Here and Now: Immigration Reform Update

To help frame the discussion, view the KJZZ HERE AND NOW Immigration Reform Fast Facts.

This about sums it up, don't you think? Only in America.


Let's say I break into your house


(A lady wrote the best letter in the Editorials in ages!!!)
--Author Unknown


Certain people are angry that the US might protect its own borders, might make it harder to sneak into this country and, once here, to stay indefinitely.

Let me see if I correctly understand the thinking behind these protests. Let's say I break into your house. Let's say that when you discover me in your house, you insist that I leave.

But I say, "I've made all the beds and washed the dishes and did the laundry and swept the floors. I've done all the things you don't like to do. I'm hard-working and honest (except for when I broke into your house).

According to the President and protesters for amnesty:

You are Required to let me stay in your house.
You are Required to add me to your family's insurance plan.
You are Required to Educate my kids.
You are Required to Provide other benefits to me & to my family.

(My husband will do all of your yard work because he is also hard-working and honest, except for that breaking in part).

If you try to call the police or force me out, I will call my friends who will picket your house carrying signs that proclaim my RIGHT to be there.

It's only fair, after all, because you have a nicer house than I do, and I'm just trying to better myself. I'm a hard-working and honest person, except for well, you know, I did break into your house.

And what a deal it is for me!!!

I live in your house, contributing only a fraction of the cost of my keep, and there is nothing you can do about it without being accused of cold, uncaring, selfish, prejudiced, and bigoted behavior.

Oh yeah, I DEMAND that you to learn MY LANGUAGE so you can communicate with me.


Why can't people see how ridiculous this is?!

why should illegal immigants be allowed to stay in america and derive many benifits they did not earn.while people like myself had to go through all the laws of immigration to be allowed to live here.why should i be contributing to an illegal government approved stupidy.

It seems that this bill has some serious concerns including.
1. The Heritage Foundation estimates a net cost of 2.5 trillion dollars over 30 years to provide social services to the ten million illegal immigrants that this bill would make legal
2. The GAO estimates that if all of the provisions of this bill were enacted it would only decrease illegal immigration by just 25%
3. This bill doubles the number of immigrants granted entry into the country with most being unskilled and uneducated.
In light of these concerns I can'r believe that we could not produce a more effective bill
Why not tackle this important issue in increments.

Almost none of the estimated 12.5 million immigrants in our country who are here without the federal government’s documented permission are guilty of any crime. It is certainly not a felony. It isn’t even a misdemeanor, except in rare circumstances. Mexicans have been crossing the border without our government’s legal authorization for generations. These undocumented workers and their descendents have made invaluable contributions to our economic and social development. But they’ve always been treated as second class human beings and most have never had the opportunity to legally come here to work or to immigrate.

The recent waves of undocumented immigrants that we have experienced have been escaping desperate poverty, corruption, and no opportunity. They have helped make and keep our relatively privileged lives possible.

Local and national politicians and many “mainstream” media have been shamelessly feeding the flames of ignorance, fear, and hatred. By misusing the word “amnesty”, they create and spread the view that, somehow, these people who have been feeding us, building our homes, and providing us with affordable service are terrorist threats, freeloaders, or threats to “our American way of life”.

The right wing rule of law crowd claim that they have no problem with immigrants if they immigrate legally in accordance with our laws and who play by the rules.

What rules? Mexicans who are not immediate family members of American citizens have never been afforded a legal means to immigrate or to come here or to travel back and forth to work.

I’m also seeing letters and statements by politicians who angrily assert that they are strongly opposed to “amnesty” and insist that currently unauthorized immigrants go to the “back of the line”.

What line? Unless our immigration laws are changed to allow people other than immediate family members to legally migrate, there will be no line to go to the back of.

José Antonio Franco
Gilbert, AZ

Isn't one reason why Republicans opposed immigration reform is that the majority of 12 million illegals will vote democratic if given citizenship?

WHY IS IT THAT PEOPLE SEEM TO THINK THAT IMMIGRANTS ARE GOING TO VOTE. They will, years in the future if they are naturalized. CITIZENS VOTE, NON CITIZENS DON'T.

Karl, look at what happened after prop 187 in California, you had a lot of people eligable for citizen apply soon afterward with the sole purpose to vote out Republicans who supported it. Pete Wilson lost in the next election.

I believe all the discussions about illegal immigration are skirting the real issue behind the uproar. It is not politcally correct to acknowledge it, and it is rarely discussed in the mainstream media.

I suspect that the strong emotional response is really coming from the fear of many in the current white majority in America, that someday they will be a minority.

Who will do our landscaping or work at Burger King? Who will wash our cars? What will this do to our local economy if this bill passes? We, the consumer, want cheap services. Is there way to compromise?

Thomas, you don't seem to know that it will be 13 years before anyone is granted the right to ask for naturalization under the present bill in Congress.

and if you will read your first posting and your second, you will see the difference between the two statements

Those people who applied for Citizenship applied after the 187. THEY WERE ELIGIBLE TO APPLY. The fact that they had not previously applied lays the lie to the first comment you posted.

I just want to thank those of you who posted. I appreciate the informed comments.
Paul