Response to post 2
This week your task is to respond to a classmate from post 2. You can pick someone you AGREE with or you DISAGREE with. Either way you need to use at least one new piece of evidence to support or attack their argument. You should write a minimum of a paragraph adding to their argument or taking it a part. It could be helpful for you when trying to understand their argument to read the sources they used. Please try to incorporate feedback you got from me last week. I look forward to reading your posts. I hope it's a lively conversation!
Due by midnight on Friday, October 2nd.
posted by Ms. Aby @ 1:22 PM
20 Comments:
After reading through several blog posts, Umaimah’s struck my eye. She argued that undocumented immigrants deserve a fair chance in becoming citizens of this country, and I couldn’t agree more.
In general, conservatives hold a belief in strict immigration policy. I agree that we need to have some sort of immigration policy, but I do not think that it should be taken to the extremes that some candidates are taking it too. Some Republican presidential candidates are even arguing that we should end birthright citizenship (1). I agree with Umaimah in that the best way to deal with illegal immigration is by enacting the comprehensive immigration program that President Obama has been pushing for.
President Obama’s comprehensive immigration reform bill would allow undocumented workers to apply for citizenship as long as they follow our rules and regulations (1). Congress has failed to even bring up this bill for a vote. President Obama has been making executive actions in order to try and do something. One of these would allow parents with American citizen children who have been living in America for over five years to be free from deportation if they register with the government (1).
Mario Sidonio is an 17 year old American citizen from Texas with big dreams to become an astrophysicist. His father is an undocumented worker who is trying to support Mario as well as five other children. President Obama’s executive action described in the paragraph above would have enabled Mario’s father to become registered with the United States government and not be at risk for deportation anymore. The state of Texas as well as 25 other states have blocked this program and have prevented it from moving forward (2). Now, over four million undocumented workers are waiting for a ruling to come out of the appeals court. It is absolutely absurd to me that politicians are so against allowing families to become citizens of this country to support their children.
As Umaimah stated in her post, undocumented workers do not deserve to be treated like criminals. Yes, there are going to be criminals that cross the border into our country. but there are also families that are only seeking a better life. Comprehensive immigration reform is the answer to this problem.
Sources:
http://www.cnn.com/2015/09/29/politics/immigration-obama-lawsuit-delays/ (1)
https://www.barackobama.com/immigration-reform/ (2)
I agree with Zach Diedriech about standardizing K-12 education. Education spending should definitely become more uniform across all 50 states. It is not fair to someone living in a low budget education region. But, I disagree when it comes to free college and immigration. The events that happen abroad cannot be ignored, as much as we would like to. If we ignore the larger problems that plague our nation we will only be worse off in the long run. Immigration is far more important than education. We need to deal with the 11.4 million illegal aliens. If someone randomly walked into your house and started using all of you stuff would allow them to stay? It would be far better if you invited them in and then let them use your things. The same concept applies to immigration. If we allow illegal immigrants to stay in the U.S. it is bad for them and it is bad for the citizens of this great nation. But, say they apply or guest worker status from outside of the U.S., they can stay and live without the fear of being deported the instant they are discovered.
The other topic I disagree with Mr. Diedrich on it education. One thing Hillary says on her own campaign page is this: “Students who invest in college leave with a degree” (Hillary). While this seems to be a harmless statement, to me it heralds the government takeover of post secondary education. Colleges would be obligated to help people who may not be meant to go to college. Clinton fails to realize that not everyone is meant to go to college. Not because those people are any lesser than others. It is just that they have different skills, a car mechanic should not become a lawyer and a lawyer should not become a car mechanic. In addition, all of the funding for free college is going to have to come from someone. That someone is the American taxpayer, or it will simply be added to the mountain of debt rising in Washington from all other “free things”. One part that I do like about Clinton’s plan is lowering interest rates. That way student debt can be paid off sooner and easier.
http://www.migrationpolicy.org/article/frequently-requested-statistics-immigrants-
https://www.hillaryclinton.com/p/briefing/factsheets/2015/08/10/college-compact/
On the topic of immigration, I have to disagree (for the most part) with what Esther wrote in her most recent blog post. While I do support the idea of giving everyone a path to becoming a legal citizen of the United States, I do not believe that illegal immigration the nation-ruining calamity that conservative candidates make it out to be. Conservatives like to say that illegal immigrants are taking American jobs; therefore we must act immediately and put a stop to this swarm of people who are ruining the job market for those who are legal citizens. This, however, is not actually true. Undocumented immigrants actually boost wages of similarly skilled American workers around them, according to an article in Forbes. By comparing data from different counties in Georgia earlier this year, several researchers discovered that “documented workers’ wages rise with increases in the share of undocumented workers in a worker’s county and employed by their employers” (Forbes). This means that the more undocumented workers employed by a average American’s company, doing the jobs that Americans are unwilling to, the more said American’s wages will go up. Another article from Forbes states that when Georgia instituted immigration reforms a few years ago, it actually hurt the economy and caused a labor shortage (Forbes 2). Many people claim they don't want undocumented immigrants in their communities, but they don’t understand the positive effects that these immigrants can have on the economy. There is also no easy solution to the problems caused by illegal immigration; politicians have been talking about it, but getting anything done, for the past thirty years. I believe that politicians should focus on issues that are more relevant to the general population, such as mental health, education, and environmental awareness.
(Forbes) http://www.forbes.com/sites/artcarden/2015/08/28/how-do-illegal-immigrants-affect-american-workers-the-answer-might-surprise-you/
(Forbes 2) http://www.forbes.com/sites/realspin/2012/05/17/the-law-of-unintended-consequences-georgias-immigration-law-backfires/
I agree with Courtney that immigration is a topic that needs to be discussed but is not the most important issue right now. Topics like education and our environment are issues that will affect generations to come. Candidates should focus on making higher education more affordable and accessible. While Hillary Clinton wants to make higher education available to those willing to work for it and reduce/eliminate student debt. (1) Ben Carson on the flip side is asking where the money to cover that will come from. (2)
As for the environment, rising global temperatures will cause an increase in the severity of weather such as hurricanes, droughts, and storms. It will also make fresh water harder to find and crops will start to fail. The future generations will be lift with a world that is falling apart. Something needs to be done about climate change now so that there will still be a world for the people of the future to enjoy. (3)
https://www.hillaryclinton.com/issues/college/ (1)
http://www.nasfaa.org/news-item/5223/2016_Presidential_Candidates_Scattered_on_Higher_Ed_Student_Aid_Views (2)
http://www3.epa.gov/climatechange/ (3)
I understand that many kids our age find higher education more important than immigration policies, however, there isn’t a quick “fix” to either problem. Although Diah mentions that higher education should be a high priority, immigration seems to be a more immediate issue because there are millions of illegal immigrants currently now in the US. Issues with education can be handled state by state whereas immigration is more a national issue.
“Gallup's monthly inventory of Americans' responses to the question "What do you think is the most important problem facing the country today?" shows that government and government dissatisfaction were listed by 17% and immigration was listed by 12%” (Gallup). Dealing with higher education was not on the top 5 list of problems. One of issues Diah mentioned was the fact that she would hate how much debt she would have after leaving college. Of the higher education plans that Diah listed I agree most with a couple of the parts of Clinton’s plan, specifically the fact that she would like to make the federal government “require colleges and universities, in exchange for the ever-more-generous support they get, to be more transparent about dropout rates and salaries earned by graduates” (National Review). Overall, I think that there is no quick fix to either issue and I can understand why many kids our age would support higher education more considering the fact that we will be college students next year.
http://www.gallup.com/poll/185504/government-economy-immigration-seen-top-problems.aspx (Gallup)
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/422362/hillary-clinton-college-plan-unaffordable-liberal-conservative-ideas (National Review)
While I do believe that there are other more important issues to be discussed by the candidates in the 2016 election, I do agree with Aly on how immigration should be handled in the United States and by the candidates. I especially agree with her statement on how even if a candidate doesn’t believe in the importance of discussing immigration, “an acknowledgement of the topic itself should be presented.” I also agree with her on how deportation of illegal immigrants already within the United States is inhumane and unjust, as well as how the D.R.E.A.M. Act is beneficial to the United States. The DREAM Act works in such a way that not only will it provide the education for willing and law-abiding students, they are also allowed to participate in the military (1). This would mean an increased pool for the number of citizens that would be allowed to enter into the military, thus ensuring national security. The DREAM Act also is not a simple way to change the status of young people’s immigration status. They must go through a lengthy process to change their status and be committed to stay in school or to go into the military so that in one way or another they are able to contribute to society (1). Despite not agreeing with Jeb Bush on some issues, I do concede that parts of his plan are valid and could work. He definitely is much more moderate than Trump, though I do not agree with him that the illegal immigration issue is dire. I can support that he wants to have immigrants earn their legal status (2), but to simply deny individuals who are seeking for a better way of life isn’t something that I can get behind.
Despite agreeing with Aly that a moderate, two-pronged approach is probably the best direction for the candidates to follow, I find issue with some of the ideas that Bush has on his website. Currently, Bush has a six step approach on how to deal with border security in the United States (3). Bush argues that more surveillance on the border is needed in order to combat threats (3). However, living in a world where it seems almost every building has security cameras watching our every move to me is something that opens up a whole new can of worms. I know that the drones and radar would only be used in locations along the border with Mexico, but to me that still seems like that could end very badly. Furthermore, while Bush doesn’t support a wall with Mexico, he still believes that fencing along the border should be expanded (3). I am not sure if this is a bid to attract more conservatives to his camp in light of Trump’s lead, but I contend that building more barriers will only end in more immigrants trying to find new ways to get across the border.
Overall, Aly does make some very compelling points as to why immigration is such an important issue to this presidential race, although I do not agree that Jeb Bush’s solution to immigration is the best one presented.
https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/DREAM-Act-WhiteHouse-FactSheet.pdf (1)
http://www.ontheissues.org/2016/Jeb_Bush_Immigration.htm (2)
https://jeb2016.com/border-security/?lang=en (3)
I agree with Leela that immigration is definitely one of the most important issues today. The fact that there are hard working and aspiring people that could and would make the US a better place but aren’t allowed simply because of their immigration status is disappointing to say the least. The DREAM Act is ideal for a more productive and educated labor force (Gonzales). It would open doors for an estimated 2.1 million teenagers to become legal immigrants. This act would reward those who are honest and hardworking. The requirements for temporary residency status requires five years in the US and to have completed high school or have a GED and to pass a background test. To become a permanent resident, one has to have attended an institute of higher learning or have served in the military. I think these are reasonable qualifications for most people, yet there still would be people that are hard working individuals that wouldn’t be able to afford post-secondary education or be able serve in the military because of physical handicaps. On the more positive side, this system wouldn’t have limits to the amount accepted for residency, which right now is part of the problem for people obtaining legal status. I think this act overall would create a more productive labor force that would greatly benefit the US economy. However there are some caveats, such as the whole education or military proposition, or that people would try to abuse it (Mehlman). These things would have to be ironed out and the DREAM Act would have to be tweaked a little bit, but the idea that legal status could be achieved through education and loyalty to the US is ultimately a good one.
http://www.immigrationpolicy.org/just-facts/dream-act (Gonzales)
http://townhall.com/columnists/iramehlman/2011/07/01/five_moral_arguments_against_the_dream_act/page/full (Mehlman)
I agree with Meghan that terrorism is an important issue to be dealt with in America, however I don’t believe that, to quote her, immigration “not necessarily... an immediate issue,” and that “[immigration] can wait.” Firstly, I think immigration could even be considered a civil rights issue, which is always a relevant concern that should have priority in being addressed. Here in Minnesota, I don’t think it is felt very much because we are so far away from the Mexican border where a significant portion of undocumented immigrants come from, but in other regions in the U.S., the xenophobic atmosphere is much more prominent. For example, Matthew Glover, member of Good Hope Alabama City Council says that “immigration has been used to pull people into the conservative movement [in Alabama]... They really beat into your mind that [immigrants] are stealing from you... that they’re taking money out of your pockets” (Stuteville). That kind of thinking is what leads people to subordinate and dehumanize others, which is never okay and can often lead to cruel abuses of human rights. Therefore it is important to deal with immigration and the attitudes that some Americans have about it because it is an injustice to undocumented immigrants who do not deserve to be treated as inferior.
Secondly, another area I disagreed with Meghan in was that I think it is more logical to deal with immigration before terrorism than the other way around. The president’s plate isn’t so small that they couldn’t deal with both things (in addition to many other conflicts and responsibilities) at the same time, but either way I think that immigration shouldn’t wait to be solved after terrorism because the solution is just a matter of policy. Several polls have showed that a greater percentage of Americans support letting undocumented immigrants earn citizenship than those who oppose it or want them deported (Gamboa). So if Congress was feeling particularly agreeable, a solution could be decided on and implemented quickly because it’s domestic policy, something that our government can control. Foreign policy however, is harder to deal with because it involves things that aren’t under our control and requires a lot more caution and consideration. For example, because of the complicated relationships between the many nations, it’s difficult to get involved in certain countries without their allies stepping in as well and creating a more confusing and intricate situation.
While I totally feel where Meghan is coming from in saying that fighting terrorism and securing the safety of Americans is important and should be a top priority for a president, I think that it’s just as important to secure the human rights of undocumented immigrants and make sure that the issues of immigration and civil rights aren’t swept under the rug.
Sources:
http://www.seattleglobalist.com/2014/03/28/an-eye-opening-trip-reveals-depth-in-the-deep-south/22071 (Stuteville)
http://www.nbcnews.com/news/latino/two-new-polls-show-continued-u-s-support-immigration-reform-n129461 (Gamboa)
Immigration is becoming the main platform for the 2016 presidential election: every presidential hopeful has some view on immigration reform, whether it be Trump’s vision of a wall or easier paths to citizenship and green cards (Ballotopedia). I don’t blame any of these candidates: immigration is certainly a fair topic to discuss and should not be glossed over, especially since the public seems to show interest in the topic. However, I still do not believe that immigration reform should dominate the political agenda. After reading through Esther’s response, I had a few questions and points I wanted to re-confirm off of Esther’s statements, and a couple new things that I learned thanks to her.
Immigration seems like a big issue, but I disagree with Esther’s stance on why America needs to fix the problem. Esther stated that “these past years the problem of immigration has been seeming to get worse and worse, with barely any change in our policies on it.” Actually, according to the PEW Research Center, the number of illegal immigrants in the US has leveled off after a peak in 2007 at 12.2 million undocumented immigrants (Krogstad). The number of illegal immigrants may even be decreasing, as the number of undocumented immigrants from Mexico has dramatically decreased from 6.4 to 5.9 million in recent years, while the number of illegal immigrants from other countries rose only slightly (Krogstad). In terms of numbers, then, the immigration situation is really better than it has been. The reason that immigration reform is presented as a crisis needing a solution is because the American system of dealing with illegal immigrants is broken (Griswald). It takes a law or two and some enforcement, and 11.5 million people will have the opportunity to come out and become American citizens under a plan like Rubio’s or Bush’s, according to Esther.
PART 2:
Esther made one more point that I will discuss: she said that a lack of reform causes “for Texas, and other states to suffer” and that “being an illegal immigrant takes away job opportunities, and more from the legal immigrants who came to America in a fair and just way.” I disagree with her statement that immigrants cause as much strife as we think they do. Immigrants don’t come to America to cause trouble or steal our money; in fact, illegal immigrants cause less crime than their companions who are native-born (Griswald). The reason immigrants come to America is for jobs-- that is why they come and illegally stay, so they can work and earn some money in an economic environment that is more prosperous. Undocumented immigrants are not a burden so much on the economy, either: a study done by the Texas comptroller showed how “the fiscal impact of illegal immigrants on state and local governments was overwhelmed by their positive contribution to the state’s economy” (Griswald). Immigrants may take low-skill jobs, but they allow the economy to grow and prosper in a free market. If immigration was reformed quickly and correctly (with a little border enforcement and a stance that made it easy for undocumented workers can get a job here legally), we could have 11.5 million more workers who have shown they can boost and economy (Griswald). Esther’s vision that states would suffer from the burden of immigrants would disappear.
Immigration reform is a 2016 election hotspot, but I still believe that it is not our greatest issue. Unlike Esther, I believe that immigration is not as looming a problem as the GOP and others make it out to be, and with a little reform, the system will work well enough that the topic of immigration will not be a big issue like it is today. America is a nation of immigrants-- this argument has lasted as long as America has. Immigrants are not bad people, and they should not be treated that way; these undocumented workers are just looking for a better life. America needs to fix immigration, and it can be done easily and effectively. It just needs to happen.
http://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/real-reform-can-fix-immigration (Griswald)
http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2015/07/24/5-facts-about-illegal-immigration-in-the-u-s/ (Krogstad)
http://ballotpedia.org/2016_presidential_candidates_on_immigration (Ballotopedia)
I completely agree with Zach’s post on the issue of immigration. He pointed out the fact that “immigration is a highly contested issue in and between parties,” and he could not be more correct. Therefore, I believe the time and energy of policymakers is better spent in other areas. It could be fighting terrorism. Or it could be education reform, for which Zach makes a great point because we are in our senior year of high school and, if we so choose, will be forced to face the expense that is college in the near future. I also agree with Zach in supporting Hillary Clinton’s proposed ‘College Compact,’ because making college free would only benefit us. Right now, the average debt of nearly $30,000 (ticas), but with the passing of the compact, it would eliminate that. However, I think a focus point for our government should be anything that will actually allow for progress. I just do not believe that there is a strong enough majority opinion on immigration, or a plan on how to go about dealing with it that would be successful, to focus on it as a primary issue. I do not think legislation will be able to go anywhere with it. I think Zach makes a great argument that education reform should be regarded as a more prominent issue than immigration is in the current standing. Not that it is not important, but I mostly just think we should not be as focused on the immigration issue as the candidates have been in the debates so far.
http://ticas.org/posd/map-state-data
While I agree with Emma that immigration is not the most important issue in the United States today, I disagree that it will decrease or go away in a few years. Studies show that immigration has leveled off in the past year, but that does not mean that there are less illegal immigrants coming to the United States. In 2014, there were 11.3 million illegal immigrants living in America, making up about three percent of the population (Pew). Of course, the majority of these immigrants live in border states like California, Florida, and Texas. In Minnesota, the issue is not as important because there is a much smaller number of them coming to live here. Emma was correct in stating that Congress has the power to decide how to deal with this issue. It is an enumerated power that is stated in the Constitution. With this in consideration, it does seem as though immigration is the main focus of the presidential candidates on both sides. Jeb Bush created a six-point plan on how he would solve the immigration issue, while Bernie Sanders has always voiced his support for the DREAM Act and moving forward with it (America’s Voice).
The environment is important too, and every bit of help counts. The real difference though, comes from a global effort. Both of these issues could take a long time before anything is changed due to conflicting views in and between parties. Neither of them are quick-fixes, and with frequent gridlock in Congress it would be difficult for a Democratic president to pass their policies in a Republican majority in both the House and the Senate, and just the same if it were the other way around (Chait).
http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2015/07/24/5-facts-about-illegal-immigration-in-the-u-s/ (Pew)
http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2015/06/nobodys-discussing-the-biggest-campaign-issue.html (Chait)
http://americasvoice.org/research/meet-the-2016-democratic-candidates-for-president-and-their-positions-on-immigration/#sanders (America’s Voice)
I agree with Charlie’s brief point that it’s a shame that isn’t higher on the priority lists of most presidential candidates. Although, I believe there’s also a few valid reasons why education isn’t among the candidates’ priority lists. The fact of the matter is four of the top five Republican candidates, Jeb Bush, Ben Carson, Ted Cruz, and Donald Trump, say that climate change does not exist (Adler). Almost every other candidate who does acknowledge its existence plans to do something to lower carbon emissions and pollution. However, they also don’t place it within their top three priority issues. Hillary Clinton plans to increase the amount of renewable energy that the US produces and uses to 30% of its overall usage and production (Leatherby). Bernie Sanders lead the opposition to the Keystone XL pipeline which likely would have increased carbon emissions worldwide by facilitating oil production in North America (Sanders). He has also said that “climate change is the greatest threat facing the planet.” So this issue seems to be divided along party lines at least for the popular candidates which is likely why the media is giving it so little attention.
Education is an issue that basically all of the presidential candidates have a simple agreement on. It needs to be improved. Which doesn’t bring much to the conversation. This is why it’s an issue that many candidates have put on the backburner, no one quite agrees on what the government’s role should be regarding education. Some believe that Congress should repeal No Child Left Behind. Others advocate for free tuition at both community colleges and private universities. A few think the government should further implement and change Common Core, the current statewide system used to standardize K-12 curriculums (Education). There’s a wide variety of action the government can take towards education in the US, especially after the precedent set by No Child Left Behind that the federal government has the power to set standards for education that the states should implement to the best of their ability. While I want education reform to happen, until any proposals gain media attention and a reasonable amount of support, it’s unlikely that the federal government will make any changes to the current education system.
http://grist.org/politics/meet-the-climate-deniers-who-want-to-be-president/ (Adler)
http://www.npr.org/sections/itsallpolitics/2015/08/11/429781692/where-presidential-candidates-stand-on-climate-change (Leatherby)
https://berniesanders.com/issues/climate-change/ (Sanders)
http://ballotpedia.org/2016_presidential_candidates_on_education (Education)
I agree with Scott’s Stance on immigration. Of course, his argument was helped when he stated that climate change and the debt deficit should take a priority over immigration. But due to Scott’s blog post I decided to do a little research on Ben Carson and also the Canadian system to understand his perspective more. I discovered that Ben Carson has an admirably humane view on illegal immigration; his main support for providing a pathway to citizenship for illegal immigrants is that it is immoral to take advantage of their cheap labor and then prevent them citizenship (Ben Carson on Immigration). He addresses something many Americans might suffer in the debate of illegal immigration: guilt. He states that Americans shouldn’t feel guilty about wanting to preserve immigration laws, because it is fairer to the legal immigrants who have worked hard to earn their citizenship to maintain the standard for all immigrants (Ben Carson on Immigration). It is odd for a Republican politician to recommend a Canadian policy regarding social issues, so I looked into the guest worker program that Ben Carson wants modeled after the Canadian program.
There are five sections of the Canadian guest worker programs according to the Library of Congress. They outline basic laws and programs that protect the temporary workers and immigrants of the country. Notably, in my opinion, the Temporary Foreign Worker programs which allows employers to hire foreign workers on the basis that the company cannot find a Canadian resident to fill the position and that the foreign worker will not ruin the labour market (Guest Worker Programs: Canada). I can see how this aspect of the Canadian system would appeal to Ben Carson and Americans in general, and I think this could work well for our immigration platform. I think Ben Carson’s idea to model our Immigration policy after this one could be sold as a popular public policy. It appeals to those who want hard limits set on those that enter our country but it also appeals to those who are compassionate and want them well taken care of.
http://www.ontheissues.org/2016/Ben_Carson_Immigration.htm
http://www.loc.gov/law/help/guestworker/canada.php
Courtney certainly makes several good points in her post. I agree that the impact of immigration in America is being overblown and that other issues such as education and the environment are pushed to the side too often. However, I would disagree with the notion that there are simply too many different opinions about immigration to effectively push any policy forward. For instance, 87% of Americans support allowing illegals to become citizens if they met certain requirements [1]. This is a working majority, and a lot better than you would get on many other issues. The government was able to get the bailouts of 2008 through with a whopping 60% of Americans opposed [2]. This demonstrates that for key issues Congress is still able and will get things done in the face of overwhelming opposition. I also think that the issue of education, which Courtney rightfully highlighted as a key issue, is intertwined with immigration policy in many areas. For example, should illegal immigrants pay in state tuition for state schools? Should US classrooms focus on teaching English above all else and then teaching science, math, and literature or should they teach these areas in Spanish while slowly transitioning into English fluency? How can we make our education system promote the assimilation of immigrants? All these questions touch not only on education but also on immigration. So while I do think that education is a very important issue this election, I don't think it would be wise to ignore the role of immigration in our system.
[1]http://www.gallup.com/opinion/polling-matters/184262/american-public-opinion-immigration.aspx
[2]http://www.gallup.com/poll/106114/six-oppose-wall-street-bailouts.aspx
Many of the presidential candidates are discussing illegal immigration and other important issues such as the national debt and the climate change. Emma Liddle notes that while immigration should be dealt with, the more important issue here is climate change. I have to say I agree with Ms. Liddle in that sense, but I have to disagree with her position on illegal immigrants.
Ms. Liddle says that with some legislation or a possible amendment, the issue of immigration will “disappear, within a matter of years.” I have to disagree with this statement entirely, as I think that even with strong legislation which prevents illegal immigration by allowing citizenship or deporting immigrants, there is no way to make illegal immigration disappear. As Peter Skerry points out in his article, “Splitting the Difference on Illegal Immigration”, immigration will take years to come into full force, as much of the laws and amendments that would have to be passed will be hard to enforce (1). If Congress can agree on a law or amendment to deal with this pressing issue, even though chances are they cannot agree, it will take many months or years to apply the law to the millions of immigrants living here illegally. If the law states that the illegal immigrants must go back to their original country (be deported), the immigration issue is sure to not, “disappear within a matter of years,” as Ms. Liddle says.
Emma Liddle additionally says that the three branches and the two houses of Congress will fix the problem by working together to get it done. That is saying a lot for the Congress who could not even agree on fixing the debt crisis because they were so polarized (2). Ms. Liddle assumes that some legislation related to illegal immigrants will just be passed quickly and sent on to be enforced by the cooperating Executive and Judicial branches. That is far from true. If the legislation related to immigration even comes up, I believe there will be no advances, as the politicians will stick to their parties, and nothing will get passed between the two houses (2). Overall, while Ms. Liddle sticks to an optimistic view of how the government operates, I, even though I like to stay positive, have to disagree and say that with today’s Congress, the issue of immigration is far from being solved.
Furthermore, I believe that the issue of immigration is not a one policy fits all situation. This issue of immigration is very complex and encompasses many different people with different stories and situations. For example, what would happen to an illegal immigrant who followed all laws, and never even committed any offense? Would they get the same treatment (possible citizenship) as someone who came across the border to commit more illegal acts (3)? Also, how should the United States pay for sending immigrants home (if that was the law which was passed)? While some believe the immigrants should pay for it, others question the ability of the immigrants to come up with the money needed (3). In summary, the issue of immigration is not one that will pass quickly so the government can move on to more “important issues”, but it is one that will take years of passing laws and enforcing those laws to solve the current situation the nation is in. Additionally, the government will have to pass many different laws to encapsulate all the different illegal groups and the numerous situations that they are all in.
http://www.nationalaffairs.com/publications/detail/splitting-the-difference-on-illegal-immigration (1)
http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonkblog/wp/2012/07/13/13-reasons-why-this-is-the-worst-congress-ever/ (2)
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/laura-murraytjan/why-obamas-executive-acti_b_7242206.html (3)
I agree with what Charlie said in his blog post about how the immigration process right now is very difficult for anyone trying to come to America, along with the current citizenship process. I think that everyone should be allowed the chance to come to America, without the difficulty and costs that come along with applying for a green card or visa. With my dad coming to America as an immigrant 31 years ago, I know that the process for him, and many of my other family members who have come here over the years, was a very hard one. As Charlie also mentioned, people will still want to come to America (even if they can’t come legally) when their country is suffering unsafe environments or there are no sufficient jobs there. In order for illegal immigration to be lessened, I think that there are policies that could be put in place for a smoother immigration process.
Immigration right now is in favor of those with “financial means, skills, and education,” not for those who have a “strong desire or need” (USA Today). This supports the reason why policies should be made so that people who want to come to America for opportunities, or for an escape from an unsafe environment, will be able to even if they don’t have the economic means to apply. Immigration should be in favor of everyone, not just of certain people. Another fact mentioned is that the fee for an employment visa was 720 dollars for an immigrant coming from Mexico (this was back in 2011 so the fee may be higher now). This is an outstanding amount as that was “more than the average monthly income for many professions in Mexico” (USA Today). Also, there are many other factors that come along with applying for a visa or green card. Medical exams, translations, and immigrant fees, are just a few examples that all have an additional cost that many people can not afford, and also make the process much longer (Visa Now). I think that as immigration is a very heated issue right now, politicians should not be focusing on how to keep illegal immigrants out (such as Trump’s wall), but on how to make the legal immigration process easier and less costly allowing for many more people to have the chance to get to come to America.
http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/nation/story/2011-10-24/legal-immigration-usa/50895150/1 (USA Today)
http://www.visanow.com/green-card-cost-fees/ (Visa Now)
I agree with Diah on her stance that immigration will actually never have a permanent fix. It is true that america will always face that problem with keeping its borders controlled like most countries throughout history. Although there is no permanent fix, temporary resolutions are being presented and plastered onto the face of campaigns. 63 percent of permanent residents are expected to be naturalized from the year 2013 to now showing that immigration is expanding and truly will never stop (1). Therefore temporary resolutions are presented to the public because of the increase. Although I agree that it can not be fixed, it is essential to the campaign itself, contradictory to Diah's view. For the public opinion overall it is a big issue and is truly a “hot topic” as Diah stated.
Personally though I would also agree that educational finances needs to be addressed in full, it unfortunately will not be presented as such a necessity because it doesn’t catch most of the public's eye. Therefore in terms of the campaign it will not be useful and most candidates such as Trump do not have any plan for it since it will be a small percentage of the voters they are trying to attract.
Bernie Sander’s stance on refinancing of 4 year college proves to be appealing to his target group of voters, therefore it’s importance is played out through his campaign (2). If popularity had nothing to do with it I would completely agree that it should take precedence.
http://www.dhs.gov/immigration-statistics (1)
https://berniesanders.com/issues/ (2)
I agree with what Eli had to say about both immigration and education. There is a general negative connotation that comes with the word illegal immigrant, however contrary to what some people seem to believe, immigrants are not all murders and rapists. Going with what he said, that many people “claim that illegal immigrants are hurting our economy” I also agree that immigrants help our economy more than they hurt it. Like Eli said undocumented workers make up a big part of the labor force, James Holt, an agricultural economist said to Congress that “if we deported a substantial number of undocumented farm workers, there would be a tremendous labor shortage.” (2) That supports Eli’s example of what happened in Georgia, the reality is that immigrants often take the jobs Americans are unwilling to do. Immigrants also help out US businesses by being consumers. “With legal status, they’d be able to change jobs more easily and—as they found better jobs and their wages increased—their economic clout as consumers and taxpayers would rise as well.”(1) Allowing for a pathway to citizenship would only help our economy. Even while being “illegal” undocumented workers still pay taxes, And according to the chief actuary of the Social Security Administration, undocumented workers have contributed close to $300 billion of the Social Security Trust Fund.(2) As well as $11.8 billion dollars in taxes in 2012.(4)
As far as education goes, i completely agree that we need to work on making college more affordable. Like Eli said, many young people aren’t furthering their education because of the ridiculous expenses, many simply can’t afford it, especially in households with multiple children. Personally, and i'm sure for many other people in class, as I make plans for next year, I have an older brother that will still be at University, making it extremely expensive for my parents to support two children in college. Many hard working students, work their whole high school career to do well, and even when they are accepted into their dream school, they can’t afford it and so are limited, and their potential is held back.(3) If we want to remain an innovative country, we need to make it more accessible for young adults to be able further their education.
1)http://immigration impact.com/2015/04/21/how-much-do-undocumented-immigrants-pay-in-state-and-local-taxes/#sthash.hcP6CzqY.dpuf (
2) http://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/foreign-policy/203984-illegal-immigrants-benefit-the-us-economy
3) http://money.cnn.com/2015/05/11/pf/college/college-financial-aid/
4) http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/2015/04/16/Study-Finds-Illegal-Immigrants-Pay-118B-Taxes [[‘
Zach makes great points in his argument supporting the issue of Education not immigration. I said in my previous post that immigration is a big issue, but it it talked about among politicians more often then their plans for education, and that is concerning. For my future, and my classmates future, Zach's research into college tuition rising was an concerning issue that crosses our minds often "the annual cost of attending the prestigious school in the fall of 1971 by $200—to $2,600." (Shoen)
It surprised me when I heard some of the ways Bernie Sanders has voted "Sanders voted against S.1502 - the District of Columbia Student Opportunity Scholarship Act of 1997, which proposed authorizing "the establishment of the District of Columbia Scholarship Corporation as a private, nonprofit corporation to administer, publicize, and evaluate the District of Columbia (District) scholarship program" (Ballotpedia)
http://www.cnbc.com/2015/06/16/why-college-costs-are-so-high-and-rising.html
http://ballotpedia.org/2016_presidential_candidates_on_education#Bernie_Sanders
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home