US Immigration Reform?

[Guest Kurgan]

Last night I caught some snippets of a Colorado (?) Senator discussing the issue of Immigration Reform on C-Span.

 

He went on and on, but he mentioned the testimony of Barbara Jordan (Chair, U.S. Commission on Immigration Reform

Before a Joint U.S. House of Representatives Committee on the Judiciary Subcommittee on Immigration and Claims and U.S. Senate Committee on the Judiciary Subcommittee on Immigration June 28, 1995; according to the 'net) which suggested that at least at one time, Immigration Reform was being seriously considered in this country.

 

The Senator asserted (among other things) that the policies of Mexico in the past have been unfair, because the US has been urged by them to open their borders to Mexico in the south, while the Mexican government has closed it's borders with its neighbors. He also mentioned that at least some of the hijacking suspects in the Sept11th attacks were here on expired visas.

 

He asserted over and over that he was not blaming immigrants in general for what happened, but that the failure of the INS and the US immigration policies were a contributing factor to the tragedy. He said that rather than thinking we can police all of the potential terrorist targets forever and ever, we should be focusing on reforming our immigration policies, to make sure that those with connections to known terrorist groups NOT be allowed in the country, and those who have allowed their visas to expire, be sent back. Also, stricter security should be imposed to stem the flow of illegals into the country, and more steps taken to ensure that those who don't obey our laws are deported.

 

What are everyone's feelings on this?

 

Is Immigration in need of reform?

 

I will say that many times I've heard people claim that restrictions on immigration are racist. I just want to throw that argument right out the window from the get go. Obviously, most immigrants are law abiding people, but they are not citizens.

 

Out of the millions and millions of immigrants that have come into the US in recent years (both legal and illegal), at least some of them were terrorists and criminals, and because our INS wasn't doing its job well enough, nobody seemed to notice until it was too late that maybe these folks shouldn't be here.

 

Regardless of their race or nationality, they do not have all of the same rights and privelages as US citizens (but if they do, why not simply call them all citizens?). Legal immigrants have a right to be here, granted at the US's pleasure, but illegals do not, right? The Senators views on the subject were that reform is necessary, and he said that it is logical step to take for ALL countries, not just the US. He rejects the idea of a policy of "open borders" feeling that it has only served to cause more problems (not just by making it too easy for those with ties to terrorists to come into the country, but also to adversly affect our economy, while using us as a safety valve for other countries who should be taking care of their citizens).

 

Would stricter immigration policy have helped prevent the events of Sept 11th? Will stricter policies help prevent future attacks like this?

 

Kurgan

 

[ October 03, 2001: Message edited by: Kurgan ]

[wardz]

Kurgan, I wish we had your laws on immigration here.

 

we have thousands of them coming in each day. The welfare state is to blame. They come here and they are given houses and money. We can't asy anything though or the liberals call us racists..

 

wardz

[StormHammer]

Well, I do think there is a very good argument for improving immigration agencies and the like...although it has to be said that very determined people will always find a way through your defences. Walls can be climbed, fences can be broken, rivers can be crossed, and you will never have the necessary manpower to watch it all, 24/7.

 

Nevertheless, I think there is a very strong case for changing some policies when you know someone is within your borders illegally.

 

For example, I watched a programme o the TV just a few nights ago that said 73,000 people had been refused asylum in the UK (because they were not genuine), yet only about 4,000 have been sent home. Why? Because we have lost track of the others.

 

I could hardly believe it when I heard it. They do not detain these people...and I suppose the argument is 'Where would they keep them all while their applications are being processed?' Now they are just starting to get trained teams out, hunting these false asylum seekers down. That's a mammoth task - and I'm sure it could have been avoided if there had been more stringent controls in place.

 

On the other hand, some of these people just came to the UK with a 6-month visa, presumably on holiday or something, and never bothered going home.

 

And wardz, I'm sorry to say that you're wrong when you say these people are just relying on our state benefits...all of those people in the programme were working. They were doing the lowest-paid jobs around the country - and being employed by UK citizens who knew full-well these were illegal immigrants. In a way, it is an even worse scenario, because unemployed people from the UK who do have to rely on benefits can't find jobs...because the immigrants are taking them instead, at a far lower rate of pay.

 

And the UK is pretty much under siege with even more asylum seekers using the Channel Tunnel as an easy route to get here from the continent.

 

In light of the recent tragedy, it is hardly surprising that there are terrorists operating in this country, as well as the US and others.

 

I have no problem with people who are genuinely in fear of their lives because of their ethnic origins, religions or what-have-you, but I'm afraid I draw the line at people who are effectively stealing employment from people born in the UK just because they can't find work at home.

 

This whole situation could be turned around if the living conditions of many of these people in their own countries was drastically improved, through investment, policy changes, administration and governmental changes. In a way, many of us have an international responsibility if we have been part of the cause for collapsing economies abroad. Perhaps in light of recent events, and the forming of this global coalition, it can be used as a springboard for developing other more responsible policies on an international level to deal with the price of war abroad.

[cossack1812]

I live downunder where we get boatloads of illegals every other week. Just recently we had the Tampa incident and that really ticks me off.

They get on board a boat, then sneak into our waters and illegaly live here, but if they get caught and sent to detention centers then they complain about the conditions and how they are being treated (the gall). Then they riot and break down our facilities. Like they have the right to complain considering they broke the law. I beleive if they get caught they should get sent back straight away. If they get sent to a detention center, and they complain then tell em to piss off, pack up and go home, cos thousands of dollars are spent on trying to keep bloody mongrels like these outta this country and that money could be better spent else where.

 

Sorry, ill calm down now

[Guest Kurgan]

Also, I was doing some checking on the 'net and I found that he was quoting at length <a href="http://www.frontpagemag.com/columnists/coulter/index.html">this column here</a>.

 

Which does bring up lots of points, etc.

 

One thing I thought was interesting was that during the Sept11th crisis, supposedly we SEALED our borders. Now why haven't we ever done this before? We have procedures for legal immigration and for obtaining visas. So what point is there in keeping our borders open (to allow millions of illegal immigrants to just walk on in)? I guess that's my question.

 

Kurgan

[StormHammer]

Kurgan...

 

Perhaps it's just a matter of money. In the short term, you can find the manpower and resources to dedicate to securing your borders - but in the longer term, when the problem is no longer in the public eye, I imagine that people start complaining about costs.

 

Other problems will always arise that need money throwing at them, so I can imagine in the longer term resources get siphoned off. After all, I don't think you can make a profit from border control. ;-)

 

Nevertheless, in light of recent events, I would have thought that all countries should remain vigilant, and keep a higher level of border control in place. The problem will not go away while people think they can live and work better in another country.