Jamie, if our vote didn't count like you say, the bill would have already passed. It's public opposition that has stopped it. Congressmen want to be re-elected.
And if our vote didn't count like you say, what's the point of debating what would be a good enough bill to pass? But since you ask, I think the no amnesty part would be good for starters. The new bill is also LESS strong on border security than the one that was passed by Congress last year, so they also ought to throw out the border security provisions and just start enforcing the law they already passed.
So what's that leave us with? A national ID card and stringent fines for those who employ illegals? The stingent fines are already in place, and we don't need a new bill; we just need to enforce existing law. So let's strip the bill of everything but the ID card to beef up enforcement of hiring regulations, and then we'd have a good bill.
2007-06-17 13:52:56
·
answer #1
·
answered by kscottmccormick 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
I've heard a lot about enforcement of our current laws in this and other posts. However, my understanding is that current laws are civil, not criminal, and that is what has led us to this point. Now, I don't really know the law, but if this is true then the first thing is to do is to make it a criminal act so individual states, cities, businesses, and other government agencies can't blow off the law without incurring a criminal penalty.
With the criminal law in place, secure our borders!
After a period of time, say 2 to 5 years in which it is proven that we have control over our borders, we can talk about what to do with the current 12M or so illegal immigrants.
"Amnesty" is another smokescreen for the politicians that are against citizenship for the current 12M people (I am glad it works though cause that bill sucks) similar to the "lazy American" arguement used by those in favor of citizenship. With that said, call it amnesty if you want, but I don't favor penalizing the current illegal immigrants if it is decided that they can get citizenship. We already talk about the money the problem costs on our social systems so how would they pay an additional monetary burden? How would they pay it without incurring more costs to our social systems. The money would be spent (wasted) by the government in the administration of the program. A lot of good that does.
I also find it funny that people are for forcing them into our military as some sort of proof of allegiance. As a recent Air Force retiree, I'll tell you that that proposition isn't feasible nor preferable. How many recruits does that make out of 12M people? Then you have to figure that the military is a highly educated and trained organization. I don't know what the education level is for the illegal immigrant community, but I assume it isn't very high. How much do we spend to provide an education for these people? Why wouldn't we just spend that money on those Americans that want further education?
Okay...my posts always run on so I'll stop now. My answer: separate the emotional humane portion of this question from the national security issue by first securing our borders that is proven through a period of time. Removing the reasons to come to this country (job, governement support, etc.) can be done through criminal laws.
2007-06-17 22:22:59
·
answer #2
·
answered by Samiwanatrete 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
You weren't bad until you got to #5. This is America and we do not work that way. If we did Japan would be the 51 State. Look at Bill O Reilly who has a good plan . Peace
2007-06-17 20:57:27
·
answer #3
·
answered by PARVFAN 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
How about rolling up your sleeves and go and get those people off unemployment and force them to get a job at the field if they want a pay check. How about making those employers hiring illegal immigrants criminals. How about boycotting those business that hire illegal immigrants . LETS PUT THE BLAME WERE IT BELONGS. and stop picking on defenseless immigrants.
2007-06-17 21:01:41
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
How about we take them all on a plane and drop them at the southern most part of south america, so it will take them a long time to get back to the border, then when they make it back, we put them on the same plane back to were they started.
2007-06-17 20:58:47
·
answer #5
·
answered by Sir 3
·
0⤊
1⤋
I vote for #6. We've already lost the battle here--lost it when they made all public documents in Spanish.
2007-06-17 21:00:26
·
answer #6
·
answered by Jess 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
just press 1 for English, then go barf!!!!!!
2007-06-17 20:52:30
·
answer #7
·
answered by pszch 3
·
1⤊
0⤋