How do feel about the IMMIGRANT bill compromise ?
366732
If they're here illegally, how do we know how long they've been here? Send them all South. Illegal = criminal! Adios!!
332511
I'm not completely familiar with the bill, but I am for regulating immigration.\n\nHere are some things to think about:\n-Illegal immigration exists.  Even though we are a nation of immigrants, our ancestors had to follow the current rules to become a citizens.  We will always need those rules so that our government can function (serve its citizens) properly.\n-The government should crack down on Americans who illegaly hire illegal aliens.  People wouldn't break the rules to enter the country if it wasn't profitable for them to do so.\n-Our econemy is NOT dependant on illegal aliens.  Mexicans (or enter any minority here) do not do jobs that other Americans don't want to do.  Americans just can't earn a living doing those jobs.\n-The minimum wage MUST be increased.  With inflation, it is the lowest since the 1960's.  With an increase many Americans would pick fruit, work in factories, do construction, mow lawns, and clean up crap.\n-Illeagal aliens need to learn our country's rules to become members of our fine club.  Otherwise a greater rift between our cultures will errupt in some kind of revolt.
847436
Expecting people to respect the law is not racist. I agree with your position, but I do care who is in the country. Respecting the law begins with not entering the country illegally. Have no fear though Democrats are going to give them amnesty and then they will all be legal. The new incoming head of the Homeland Security Committee has stated that his first goal will be to review the border fence with an eye towards scrapping the whole project. I am also sure that now that Democrats control The House, The Senate's first order of business will be to pass the Kennedy/McCain immigration bill, which will not only legalize all that are hear already, but will also allow no less than 400000 new immigrants into the country per year. The major stumbling block to passage has been that the House would not accept it and that doesn't appear to be a problem anymore.
514497
First off, I believe you mean H.R. 4437. It's a good, strong bill againt illegal immigration passed by the House and yet to be voted on by the Senate, but will probably be shot down because the GOP has become a bunch of sissies. See below for more info (especially the External Links at the bottom).
221819
When I watched the news, they stated that this bill will make \n1) "illegal" immigration a felony, and anyone who helps an "illegal" immigrant will be charged with a crime.\n\nAn example was used by ASI, the student body goverment at my school, "If someone happens to take someone to the hostipital, that person who helped the illegal immigrant will be charged with a crime."\n\nTeachers, conselors, priests, strangers can all be accused for the crime of helping an "illegal" immigrant.\nFurthermore, government officials will also be unable to help the situation of illegal immigrants because they would be charged with a crime. \n\nASI also explained that if the bill passes,\n2) Children who are born in the US but have parents who are considered "illegal" immigrants will not be granted with their United States citizenship.\nRegardless of what side your are on in this issue, this is unconstituational because it is stated in our Fourteenth Amendment that U.S citizenship is granted to any individual who is born in this country\n\n3) Currently, border patrol and other immigrantion officials are the only ones who can arrest and deport "illegal" immigrants but now any official, such as police officers, can deport and arrest individuals who are "illegal".\n\n"Illegal" is the base word in immigrant that makes the whole situation biased. What is meant by "illegal immigrant"? A person who doesn't have papers to be in this country. \nIf I am correct, this country was founded by European "illegal" immigrants. Why is it okay for those immigrants, who first invaded this country, to not be properly refered as "illegal" immigrants and why did it become okay for them to stay here?
1054732
My parents were not legal Immigrants, but I am. For myself it wasn't that difficult, to get here from Scotland. It took effort and a lot of paper work, and a sponser, to guarantee, my welfare, for the first six months.\n I got a job early, and put no burden on my sponser. But I was covered by his generosity.\nOther legal immigrants from other nations, had the same problems as I did, some worse, due to the old quota systems. But they too all waited in lines, saw Doctors, got X-rays, filled reams of paper work, and did the right thing.\nIt angers me to see those illegals, sneak, or really, openly cross our borders.  They seem to think they are entitiled to do so. They see no crime being committed, and other latinos who were born here, or whos parents, got here, illegally or legally, try to help them out, and can't see what they are doing to our health system and schools.\nI think the politicians are working hand in glove with businesses, to supply this latest form of cheap labor.It lowers all our standard of living. See how expensive health care is now, if it's even available, and out pension plans, going down the tube. All of this isn't all due to illegal immigration, but it certainly isn't helped by it.\nWe need to control our borders and immigration. What other country would allow over twelve million illegals amongst them. \nI have no bias, against those people who are just trying to better their lives, for them and their families. But how much better would it be, if they did that in there own Country.\nMexico, could easily be a first world country, given its natural resources, and the skill and hard work of their natives. But their Government is too corrupt, and so few own the majority of the wealth of their nation, and aren't willing to share, it with the less fortunate amongst their people.
1089861
The two immigration bills that have been passed by the House and the Senate are still not law. The House and Senate bills have to be reconciled in committee. Both versions are worlds apart with the House version being much harsher and offering no relief for people currently in the U.S. illegally. As to what version is going to survive after comittee or if any law will be passed your guess is as good as mine.
1108324
I agree, particularly when you look at the fact that Che  and Cesar Chavez were against illegal immigration for driving down a 'living wage'.\n\nHowever, while I would support an appropriate immigration program (to my mind) if you say you support a work visa program you are being taken as supporting the Senate Bill, which is really terrible.  I don't think immigration should flood our schools legally OR illegally.\n\nHowever, if it really could be temporary, and for the workers only (or else putting a quota limit on family as well, not making that 'above the limit') I'd think that is ok.  However, you have to look at total numbers, and on top of the illegal immigrants already here, I think right now increasing immigration rates would be a bad idea.  I think since the illegals are already here we should look at screening them, and scrap the guest worker program for now.  \n\nWe need border security and employer enforcement, and need to dismantle the huge web of benefits to illegals that serves as a magnet to bring them across the border. Until that is done, any increase in legal immigration will be on top of continuing illegal immigration.
693188
There are many parts to this bill:  Here is a recap so far, and nothing but nothing is final.  No I certainly do not think employers should be penalized by the way.  We are only required to get a green card from them, not make sure that they are real or fake documents.  We are not the INS.\nThe Senate continues consideration of amendments to the comprehensive immigration reform bill.  Here is a summary of amendments considered since the last update of May 17.  \n\nMore amendments from May 17\n\nSenator Patrick Leahy (D-VT) offered an amendment (for Senator Ted Stevens (R) of Alaska) that would delay until June 1, 2009 the deadline by which persons traveling between the U.S. and Canada or Mexico would be required to carry a passport or other similar secure document.  That amendment was accepted by voice vote.\n\nAmendment: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d109:SP4018:/\n\n\nSenator Rick Santorum (R-PA) offered an amendment that would include Poland in the Visa Waiver program (in which travelers from certain countries (mainly in Europe) do not have to apply for a visa to travel for short periods to the U.S.  That amendment was accepted by voice vote.\n\nAmendment: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d109:SP4000:/\n\n\nSenator John Cornyn (R-TX) offered an amendment that would delete the ability of immigrants coming to the U.S. in a temporary worker program to petition for a green card on their own after four years.  This amendment narrowly passed by a vote of 50 to 48.  (However, this amendment was mostly overturned by a subsequent amendment, see below.)\n\nAmendment: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d109:SP3965:/\n\nVote: http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=109&session=2&vote=00128\n\n\n \n\nAmendments from May 18\n\nSenator Edward Kennedy (D-MA) offered an amendment that mostly rolled back the Cornyn amendment passed on May 17.  The amendment restores the ability of immigrants coming to the U.S. in the temporary worker program to petition for a green card after four years, but the Department of Labor would have to certify that there is no available U.S. worker to perform the job.\n\nThat amendment passed 56 to 43.\n\nAmendment: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d109:SP4065:/\n\nVote: http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=109&session=2&vote=00129\n\n\nSenator John Ensign (R-NV) offered an amendment that would bar undocumented immigrants who become legalized from receiving Social Security benefits for which they have paid through payroll taxes during the time they were undocumented.  There was a motion to table that amendment, which was agreed to by a vote of 50 to 49.\n\nAmendment: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d109:SP03985:/\n\nVote on Motion to Table: \n\nhttp://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=109&session=2&vote=00130\n\n\nSenator Daniel Akaka (D-HI) offered an amendment that would exempt the unmarried and married sons and daughters of naturalized Filipino World War II veterans from the numerical limitations on family-based immigration.  This amendment was accepted by voice vote.\n\nAmendment: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d109:SP4029:/\n\n\nAn amendment by Senator David Vitter (R-LA) would tighten somewhat the requirements for documenting eligibility for the legalization program.  This amendment was approved by voice vote.\n\nAmendment: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d109:SP3964:/\n\n\nSenator James Inhofe (R-OK) offered an amendment that would make English the “national language” of the U.S.  The amendment states that, unless specifically required by law, no person has a “right” to have government services or materials provided in a language other than English.  \n\n\nAdditionally, the Inhofe amendment strikes the option that an undocumented immigrant who is applying for legalization, or a participant in the temporary wor
1067873
I agree with you.. though I'm Canadian, I would support such a bill here in my country as well.  I think it's disgusting that we, as taxpayers, pay for illegals to be deported back to their countries.  I also feel that, if an illegal commits a crime, they should be returned to their country rather than my tax dollars paying for them to be imprisoned.  I don't care if they're from a country that will chop off their hands for the crime, their penis, or even capitol punishment.  If they can't do the time... they shouldn't do the crime, especially in my country.\nAlthough our immigration laws are not as lax as most US politicians would have American's believe, I still think we need to review our immigration laws in Canada and put a stop to certain types of people that are permitted to come into this country.  I know the states has a similar issue.  As far as this goes, I'm on the same page... and I think USA and Canada should combine their resources to fight illegal immigration across the Canada/USA border and the Mexican/USA border as well as illegals coming in through other methods such as ships and airports.
367079
I think it probably depends more on where you live, as to how you feel about it. Most people closer to the border, our fellow Americans, aren't to happy with ILLEGAL immigration. Always remember to say legal or illegal, that is the issue, not immigration.
1152414
Absolutely not.  It is so out of step with what people in this country want (deportation of all illegals, an end to illegal immigration, a restrict reduction of legal immigration) that the senate bill representing Bush's plan is essentially dead in the water.
900439
An interesting assignment. I would be interested in seeing how that goes...\n\nI'm a Republican, and there's really not allot that stumps me. However, I WOULD ask for proof that a guest-worker bill is NOT amnesty by another name.
388014
They defeated a motion to proceed in the Senate.  It got 38 votes, I think, and needed 60.  Now Repubs and Dems are accusing each other, again, of not making headway on this issue.\n\nThe bill would have allowed another round of amnesties for people who had been here from 2-5 or more years and had not committed serious crimes.  They would have been allowed to apply for green cards, permanent residency, and so on.  In other words, they would have been rewarded for breaking the law, as has happened several times since 1986.  Back then, Reagan signed a bill allowing for the first modern amnesty of this sort.\n\nAs it stands now, our immigration laws do not have current provisions for ongoing amnesties, though some illegals who have not registered MIGHT be able under older laws to apply for residency.  They'd need to check with an immigration attorney on that one.\n\nI say we deport them all en masse, which is permitted under our Constitution, laws, and the doctrines of national sovereignty.  Given the ability, the USA would do just that, I think, but I have read lots of articles about manpower shortages at ICE and what are still porous borders...
444508
I think that it's an unnecessary strain on race relations.  I believe they would have been more successful at getting reform by doing this quietly.  The president, who is a conservative, had just pushed a bill to allow illegals to become eligible to apply for citizenship.  So, if a conservative is for it, it will probably pass since most of his party will follow him and the liberal would vote in favor of it.\n\nBut then it got ugly and there were marches demanding AMNESTY (instantly legal), not just the ability to apply for citizenship, and the race issue came up.  They accused whites of being racists, and a BIG backlash is brewing among american citizens.\n\nI've been raised around the hispanic culture and they're fine people.  I work with them daily, and my company has a center in MX City.  Actually, race has never been an issue around here, for the most part.  But this whole May 1st walkout is brewing some serious anger among Americans because they are demanding when they, quite honestly, should be humbly asking.  I've never seen anything like it.  I'm not racist, and even I'm getting dragged into the melee because I refuse to allow an illegal any latitude for their illegal entry.  And instantly people call me a racist or an "arrogant American."\n\nWe gave an amnesty in the 80's and everybody was ok with it.  The idea was that we're going to clear up the illegal issue and keep the new illegals out.  Well, now we have an illegal population of about 10 million...so amnesty is a big POS.  Enforcement is the answer.
256618
There are over 200 million US citizens, so you probably have more than one opinion!  I as one US citizen don't feel threatened by Mexican immigration.  The system we currently have is broken.  I believe the law should not be broken and employers should be fined if they hire illegals.  At the same time, why not let Mexicans come legally to the US, give them Social Security numbers and keep everybody paying into the social programs.  Many illegals are paid cash, which means there is less money going to pay for the soon to retire baby boomers.  Mexico has a young population, but the US has a aging population.  The US needs more Mexican immigration.  If people come to work, fine.  I wouldn't want people to come and to demand social programs and services in Spanish.
334869
I think that a bill needs to be passed to help curb illegal immigration.  There are plenty of opportunites for people to legally immigrate.  Do it legally.  Then there won't be this problem.  I applaude the independant people who stand along to US/Mexico border to help stop the illegal immigration.  I don't think that the illegal immigrants realize how much of a strain they place on the US economy.  They can't get health insurance, driver's licenses or any of the things that they need.  Everyone else is forced to pick up the tab for them.  I feel bad for the kids of illegal immigrants who are US citizens but that's the chance that their parents tooks when they chose to move here illegally.  They need to go!  I know that sounds mean but that's how I feel.