umm, lola, i never said mexico was a third world country. i know mexico is very rich. i also know, the money is help by a small percentage of the population, while the rest live at or way below the poverty line. i was mearly stating, that if this continues, the u.s. is going to go down the tubes. i used third world country for lack of a beter phrase. so much for respectful dialogue.
Amnesty for Illegal Immigrants?
by nvrgnbk 73 Replies latest members politics
-
-
brinjen
Just wondering if the U.S. media has mentioned Bush & Howard's plans to swap asylum seekers. It's received a lot of media coverage here, was wondering if it has been mentioned over there as well.
http://www.workpermit.com/news/2007_04_24/australia-united_states/refugee_exchange_program.htm
http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,21702992-661,00.html
Any thoughts?
Personally, I can't see any good to come from it.
-
nvrgnbk
The rich exploit the poor.
The only way to improve humanity, and it's no short-term solution, is to educate people.
But of course, the rich don't want an educated work force. Harder to exploit. And on and on it goes.
-
nvrgnbk
Proposals From Both Sides Fail in Immigration Debate </form>
By ROBERT PEAR Published: June 28, 2007WASHINGTON, June 27 — The Senate on Wednesday killed proposals from the left and the right for major changes in a comprehensive immigration bill, but the outlook for the bill remained in doubt as senators prepared for a crucial vote on whether to end debate and move to final passage.
Democrats failed in efforts to promote family unification by providing more visas to parents of United States citizens. Republicans lost in their bid to toughen the requirements for illegal immigrants who want to become permanent residents and ultimately citizens. Those results preserved the fragile bipartisan compromise embodied in the bill, President Bush’s top domestic priority, which would make the biggest changes in immigration law in more than 20 years.
The debate became unusually testy, and senators tied themselves in procedural knots as they tried to work through a package of 27 amendments. Some stonewalled normally routine requests by their colleagues — raising objections, for example, when senators asked to dispense with further proceedings under a quorum call or to explain their reasons for opposing requests for unanimous consent.
“We are in trench warfare,” said Senator Arlen Specter, Republican of Pennsylvania, a strong supporter of the bill.
A leading opponent of the measure, Senator David Vitter, Republican of Louisiana, said, “I am being railroaded.”
The conflict was leading to a critical vote, set for Thursday morning, on whether to end debate. Supporters of the bill said that if they got the 60 votes needed to close debate, then passage would be likely.
But senators of both parties said they were unsure the bill would clear that hurdle. Several senators who voted to keep the bill alive Tuesday said they would probably oppose efforts to shut off debate.
The bill would provide $4.4 billion for border security, increase the penalties for hiring illegal immigrants, create a new guest worker program and offer legal status to millions of illegal immigrants.
By a vote of 53 to 45, the Senate killed a Republican proposal that would have required most adult illegal immigrants to return to their home countries to apply for legal status, in the form of special “Z visas,” which would allow them to work in this country.
The vote does not mean that the “touchback requirement” is dead. The overall bill includes such a requirement for people who want permanent residence visas, known as green cards. And the Senate is scheduled to consider another version of the touchback requirement supported by many Republicans. The proposals respond to criticism from conservatives who denounce the bill as a form of amnesty for people who have broken the law.
The bill would establish a point system to evaluate would-be immigrants, giving more weight to job skills and education and less to family ties. The Senate on Wednesday rejected two proposals intended to promote the reunification of families.
One of the amendments, offered by Senator Robert Menendez, Democrat of New Jersey, would have awarded 10 extra points, on a 100-point scale, to adult children and siblings of United States citizens and legal permanent residents. The other, by Senator Christopher J. Dodd, Democrat of Connecticut, would have set aside more green cards for parents of American citizens.
By a vote of 56 to 41, the Senate killed an amendment by Senator Christopher S. Bond, Republican of Missouri, that would have prohibited illegal immigrants from obtaining green cards. In general, under existing law, permanent residents can apply for citizenship after living in the United States for five years.
“If they come here illegally just to work, they have not earned citizenship,” Mr. Bond said. “We are all immigrants, but we did not come here illegally and expect to get citizenship.”
Senator Edward M. Kennedy of Massachusetts, the chief Democratic architect of the bill, said illegal immigrants would be easily exploited if they could never become lawful permanent residents. “We can imagine the resentment, the hostility that will seethe and grow,” Mr. Kennedy said.
By a vote of 79 to 18, the Senate killed a proposal by Senator Jim Webb, Democrat of Virginia, that would have reduced the number of illegal immigrants who could gain legal status. Under the bill, legal status would be available to immigrants who have been in the United States since Jan. 1. Mr. Webb would have pushed the date back to 2003, requiring four years of “continuous physical presence.” He would also have eliminated the touchback requirement, which he said was unworkable.
Senator Jim DeMint, Republican of South Carolina, complained that the Senate majority leader, Harry Reid, Democrat of Nevada, had “handpicked the amendments” to be considered this week.
Mr. Reid said he had chosen the amendments in consultation with the minority leader, Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky. Aides to Mr. McConnell confirmed that.
Influential labor and Hispanic groups urged the Senate to pass the bill and send it to the House, where they said flaws could be corrected. The groups included the Service Employees International Union, the National Council of La Raza, the United Farm Workers and the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund.
“The price of failure will be hundreds of more people dying in the desert,” said Eliseo Medina, an executive vice president of the service employees union. “The price of failure will be more workplace raids and families separated as breadwinners are arrested and deported. The price of failure will be more public anger at the broken immigration system. More states and cities will pass punitive laws that target immigrants.”