Thread: Is Newt calling for Amnesty?

Originally Posted by El_Zoido

What I don't understand is, that the discussion focueses so much on the immigrants.

It would be more efficent and easier to tackle the problem by punishing americans who violate the law by employing illegal immigrants. I think the maximum fine for doing that is 500.000 € ($700.000) here.

It's much more civilized to single out those who break the law because they don't want to pay american workers. If the price of that are higher prices, that something else...

You are correct. The power of special interests coupled with some ideology has kept the gov't from going after these criminal employers in any large measure.

You wanta do something effective in stopping the influx? All you need is a toll free number to call, with rewards being offered for every employer caught by the civilian police work. Since this would actually work, of course it will never be used. We catch crooks from shows like America's Most Wanted, a tv show.

Originally Posted by thanatos144

Illegal immigrants are breaking the law as well.

What are you inferring? That since the illegals are breaking the law, we should not go after the carrot that brings them here? When you are up to the ass in gators, you must not forget that the purpose was to drain the swamp. The swamp that needs to be drained are american employers who want to make more money to keep by hiring illegals who will work for low pay, and they do not care if they break laws by doing so. That is a criminal mindset, and they are not better than the common street thug.

Originally Posted by El_Zoido

What I don't understand is, that the discussion focueses so much on the immigrants.

It would be more efficent and easier to tackle the problem by punishing americans who violate the law by employing illegal immigrants. I think the maximum fine for doing that is 500.000 € ($700.000) here.

It's much more civilized to single out those who break the law because they don't want to pay american workers. If the price of that are higher prices, that something else...

That's a very important aspect of resolving the illegal immigration problem but there has been a lot of resistance to that. For example, in 2007 we in Arizona approved the "Legal Arizona Workers Act" which required all employers to verify all new hires through the federal e-Verify system. Those employers who were found to have employed illegals (after the enactment of the law) and had not used the e-Verify system were subject to fines and suspension of their business license up to and including an outright revocation of their right to conduct business in AZ.

Prior to the law going into effect in 2008 there were a number of legal actions taken against the State and it wasn't until US v Whiting was settled by the SCOTUS in March of this year that the law actually got the green light even though it has now completely fallen off the radar. In fact, just a few weeks ago I got a call from DHS asking whether I intended on keeping my e-Verify account active.

Originally Posted by Dilettante

We're looking at a situation where people are, undoubtedly, breaking the law. But in these cases (established immigrant families who have lived here peacefully for many years), enforcing the law does more harm than good: economically, socially, and in the lives of the effected individuals.

Where do we set the number of years, 10, 20, why not 5. Have they paid taxes or worked under a stolen SSN. Have they received welfare,food stamps, free medical etc all at tax payer expense? All which is another crime. Now you have more crimes on top of the original crime. Should we try to recover the cost plus a fine. Or just let it go?

Where do we draw the line?

Originally Posted by Dilettante

Crossing the border illegally is indeed a crime. And so is going 5 miles over the speed limit (so is going 1 mile over the speed limit, for that matter).

And I think the analogy is fine for this purpose. I would say that the police department is not serving the public with efficiency when its stopping people for going 5 miles over the limit. Imagine now if, instead of getting money from you paying the ticket, the government was actually at a net loss because you were pulled over (which would almost certainly be the case when it comes to paying for the deportation of established families) and instead of just inconveniencing you it separated you from your loved ones.

We're looking at a situation where people are, undoubtedly, breaking the law. But in these cases (established immigrant families who have lived here peacefully for many years), enforcing the law does more harm than good: economically, socially, and in the lives of the effected individuals.

Granted, from your perspective it does more harm than good TO THE ILLEGALS. Yet we do not take the families of sentenced law breakers into account when the judge passes the sentence. In fact, if serving time totally breaks a family apart, we have not cared. Yet the exception is with illegals, as suddenly you have lots of folks saying the family should not suffer punishment, because one of the members broke the law. This is inconsistent with how we treat other lawbreakers. These illegals are breaking our laws, and they should be treated in the same manner, even if it breaks up families. If you don't like the law, get it changed.

Yet the more humane solution is to simply go after the employers, and let the illegals deport themselves. If they insist on taking a chance on their family being broken up, they are doing nothing more than paying then price for willfully breaking our laws, when they get caught.

Any serious plan will have the illegals deporting themselves in large numbers.

Yes, it does amount to Amnesty, saying it doesn't is just a semantic game and I don't see how anyone can say anything else. I say this very reluctantly too, as Amnesty is one of the very few things I agree with some Republicans on, such as Bush and Gingrich, while I despise them generally as mainstream Republicans and for most all of their other positions.

Originally Posted by wooyarn

Where do we set the number of years, 10, 20, why not 5. Have they paid taxes or worked under a stolen SSN. Have they received welfare,food stamps, free medical etc all at tax payer expense? All which is another crime. Now you have more crimes on top of the original crime. Should we try to recover the cost plus a fine. Or just let it go?

Where do we draw the line?

With regard to taxes, they will have been paying sales taxes (local and state, if any), gas taxes and other taxes on consumption. And while they may not be paying income tax, given their income levels, chances are they wouldn't have been paying any even if they were citizens. And since they don't file taxes, they don't get credits back from the government. So I don't think the government is losing any income here just because they're illegal immigrants.

With regard to fines and expenses, I have no problem with the notion of a set fee being attached to receiving a residency card (or whatever they get), to off-set public expense on welfare programs, payable over time if necessary. I don't know what the numbers on that would be like.

And with regard to the number of years, I'll suggest 10, because its a nice round number and a decade is long enough to put down roots as a family, long enough for a child to become connected to his/her community, and long enough to establish a record as a peaceful member of society. But it isn't up to me. More informed people can draw the line wherever they think proper, and doubtless it would eventually be the result of compromise. But surely the worst place to draw the line would be at some extreme position!

Many Hispanics who came here illegally used to vote Republican until this campaign of hatred and vilification of them which grew far worse after 9/11 made them finally change their minds. I find claiming it is a plot of the "loony left" instead of the natural result of many Conservatives' own vocal objections and actions is hilarious to say the least. Not to mention I doubt it is the 20% of the population which actually belongs to this "loony left" who only employ them.

But all this rhetoric has stimulated my creative juices. Here is one possible way to deal with this grave threat to our very existence:

I think would be quite simple to eradicate the undocumented immigrant problem and to cleanse them from the US. All we need to do is to use the national ID program which is now part of the drivers licensing program in every state, along with military-style checkpoints every 10 or 20 miles similar to those used by fascist governments to such great success, to validate that each and every person rightfully belongs here. To capture the rest who would then likely decide not to move any great distance to avoid justice, we could simply make it illegal to make any financial transaction at any store without showing that proper ID or a valid US passport showing that they were in the country legally. To assure compliance, we would require all vendors to scan these documents to show they are legitimate and that each and every sale was only made to approved individuals.

And this is only the tip of the iceberg. Once we have caught the criminals who were here illegally, we could revive the extraordinary rendition program to send them to countries like Morocco and Egypt where they could be tortured and murdered with impunity to give up the identity and specifics of those who aided and abetted their illegal activities. Those who have ever harbored or even allowed these criminals to clean their toilets or mow their laws should also pay the price for their criminal acts.

Of course, we are going to need much larger prisons than we already have to incarcerate all these citizen criminals. Perhaps it would be a good idea to turn much of Georgia back into giant penal colony again. While much of the world will likely mock us for increasing the prison population far greater than any other advanced country as it already is, at least we will know that we have eradicated this grave peril to our very way of life.

Originally Posted by Blue Doggy

Granted, from your perspective it does more harm than good TO THE ILLEGALS. Yet we do not take the families of sentenced law breakers into account when the judge passes the sentence. In fact, if serving time totally breaks a family apart, we have not cared. Yet the exception is with illegals, as suddenly you have lots of folks saying the family should not suffer punishment, because one of the members broke the law. This is inconsistent with how we treat other lawbreakers. These illegals are breaking our laws, and they should be treated in the same manner, even if it breaks up families. If you don't like the law, get it changed.

Yet the more humane solution is to simply go after the employers, and let the illegals deport themselves. If they insist on taking a chance on their family being broken up, they are doing nothing more than paying then price for willfully breaking our laws, when they get caught.


Any serious plan will have the illegals deporting themselves in large numbers.

My understanding is that our present economy is doing that right now.

Your first statement is not in keeping with most sentenciing practices I've seen. While most judges won't let a guy off completely for having a big family it does argue, and sometimes strongly, for leniency, particularly with first offenders and/or those who were demonstrably trying to help their families with the crime ( with however stupidly misguided that notion may be a strong factor)

Originally Posted by El_Zoido

No doubt.
But I think the public outrage should be more focused on those americans who benefit from illegal activity, than those people who -legal or not- simply want to work and get a better life.

The person here illegally is also benefiting from their activity. It isn't a one sided deal.

We do not need to go house by house looking for illegals. That would be useless and expensive. We do need to make a concerted effort to enforce the laws that are on the books and not carve out exceptions for this, that and the other. It's simple....all public services (schools, social services, etc) should only be made available to legal citizens. Anyone here illegally who is found committing ANY crime (speeding, jay walking, spitting on the sidewalk) is referred for deportation along with any family members that are here illegally. If someone is here illegally only because their parents brought them across as infants.....though shit.

On the other side....establish and employ a sponsorship program for temporary workers. Employers will be responsible for workers hired on a temporary visa. Workers will be exempt from SS/Med withholding but will be required to pay income tax on all wages earned while here. Approval process will be fast and efficient - applicants must pass a basic criminal background check and health check. This check can be conducted in their country of origin by an approved agent. Temporary visas will extend for no more than one year but will be renewable. Conviction of any criminal act, including misdemeanors, will result in revocation of the visa.

Originally Posted by Blue Doggy

Granted, from your perspective it does more harm than good TO THE ILLEGALS. Yet we do not take the families of sentenced law breakers into account when the judge passes the sentence. In fact, if serving time totally breaks a family apart, we have not cared. Yet the exception is with illegals, as suddenly you have lots of folks saying the family should not suffer punishment, because one of the members broke the law. This is inconsistent with how we treat other lawbreakers. These illegals are breaking our laws, and they should be treated in the same manner, even if it breaks up families. If you don't like the law, get it changed.

It also does more harm than good to society.
Harm: it creates more broken families dependent on gov. aid and more likely to take up crime, raises prices, removes an established and peaceful member of the community, and costs the tax payers a bundle.
Good: ??? Possibly that it creates a new job opening at extremely low wages and 0 benefits for a citizen?

I don't think that's a net win.

We're willing to tolerate broken families when it comes to imprisoning people who are actual threats to society (i.e. when the good of enforcement outweighs the harm). With these sorts of immigrant families (again: peaceful, established, mixed with citizens, and long-term), that isn't the case. It's like breaking up Wooyarn's family because of his speeding ticket.

Originally Posted by Blue Doggy

Yet the more humane solution is to simply go after the employers, and let the illegals deport themselves. If they insist on taking a chance on their family being broken up, they are doing nothing more than paying then price for willfully breaking our laws, when they get caught.

Any serious plan will have the illegals deporting themselves in large numbers.

I can agree with that.

Originally Posted by John Drake

My understanding is that our present economy is doing that right now.

Your first statement is not in keeping with most sentenciing practices I've seen. While most judges won't let a guy off completely for having a big family it does argue, and sometimes strongly, for leniency, particularly with first offenders and/or those who were demonstrably trying to help their families with the crime ( with however stupidly misguided that notion may be a strong factor)

I have seen and know of countless families broken up by long sentences on drug charges. We go after druggies here, and they get more time than manslaughter in many cases.

But yes our bad economy has deported many, but I cannot help but wonder how many are on the public dole. And there are still large pockets of these illegals here in the South, apparently still working and spittin' kids out regularly.

Between the cons and the libs, we can't solve the problem. They don't really want to solve it, is the truth here.

Originally Posted by Formaldehyde

Many Hispanics who came here illegally used to vote Republican until this campaign of hatred and vilification of them which grew far worse after 9/11 made them finally change their minds. I find claiming it is a plot of the "loony left" instead of the natural result of many Conservatives' own vocal objections and actions is hilarious to say the least. Not to mention I doubt it is the 20% of the population which actually belongs to this "loony left" who only employ them.

But all this rhetoric has stimulated my creative juices. Here is one possible way to deal with this grave threat to our very existence:

I think would be quite simple to eradicate the undocumented immigrant problem and to cleanse them from the US. All we need to do is to use the national ID program which is now part of the drivers licensing program in every state, along with military-style checkpoints every 10 or 20 miles similar to those used by fascist governments to such great success, to validate that each and every person rightfully belongs here. To capture the rest who would then likely decide not to move any great distance to avoid justice, we could simply make it illegal to make any financial transaction at any store without showing that proper ID or a valid US passport showing that they were in the country legally. To assure compliance, we would require all vendors to scan these documents to show they are legitimate and that each and every sale was only made to approved individuals.

And this is only the tip of the iceberg. Once we have caught the criminals who were here illegally, we could revive the extraordinary rendition program to send them to countries like Morocco and Egypt where they could be tortured and murdered with impunity to give up the identity and specifics of those who aided and abetted their illegal activities. Those who have ever harbored or even allowed these criminals to clean their toilets or mow their laws should also pay the price for their criminal acts.

Of course, we are going to need much larger prisons than we already have to incarcerate all these citizen criminals. Perhaps it would be a good idea to turn much of Georgia back into giant penal colony again. While much of the world will likely mock us for increasing the prison population far greater than any other advanced country as it already is, at least we will know that we have eradicated this grave peril to our very way of life.

Typical liberal big government solution. My idea is to require all citizens to have an id chip embedded somewhere in their bodies. Then we could identify citizens with friend or foe type detectors placed in road sign and public builidings. We could attach these to lethal devices which would then instantly kill any perpetrators.

It would be easy to develop these even further, so they would read the criminal's mind, thus eliminating any wrongdoing whatsoever at the very beginning.

And the genius of these is they wouldn't even have to actually work. Just have them go off and kill the occasional passerby at random. The rest of the population would be quickly frightened into submission. Surely the lives of a few insignificant individuals are worth it to eliminate crime from our Great and Free society.