"Dream Act" immigration bill blocked in Senate

reefedjib said:

Better to legalize them and eliminate the revenue stream for cartels and smugglers.

Click to expand...

Oh thats right...you want to make MJ legal because enforcing the current laws on it is too hard....hmmm I wonder just how hard it would be if there was a wall along our borders putting a serious crimp on the flow of illegal drugs (which by the by would also do the same for the revenue stream of the cartels)...wonder what that would do for many pro-pot peoples arguements....

reefedjib said:

In your dreams

Click to expand...

Really? Then prove to me that putting up a fence along our border would cost more resources than 2 wars.

Kal'Stang said:

Really? Then prove to me that putting up a fence along our border would cost more resources than 2 wars.

Click to expand...

I'll just simply point out that those two wars were bounded by a timeframe. Sure the AFG war is still ongoing, but it will wind down. Iraq has 50,000 troops left and they will be out this time next year.

Whereas a wall would have to be monitored and maintained into perpetuity. Initial costs would probably exceed the cost of the wars, but even if they didn't, monitoring, staffing and maintenance would over the years.

Are you suggesting we deficit spend to build and staff the wall?

Kal'Stang said:

Oh thats right...you want to make MJ legal because enforcing the current laws on it is too hard....hmmm I wonder just how hard it would be if there was a wall along our borders putting a serious crimp on the flow of illegal drugs (which by the by would also do the same for the revenue stream of the cartels)...wonder what that would do for many pro-pot peoples arguements....

Click to expand...

Enforcing current laws is impossible. The war on drugs is a failure. The American people want to use these drugs recreationally and you can't stop them. A wall will do nothing, just change the flows.

reefedjib said:

I'll just simply point out that those two wars were bounded by a timeframe. Sure the AFG war is still ongoing, but it will wind down. Iraq has 50,000 troops left and they will be out this time next year.

Whereas a wall would have to be monitored and maintained into perpetuity. Initial costs would probably exceed the cost of the wars, but even if they didn't, monitoring, staffing and maintenance would over the years.

Are you suggesting we deficit spend to build and staff the wall?

Click to expand...

OH so you want to go that route huh? Ok. How about I also add in other wars...like vietnam (another war which is being called a failure)? Or how about future wars which fall into the same criteria of not needed and was a failure?

I could also bring in the fact that we spend lots of resources already on border security and maintence.

Or should we just keep it to the confined 10 year limit that we currently have as we are basing this fence building on the current 2 wars which have already been mentioned?

The illegal Mexican problem won't be solved until Mexico itself is solved. When you can stand on the border in a land of riches and see abject poverty commencing just a few yards away, it's easy to see that the problems lie with the source, and that is Mexico itself. A few years ago drove a fifth wheel from Vancouver down to Central America and there were often cases where young people asked to go with me (it never happened) just to get out of where they were.

The first problem is Napoleonic Law, the second is the social reluctance to complain, and the third is respect for those on higher authority, which includes the bureaucracy. All of this leads to corruption on a grand scale.

The Mexicans (and Latinos) are a curious mix of pride and humility, a lovely people overall, and that they find themselves in such a desperate situation now can only be laid at the systematic forces, cultural and legal, in Mexico which keep them down. Huge changes must occur before these problems are solved and the inequities in Mexico that lead to these sort of degrading problems should be better publicized. The same can be said of other Latin American countries.

This is a tough one because I can see both sides of the debate.

The opposition's viewpoint:

An illegal alien is an illegal alien. And when they migrate to this country and have children only to take advantage of the many privilages (i.e., "loopholes") in our immigration laws to gain access to the very privileges nationalized or natural born citizen are rightly entitled to, it undermines the rights given to legal citizens. But then there's the other side...

When I think about the DREAM Act, I also think about Won Kim Ark's parents, how they migrated to this country, were positive contributors to the community where they lived and other than the limits placed on them under the Chinese Exclusion Act, could have become naturalized U.S. citizens. For those unfamiliar with this landmark SC case, their son was born in the U.S. soon after his parents migrated here. Still, he would be classified as an "anchor baby" today. Nonetheless, the issue here is "should an individual brought to this country by his or her parents, having been a 'resident alien' and, therefore, a positive contributor to society having broking no laws, obtained atleast a high school education and is willing to join this country's military be denied U.S. citizenship upon serving honorably?"

Throughout this nation's history from as far back as the Civil War (and quite possibly even further), this nation has afforded foreignors and non-citizens (slaves) the right to citizenship if they served honorably and faithfully in our armed services. There were caveats, of course, but our Immigration and Nationalization laws do provide a pathway to U.S. citizenship for foreignors who served during wartime. (See INA 1440 for details) The only question here is should a resident alien under the age of 16 who has caused no trouble, obtained an education (because ESL and other measures are helping to make this young person a viable member of society by breaking down that language barrier) and is willing to serve in our military with honor in peace time and in war be granted a faster path (or direct path) toward U.S. citizenship?

Sidenote: Personally, I think this issue should be made part of immigration reform and not be attacked to another measure that deals with aspects of our military (i.e., appropriations or cost of living allowances), but as a whole as part of immigration reform I would not have a problem with it only because our nation would not be allowing anyone to come into the military for the purpose of gaining U.S. citizenship. They'd essentially be selection "the best and the brightest resident alien youths" who would then take what they've learned (perhaps even going on to college) and putting their education and that American "can-do spirit" that's been positively cultivated and "repaying America" by all it has given to him or her. So, for those who see this as a pathway for "illegal Mexicans only" or just any foreign-born individual to gain U.S. citizenship, I think you need to think again on the matter at hand. Furthermore, those who continue to say that the DREAM Act would "reward illegal behavior" are totally misguided here. It's not the parents of this children who would be afforded a pathway to citizenship via serving in our nation's armed forces. It's the children. They had no say in where they were born. And again, only those who have committed no crimes and have graduated high school or college would have any stake in this. Let's try to remember that.

Barbbtx said:

As far as college some will be treated better than American citizens. They would pay in state tuition while those from outside the state would not. We are not ready for this kind of reform.
It's dead for now. It's catch 22. Dems won't secure the border. They think if they do Rep. won't vote for any kind of amnesty because they got what they wanted.
Republicans won't vote for any kind of amnesty because the borders are wide open.

I think we already fast track illegals who have served in our military.

Click to expand...

How do you figure that? Are the application procedures for obtaining grants and scholarships, tuition any different for resident aliens than they are for those for U.S. citizens? What about college registration procedures? Are they different for those applying for a 2-yr community college from that of a major 4-yr university? Think it through, Barb...

Give us some examples that show resident aliens receive better access to financial aid or are granted entry into community colleges or major universities ahead of U.S. citizens whether they are white privileged Americans or poor minorities (and no, I'm not playing the race card here, just trying to sight examples of how these processes might be different based on some other underlying criteria) and I'm with you.

You now have the floor...

(Oh, and before ANYONE jumps on that affirmative action bandwagon, let's remember - that applies to minorities, not resident aliens.)

Barbbtx said:

Here's a thought. Send them back as soon as we realize the are here illegally. Don't allow them to go to our schools. Don't make them automatic citizens for being born here. Don't give them welfare, foodstamps and healthcare. Don't give them jobs. If we did that, there would be no need for a fence.
We need to find a way to speed up the process so that it's not years of waiting in line to become legal. But there still needs to be a line.

Click to expand...

Mistaken connection yet again...

We're NOT talking about illegal aliens; we're talking about "resident aliens" who come here as adults w/their young children in tow, not illegal aliens who come here, have children and are, thus, "anchor babies" - birth-right citizens. Let's NOT confuse the two. Now, if the DREAM Act would reward the children of illegal aliens who skirt the law, sneak past our boarders bringing their children with them, hidding under our noses and then their children use our military as a pathway to citizenship, then yes I'd have a problem with that despite the fact that the child was unaware that the law was broken. But if the parents are resident aliens and their under aged child wants to become a U.S. citizen by joining the military and he/she has a clean criminal record and his atleast a high school grad, I wouldn't have a problem with that at all as long as such ruling was made part of immigration reform not military appropriations or other such laws dealing exclusively with our military. It's simply the wrong venue to take up such a cause.

Albert Di Salvo said:

That depends on one's perspective and values.

Click to expand...

Im pretty sure the South, the Bible Belt and West Coast dont give a damm about the North East and vice versa. The midwest is a toss up

The end of America will bring both foreseeable and unknowable consequences.

Click to expand...

Such as.....

Barbbtx said:

As far as college some will be treated better than American citizens. They would pay in state tuition while those from outside the state would not.
We are not ready for this kind of reform.
It's dead for now. It's catch 22. Dems won't secure the border. They think if they do Rep. won't vote for any kind of amnesty because they got what they wanted.
Republicans won't vote for any kind of amnesty because the borders are wide open.

I think we already fast track illegals who have served in our military.

Click to expand...

Fact check Barb, fact check....

PolitiFact Florida | Florida congressman says DREAM Act means lower tuition for illegal immigrants

Second, the legislation that passed the House on Dec. 7 does not mention in-state tuition, and no version ever considered would mandate or force states to offer DREAM Act participants in-state rates. That's an opinion shared by Michelle Mittelstadt, a spokeswoman for the nonpartisan Migration Policy Institute, and by Steve Camarota, director of research for the Center for Immigration Studies, a group that opposes the DREAM Act.

Click to expand...

It would be up to each state whether they paid instate tuition rates. Currently 11 states do allow that, but that has nothing to do with DREAM, since that is already the case in those states.

chevydriver1123 said:

Im pretty sure the South, the Bible Belt and West Coast dont give a damm about the North East and vice versa. The midwest is a toss up




Such as.....

Click to expand...

It won't be broken down by region. It will not be an orderly process. There won't be a constitutional convention to determine the future. There will be chaos.

Foreseeable consequences...diminished standard of living, racial violence, further Mexican colonization...

Unknowable consequences...the disappearance of American power will create a political vacuum...there will be wars that can't be predicted.

Redress said:

"Dream Act" immigration bill blocked in Senate - Yahoo! News



This is one where I have to come down on the same side as republicans. I like the concept of DREAM, but I think, at least for now, it should be limited to military service as the route to access to citizenship.

Click to expand...

I might also point out that allowing illegal immigrants citizenship via the military is a terrible idea for your military forces. Consider the examples of Texas or South Africa -- both times, immigrants were granted amnesty, or citizenship for serving in the military (in Texas, American immigrants to Mexico, and in South Africa, English immigrants to Boere held Transvaal). Eventually, there came to be so many of X ethnic group in the military that the military decided it would be better to support the interests of X ethnic group (Mexico, in this scenario), instead of their new country.

Not saying this is an inevitability, only something to chew on, and think about.

Le Marteau said:

I might also point out that allowing illegal immigrants citizenship via the military is a terrible idea for your military forces. Consider the examples of Texas or South Africa -- both times, immigrants were granted amnesty, or citizenship for serving in the military (in Texas, American immigrants to Mexico, and in South Africa, English immigrants to Boere held Transvaal). Eventually, there came to be so many of X ethnic group in the military that the military decided it would be better to support the interests of X ethnic group (Mexico, in this scenario), instead of their new country.

Not saying this is an inevitability, only something to chew on, and think about.

Click to expand...

That is a nonissue.

Redress said:

That is a nonissue.

Click to expand...

Just saying it isn't an issue doesn't make the issue go away. Why is this a nonissue? Many of the Mexican citizens where I live are in love with Mexico and think poorly of America.

Albert Di Salvo said:

Just saying it isn't an issue doesn't make the issue go away. Why is this a nonissue? Many of the Mexican citizens where I live are in love with Mexico and think poorly of America.

Click to expand...

I don't get this. Mexico has devolved into a lawless chaos of territorial warlords and drug cartels, amidst what has been a poverty-stricken wasteland completely devoid of opportunity. Here, they find law, peace, opportunity, and decency.

Where does this pride come from in the motherland?

Erod said:

I don't get this. Mexico has devolved into a lawless chaos of territorial warlords and drug cartels, amidst what has been a poverty-stricken wasteland completely devoid of opportunity. Here, they find law, peace, opportunity, and decency.

Where does this pride come from in the motherland?

Click to expand...

Memory is a funny thing. Mexicans love their culture. They remember the good things and forget the bad things. I think they are also conscious of the fact that they are deeply resented because of the burden they place on the taxpayers of California who are compelled to provide social welfare benefits for them.

Mexicans and Anglos walk past each other on the sidewalks here and our eyes never meet. We ignore each other. This is the new America.

Morality Games said:

Obama is right. This was a defeat for common sense.

Since it isn't logistically possible to extricate illegals from the regional economies they plugged into (local governments won't consistently cooperate), not to mention the social and cultural connections they've made, most of the ones already here aren't going anywhere. That's why we gave in during the 80s, because we didn't have much of a choice. We're in the same situation now that we were then, because we didn't seal the border.

Putting aside whether or not we should seal the border, there's nothing to be done about the people we have here now without invoking some kind of martial law and causing a bunch of chaos. Since it is the case that they "have" to be part of our community, we might as well implement a process of meritocratic selection to determine which of them ought to be politically empowered members.

Click to expand...

The issue for America is will it have a new underclass of people. I see it as, “Been there, done that.” We know that is a disaster for our society which leaves long lasting divisions. We must support every mechanism available to integrate and enfranchise this latest wave of economic immigrants for our own nation's sake.

Chappy said:

The issue for America is will it have a new underclass of people. I see it as, “Been there, done that.” We know that is a disaster for our society which leaves long lasting divisions. We must support every mechanism available to integrate and enfranchise this latest wave of economic immigrants for our own nation's sake.

Click to expand...

Your country is broke, poorly educated, semi-skilled, and is financially unstable. Your country will be like Venezuela with a rich white ruling class and a poor brown underclass.

In California where you and I live the middle class is disappearing. That's because you and those you support have run this state into the ground. That's what you intend for the whole country.

Chappy said:

These are kids who through no fault of their own are here, who in many cases have no personal recollection of any other country but this one, who are among the top achievers of our public school systems, and who have enormous potential to contribute to our society and strengthen our nation. The DREAM act empowers that realization and in my opinion it is only human shortsightedness that prevents this urgently needed legislation from being the law of the land.

Click to expand...

what if they arent among the top acheivers in our public school system, OR
they do know another country, just more recently this one.

Do we include a boatload of haitian children that managed to wash up on the shores of Miami and scurried into the population for 10 minutes or so before being caught?

i'm not sure your side has thought these things out...as usual

shades said:

what if they arent among the top acheivers in our public school system, OR
they do know another country, just more recently this one.

Do we include a boatload of haitian children that managed to wash up on the shores of Miami and scurried into the population for 10 minutes or so before being caught?

i'm not sure your side has thought these things out...as usual

Click to expand...

You should read up on what the DREAM Act is actually about before posting.

Chappy said:

You should read up on what the DREAM Act is actually about before posting.

Click to expand...

It's a thinly veiled attempt to drum up expected Dem voters. Nothing more.

You don't reward illegals by making their children citizens.

Chappy said:

You should read up on what the DREAM Act is actually about before posting.

Click to expand...

Look at what your side has done to the State of California. Your side should be ashamed for profiting on the misery of the middle class and poor.

Albert Di Salvo said:

Look at what your side has done to the State of California. Your side should be ashamed for profiting on the misery of the middle class and poor.

Click to expand...

Actually it is YOUR SIDE with its neafarious Prop 13 that has castrated the idea of majority rule in your state and has introduced the tyranny of the minority.

haymarket said:

Actually it is YOUR SIDE with its neafarious Prop 13 that has castrated the idea of majority rule in your state and has introduced the tyranny of the minority.

Click to expand...

The "tyranny of the minority" now thats a new one on me. Please do explain this one.

haymarket said:

Actually it is YOUR SIDE with its neafarious Prop 13 that has castrated the idea of majority rule in your state and has introduced the tyranny of the minority.

Click to expand...

Not true. You sound like a broken record. Nobody believes you.

Not even extreme leftists are suggesting that Prop. 13 be changed. It's not on the radar. Public sector union defined benefit pension plans are in the news out here, not Prop. 13.