# Next up: Immigration reform (one more time) **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [March 22, 2010, 4:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/next-up-immigration-reform-one-more-time/533353 "2010-03-22T16:29:41Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Kearsen](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/82dd89/32.png) [@Kearsen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kearsen)\ **Post date:** [March 22, 2010, 8:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/next-up-immigration-reform-one-more-time/533353/41 "2010-03-22T20:02:05Z")
> [@villa](#): > > Depends on the visa. > > Just out of curiousity, do you think anyone “foreign looking” should be stopped to have their paperwork checked, or only those involved in political advocacy? It’s a trick question! No, actually I skipped it the first time because it’s a silly question to ask. It does beg the question though: Why would we allow political advocacy by those not here legally? ---
**Author:** ![Giles](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/giles/32/60_2.png) [@Giles](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Giles)\ **Post date:** [March 22, 2010, 8:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/next-up-immigration-reform-one-more-time/533353/42 "2010-03-22T20:03:51Z")
If **Chen019** ’s quote is right, > [@](#): > > The reality is that even those who work and half do not, according to the Pew Hispanic Center cannot subsist on the wages they receive and depend on public assistance to a large degree. then the wages being paid to those immigrants are too low. Indeed, I’ve met Americans who work in two or even three jobs to get by. If that’s true, then minimum wages are too low – perhaps because of all the union-busting that goes on in the US – and they should be raised so that people can live on the minimum wage. ---
**Author:** ![villa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/bc79bd/32.png) [@villa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/villa)\ **Post date:** [March 22, 2010, 8:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/next-up-immigration-reform-one-more-time/533353/43 "2010-03-22T20:06:37Z")
> [@Kearsen](#): > > It’s a trick question! > No, actually I skipped it the first time because it’s a silly question to ask. It does beg the question though: Why would we allow political advocacy by those not here legally? Why is it a silly question? Do you support random checks of people’s papers to make sure they are here legally? Whose papers will be checked? In fact, you don’t know if any of the people demonstrating for immigration reform were here illegally. You can’t tell by looking at someone if they are here illegally, were legal immigrants, or were born here. Although clearly a significant wing of the anti-immigration reform movement believes that you can. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [March 22, 2010, 8:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/next-up-immigration-reform-one-more-time/533353/44 "2010-03-22T20:07:29Z")
> [@Kearsen](#): > > It’s a trick question! > No, actually I skipped it the first time because it’s a silly question to ask. It does beg the question though: Why would we allow political advocacy by those not here legally? Because political advocacy comes under the First Amendment, and no part of the Bill of Rights is limited to U.S. citizens, nor to legal residents. Broadly speaking, U.S. citizens have only two classes of rights non-citizens have not: (1) Right of full political participation, to the extent of voting and holding public office. (Of course, even citizens can be deprived of those rights, as by felony conviction in some states, or adjudication of mental incompetence.) (2) Right of residence on U.S. soil. No exceptions to that that I know of. If you’re convicted of a crime and you’re a citizen, the state can deprive you of most of your civil rights, lock you up, even kill you; but it cannot deport you. (Unless you’re a naturalized citizen and deprived of citizenship by due process of law.) Exile is a punishment unknown to American law. ---
**Author:** ![Kearsen](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/82dd89/32.png) [@Kearsen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kearsen)\ **Post date:** [March 22, 2010, 8:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/next-up-immigration-reform-one-more-time/533353/45 "2010-03-22T20:07:33Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > Any plan that grants amnesty or amnesty light (a “path to citizenship”) makes a mockery of our laws and turns those people with the good graces to not sneak in and wait in line suckers. > > We need reform, yes. And we need to make it much easier for people to immigrate here legally. But the numbers we let in should serve us, not anyone else. If we need a million a year, open the spigot; if we have high unemployment, close it. Also, a guest worker program like that in Canada would serve us well. Especially since our labor needs are seasonal, and can fluctuate from year to year. > > We need to immediately start going after employers in a serious manner. Their undermining of our laws and national security will continue until owners and managers who knowingly try to game the system have a likelihood of spending a few years in jail. > > Next, we need to turn off the other magnets. No benefits for any illegal—no school, assistance, or medical care aside from basic emergency care and possibly vaccinations. > > **One other thing we should do is pass a law that no one who is here after a certain date, or can shown to have been here illegally, can ever become a citizen or get a green card.** They must leave and, if they’d like, seek entry via legal channels. > > Of course, this nonsense of allowing someone to sneak in and plop out a bay on American soil and have that baby be a citizen (and a ticket to citizenship for the parents) should stop immediately. We are saps. Time to wake the fuck up. As it stands currently, whether or not the law is written this way or not, if an illegal alien gets deported there is no way in hell is granted a work or other visa. ---
**Author:** ![Giles](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/giles/32/60_2.png) [@Giles](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Giles)\ **Post date:** [March 22, 2010, 8:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/next-up-immigration-reform-one-more-time/533353/46 "2010-03-22T20:10:40Z")
> [@Kearsen](#): > > It’s a trick question! > No, actually I skipped it the first time because it’s a silly question to ask. It does beg the question though: Why would we allow political advocacy by those not here legally? Because of the First Amendment. ---
**Author:** ![Kearsen](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/82dd89/32.png) [@Kearsen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kearsen)\ **Post date:** [March 22, 2010, 8:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/next-up-immigration-reform-one-more-time/533353/47 "2010-03-22T20:13:15Z")
> [@Giles](#): > > Because of the First Amendment. This first amendment: [First Amendment to the United States Constitution - Wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution)? How does that apply to non-citizens? ---
**Author:** ![code\_grey](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/f4b2a3/32.png) [@code\_grey](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/code_grey)\ **Post date:** [March 22, 2010, 8:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/next-up-immigration-reform-one-more-time/533353/48 "2010-03-22T20:14:30Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > 😕 No, we’re not. You would find it a lot easier to move to Mexico, if you wished, than a Mexican finds it to move here. do you have reading comprehension problem, **BrainGlutton**? I didn’t say it’s easy for Mexicans to come HERE. I said it’s easy for illegal immigrants here in America to go to MEXICO. And live there using money from savings they made working in America, while freeing up the jobs for Americans. Meanwhile, Americans would find it relatively difficult to go to Mexico by themselves. Mexico’s greatest strength apparently is not their diversity… ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [March 22, 2010, 8:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/next-up-immigration-reform-one-more-time/533353/49 "2010-03-22T20:14:31Z")
> [@Kearsen](#): > > This first amendment "[First Amendment to the United States Constitution - Wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution)? > > How does that apply to non-citizens? **All** of the Bill of Rights applies to non-citizens. See post #44. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [March 22, 2010, 8:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/next-up-immigration-reform-one-more-time/533353/50 "2010-03-22T20:16:05Z")
> [@code\_grey](#): > > Meanwhile, Americans would find it relatively difficult to go to Mexico by themselves. No, they wouldn’t. What are you talking about? ---
**Author:** ![Driver8](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b5a626/32.png) [@Driver8](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Driver8)\ **Post date:** [March 22, 2010, 8:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/next-up-immigration-reform-one-more-time/533353/51 "2010-03-22T20:17:51Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > A purely administrative problem, soluble by hiring just a few more bureaucrats to process the paperwork. The really long delays are not administrative in nature but rather laws specifying annual quotas for certain categories of permanent resident. Someone stuck in a queue for five or twenty years typically isn’t stuck simply because a bureaucrat hasn’t gotten around to reviewing his application, he is stuck there because only X number of people are allowed by law to obtain permanent residency in a year, and there are 5X people in front of him in the queue (a horrible oversimplification for illustrative purposes only). So this would mostly be a legislative issue rather than an administrative issue. In contrast, my permanent residency application based on marriage to a US citizen has no legally defined quotas and took about six months to process, and my removal of conditions after two years took four months. Still pretty lengthy, but at least not measured in years. ---
**Author:** ![Kearsen](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/82dd89/32.png) [@Kearsen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kearsen)\ **Post date:** [March 22, 2010, 8:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/next-up-immigration-reform-one-more-time/533353/52 "2010-03-22T20:21:03Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > **All** of the Bill of Rights applies to non-citizens. See post #44. Then why is campaign finance illegal from foreign sources? ---
**Author:** ![Eva\_Luna](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/e495f1/32.png) [@Eva\_Luna](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Eva_Luna)\ **Post date:** [March 22, 2010, 8:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/next-up-immigration-reform-one-more-time/533353/53 "2010-03-22T20:22:36Z")
> [@RTFirefly](#): > > Let’s see: > > 1. A couple of years ago would have been at the high point of the Bush-era recovery. > 2. The jobs were physical labor and were temporary. > 3. There was this matter of the criminal background check. > > Let’s revisit the statement: > > “Sure, all Americans will do any job, especially if they can’t find anything else. NOT.” > > It was at the top of the employment cycle, so most people _could have_, and probably had, found some other job by that point. Except the company had gone through this process every year for the past 10 years or so, because they have chronic problems finding unskilled labor. > [@](#): > > A big chunk of those still having difficulties finding jobs were surely persons with nontrivial past encounters with the law, who you were weeding out (or scaring away, same difference) by the criminal background check. > > And then what you’re offering the relative handful of unemployed people with little to fear from the background check is a physically demanding but temporary job. Many of them wouldn’t be in the market for such a job even if it were permanent; the rest, in that labor market, might figure the payoff from staying put and looking for something of a longer-term nature was likely to be better. But that’s a whole separate discussion. I thought the larger discussion here was about whether there is ever a legitimate need for U.S. companies to hire foreign workers, and if so, what might a reasonable process be like for doing so within the law. ---
**Author:** ![Chen019](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/f19dbf/32.png) [@Chen019](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chen019)\ **Post date:** [March 22, 2010, 8:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/next-up-immigration-reform-one-more-time/533353/54 "2010-03-22T20:24:51Z")
> [@Giles](#): > > If **Chen019** ’s quote is right, > > then the wages being paid to those immigrants are too low. Indeed, I’ve met Americans who work in two or even three jobs to get by. If that’s true, then minimum wages are too low – perhaps because of all the union-busting that goes on in the US – and they should be raised so that people can live on the minimum wage. Correct, Unions should logically oppose this influx of low skill migrants who are driving wages through the floor. Also, those who are concerned about the rate of unemployment should logically oppose low skill immigration. ---
**Author:** ![DigitalC](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/ebca7d/32.png) [@DigitalC](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DigitalC)\ **Post date:** [March 22, 2010, 8:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/next-up-immigration-reform-one-more-time/533353/55 "2010-03-22T20:25:53Z")
> [@code\_grey](#): > > . Meanwhile, Americans would find it relatively difficult to go to Mexico by themselves. Mexico’s greatest strength apparently is not their diversity… Exactly what are you basing this ridiculous idea on? tons of Americans retire to Mexico and other third world countries. Poor countries WANT americans spending their money there, thats just fucking common sense. ---
**Author:** ![Jack\_Batty](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jack_batty/32/3201_2.png) [@Jack\_Batty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jack_Batty)\ **Post date:** [March 22, 2010, 8:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/next-up-immigration-reform-one-more-time/533353/56 "2010-03-22T20:30:56Z")
Just ask Rush Limbaugh. I hear he’s moving to Costa Rica. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [March 22, 2010, 8:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/next-up-immigration-reform-one-more-time/533353/57 "2010-03-22T20:45:55Z")
> [@Kearsen](#): > > Then why is campaign finance illegal from foreign sources? I’m not sure – perhaps because the federal courts have not been **entirely** consistent in applying that bullshit “money = speech” theory (that gets in the way of the campaign-finance reform that we so urgently need to put down plutocracy in the U.S.; but that’s another debate). ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [March 22, 2010, 8:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/next-up-immigration-reform-one-more-time/533353/58 "2010-03-22T20:55:14Z")
> [@Chen019](#): > > Enforce existing laws, implement e-verify, end birthright citizenship and remove welfare for illegals. > > [National Review Online: Stop Illegals, Save CA : NPR](http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=112167023) In [this thread](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=547410) recently you argued for “skills-based” immigration standards. Does the fourth of Lind’s proposals meet your criteria there? And what is “e-verify”? As for “end birthright citizenship,” that would require either a constitutional amendment, or a major Supreme Court decision reversing an interpretation of the 14th Amendment [going back to 1898.](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Birthright_citizenship_in_the_United_States_of_America#Children_of_immigrants) Don’t expect to see either in your lifetime. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [March 22, 2010, 9:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/next-up-immigration-reform-one-more-time/533353/59 "2010-03-22T21:03:51Z")
> [@Jack\_Batty](#): > > Just ask Rush Limbaugh. I hear he’s moving to Costa Rica. :mad: Rush! Don’t tease us! ---
**Author:** ![Eva\_Luna](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/e495f1/32.png) [@Eva\_Luna](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Eva_Luna)\ **Post date:** [March 22, 2010, 9:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/next-up-immigration-reform-one-more-time/533353/60 "2010-03-22T21:15:24Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > And what is “e-verify”? [Here’s some basic info on e-Verify.](http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.eb1d4c2a3e5b9ac89243c6a7543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=75bce2e261405110VgnVCM1000004718190aRCRD&vgnextchannel=75bce2e261405110VgnVCM1000004718190aRCRD) The program’s effectiveness has been mixed; there have been problems with data verification, both with [false positives](http://www.informationweek.com/news/government/security/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=223100838) and [false negatives.](http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/2008/0707/p02s01-usgn.html) [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/next-up-immigration-reform-one-more-time/533353.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/next-up-immigration-reform-one-more-time/533353.md?page=4)