My apologies in advance.... this is going to be a long post. This issue is very close to my heart and I have a lot to say about it!
I hate it. Seems absolutely barbaric and horrific to me. This country was built on the shoulders of immigrants (some forced into this country). They help run our country. Surely there's room for everyone here without splitting families. This is just hateful to me.
-arbygil
I agree.
To be quite honest, I think the new immigration law is brilliant.
In each instance in the whole history of this country when elements of the conservative, moralist right have 'cracked down' on something they cause such strife that the country swings just a little further to the left and the oppressed minority gets a more sane way of dealing with their problems when the law is overturned.
Think about it. The conservative parties have cracked down on homosexuality, rights for blacks, rights for women, drugs, atheism, human sexuality...and what happens every time? They completely alienate the non-crazies that makes up the majority and instead of bringing about their 'moral utopia' they create a more effective underground and a human rights cause which eventually, inevitably triumphs.
-Chessie
Haha, I hadn’t thought of it that way – fantastic!!
and why don't they come the legal way? in said poor countries it is nearly impossible to get documentation legally as they do not have the resources in any way, these people are desperate and can even afford paying to do this legally
-Raccoon Love
Right on – this is especially the case for asylum-seekers. For most Mexicans, who aren’t typically asylum-seekers because the US doesn’t recognize economic refugees, they have it even harder. To get an immigrant visa, you typically need either a pre-arranged employer who is willing to go through all the bureaucracy and expense to hire a foreign national, or you need a close relative in the US (citizen or permanent resident to sponsor you). If you don’t have either of those, you’re out of luck.
Open borders cause a lot of human rights problems.
-Satya
Actually, a pretty good case can be made for the opposite—that hard boundaries violate human rights.
You haven't read the law. It asserts that officers must first make "lawful contact". The legal definition of such means they must already be under suspicion of having committed a crime. Next, the bill asserts that the officer must have "reasonable suspicion" that the individual is an illegal alien. This goes beyond skin color or manner of speaking because the law directly asserts that race alone can't be used to demand proof of citizenship.
-Satya
Actually, the end of sentence that “forbids” using race/national origin for a basis of suspicion is where the problem lies. It ends with, “except to the extend permitted by the US or Arizona Constitution.” (
http://www.azleg.gov/alispdfs/council/SB1070-HB2162.PDF, page 4). Well, guess what? In 1975, the US Supreme Court sanctioned racial profiling near the border in the case
United States v. Brignoni-Ponce. In this case, it was ruled that Mexican appearance is a legitimate reason, under the Fourth Amendment, to verify a person’s immigration status.
I have a much simpler and more effective plan to eliminate illegal immigration: make all immigration legal. While I recognize that federal immigration regulations are constitutional, I consider them unjust.
Ok, I can accept some minor regulations to keep out those carrying contagious diseases as well as fugitives from justice. I can also see the value in border checks and arresting those trying to bring in bring in contraband, including weapons, drugs (although I think legalizing, heavily taxing, and leaving the decision on whether to ban to localities is a better policy than banning these outright), and of course slaves (especially those intended for child prostitution). However, I do not accept the validity of implementing any quota system, or in requiring immigrants apply for any sort of visa or green card.
-magister
Right on!!
it's not just lengthy and expensive, it's IMPOSSIBLE for a large percentage of the desiring population to qualify, have a heart.. people are only looking for a better life. immigration policies are unfair to begin with.
-april
Again, right on!!
the land of Arizona was stolen from Mexico (and the Mexicans living on it) through the treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo.
-mf
Exactly.
So America is responsible for the desperation in Mexico?
-Satya
Well… yes, actually!! I was going to talk about corn, but That Girl’s got it covered:
What's the issue?
Corn.
Mainly, American corn subsidies and NAFTA.
The numbers we're looking at are over a million Mexicans losing their agricultural jobs since NAFTA went into effect in 1994. Tariffs that protected the industry ended in January 2008. Thus, these farmers were put into direct competition with U.S. farmers. Do you even need examples that compare the two in technology? If you look at the Department of Agriculture, a U.S. farm can produce up to a metric ton of corn in a half-hour (and this is probably not up-to-date information). America is exporting this corn to Mexico. We're forcing these people to find work in other places and their isn't enough jobs in their own cities, i.e. coming to the United States to find work and to, hopefully, bring that money back to their families. We're talking about a rational attempt at survival.
The economy isn't bad because of illegal immigrants. Jobs are not being taken away because of illegal immigrants. All that has been happening because of the collapse of the housing bubble and corporations that have gone under. How that will change is by renewing the economy (somehow) - not by the deportation of folks.
To me, all this stuff about "illegal immigrants taking our jobs and stealing our healthcare" is a Whitewash. It's using the label "illegal immigrant" to label a group of people that they feel are "overrunning" their state. And they want to stop it.
Right. And also, undocumented immigrants actually contribute to the economy. They pay the same sales taxes and property taxes (whether they rent or own their homes) as citizens. According to the Urban Institute, a nonpartisan organization that conducts economic and social policy research, “the majority of state and local costs of schooling and other services are funded by these taxes.”. Furthermore, in 1996, the IRS began issuing tax ID numbers to undocumented immigrants so that they could pay payroll taxes – and they do. In 2005, Social Security actuaries estimated that 2/3 of undocumented immigrants paid payroll taxes, and as a result, they contributed $6-$7 billion to Social Security—a benefit they are ineligible to collect—and $1.5 billion to Medicare.” Even the Reason Foundation, a
free market think tank, concludes that undocumented immigrants “are not milking the government. If anything, it is the other way around.”
Finally, one last thing to think about: undocumented immigrants have drastically reduced rights in the US - basically the only social services available to them are emergency medical care and K-12 school. But even legal immigrants have significantly fewer rights than US citizens under US law: for example, they're not eligible for food stamps, or Social Security unless they came here before the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act was passed in 1996. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights sets out rights on the basis of
personhood. Is it ethically justifiable to redefine these rights as guaranteed based on
citizenship?
