PDA

View Full Version : Immigration Deal



Buccaneer
05-17-2007, 02:23 PM
WASHINGTON - Key senators in both parties and the White House announced agreement Thursday on an immigration overhaul that would grant quick legal status to millions of illegal immigrants already in the U.S. and fortify the border.


The plan would create a temporary worker program to bring new arrivals to the U.S and a separate program to cover agricultural workers. Skills and education-level would for the first time be weighted over family connections in deciding whether future immigrants should get permanent legal status. New high-tech employment verification measures also would be instituted to ensure that workers are here legally.

The compromise came after weeks of painstaking closed-door negotiations that brought the most liberal Democrats and the most conservative Republicans together with President Bush's Cabinet officers to produce a highly complex measure that carries heavy political consequences.

Bush called it "a much-needed solution to the problem of illegal immigration in this country" and said, if approved, the proposal "delivers an immigration system that is secure, productive, orderly and fair."

"With this bipartisan agreement, I am confident leaders in Washington can have a serious, civil and conclusive debate so I can sign comprehensive reform into law this year," he said in a written statement. Bush planned to make remarks about the bill later Thursday at the White House.

Sen. Edward M. Kennedy of Massachusetts, his party's lead negotiator on the deal, hailed it as "the best possible chance we will have in years to secure our borders and bring millions of people out of the shadows and into the sunshine of America."

Anticipating criticism from conservatives, Sen. Arlen Specter (news, bio, voting record), R-Pa., said, "It is not amnesty. This will restore the rule of law."

The accord sets the stage for what promises to be a bruising battle next week in the Senate on one of Bush's top non-war priorities.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (news, bio, voting record), D-Nev., called the proposal a "starting point" for that debate, but added that it needs improvement.

"I have serious concerns about some aspects of this proposal, including the structure of the temporary worker program and undue limitations on family immigration," Reid said in a statement.

The key breakthrough came when negotiators struck a bargain on a so-called "point system" that prioritizes immigrants' education and skill level over family connections in deciding how to award green cards.

The immigration issue also divides both parties in the House, which isn't expected to act unless the Senate passes a bill first.

The proposed agreement would allow illegal immigrants to come forward and obtain a "Z visa" and — after paying fees and a $5,000 fine — ultimately get on track for permanent residency, which could take between eight and 13 years. Heads of household would have to return to their home countries first.

They could come forward right away to claim a probationary card that would let them live and work legally in the U.S., but could not begin the path to permanent residency or citizenship until border security improvements and the high-tech worker identification program were completed.

A new temporary guest worker program would also have to wait until those so-called "triggers" had been activated.

Those workers would have to return home after work stints of two years, with little opportunity to gain permanent legal status or ever become U.S. citizens. They could renew their guest worker visas twice, but would be required to leave for a year in between each time.

Democrats had pressed instead for guest workers to be permitted to stay and work indefinitely in the U.S.

In perhaps the most hotly debated change, the proposed plan would shift from an immigration system primarily weighted toward family ties toward one with preferences for people with advanced degrees and sophisticated skills. Republicans have long sought such revisions, which they say are needed to end "chain migration" that harms the economy, while some Democrats and liberal groups say it's an unfair system that rips families apart.

Family connections alone would no longer be enough to qualify for a green card — except for spouses and minor children of U.S. citizens.

New limits would apply to U.S. citizens seeking to bring foreign-born parents into the country.

JasperDog94
05-17-2007, 02:57 PM
Originally posted by Buccaneer
In perhaps the most hotly debated change, the proposed plan would shift from an immigration system primarily weighted toward family ties toward one with preferences for people with advanced degrees and sophisticated skills. Republicans have long sought such revisions, which they say are needed to end "chain migration" that harms the economy, while some Democrats and liberal groups say it's an unfair system that rips families apart. Bravo!!!

Although I didn't read anything about immigrants needing to pass an English proficiency exam.

Macarthur
05-17-2007, 03:01 PM
Originally posted by JasperDog94
Bravo!!!

Although I didn't read anything about immigrants needing to pass an English proficiency exam.

Well, that isn't going to happen.

Old Tiger
05-17-2007, 03:19 PM
send the illegals back to where they came from!

JasperDog94
05-17-2007, 04:02 PM
Originally posted by Macarthur
Well, that isn't going to happen. Why not?

carter08
05-17-2007, 04:06 PM
Originally posted by JasperDog94
Why not?

Because that would be unfair

English is not officially the official language of the U.S.

Macarthur
05-17-2007, 04:10 PM
Originally posted by JasperDog94
Why not?

Because that is a pretty right leaning ideal. That type of legislation would require major bi-partisanship and that just isn't going to happen.

JasperDog94
05-17-2007, 04:20 PM
Originally posted by Macarthur
Because that is a pretty right leaning ideal. That type of legislation would require major bi-partisanship and that just isn't going to happen. Why is it right leaning to ask people that want to live here to learn english?

JasperDog94
05-17-2007, 04:20 PM
Originally posted by carter08
Because that would be unfair
How on God's green Earth is that unfair?

Old Tiger
05-17-2007, 04:22 PM
Why should we have to learn spanish? That is dumb!

Macarthur
05-17-2007, 04:34 PM
Originally posted by JasperDog94
Why is it right leaning to ask people that want to live here to learn english?

There's nothing wrong with asking, but your implication was to basically require and that would just never fly. I'm not telling you it's wrong; I'm just saying in today's political climate, it will never happen.

KTA
05-17-2007, 06:19 PM
if we moved to mexico would they have seperate text books for us that are in english and spanish? Would they go out of there way to make sure most products were wrote in spanish and english? It gets on my dang nerves that we can have streets full of immigrants rasing hell about immigration laws waiving there Mexico flags and we dont go rounding them up. They have NO right being over here illegally. If they want to come over here do it the RIGHT WAY. If a swarm of illegal Israelis came over waiving there flags in the middle of the streets what do you think would happen to them? They would get treated completly different (in a bad way...well good way depending on how you look at it).


send the illegals back to where they came from!

I agree with that 100%

SintonFan
05-17-2007, 09:49 PM
Originally posted by carter08
Because that would be unfair

English is not officially the official language of the U.S.
.
Yes we are a melting pot but we do need an official language. Communication would
be the first reason why, but also a common language helps bond a nation.
Your gonna learn alot about "fairness" when you get out into the real world.

JasperDog94
05-17-2007, 10:05 PM
Did you know that in most foreign countries that the kids are learning English? Why is that you might ask? Because it's the language that we speak in the USA!!!

JR2004
05-17-2007, 10:15 PM
Not very happy about this at all. Why in the heck are they rewarding ILLEGAL immigrants by granting them the right to be here? They have no right to be here, but since they came here illegally and all, we'll go ahead and grant them a quick legal status. What a joke...

THEY DON'T BELONG HERE, PERIOD. The ones who belong here are the folks who go through the process legally and didn't cross the border ILLEGALLY. Why is this concept so hard to grasp for the folks in Washington? They need to get a backbone and quit worrying about how this stuff could affect who votes for what party.

JasperDog94
05-17-2007, 10:18 PM
Originally posted by JR2004
They need to get a backbone and quit worrying about how this stuff could affect who votes for what party. Illegals can't vote anyway!!!:doh:

SintonFan
05-17-2007, 10:21 PM
Originally posted by JasperDog94
Illegals can't vote anyway!!!:doh:
.
Yes but some are slobbering over the fact that they might in the near future.:doh:

JR2004
05-17-2007, 10:21 PM
Originally posted by JasperDog94
Illegals can't vote anyway!!!:doh:

They're not the ones I'm talking about both these parties pandering to.

Old Tiger
05-17-2007, 10:24 PM
we should put 15 feet wide fly traps on the borders and call them Mexican Traps

BIG BLUE DEFENSIVE END
05-17-2007, 10:30 PM
Illegal immigrants should not be granted U.S. citizenship, and here are a few reasons why:

First of all, they entered our country illegally, infiltrating our borders. To put icing on the cake, illegal immigrants steal the identities of United States citizens and sometimes abuse them. Few pay money into the tax system because they file a large number of dependents and don't have to pay income taxes because the wages they make can never be traced to them.

Second of all, illegal immigrants come in and demand healthcare, education for their children, and every ammenity granted to legal United States citizens, but there again, they don't put into the tax system.

Third of all, they're illegal and the only rights they have are the ones that are guaranteed to them by international treaties and agreements, not the rights of life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness that are granted to Americans.

Finally, people say they are doing jobs that Americans refuse to take? That is a fallacy, there are Americans going out and working every day doing the same jobs, sometimes losing jobs to illegal workers because they will work for cheaper wages, which are sometimes and often below minimum wage and American workers would refuse to work for so cheap.

The bottom line is, illegal immigrants are here illegally and the current laws should be upheld at all times, not just when it is convenient for our lawmakers. It's ridiculous that amnesty is even an option, and it's just a ploy to get more votes. Nobody should just come to America and expect to be given things, and that is what illegal immigrants have done, and now our legislators want to let them do it legally. I'm disgusted. :mad:

SintonFan
05-17-2007, 10:38 PM
Originally posted by BIG BLUE DEFENSIVE END
Finally, people say they are doing jobs that Americans refuse to take? That is a fallacy, there are Americans going out and working every day doing the same jobs, sometimes losing jobs to illegal workers because they will work for cheaper wages, which are sometimes and often below minimum wage and American workers would refuse to work for so cheap.
.
A friend of mine works in construction and has been a brick mason his whole life. He's
55 and made more per hour in the early 80's than he does now. The reason is because of the influx of cheap labor that has driven down the hourly wage. He used to make over $15 an hour over 20 years ago but now struggles to earn $10 because of illegals. This man has almost 40 years experience and outworks them all. Luckily for him he's running a crew now and does better but frikkin cripes what he has gone through is ludicrous!:doh: