Amnesty: The Real Solution to Immigration Reform
This paper serves two purposes. The first is to examine why amnesty is the lynchpin (or central factor) for creating sound and responsible U.S. immigration policy and the second is to argue that people who are unconditionally anti-amnesty are obtuse (or to use the word that's truly fitting: idiots) given the known facts about high deportation costs and near-impossible deportation logistics.
To start with the basics, one should define amnesty in this particular context. U.S. Immigration Support Org. states, "Amnesty for illegal immigrants is defined as a governmental pardon for violating policies related to immigration. Amnesty would allow illegal immigrants or undocumented aliens to gain permanent residency in the United States" (Amnesty, n.d.). In short, amnesty means allowing those who are here illegally to stay in the U.S.
During his last years in office, President George W. Bush put forth an immigration reform bill that would have drastically changed immigration policy in the U.S. Bush's plan had three main objectives: the first was to provide the 12 to 20 million illegal immigrants residing in the U.S. A clear path to citizenship, the second objective was to reinforce security at the U.S.-Mexican border and the third objective was to create a guest-worker program for U.S. companies wishing to exploit the cheap labor of foreigners. On June 29, 2007 Bush's plan died on the Senate floor, garnering only 46 of the 60 votes necessary to pass the bill (Amnesty, n.d.)
Why did Bush's plan fail? There are several reasons, self-centered and indecisive Senators were more concerned with the putative repercussions of voting on a large reform bill during an election year than they were with the well-being of the country, general antipathy for President Bush, and, of course, human pride and vanity, but the main reason Bush's plan failed, the reason the U.S. does not have a commonsensical and comprehensive immigration policy in place, is due to a sizable faction of Americans and politicians who believe amnesty for the 12 to 20 million illegal immigrants living in the U.S. is unacceptable and that any immigration bill or plan that proposes amnesty or pseudo-amnesty...
Here is a quote from the U.S. Support for Immigration Org., "The bill's bitter end has a deeper meaning, as it demonstrated that conservative Americans' vision for U.S. immigration reform should not include any type of amnesty or legalization for undocumented workers" (Amnesty, n.d.). Essentially, the bill died because politicians couldn't agree upon the issue of amnesty.
William Finnegan of the New Yorker Magazine, discusses this issue in his article "Borderlines" -- he writes, "The problem of illegal immigration isn't a matter of violent criminals storming the walls of our peaceful towns and cities. It's a matter of what to do about the estimated eleven million unauthorized residents who are already here. The mass-deportation fantasies of some restrictionists notwithstanding, the great majority of "illegals" are here to stay" (2011). He states, rather matter-of-factly, the truth about illegal immigration. And to extrapolate on his point, it's not so much a matter of higher fences or more border guards (patrol agents) or attempts to stymie violent crime perpetrated by illegal immigrants as it is what to do about those 12-20 million people (the numbers vary, 12-20 seems to be the range that appears the most) who are here illegally, which, of course, makes it the quintessential issue. And it bears repeating, the second part of his point, they are, indeed, here to stay - whether one likes it or not.
If Americans could agree on amnesty, then immigration reform would get passed. However, in order for Americans to agree, one side has to be admittedly "right" and the other side has to be admittedly "wrong" (for argument's sake and assuming an elemental divide with no intermediary positions). In this particular case, the pro-amnesty crowd is "right" and the anti-amnesty crowd is "wrong." It's not a matter of pathos or ethos that makes the pro-amnesty crowd "right," rather it's a matter of logos -- logic and practicality. Giving those 12-20 million illegals amnesty is the right thing to do because they have a symbiotic relationship with U.S. industry. Finnegan states in his article, regarding illegals, "they are, for a start, essential to large sectors of the economy, beginning with the food supply -- the Department of Labor calculates that more than half the crop pickers in the United States are undocumented" (2011). Illegal immigrants provide inexpensive labor to industries…
Immigration Reform There is a broad based agreement of a need for immigration reform. In recent months and years, immigration reform has become an important political issue. However, there is some disagreement as to what precisely this reform will look like. On one hand, there is talk about amnesty for illegal immigrants who are currently in the country, an issue that has proved divisive (Grant, 2012). One the other hand, technology
Illegal Immigration Cost Cost to the California Criminal Justice System of Illegal Immigration The illegal immigration debate in the United States has taken center stage recently because the President and Congress have decided that is finally time to deal with the situation. Although there have been many stated solutions, it seems that no one can reach a conclusion that is satisfactory to all. In the past year the President has signed an
Ethical Review of ICE This final report will be a review of the non-profit or governmental agency of the author's choosing. The report will explore the two higher-end topics of ethics and social justice. When it comes to those two topics, there is one agency that just stands out as a great agency or entity to focus on and that is the Immigration and Custom Enforcement Agency, which is part of
To protect themselves, many Americans chose to avoid working with or becoming friends with those who immigrated. A lack of trust permeated everything that the Americans did in regards to the immigrants, at least with the men. This was not always true of the women, as they often got along together and shared the trials and difficulties of raising families. However, many men who owned shops and stores would not
I can think of few things that could be more dangerous for homeland security than granting amnesty to 8 to 12 million illegal aliens," said Rep Tom Tancredo, R-Colo., an outspoken critic of legalization. "Perhaps the administration ought to dedicate more energy to enforcing our existing immigration laws and less on finding ways to allow millions to skirt them," Tancredo added. (Stern and Kammer) legalization program on the scale Tom
Proponents advanced that both legal and illegal immigration to California was a concrete and hard reality, which neither legislation nor strict controls could blot out. They envisioned a menial, lowly paid workforce, a source of cheap labor, on which the State would depend. They also held that opponents were racially motivated and too harsh towards non-whites who wanted to flee from poverty and despair. On the other hand, those