Hey, we all know we had to choose the lesser of two evils.

My libertarian hackles are raised by nearly every Bush domestic policy, except tax cuts. I knew, however, than John Kerry was going to be worse; ergo my vote.

And I also knew that Bush can do pretty much what he wants in his second term. I was hoping that all of his policies I didn't like were just political expedients that would no longer be expedient in his second term... but I never had a guaranteee, did I?

You can vote Republican and get outrageous spending coupled with tax cuts, or vote Democrat and get more outrageous spending without tax cuts, I guess... and Democrats want to give illegals amnesty AND driver's licenses.

This is another issue where there is no universal cure. The US, by it's very nature, the melting pot of the world, is an open society. I had a much different view of this issue when I spent 18 years in the MidWest. Now after 22 years in AZ, I can better appreciate the complicated issues here, especially since I have owned/ run a service oriented business for 2 years now. State economies like AZ, CA and TX are completely dependent upon immigrants. The trouble is that finding the immigrants with proper Visa's to work compared to the illegal immigrants with bad paperwork costs a lot of money and those getting rich are the coyotes and the people selling paperwork to illegals. Having a guest worker program is a necessity in these border states. The problem is not the immigrants, it is the identification and tracking of who is coming across the border. If we give people a legal way to come here and work, then we can truly crack down on illegal border crossing, without disrupting the economies of border states. The problem is, dealing with those here now illegally and in that regard, let them become part of the new program and register/pay taxes in their own names rather than not knowing who is here. It is also reasonable to offer a method for gaining residency and eventually citizenship if it can be proven that these people are filling roles that otherwise could not be filled by the same quality worker. It is very tough to say no to so many people that are just trying to provide for their families and are honest, hard-working people, especially when you have positions open that you cannot find suitable workers for. That is the same opportunity my german ancestors came to this country for. Most of the people that are here working, just want an opportunity, I cannot hire them but others do, including most every restaurant, 5 star resort etc etc.

Do we want walls, or ways to identify who is here and who is coming? Do we pretend that all those here under assumed names do not exist or do we find a system to bring them into the mix? The issues are terror and our economy. An America that puts up walls and prevents all immigration is not the America our ancestors knew. An America that finds a way to better protect her citizens, while providing opportunities for hard-working immigrants is the America I want. Technology and tracking is the key to security today, we simply need to reduce the "need" to illegally immigrate, so that we can act aggressively toward those that still choose to try! The proposed policy does not sound too bad to me - it is an effective starting point and much cooperation with the most affected states is a necessity.

The idea of amnesty without a process makes no sense to me since it punishes all those who legally go through the long process. The program proposed rewards people if they have been valued contributers to our economy for many years. It does not grant immediate amnesty to people here illegally. This reward for "breaking the law" mentality is ridiculous. The ecomonies of the 2 countries creates the dynamic necessity for these people. Simple logic would dictate this activity, despite the law. The laws are simply not reflective of the "real situation" . Before 9-11, the laws could be ignored to some degree, but that is not the case. Will I wait for a perfect solution that does not exist, or do something that helps move to a more secure position. In effect, the program Bush has proposed is more of a Homeland Security program, than an immigration program.

Please consider this perspective. I'm about as conservative as they come as some of you know from my prior posts, and I believe my position on this issue IS STILL CONSERVATIVE as it addresses a security issue, while not granting direct or immediate amnesty, but letting people be identified and enter a process.

All I know about this issue is that there are a group of Mexican day laborers (almost certainly illegals) who live in my community. Indirectly, I have taken advantage of their (cheap) hard work in my yard. It wouldn't hurt my feelings any if they were made legal. I do see that there can be too much of a good thing. But I don't see any easy answer to that though, since it seems we will always have a porous border with Mexico and our economy will always be an attraction (let's hope, anyways).

If we need these workers (and it seems we do), is it just spite that makes you all want to send them home? I know there is the whole respect for the law thing, but this would not be the first amnesty ever declared, the effect of which is to make legal.

I'll tell you why I hate the amnesty, rdelephant.

Because my physics department is full of foreigners. They have to jump through all sorts of hoops to get here and stay here. If they want to become permanent residents they have to go through dozens of stupid time-wasting and expensive steps and any misstep can get them deported. That's what they get for following the law.

Meanwhile, illegals who don't follow the law get an amnesty? What does that say to those who are trying to follow the law?

I don't like the current system, and I favor greatly expanding the number of legal immigrants and making it easier for them to stay here--but not at the expense of those who tried to follow the law at great cost and inconvenience to themselves.

So you see, rdelephant, I'm not opposed to immigration or immigrants, but to illegal immigration--and making it retroactively legal is just flagrantly unfair.

I don't live in the Southwest so I can't begin to understand the details mentioned here in the comments. There is a sizable population of hispanics in Kentucky. Most work seasonal jobs in the tobacco fields and some stick around and open businesses.

I have no idea who's here legally and who isn't. What I know beyond a doubt is that the Kentucky farming community would be hit hard of these folks ARE illegal and got deported. BUT, as Gabriel said, I don't understand how automagically enrolling the illegals in a "Worker Visa" program does ANYTHING to slow down the work of the Coyotes! Won't it just reinforce their business model?

"Come on Jose, it's only 12 hours in my trunk through the desert in August and then you will get enrolled in Mr. Bush's plan!"

Hardly a deterent to illegal immigration. and then there's the problem of Jose not REALLY being the good Catholic boy he claims to be...

No no...this issue is a stinker any way you cut it. Granting blanket amnesty and shaking a stern finger at the border saying, "Now the rest of you should immigrate legally" isn't going to work. Maybe a better solution is working with the Mexican government to educate their people on how to immigrate to America, give a grace period of 3 months or so to the illegals in the country during which time they can present themselves to their local county court house for identification, and once the period has lapsed go after the remaining illegals...HARD. NO...we don't shoot them but we do CHARGE them and PROSECUTE THEM. If guilty they get to work here in America for free for a while, courtesy of our fine Prison System.

The coyotes get people across the borders illegally, usually drop them in a "safe house" and sometimes get them in contact with people who may employ them. They are absolute scum and often mistreat these people and they are often paid over $1500 per person. If there is a guest worker program which allows the same people to come legally, why pay a coyote and cross illegally? They would reapply at intervals (3 years) and if over a period of several renewals they show that they are productive - hold full time jobs with legal employers who want them to continue working (sponsor them), then they can gain resident status and start working toward citizenship. Those already here would get the same treatment, but may already be able to show years of consistent work. The whole point is documentation and identification. Then the actual "illegal" crossings should be greatly decreased and with all of our monitoring capabilities, we could truly go after anybody crossing illegally and prosecute them under terrorist/ homeland security laws. That is my view of what Bush, McCain, Kyl and Hayworth are working toward.

But there's the rub; a lot of people don't want legal (read: pay taxes on) workers, they want to be able to pull their pickup up to the corner, pick the 5 guys they need for day laborers, and then pay them cash.

I work with the migrant ministry at our parish, and the places the tobacco farms provide for the migrants to live -- try no windows, door that won't lock, building that looks like a strong wind would blow it over, no electricity to the house (I mean, no drop, not can't pay the bill) water from an outside faucet. If they were legal, and had recourse to the things like OSHA and the like, the farmers would still want the illegals they could pay nothing and treat like animals.

Bunch of claptrap!!!

This issue spins around one axis...capitalism and market-based economy. The coyotes and the illegals fit right in with the used car/real estate sales mentality. And it goes right to the top leadership of this country. BC&Rove...sold to the highest bidder.

A system of haves and have-nots breeds problems like this...going back to feudalism...they don't go away, they morph. And it isn't going to change as long as fine upstanding citizens (moral values, my eye!) know that they can get cheap yard help.

Deal with this like crimes with guns...enforce the existing laws.

Regarding the "humanitarian" argument: The current situation or anything similar is not too good for the sending countries. They become dependent on sending us their excess population and receiving remittances back.

There's also the generally undiscussed issue of our sovereignty. We can't afford to give Mexico partial control over our immigration system. Yet, that's what's happened. They used to own the Southwest and a majority of Mexicans still think it's rightfully theirs. Fox and Zedillo have both said the "Mexican Nation" includes all those in Mexico as well as their millions of citizens in the U.S. and the millions of Mexican-Americans. It's quite dangerous to allow a foreign country to claim part of our population as its own.

The solution is to fine employers and encourage the use of machinery to do many of the jobs done by illegal aliens. If we really need serf labor, we need to make sure they aren't exploited and we need to get them from many countries so we don't give one country a monopoly on the supply, especially given our history with Mexico.

Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (Click here should you choose to sign out.)

As you post your comment, please mind our simple comment policy: we welcome all perspectives, but require that comments be both civil and respectful. We also ask that you avoid the extensive use of profanity, racist terms (neither of which we consider civil or respectful), and other boorish language.

We reserve the right to delete any comment, and to prohibit you from commenting on this site, if we feel you have broached this policy. As a courtesy, we will first send you an email noting a violation so you understand the boundaries. This will occur only once, however, and should we ban you from our comment forums we expect that ban to be permanent.

We also will frown upon those who suggest that we ban other individuals for voicing unpopular opinions, should those opinions be voiced in a civil and respectful manner. The point of our comment threads is to provide a forum for spirited though civil and respectful discourse … it is not to provide a forum in which everyone will agree with your point of view.

If you can live by these rules, welcome aboard. If not, then we’re sorry it didn’t work out, and thanks for visiting The Command Post.

URL:
Remember me? YesNo

Comments: