Why Enforcement Policies Won't Work

  • Thread starter Thread starter Ituyu
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I

Ituyu

Guest
Okay, I just tried to post a new thread, something I’ve never done before. I pressed submit but the thread did not appear. So, I am giving it one more try in hopes that I am not guilty of double posting.

I found this article which gives a very good overview as to why our Enforcement Only policies which we have been pursuing since IRCA 1986 have failed and will continue to fail.

I hope this helps in focusing the discussion on the issue.

freetrade.org/pubs/pas/tpa-029.pdf
 
Okay, I just tried to post a new thread, something I’ve never done before.

I found this article which gives a very good overview as to why our Enforcement Only policies which we have been pursuing since IRCA 1986 have failed and will continue to fail.

I hope this helps in focusing the discussion on the issue.

freetrade.org/pubs/pas/tpa-029.pdf
That is one opinion.

There are many who disagree including myself.

Here are a few more -

U.S. Sen. Richard Shelby

“I’m all for people making a better life for themselves, but we have to have some controls,”

“We just need to enforce our laws,” he said. “If we continue to break the law and look the other way, what does that say to the people who come here legally?”

shelby.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=PressRoom.Articles&ContentRecord_id=183835aa-802a-23ad-4ba7-8f9742824786&Region_id=&Issue_id=&County_id=

U.S. Sen. Craig Thomas

immigration reform must secure our borders against unauthorized entry.

a comprehensive immigration solution must enforce immigration laws within our country.

Entering the United States without the proper documentation is a crime, regardless of the good intentions that individuals may have.

thomas.senate.gov/index.cfm?FuseAction=Issues.Detail&IssuePosition_id=62

U.S. Sen. Ben Nelson

TIME TO GET TOUGH ON ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION

bennelson.senate.gov/news/details.cfm?id=249358&&

U.S. Sen. Johnny Isakson

“Immigration to the United States is a privilege, not a right,” “We are a nation of laws, and the Mexican government has an obligation to respect those laws, encourage its citizens to do the same, commit to securing its side of the border and address inadequacies in its own policies that have contributed to this situation.”

isakson.senate.gov/press/2005/122605mexico.htm

U.S. Sen. Kyl

The security of the United States and its citizens should be the first and foremost consideration in formulating border and immigration policies.

Any reform of our nation’s immigration laws should be careful to avoid amnesty by any name.

Turning a blind eye to illegal immigration, or sanctioning such behavior, undermines the rule of law in our country. It mocks those who wait patiently, sometimes for years, to enter the U.S. through legal channels. It encourages more people to immigrate illegally

kyl.senate.gov/print_page.cfm?File=legis_center/border.cfm

US Senator Saxby Chambliss

Preventing illegal immigration and gaining greater control of our borders must include accountability in the hiring of legal workers.

chambliss.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Issues.View&Issue_id=4ca1c2f6-2877-40b6-a55c-9ee76adf7017

 
Okay, I just tried to post a new thread, something I’ve never done before. I pressed submit but the thread did not appear. So, I am giving it one more try in hopes that I am not guilty of double posting.

I found this article which gives a very good overview as to why our Enforcement Only policies which we have been pursuing since IRCA 1986 have failed and will continue to fail.

I hope this helps in focusing the discussion on the issue.

freetrade.org/pubs/pas/tpa-029.pdf
Here are a few more that do not agree with your reference.

Rep. Brian Bilbray

If voters have told us anything, it’s that they want secure borders and do not want citizenship sold to illegal immigrants.

We must enforce our existing laws, strengthen document security, secure our borders and finally, punish illegal employers who hire illegal immigrants.

house.gov/list/speech/ca50_bilbray/in_060828.html

Rep. Charlie Norwood

After decades of being told that it is impossible to stop illegal immigration on the Arizona border, it has been all but halted since April 1 through the very means we were told wouldn’t work – dedicated manpower and willpower.

house.gov/list/speech/ga09_norwood/Minutemen.html

Rep. Virginia Foxx

Illegal immigration must be stopped, but we cannot and should not close our doors to those who wish to enter the country legally. We must increase our efforts to achieve closed borders with open, guarded doors. We have an immigration process in place that simply must be followed. It also must be strictly enforced.

foxx.house.gov/index.cfm?ContentID=370&ParentID=3&SectionID=5&SectionTree=3,5&lnk=b&ItemID=366

Rep. Feeney

Every sovereign country has an obligation to defend its borders and enforce its laws. America can not and will not be an exception.

In order to protect our homeland, we must secure our borders by providing both a physical barrier to illegal entry and an increased number of border patrol agents.

We must send a clear message to those involved in illegal immigration that America’s laws must be treated like laws, not guidelines to be followed or ignored according to individual whims.

Illegal immigration is corrosive not only to our border security, but also to our economy.

Our classrooms and our hospitals are overcrowded because they must support the additional burden of those who are not American citizens. The millions of illegal immigrants in our country do not pay their fair share of taxes, yet they take advantage of our taxpayer-funded social services and so increase our national deficit.

house.gov/feeney/OviedoVoiceImm.htm
 
Okay, I just tried to post a new thread, something I’ve never done before. I pressed submit but the thread did not appear. So, I am giving it one more try in hopes that I am not guilty of double posting.

I found this article which gives a very good overview as to why our Enforcement Only policies which we have been pursuing since IRCA 1986 have failed and will continue to fail.

I hope this helps in focusing the discussion on the issue.

[freetrade.org/pubs/pas/tpa-029.pdf](http://www.freetrade.org/pubs/pas/tpa-029.pdf)
Liberal SOP: appeasement; just give 'em citizenship
 
Liberal SOP: appeasement; just give 'em citizenship
True. Those darn liberals overlook the great success of the US enforcement only policy on drug use. Thanks to the Reagan, Bush 1, and now Bush 2 administration, America no longer has a problem with drug use. Our law enforcement coupled with severe sentences for possession stopped all importation of cocaine and pot. Problem solved! 😛

BTW: shouldn’t enforcement also include prison terms for employers of illegal aliens? Even if the employers have, you know, a lot of money? Oopps! Sorry. Said the “M” word. Not conservately correct. And folks with money should not be annoyed with laws that interfere making a profit. That’s un-American.
 
True. Those darn liberals overlook the great success of the US enforcement only policy on drug use. Thanks to the Reagan, Bush 1, and now Bush 2 administration, America no longer has a problem with drug use. Our law enforcement coupled with severe sentences for possession stopped all importation of cocaine and pot. Problem solved! 😛

BTW: shouldn’t enforcement also include prison terms for employers of illegal aliens? Even if the employers have, you know, a lot of money? Oopps! Sorry. Said the “M” word. Not conservately correct. And folks with money should not be annoyed with laws that interfere making a profit. That’s un-American.
Wow Mike. Your position is remarkably partisan and…silly. Never argue with a clintonista/socialist/lib (I say that because you didn’t mention what must have been your hero Clinton)…because truth is the first and last casualty. You need to exhale… there you go…Now what were you saying about enforcement.😃
 
Most conservatives believe in enforcement both at the border and the employer, so you are a little off-base.
True. Those darn liberals overlook the great success of the US enforcement only policy on drug use. Thanks to the Reagan, Bush 1, and now Bush 2 administration, America no longer has a problem with drug use. Our law enforcement coupled with severe sentences for possession stopped all importation of cocaine and pot. Problem solved! 😛

BTW: shouldn’t enforcement also include prison terms for employers of illegal aliens? Even if the employers have, you know, a lot of money? Oopps! Sorry. Said the “M” word. Not conservately correct. And folks with money should not be annoyed with laws that interfere making a profit. That’s un-American.
 
Liberal SOP: appeasement; just give 'em citizenship
Wow Mike. Your position is remarkably partisan and…silly. Never argue with a clintonista/socialist/lib (I say that because you didn’t mention what must have been your hero Clinton)…because truth is the first and last casualty. You need to exhale… there you go…Now what were you saying about enforcement.😃
Our enforcement only policy for illegal immigration would be as successful as our drug enforcement policy. Are you happy with the success of the US drug enforcment policy?
 
Most conservatives believe in enforcement both at the border and the employer, so you are a little off-base.
Looked thru the thread and didn’t find much about law enforcement against employers. Pls enlighten me about how conservatives will enforce the immigration law against employers.
 
Gee. You looked through the thread and couldn’t find it? Wow. I looked through the thread and didn’t see anything about the drug war being relevant to immigration enforcement. :whacky:

But, I will enlighten you, since you asked…
washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/12/16/AR2005121601814.html
Under the House bill, employers would have to confirm the authenticity of employees’ Social Security numbers against a national database of legitimate numbers or face stiff new fines of as much as $25,000 per violation. The measure would end the “catch and release” policy for immigrants other than Mexicans who are caught entering the country illegally and then released with a court date. All illegal immigrants apprehended at the border would have to be detained, and deportation processes would be streamlined.
Looked thru the thread and didn’t find much about law enforcement against employers. Pls enlighten me about how conservatives will enforce the immigration law against employers.
 
Ituyu;1588057:
I think the key point here is that a “battle of the experts” will not solve anything.
BUT, you’ve only quoted lawyers and politicians, with little understanding of the problem.
You will praise the references that support your point of view and reject comments and references that disagree with you – as well as criticize and belittle the references that make those opposing comments. Others like me will praise references that support our point of view and reject those that disagree. That is not proof that your view is right or valid, nor is it proof that my view is right or valid
Unfortunately you haven’t provided any proof against the facts.
All of the references see pretty much the same facts, data and information but draw different conclusions. Those conclusions do not prove anything; they are just a matter of opinion, an interpretation that is usually based on an agenda.
No they have agenda, to win elections. The don’t even attempt to get at the truth as Norwood’s positions clearly illustrate.
Certainly most of the references I posted have a partisan point of view. So what? What did you expect?
Honestly, to address the issue concretely with some credible sources.
The Cato Institute is certainly not the “non-partisan group” that you claim. It is Libertarian based organization with and agenda. That does not make them good or bad, but it certainly does make them partisan.
Actually they were most closely connected to the Republican Party. President Bush’s plan is very close to what they recommend.
The Cato Institute also has critics. See “Criticisms of the Cato Institute”

world.std.com/~mhuben/cato.html
Agreed. However, in this study, their sources were indeed prominent experts in the field. Compare and contrast their methods and expertise to the politicians you support. These politicians should be seeking expert advice instead of dealing with the issue based upon their own prejudices and self-serving goals. They gain personally.
The Cato Institute has expressed some good ideas that I can support. In this case I disagree. Enforcement of our immigration laws is an important job that our government needs to do.
But on what basis do you disagree. Where are they wrong in this study?
 
Fremont;1588973:
Ituyu;1588057:
BUT, you’ve only quoted lawyers and politicians, with little understanding of the problem.

Unfortunately you haven’t provided any proof against the facts.

No they have agenda, to win elections. The don’t even attempt to get at the truth as Norwood’s positions clearly illustrate.

Honestly, to address the issue concretely with some credible sources.

Actually they were most closely connected to the Republican Party. President Bush’s plan is very close to what they recommend.

Agreed. However, in this study, their sources were indeed prominent experts in the field. Compare and contrast their methods and expertise to the politicians you support. These politicians should be seeking expert advice instead of dealing with the issue based upon their own prejudices and self-serving goals. They gain personally.

But on what basis do you disagree. Where are they wrong in this study?
Now you are getting silly.

Just as I predicted you automatically reject any views that differ from yours. And then you belittle those with other views as being incompetent and not understanding the “facts” or the “problem”. Your rantings prove nothing and change nothing other than to demonstrate a very bias view.

Most associate the Cato Institute with Libertarianism, now you claim they are Republican. You are more hung up on the distinction than I am.

The point is that the Cato Institute is a partisan organization with an agenda and is not the “non-partisan group” that you claim. Their credibility should be viewed with that in mind.

It is my guess that even though the Cato Institute is apparently your latest hero you do not give “Carte Blanch” support to everything they say. They seem pretty conservative.

Yes I disagree with the position expressed in the reference you posted.

I do not know how I can express my position more clearly than I have done previously. But, here again - - -

I believe solving our illegal immigration problem will have at least two phases.

The first phase is stemming the flow of illegal immigrants from any and all countries and at all points of entry. I think we should utilize various means such as barriers, more rigorous enforcement of our laws, greater surveillance, better inspections and/or other processes to achieve this. I would like the efforts to not only catch and return those attempting to achieve illegal entry but also to send a message of discouragement to would be illegal immigrants so they will rethink their plans and decide not to attempt illegal entry to the US.

The likely second phase will be to address what to do about the illegal immigrants already in the US. I believe that granting any sort of amnesty would be a disaster and should be avoided completely. There should be no “free lunch”.

First, all illegals should be photographed, fingerprinted and provide a DNA sample, for positive identification and to be included in a permanent record.

Then one approach might be that any application for legal status by a current illegal immigrant should be made from the country where they have citizenship or legal residence. They voluntarily return and then they apply.

There could be a fine of maybe $1,000 per year for every year they resided in the US illegally. All applicants should also have to pay all income and self-employment taxes due on their earnings while in the US illegally. No application for legal entry should be considered until all fines and taxes have been paid to the satisfaction of the US government.

There could be a waiting period before applications are considered. This might be 4 years for illegals in the US for less than 1 year and who voluntarily return to their country (there is already a 5 year waiting period for anyone deported). Then, on a sliding scale, a 3 year wait for illegals residing in the US from 1 to 5 years, a 2 year waiting period for illegals residing in the US for 5 to 10 years and 1 year for illegals residing in the US for 10 years or more.

There could be a reasonable period of time provided, maybe 1 year, for the illegals to get their affairs in order and arrange their return to their country. Registration as well as payment of fines and taxes could be done or started during this adjustment period and/or completed after they depart.
 
Its nice to see the same old stuff over and over again. Its like groundhog day around here.
 
True. Those darn liberals overlook the great success of the US enforcement only policy on drug use. Thanks to the Reagan, Bush 1, and now Bush 2 administration, America no longer has a problem with drug use. Our law enforcement coupled with severe sentences for possession stopped all importation of cocaine and pot. Problem solved! 😛

BTW: shouldn’t enforcement also include prison terms for employers of illegal aliens? Even if the employers have, you know, a lot of money? Oopps! Sorry. Said the “M” word. Not conservately correct. And folks with money should not be annoyed with laws that interfere making a profit. That’s un-American.
I was unaware that the drug problem went away during the 8 years Clinton was in office. Likewise for the illegal immigration problem. Yeah, lets go back to the good ol’ days of Carter, the ultimate liberal, and stagflation. Double digit unemployment and interest.
 
Now that I think about it there was no illegal immigration problem under Carter. He knew how to solve that problem. Create double digit unemployment in the US, that way there are no jobs for them.
 
Ituyu;1589075:
Fremont;1588973:
Now you are getting silly.

Just as I predicted you automatically reject any views that differ from yours. And then you belittle those with other views as being incompetent and not understanding the “facts” or the “problem”. Your rantings prove nothing and change nothing other than to demonstrate a very bias view.

Most associate the Cato Institute with Libertarianism, now you claim they are Republican. You are more hung up on the distinction than I am.

The point is that the Cato Institute is a partisan organization with an agenda and is not the “non-partisan group” that you claim. Their credibility should be viewed with that in mind.

It is my guess that even though the Cato Institute is apparently your latest hero you do not give “Carte Blanch” support to everything they say. They seem pretty conservative.

Yes I disagree with the position expressed in the reference you posted.

I do not know how I can express my position more clearly than I have done previously. But, here again - - -

I believe solving our illegal immigration problem will have at least two phases.

The first phase is stemming the flow of illegal immigrants from any and all countries and at all points of entry. I think we should utilize various means such as barriers, more rigorous enforcement of our laws, greater surveillance, better inspections and/or other processes to achieve this. I would like the efforts to not only catch and return those attempting to achieve illegal entry but also to send a message of discouragement to would be illegal immigrants so they will rethink their plans and decide not to attempt illegal entry to the US.

The likely second phase will be to address what to do about the illegal immigrants already in the US. I believe that granting any sort of amnesty would be a disaster and should be avoided completely. There should be no “free lunch”.

First, all illegals should be photographed, fingerprinted and provide a DNA sample, for positive identification and to be included in a permanent record.

Then one approach might be that any application for legal status by a current illegal immigrant should be made from the country where they have citizenship or legal residence. They voluntarily return and then they apply.

There could be a fine of maybe $1,000 per year for every year they resided in the US illegally. All applicants should also have to pay all income and self-employment taxes due on their earnings while in the US illegally. No application for legal entry should be considered until all fines and taxes have been paid to the satisfaction of the US government.

There could be a waiting period before applications are considered. This might be 4 years for illegals in the US for less than 1 year and who voluntarily return to their country (there is already a 5 year waiting period for anyone deported). Then, on a sliding scale, a 3 year wait for illegals residing in the US from 1 to 5 years, a 2 year waiting period for illegals residing in the US for 5 to 10 years and 1 year for illegals residing in the US for 10 years or more.

There could be a reasonable period of time provided, maybe 1 year, for the illegals to get their affairs in order and arrange their return to their country. Registration as well as payment of fines and taxes could be done or started during this adjustment period and/or completed after they depart.
Gee, this is really an improvement from your most recent posts. Still draconian but slipping away from those Enforcement Only measures.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top