What are the three most important arguments: In favor and against the legalization of undocumented workers?
338518
In favor:\n\n(1) It is a humane and compassionate thing to do, especially with undocumented workers who have been here for a long time, and have therefore taken roots here.  (It also helps to eschew the problem of separating families because some of the members are here illegally and some are not.)\n\n(2) It is a way to obtain some revenue: e.g., one could legalize an undocumented worker and make him or her pay--over the years, and in small amounts--the tributary debt he or she owes to the IRS, for all the years spent in the US illegally.\n\n(3) It keeps in line with America's historical openness to immigrants and refugees.\n\nAgainst:\n\n(1) It may encourage more illegal immigrants to come here.  This is a serious problem, and so amnesty should only be given if coupled with a substantial increase of border security, and a toughening of the regime of deportations, perhaps even with the criminalization of illegal trespassing.\n\n(2) It will infuriate simpletons in both parties, particularly in the Republican right-wing.\n\n(3) It will produce a block of future values-voters.
944829
I'm Canadian, and I support illegal immigration because immigration is restricted only for xenophobia, to not let the face of the U.S. or Canada change too fast.   The labour market has decided that the Mexican illegals should work in the U.S., and they should be allowed to do so unless the English language becomes threatened.  Call me a bleeding heart, but economic migration is one of the best ways to alleviate poverty in the world.\n \nWhat is "illegal" anyways.  Well, in 1776, the whole U.S. was quite illegal, so some laws shouldn't be respected, should they?
324205
Key provisions of the Senate's main immigration bill would create a "gold card" program for illegal immigrants who entered the United States before Jan. 4, 2004, and create a guest worker program to bring in more foreign laborers, according to Senate Judiciary Committee staff members.\n\nThe committee is to begin debating the measure Wednesday under a three-week timetable aimed at producing a final version for the full Senate by March 27.\n\nSponsored by the committee chairman, Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pa., the legislation is designed to strike a middle course between a bill passed by the House that calls for tougher immigration enforcement and the wishes of pro-immigration advocates who call for permanent legal status -- and eventual citizenship -- for an estimated 11 million illegal immigrants.\n\nPresident Bush, defying objections from conservatives, has called for an overhaul of the nation's immigration laws and the creation of a temporary guest worker program to ensure a steady source of labor for U.S. businesses. Under Bush's plan, qualified workers, including residents now living here illegally, could stay in jobs for up to six years, then would be required to return home.In a move to build support for Bush's guest worker amnesty plan, administration officials talked about how they would actually implement the program. Jaws dropped as the administration reps explained the centerpiece of the program, a "Gold Card" that would enable illegal aliens to enter the U.S. at will, and work at any job with no labor market or other tests needed but would deny them citizenship. "Gold Card" would be valid forever, similar to current "Green Cards" but illegal aliens holding a "Gold Card" would not be able to adjust their status through naturalization.
757224
Deport, Deport, Deport \nALL ILLEGAL ALIENS \nAnd Their ILLEGAL ALIEN ANCHOR BABIES \nIMMEDIATELY Upon Discovery \n\nIn Response To miska (Above) \n\nThe Economy is NOT going to Collapse \nIf We Deport All 20 Million NON Taxpaying ILLEGAL ALIENS\nFrom An Economy Supported By 300 Million Taxpaying Consumers \nbecause they only make up 5% of the work force, \nand there are plenty of Under Employed AMERICAN CITIZENS\n(18 Million Of Them) \nto Step Up And fill in after the ILLEGAL ALIENS \n( And WHOEVER WANTS TO GO WITH THEM ) \nLeave OUR NATION
304867
To answer this question you have to look deeper at the issues. First, the US has outpaced the world in labor costs. Americans want more for less and are given it. That is why companies move their factories overseas, the labor there is so cheap it's still cost effective even after paying shipping costs for their goods. The Global Economy will eventually reverse this but Americans won't be happy about it.\n\nSecondly, legalizing the illegals will only make companies that use them pay them minimum wage, hence no longer cheap labor. Their whole appeal to companies is that they don't have to pay them American wages, no health care, etc, so legalizing them doesn't solve anything, those companies will just go get more.\n\nYou want to make the economy work, drop the minimum wage, which artificially alters the free market, and let people work for what they will. So long as companies pass the saving on to the consumer, you will see a downward spiral in pay but also in cost of goods.\n\nUnfortunately, there will always be rich people, middle people, and poor people. Even socialism does that. Look at the Soviet Union, and even now, Cuba. There are haves and have nots. It's human nature, we are not hive animals or insects.
216046
There is no question that as a whole it is beneficial to the economy of California (and the whole U.S.)  Immigrants, including esp. illegal immigrants are among the most productive workers in the U.S., and whole industries such as agriculture rely on illegal immigrants as a work force.\n\nNow, while beneficial to the economy as a whole, illegal immigration does expand the labor market, thus helpful manufactures, agribusiness, etc., and consumers but doing so to the detriment of US labor (organized and otherwise.) Wages are depressed by the influx of workers.
953435
gay/lesbian rights, being a vegetarian, animal rights, giving blood, saving the rain forest, death penalty, open U.S. borders\n\njust remember to take a stand and be agressive.
436640
1) Many businesses rely on illegal immigrants. Quite a few Republicans don't like the idea of punishing businesses.\n\n2) 11 million people. 11 million potential voters. And neither party wants to alienate the Hispanic populace this close to the 2006 midterms.\n\n3) Many people, particularly liberals, have framed this as a race issue, rather than a law issue. Sorta kinda true, since most illegals are Hispanic, but irrelevant. I don't care if they're white, black, or green, they drain society and infest it with drugs and crime.\n\nprasoonc : Oh really? My parents filled out tons of forms to get here and make this country better. Legally. And since when did the  Native Americans have anti-immigration laws like we do?
401018
Yes ... I Think It Will Have An Impact- AND I SUPPORT It\n\n1-People Will Lose Their Jobs And Be Replaced By Citizens\n\n2-There Is CERTAIN To Be At Least ONE Incident Of Violence\nPrompting Washington To Realize The DANGER In Keeping The ILLEGALs Here And Ensuring The Full Endorsement Of HR4437\nWith NO AMNESTY\n\n3-There Will Be Less Traffic That Day
632208
1. free health care [pay the minimum, and you can see a doctor/specialist whenever you want w/o being charged + hospitalization + surgery]\n\n2. child benefit tax [the more kids you have under 16y/o, the more money you receive from the gov.]\n\n3. lots of jobs available [that is why they are encouraging more immigrants to come...legally of course]\n\n4. more friendly people [costumer service is real customer service]\n\n5. cheaper real estate\n\n6. in general....one of the best countries to live in.
191937
While the arguments you advance have merit, there are many reasons not to legalize currently illegal narcotics. Not the least of these reasons would be the major negative impact on our productivity as a society if an even higher percentage of our intellectual capital were incapacitated due to intoxication.  Take a look at the loss of labor in China around the turn of the previous century when opium was legal and parlors were allowed to exist for the purpose of giving the users a "safe" place to indulge.  Many of them died, sometimes forgetting to eat.  Work slowed to a near halt.  Crime still rose because users who didn't work had to steal and rob (and occasionally murder) to support their habits.\nAlso, the supply of newly legalized drugs would only be slightly more traceable than their illegal counterparts are now.  If this weren't true, there wouldn't be the booming trade in moonshine whiskey that still exists despite that prohibition ended in the U.S. more than 75 years ago.
1040134
That's tough to answer since my ancestors were, in part, \n\n1) traced back within one generation of the Mayflower \n  (the original illegal immigrants and the first "boat people")\n2) Irish immigrants\n3) Native Americans\n\nI wonder what most Americans would do if their family was living in poverty and the best way to care for their children - provide better clothes, good food every day, adequate medical attention, better education, etc was to slip across a border and do menial work.  If I felt that was my only viable choice, I think I'd break the law.\n\nHow many people break the law on a daily basis just driving to work by speeding or driving recklessly or failing to follow basic traffic signals and signs?  What's the justification?  They're late .. everyone else does it .. it's not that important .. and so on.  What's the risk?  Injuring or killing someone else .. someone else's father, mother .... and for what?\n\nWhat's the justification for illegal immigrants coming here?  They want a better life, they want to provide for their families and children.  They want adequate food, education, health care.  A better standard of living, and so on.  What's the risk?  Hmm ... fewer people cleaning your houses, fewer janitors, fewer people gathering food in fields ... is that really a risk?\n\nI think we Americans need to show a little human compassion and understanding on this issue.   Just because we're a few generations further removed from our own illegal immigrant roots doesn't give us the right to be so quick and harsh in our judgment today.\n\nI don't endorse all of the latitude being suggested for illegal immigrants, but I do think they should be given the chance to work, become citizens, become tax payers, and earn the benefits that citizens deserve.  Wholesale deportation is not feasible, nor is it compassionate.\n\n"Give me your tired, your poor, \nYour huddled masses yearning to breathe free, \nThe wretched refuse of your teeming shore. \nSend these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me, \nI lift my lamp beside the golden door!”
689980
It is cheap to the employer because the taxpayers pay the benefits for the employer's employees.  That is why the employers are pushing the guest worker program.  The smallest part of the guest worker program allows limited potential legalization for some current illegals.  Most of the guest worker program is to provide a going forward cheap (to employers) work force to the tune of 185 million to 217 million poor immigrants over the next 20 years.  \n\nThis is intended to permanently drive down wages for the less skilled.  Meanwhile, the employers want to welcome the new immigrant's families so the schools and social services throughout the country will be overburdened.   (Did you know that it costs $18,000 per year to educate a single child in California?) As a result, education through the public schools will degrade even further, and upward mobility will be reduced.\n\nWe will become an upper crust of rich and a vast lower class of poor with perpetually reduced wages and educational options.\n\nWait a second, isn't that what the illegals broke into our country to avoid?\n\nTell your Congressmen that having no bill is better than the Senate Bill. Make them go back and come up with something sensible.
596354
The problem is that the legalization elements have been all entwined in the guest worker program which is a really bad program.  One Senator ran projections of how many poor immigrants would come here under the program (on TOP of the current rate of immigration and on TOP of the current illegal immigrants) and he came up with 185 million to 217 million poor immigrants in the next 20 years.  Even California Senators Boxer and Feinstein who have been pushing for legalization as their main goal in the program voted against this element of the program. (They lost.)\n\nCan  your school and neighborhood fit and support that many poor immigrants?  Mine can't. Do you see that many jobs around? I don't.  This is a big business idea to keep wages depressed for unskilled and semi skilled labor into the indefinite future.\n\nIf the border is truly secured, I want to deport felons and want illegal immigrants to actively start learning English as a condition of legalization.  However, as you say, they are already here.  The problem is that if you say you want legalization people now say 'I want the guest worker program' and most of them don't have a clue what is in it.\n\nIf there is a way to frame the bill during conference into qualified illegal legalization plus MAJOR border security, I would be in favor of it.  To tell the truth, though, I'd rather have no bill at all than the Senate Bill in its current form.
384706
1- allowed the company I worked for to send our jobs to Brazil and Germany, then let them hire from temporary services for other jobs we could have done.\n\n2- allows illegal immigrants to work here for low wages then get social services that the American Citizens pay for.\nWith their wages plus the cost of the free services they get they actually end up with better care than we (USA citizens) can afford.\n\n3- Illegal immigrants come across our southern border by the hundreds daily, costing us BILLIONS anually. Our government fails us by not placing the National Guard at that border.\n\n4 - No matter how many times illegal immigrants are reported, the INS arrests very few. They stand back, watch and do NOTHING!!\n\n5- By not allowing Americans who formerly made a decent wage and had insurance, to qualify for assistance until they can get back on their feet.\n\n6-By taking 'recesses' when important issues are on the table. They should have come up with something, at least more stringent border control, before going on two weeks recess.
532006
1)freedom of speech\n2)freedom of religion\n3)the right to own property and to operate in a capitalist system.
355241
well here i have two cool websites for u the first shows the opinions which Alan Greenspan has about illegal immigrants read the sixth review which talks about the contributions of immigrants . and the second talk about the trues and lies about undocumented workers .\nhttp://www.businessweek.com/2000/00_14/c3675078.htm\nFederal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan has spoken repeatedly about the contributions of both skilled and unskilled immigrants. He has advised Congress to ''open up our immigration rolls significantly''\nhttp://www.durrani.com/newsite/news_items/nactive_disp.asp?ID=1306