• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

AP sources: Immunity offered to certain immigrants

Employee costs are a small fraction of the overall cost of a product. Most farmers do not use illegals.


Nowhere near as high as what the pro-illegals claim.

If employee costs were only a small fraction, we wouldn't be having the problem with illegals because NOBODY would be hiring them.

The fact is that it isn't just a small fraction and it is significant or they wouldn't be doing it. Who wants to risk getting their business fined for a "small fraction"?
 
If employee costs were only a small fraction, we wouldn't be having the problem with illegals because NOBODY would be hiring them.

The fact is that it isn't just a small fraction and it is significant or they wouldn't be doing it. Who wants to risk getting their business fined for a "small fraction"?

What risk? A quick internet search turns up no massive fines or arrests for hiring illegal alien labor, since the Postville raid. Most use 1099 contract labor to safely avoid any problems. In my last construction job (framing houses) half the crew was illegal, but I never saw any ICE problems.
 
The power to execute the law is given to the president in the constitution, not to the Congress. Prosecutorial discretion is part of that power. That has been thoroughly established in the courts for many decades.
Cite where in the constitution it cites the President has discretion ... :roll:

I think you just don't get the most basic elements of what is going on.
I think I do... President Obama is the "decider" who's decision is to not enforce immigration laws that have also been thoroughly established since it's founding, all for political points. No really, I DO get the most basic elements of what's going on here.
 
Cite where in the constitution it cites the President has discretion ... :roll:

Ask Justice Scalia:

“To ameliorate a harsh and unjust outcome, the INS may decline to institute proceedings, terminate proceedings or decline to execute a final order of deportation,” Justice Antonin Scalia, quoting from another writer, added in a 1999 Supreme Court decision.

Did Obama exert too much executive power on deportations? - KansasCity.com

And last time I checked, Art. 2 gives the president the power to grant reprieves and pardons.
 
Ask Justice Scalia:



And last time I checked, Art. 2 gives the president the power to grant reprieves and pardons.

Funny how you posted the piece, but didn't read it. From the same article:

“Deferred action, a form of prosecutorial discretion, is not a form of relief from removal … exercised on a categorical basis for large classes of aliens,” Napolitano stated then in response to GOP questions.

Deferred action is not a grant of reprieve or pardon (powers Obama has exercise in the past as the article notes).
 
What do you think will happen when farmers are forced to actually pay min wage for workers? Do you think the farmers will just eat the additional cost or what? Of course food prices will go up.

And how does this justify continuing to do the wrong thing?

Sent from my blasted phone.
 
Funny how you posted the piece, but didn't read it. From the same article:



Deferred action is not a grant of reprieve or pardon (powers Obama has exercise in the past as the article notes).

Reprieve yes, pardon no...
 
Although Obama's methods are a sleazy way to keep illegal immigrants here legally with the workers card, I don't think he is advocating that they be made citizens that can vote.

What he may be trying to do though is rally the legal Hispanic voters to support him.

Maybe he should have considered that most Mexican Americans whom are here legally are mostly
Catholic, and living in a border state and having many Mexican American amigos I can state almost
all whom are here legally detest the illegals. Many whom are here legally do fairly well in the work
place but they understand the jobs their kids may need, entry level low paying jobs will now be
diluted. IMHO, this move was clearly purely political as no effort to solve border security was offered.
I don't know exactly what this amnesty covers but, how is this going to play out in terms of taxes?
Will all of these new legal aliens get a pass on years of social security payments they should have
been making? Are we adding hundreds of thousands or a million new people who will end up getting
back more taxes than they pay in producing further strain on our economic situation? It doesn't
seem like the ramifications of this were thought out very well. Right now the US needs some fiscal
leadership, not someone pandering social issues which will add to the burden we're already coming
up short on not too far down the road here. This was a slap to the face of all Americans.
 
How about partnering with State and local LE for enforcement of immigration laws. How about streamlining deportation to minimize court costs? How about instead of just letting illegal aliens stay, do something to reduce/stop the influx of illegal entery into the US.

You are correct that with a finite resources and funding choices have to be made. That happens all the time. Still does not make it right for those who break our immigration laws. Our system does need to be overhauled. We need a better migrant labor guest program. We need a swifter/more economical method to deport illegal aliens. Our legal system for handling many violations of law is way to costly.

I mostly agree with you. We need a better guest worker program and we need to make the whole process more efficient and we need to ramp up enforcement once we have a good guest worker program in place.

But, two thoughts. First off, ICE does work heavily with state and local law enforcement. The program that Arpaio was in, for example, empowers state and local law enforcement to enforce federal immigration law. Virtually all states and cities with significant numbers of undocumented immigrants are part of that program. The ONLY person who has ever been kicked out is Arpaio. So, where you happen to live I'm sure it seems like they don't work with state and local cops, but that's just because your local sheriff is a total nutjob that flagrantly violated the constitution over and over and had to be stripped of his powers. Elect somebody sane and they'll be right back in the program no problem.

Second, I don't disagree that we need to streamline deportation. But, a big word of caution on that. What we really need to do most of all is to establish more immigration courts and get more judges confirmed as fast as possible. That's the biggest part of the cost. The immigration courts are so backlogged that people have to wait up to a year for their first appearance. Often they are sitting in jail that whole time. That is extremely costly and it is horrifically, insanely, unfair for those folks who turn out to be here legally to lose a year of their lives just because of backlog in the courts. The Republicans filibustering of every judge that comes along needs to stop. Immediately. It is costing us hundreds of millions or even billions of dollars a year just on the immigration front alone.

But, when some people talk about streamlining the process what they mean is lowering the burden of proof for people accused of being here illegally. Whenever there is any crime that society is particuarly upset about, there starts to be pressure not just to increase the penalties, but to make it easier for the government to prove that they did the crime. IMO that is always a huge mistake. For example, we have done that with sex offenders and now in some trials against sex offenders some extremely shady evidence that would never be allowed in a normal trial has to be allowed. Proof beyond a reasonable doubt has to be the standard for every crime and the standard rules of evidence needs to remain in place for every crime IMO.

People kind of assume that in an immigration trial basically you just ask the guy for his ID or green card or whatever and if he doesn't have it, that's that. But I did some volunteer work once for a service that represents undocumented immigrants and I can tell you it is usually WAY more complicated than that. Somebody was here on a work visa and they submitted their application to extend it properly and on time, but ICE lost it, and then they followed up immediately, but before ICE fixed it, they land in immigration court after a speeding ticket. Or a woman met an American man in another country, came here on a visa, married him, and he told her that now she was a citizen and she didn't know enough about our laws to realize it wasn't true. In actuality just getting married doesn't do it (altough you would think it did from popular culture). You actually have to file a form with immigration as well and if the citizen didn't do that, she's not actually a citizen. Maybe the guy didn't realize that either and he's willing to sign the form immediately. Should she be deported and blacklisted so she can't get citizenship in the future just because of that? What if she's been here for 10 years and has 3 kids here? Or, and this sadly is very common, a non-citizen marries a citizen and he refuses to file the form to make her a citizen. Instead, after they have a kid, he holds it over her head that if she disobeys him, he will turn her in to ICE and she will be deported and he will get the kids. So then he starts beating her. The Violence Against Women Act has provisions to protect victims of domestic violence in that situation, but proving it is a full fledged trial and it is pretty tough because the victims usually have battered women's syndrome and on the flip side they have a good reason to make it up. So it requires a whole lot of investigation. And so on. Those are just a few examples, but there are many more. People who claim that their estranged father was a US citizen are very tough to resolve.

Anyways, my point is that the way to make it cheaper is to spend more up front on courts so that the detention costs drop, not to just start turning it into a rubber stamp injustice machine where people are basically getting deported whenever the whim hits the government to do so.
 
tea:
some good points. Yet there are hundreds that come across the AZ border daily. When caught by BP and they have no proof of being a US citizen or in the US legally, they should be exported back across the border.

We also need to find a way to slow the influx of illegal crossers. If we slow the influx, we reduce the burden on the courts.
 
What do you think will happen when farmers are forced to actually pay min wage for workers? Do you think the farmers will just eat the additional cost or what? Of course food prices will go up.

No the federal government will be forced to subsidize the farmers and then give someone else something to complain about.
 
And how does this justify continuing to do the wrong thing?

I never said it did. Just pointing out that prices will indeed increase and the labor cost isn't just a small fraction of the costs for farmers.
 
No the federal government will be forced to subsidize the farmers and then give someone else something to complain about.


That indeed may be a possibility and if the government really wants people to get on board with this and stop hiring illegals that may be a way.

The real problem is there is a market for illegals to come here and work and as long as that market is there, it's going to be hard to get people to comply. The only way to get people to comply is to fine them heavily, however, Republicans and Democrats have been unwilling to do this for the most part. Companies need to be heavily held responsible for hiring illegals.
 
Erm ... What? I was talking about border patrol. You know, those folks who are tasked with preventing illegals from entering the country?

So what? If you are saying the illegals have free access to going south, you'll need to prove that.
 
Pretty sure that Big Agriculture is in favor of letting illegal immigrants stay as long as they can.
 
No the federal government will be forced to subsidize the farmers and then give someone else something to complain about.

And where is that money supposed to come from? More borrowing from China?


j-mac
 
Ask Justice Scalia:



And last time I checked, Art. 2 gives the president the power to grant reprieves and pardons.

So INS = President of the United States? Try again.
Still waiting for the cite from the Consitution btw. :lamo
 
And where is that money supposed to come from? More borrowing from China?


j-mac

I think they're the only idiots willing to keep sending us money - of course they're going to cash in one of these days too.
 
So INS = President of the United States? Try again.
Still waiting for the cite from the Consitution btw. :lamo

I already supplied the cite to the Constitution. Did you want an actual quote?
 
tea:
some good points. Yet there are hundreds that come across the AZ border daily. When caught by BP and they have no proof of being a US citizen or in the US legally, they should be exported back across the border.

Oh, sorry, I should be clear. If they're caught crossing the border they are indeed just sent back where they came from. No trial or anything like that. It's for people they catch who are already in the US that the whole trial and all that ensues.

We also need to find a way to slow the influx of illegal crossers. If we slow the influx, we reduce the burden on the courts.

Actually the number of undocumented immigrants inside the US has been dropping for the last 3 years, and the number of illegal border crossings is way, way, down. The burden on the courts is mostly for the folks who are already here. Those are the big complicated trials.
 
Maybe he should have considered that most Mexican Americans whom are here legally are mostly
Catholic, and living in a border state and having many Mexican American amigos I can state almost
all whom are here legally detest the illegals. Many whom are here legally do fairly well in the work
place but they understand the jobs their kids may need, entry level low paying jobs will now be
diluted. IMHO, this move was clearly purely political as no effort to solve border security was offered.
I don't know exactly what this amnesty covers but, how is this going to play out in terms of taxes?
Will all of these new legal aliens get a pass on years of social security payments they should have
been making? Are we adding hundreds of thousands or a million new people who will end up getting
back more taxes than they pay in producing further strain on our economic situation? It doesn't
seem like the ramifications of this were thought out very well. Right now the US needs some fiscal
leadership, not someone pandering social issues which will add to the burden we're already coming
up short on not too far down the road here
. This was a slap to the face of all Americans.


546580_397805063595017_1894789712_n.jpg
 
Maybe because not all Republicans are worried about the National deficit.
 
I already supplied the cite to the Constitution. Did you want an actual quote?

Which post # did you provide that? Was there a link?
 
And where is that money supposed to come from? More borrowing from China?


j-mac

And where is the money supposed to come from to gather them all up? It would take overtime, multiple shifts, more people, more transportaion, and more gas to gather and transport them. Let alone the costs of building and manning this so called "wall" conservatives want. There are also some conservatives that believe they should be jailed first before being sent back.

Where is that money going to come from? More borrowing from China?
 
And where is the money supposed to come from to gather them all up? It would take overtime, multiple shifts, more people, more transportaion, and more gas to gather and transport them. Let alone the costs of building and manning this so called "wall" conservatives want. There are also some conservatives that believe they should be jailed first before being sent back.

Where is that money going to come from? More borrowing from China?

From you favorite program.:mrgreen: Or maybe let the States who want to assist in dealing with illegal aliens (more than what current ICE agreements will let them do)., Take money from CA bullet train grant, etc. There is funds if the feds want to do it.
 
Back
Top Bottom