only thing I'm ever gonna do for you, you Gun-Grabbing schmuck).
No fair, you say, you can't assign Evil to a government program even before it's had some meat put on the bones?
Well now, Pilgrim, take the not-yet dead Gun control issue and the un-dead Gun Controller Chuck Schumer. We knew all about THAT fiasco before it started, didn't we? Feinstein and her gun-grabbers had their dancing shoes on before those little hearts had stopped leaking, didn't they? Quod Erat Demonstratum est.
Here are the big dangers:
- The "some more equal than others" ploy, You're an immigrant "waiting in line." Okay then, let's say that you are working and you have your choice of jobs:, both involve agricultural labor. Job "A" involves just showing up at the farm labor center, punching in and going out to work on a farm. Job "B" involves joining a farm worker's union, then showing up and working on a farm. Do you suppose Job A or Job B gives you the best "path to citizenship"? Now let's say you stick out Job B for two years, and a new program is announced to give low-interest loans to farmworkers to pay their $5000 fee and back tax bill (supposedly this will be a pre-requesite). Who do you suppose will get those loans, Jobholder "A" or Jobholder "B"? I knew you could see the light.
- Then there's the old "anchor-baby" ploy. There's already talk of making a smoother or quicker "path to Citizenship" for those parents with Anchor Babies. Look for this issue to raise it's ugly head, and very soon. This issue might very well kill the program right off the bat. Thing is, it doesn't have to be a fight here. We may be the ONLY Nation to have the Anchor-Baby Doctrine (and if we're not, you can bet all the ones which do are Socialist countries by admission and trying to become more so). This is a no-brainer: Instead of Anchor Baby status, give Dual Citizenship to the Anchor Baby. That way, the youth has an opportunity to live in the USA if it can arrange foster parent status or some FAIR way can be devised to "hold" a slot for the parents that doesn't trump any other immigrants' rights, but the parents aren't rewarded for breaking the Immigration laws to have the child here. No one is disadvantaged with the Dual Citizenship plan, and that way two parents and a child don't steal TWO "places in line" from someone who did NOT have an anchor baby.
- How do State's Rights figure into this new system? LOTS of opportunity for vote-buying here, folks. The Liberal States already heavily regulate and subsidize immigrant housing, and to some degree, there is other subsistance as well. How about the Conservative states? Let's take two States, California and Texas. Let's say the total value of immigrant housing bennies in CA is $1,000/month, and in Texas it's $600/month. Let's say the generous Feddle Gummint adds $400 month to that total in each State, so there's no favoritism there, is there? Nazzofast, Guido, now toss in the fact that CaliforniKa can't afford those extra bennies, but they pay them anyway, and then snivel up a bailout from the Feds, when Tejas doesn't need a bailout, pays it's own way. NOW who is cutting the fat hog? Why, it's both the State of Kalifornika AND the immigrants, and they both scratch each others' backs.
If this Immigration Reform, I call it the Rio Grande Compromise, is going to work, it has to have a fine nit-comb used on it to get out all the political lice, or those immigrants are not going to be anything but a mechanism to insure the complete and forever Socialist conversion of the US of A.
Oh, Wait, maybe that's the whole Idea.
Mister Representative, can I talk to you just a bit....
I is a firm believer that "illegal is illegal", and that we ought to deport all illegals. Wait! I'm not as bad as that may sound. (I just like being dramatic!) Obama's program was tolerable (don't harass those not causing trouble) but only addressed 1/3 of the problem. We need registration to make illegal or "undocumented" folks legal and documented visitors (then deport those not registering). But then we need to track them, because registration is bogus without tracking or accounting. We want to keep the best, and the good, maybe even the tolerable. But not the bottom of the barrel, the users and takers. Issue a holographic card with photo and thumbprint, renewable and revokable. I want to see tax returns filed. No reported income - gotta be working under the table, dealing in illegalities or milking the welfare system - hello and goodbye! No return filed, card revoked. I have more ideas and details, but that's pretty much of it in a nutshell. Pay into SS, if you become a citzen you have half or 2/3rds credit for your contributions. Etc.,etc.
Posted by: Richard Bergerson | January 29, 2013 at 12:53
I think that there is a compromise we can reach.
Each illegal alien signs a plea bargain that basically confesses to entering the country illegally, which is a felony punishable by more than one year in prison, and is released after serving something like one day in the county lockup, and pays a nominal fine, or something. In exchange for that confession, he gets to live here, as an Legal Alien, apply for citizenship (take the test) BUT forfeits any right to vote (particularly in elections of federal offices), or own a firearm, just like any other felon. I can see some who would want to require English Language skills and long-term residency proof, etc. I won't quibble, but that is secondary.
This means that the democrat party can't import a bunch of voters to swamp the votes of American citizens, and the illegals don't need to fear every cop they see. (As things are now, the illegals are a target for extortion and mistreatment because of their illegal status.) They are then also entitled to social security retirement benefits (which they have been paying for all along, but not eligible to collect), and have to pay normal income taxes, etc.
We need some way to make sure that one adult in the family taking the deal does not lead to everyone else in his family getting immunity from deportation. The goal is to regularize the status of each immigrant, without swamping out the votes current citizens.
Some would complain that this makes immigrants second-class citizens. I say, second class is better than nothing, and their kids get in on the American dream.
This only works as a viable compromise if voter registration is made more secure - showing ID, checking the ID against the voter rolls, etc.
Posted by: Como | January 28, 2013 at 22:50