Bob78164 wrote:On the original post, I think I like what
David Brooks has to say:
David Brooks wrote:[W]hen you wade into the evidence you find that the case for restricting immigration is pathetically weak. The only people who have less actual data on their side are the people who deny climate change.
You don’t have to rely on pointy-headed academics. Get in your car. If you start in rural New England and drive down into Appalachia or across into the Upper Midwest you will be driving through county after county with few immigrants. These rural places are often 95 percent white. These places lack the diversity restrictionists say is straining the social fabric.
Are these counties marked by high social cohesion, economic dynamism, surging wages and healthy family values? No. Quite the opposite. They are often marked by economic stagnation, social isolation, family breakdown and high opioid addiction. Charles Murray wrote a whole book, “Coming Apart,” on the social breakdown among working-class whites, many of whom live in these low immigrant areas.
. . . .
. . . [R]estrictionists are stuck in a mono-cultural system that undermines their own values: industry, faithfulness and self-discipline. Of course they react with defensive animosity to the immigrants who out-hustle and out-build them. You’d react negatively, too, if confronted with people who are better versions of what you wish you were yourself.
But why trust actual data when you can rely on preconceptions? --Bob
Again, anyone who doesn't distinguish between people who have moved here by following the legal process and those that don't are pushing an agenda. The agenda, which is intentionally downplayed and NEVER mentioned by the MSM, is that democrats believe that most people who have come here illegally will vote for democrats if given the right to vote. Many republicans want to have cheap labor. That is what this is all about. That is why the democrats are willing to shut down the government, hurting American citizens, to fight for people who came here illegally instead of the people they are supposed to represent. That is why Obama, after saying many times that he didn't have the Constitutional authority, unilaterally and unconstitutionally gave many of them legal status and unilaterally decided not to enforce existing immigration laws. And that is why sanctuary cities exist at all.
If you only listen to the msm, you believe that trump wants to end DACA and deport everyone because he is a white supremacist or whatever else they are calling him today. The truth is that he knows that the DACA thing that Obama did is invalid and he is forcing Congress to legislate it, which is how it should have been done in the first place. He wants some form of legal status for these people. It is obvious, because in his latest proposal he has more than doubled the number of people included in DACA, and has said the words 'path to citizenship'. But you trump haters will continue your assigned mission no matter what the facts are.
Here is my solution:
1. Anyone who has entered this country illegally before TODAY (or some date in the past) can apply for legal status when the following conditions have been met. They will be here legally, but will not be able to apply for citizenship. However, any child who was brought here by people entering illegally (through no fault of their own) may legally apply for citizenship the way any other non-citizen would, when the following conditions are met:
A. An immediate end to Chain Migration.
B. End of the immigration lottery system. Make immigration a merit-based system, like other countries do.
C. End of Sanctuary Cities, States, etc.
D. Appropriation for trump's wall. This appropriation will require a guarantee that the appropriations must continue until the wall is built according to specifications set forth beforehand. Money for a wall has been passed by congress a couple of times before, only to have the next congress take the appropriations off the table. Many of the people who are totally against a wall today voted to fund a wall in the past. (But the msm media won't tell you that.)
The process for becoming a citizen takes many years. The wall, as trump wants it, can be built before any daca people will be eligible to take oaths of citizenship. No daca person will be granted citizenship before the wall is completed.
E. Any person entering this country illegally after the date in point 1 will be deported back to their country of origin. We will start actually enforcing our immigration laws again.
I think this is fair for all sides. No one will be 'in the shadows' anymore, and we will ensure we don't have to address this problem in the future. But will it be done? No.