2006-07-07 03:44:41 · 11 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Immigration
No and never!
2006-07-07 03:48:52 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
No.
I distinguish between any amnesty which I think should not be called a 'guest worker program' and the supposed 'guest worker program'.
The point of having a 'guest worker program' as opposed to increasing immigration is that we are saying our services can't support the families of that many people. However, we are also saying there might be people in Mexico, East Europe, China or wherever who would like to come work for a short period, make money, and go back home to live. If we have need for labor, and they would like to do that, if going back home can actually be enforced, we can let those people in without worrying about their impact on schools, and if the employers give health insurance that burden would be lessened, too.
The idea is that those people don't hurt anything, offer a benefit, and will be going back home, so why not?
However, it requires that those people be temporary or it starts triggering the 'bring in the family' problems of strain on education and other services we need for our own people. Citizenship should not be in the cards.
I think one of the problem with the Senate Bill is that to get a concensus to pass the bill, it blended 'guest worker' with amnesty for screened long time residents. They are not the same thing, and to treat them as the same thing creates huge problems in terms of drains on services and reduced educational opportunities going forward.
Regarding any amnesty, I think we need border security and need to get our systems set up to enforce against employers and to dismantle the benefits to illegals.
I would then say what we grant is permenant residency without the ability to bring in absent family and quadrupal their numbers. I think citizenship is a separate issue that should not be dealt with in the amnesty. That means that in practice they could get in line to be citizens. However, I don't think the two things are related.
I don't think it should be easy to become a citizen.
2006-07-07 04:55:45 · answer #2 · answered by DAR 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Not automatically. The worker,being a guest is not committing himself to becoming a citizen. He should emphasize a path to citizenship by stating he wishes to do so when entering the country and get the proper paperwork thru a visa. There should be no shortcuts allowed to jump ahead of those who prperly waited to obtain citizenship the legal way.
2006-07-07 03:52:03 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
No... the guest worker plan should give a legal path to work for thse who would otherwise enter illegally. We should only grant a work visa to the quantity of a work force needed for jobs not being filled, its should be a temporary job placement service on a grand scale!
2006-07-07 03:55:23 · answer #4 · answered by Americans1st 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Nope. Border fence, employer enforcement, 2-3 years of that, THEN we start talking about what a guest worker program might look like, and if you want to emigrate, get a fresh pen, you'll need it. People have abused our visas for years, it's time to re-format the whole mess, starting with a 'get out' policy...
2006-07-07 05:27:39 · answer #5 · answered by gokart121 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I don't think that people who are here illegally should be rewarded with citizenship OR a guest worker program.
2006-07-07 03:49:48 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
the situation is that the term 'the targeted visitor worker software' is basically too huge. at present it has a course to citizenship, yet that could reason issues of passing the finished element whilst the situation is basically with part of the team. As utilized to human beings right here, i think of it may desire to get surpassed. As utilized to a upward thrust interior the criminal immigration cost interior the destiny which grow to be meant to be of non everlasting workers, that's inflicting real issues in Congress.
2016-12-14 05:11:07 · answer #7 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
your talking about effect without addressing the cause. There must be limited immigration for what our country needs. As long as the laws are enforced, illegals deported en masse, then we'll believe our government is serious to protect Americans. I have seen state bills that limit to 300,000 a year as a national level, that's fine, but there must be sponsorship and their must be other conditions that apply, including expanded causes for losing your citizenship.
How long to get citizenship - as long as it takes to stop being a foreign national and become an American citizen in identity, language, alliegience, and culture.
2006-07-07 03:57:36 · answer #8 · answered by yars232c 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No, it should not! Why on earth should it?? A guest worker is a guest worker ... just that ... he comes in, he works for a specified time in a specified field, and he goes home!!
2006-07-07 03:58:55 · answer #9 · answered by Sashie 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It should offer one path and that's a path back home. I would rather pay NOW to get rid of them than pay for years of subsidized housing and health care.
2006-07-07 03:48:52 · answer #10 · answered by Plantoneonme 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No-it does not work.
2006-07-07 09:58:26 · answer #11 · answered by Ann E 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋