And rightly so. Have you read the links above regarding the economic damage & downgrading of educational standards?
I’d also recommend this old article by Japanese economist Yuji Aida which uses quite plain language to get the point across.
No one, at least in this thread, is saying that the US has either a moral or legal responsibility to help these children of illegal immigrants. But, the reality is that they’re already here in the US and not likely to go back to their country of origin anytime soon, particularly if they can’t speak their native language or have no cultural ties back there. If at least the option to earn their legal status isn’t given, then these people could very well be or continue to be net burdens on their states and communities rather than assets. Illegal immigrants are already an underclass in society and preventing their children, who are already here and not likely to go home the chance to earn their way out, risks passing on this underclass status to another generation.
This has nothing to do with the parents. Punishing the children because of their parents’ illegal entry isn’t a very effective deterrent because the parents are not likely thinking that far down the road anyway when they migrate to the US. After all, the current policy hasn’t stopped roughly 11 million illegal immigrants from coming to the US. Since these children who grew up in the US are not likely to leave, and in many cases have already assimilated into US culture, the US has an opportunity, not an obligation, to formally assimilate them. By having them earn temporary legal status with a path towards more, they can be raised out of the underclass and into the middle class.
Some of these kids are already in college. This article features a soon-to-be law school graduate who wants to join the military, presumably one of the services’ JAG Corps, but can’t since he is here illegally after being brought to the US when he was 4. After he graduates from law school, he may not even be able to take a bar exam since some states, such as Arizona, ask about and require immigration paperwork for non-US citizens as part of the character and fitness check. Why shouldn’t the US view this guy and others like him as potentially valuable resources and use this as an opportunity to take advantage of his abilities and willingness to serve?
I wonder if the millions of “encouragers” are that way primarily because of the skewed labor value or the very likely skewed voting value once they become legal voters?
Actually, I did mention the “moral and legal questions” involved, and I do feel there are sociological factors which impart some responsibility to US society in recognizing the children of illegal immigrants. There are deliberate incentives which exist for temporary and migrant workers to enter the US and provide cheap labor, and since these are sub rosa incentives, they come with no safeguards for the families who are brought in along with the laborers.
While I’m all for thorough policing of US employers who violate the law by hiring undocumented workers, I don’t see any justice in treating the innocents caught up in this social conspiracy as some other country’s problem. They’re ours to deal with. We effectively invited them here, through our loud and proud propaganda re: the American Dream, and through the pervasive wink-and-a-nudge advantage taking of migrant farmworkers and day laborers.
Right. Must be a Democratic party conspiracy. You’re a genius.
My court appointed lawyer says that last crack was needlessly combative and advises that I should apologize. (But then again, he also says I should blame ACORN, so I take his advice with a grain or two of sal de la mar.)
In this economic climate, I’m surprised this bill managed to get any traction at all, let alone support from 55 Senators. Trying to get any sort of immigration-related legislation passed right now is going to drum up a lot of ill will. And with the Republicans in control of the house and with 47 seats in the Senate in the coming term, immigration reform is effectively dead for the next couple of years.
I am of a more enlightened self interest state of mind. The people that this act was could have given a path to legal permanent status are not those who would be our burden; they are the people who are proving or who have proved that they are a benefit to us.
Young adults who are proving themselves smart and becoming educated. Young adults willing to die for this country.
Yup. Selfish thinking on my part but I see the situation as this. These young adults are here, have been here, and will likely stay here, legal or not. I can identify those who can prove themselves to be smart and ambitious, and those who are willing to put their lives on the line for this country, and give them a chance to to contribute fully, to not be a burden, and by so proving themselves have path to being a legal permanent resident. Or I can have a circumstance in which they are prevented from making such a contribution. And what happens then? We have a larger number of under educated illegal individuals whose smarts are not utilized for the good of this country. And who then, either directly or indirectly, have more of a chance of becoming a burden.
The only people who would qualify under this act are those who have already given to this country by way of military service or who have proven they are smart enough and hard working enough to be contributors. This is not kindness; this is informed self-interest. We want these people to be citizens! We benefit from them having a chance to fully contribute. We should just be grateful that they want to.
Now the idiots who are against doing that - born here or not, those people I’d be happy to not have be a burden on the rest of us.
Before you were even charged with anything !
You must have a court appointed lawyer on retainer… another Democrat conspiracy !!
You know us litigious liberals -keep a lawyer on hand but make the gummint pay for him!
-
So if our intent is to not continue to draw people into the US to work illegally, which is going to be less confusing of the following two options? Start giving bonuses to illegals, or start enacting measures to stop drawing people into the country?
-
If the illegal kids are receiving a better life than they were in Mexico – which is darned likely – then I’m not seeing your argument that these are poor innocents caught up in some horrible thing.
-
Who is advertising the American Dream down on the far side of the border, exactly? So far as I’m aware, people come up because they know they can make money. They aren’t coming to become citizens. They only bring their family because that’s the better option for them, but they’re planning to go back and raise those kids in Mexico after a short period of time.
When did we lose the capacity to execute more than one policy at a time? We can choose to enforce employment laws, and tighten entry procedures, and audit the classes of employers known to utilize undocumented workers, and patrol our borders, and process illegal immigrants back to their country of origin, and do all this humanely while still fairly assessing the needs of those children and of our society. I will again point out, because you seem not to get it, that the class of people most affected by this bill are kids who were largely or mostly raised in this country, who grew up in our various school systems, and who are able and willing to give service to this country and become productive Americans. This is not some soft headed “bonus to illegals” as you keep insisting and it offers no extra or special path to legality for the parents of the children who qualify, and in fact would tend to place those parents in higher jeopardy of discovery and deportation when their kids qualify for the program.
You’re not seeing that argument from me at all, because I never made it. I’ve pointed out, in response to assertions that I want to reward illegal activity, that we’re talking only about persons who had no standing or power to make the decisions to enter and reside here. Whether they’ve enjoyed, hated, been harmed or benefited from their life in the US is not relevant to my argument, only the fact that they are not liable for their illegal status.
It’s a quite Orwellian idea that there can be such a thing as “illegal kids” in the first place. We treat minors differently from adults throughout our system of justice, even when their criminal transgressions are deliberate. I trust you understand the reasons behind different legal treatment of children, and I have to ask why you would advocate ignoring the same distinctions between underage and adult actions when it comes to children who aren’t US citizens. Are they different than American kids when it comes to criminal culpability?
I’m taken aback by your blithe ignorance of the packaging and delivery to the rest of the world of American Exceptionalism®. The assertion that we’re “the greatest country on Earth” has been an integral part of our cultural exports since at least the first world war. Right leaning types like to trumpet our system of government, health care system, industry, and national character as pinnacles of human achievement toward which all other countries should strive. They’ve worked hard to associate the phrase “land of opportunity” with the good ol’ USA, and they’ve largely succeeded.
But many of those patriotic pitchmen also want to make the country a sort of giant gated community. They’re willing to let the right sort of foreigners into the club, and they’ll fight like hell to keep it exclusive, but they sure do like the price of the landscapers and wait staff who come in the back door. As long as they can close the gate on their backs at the end of each work day.