Already a way for people to square themselves with the laws, go home and come
back legally. When will the Deseret news start telling people to
come here legally so we don't face the same problem in the future?
We have had guest workers in this country for decades, they are called visa
workers. Let's not create a sub class of workers to satisfy business interest.
He is talking about letting those that have been here for 25 years a
chance to stay, that would mean deportation of 90% of those here illegally. It
was a mere 25 years ago that we had our last amnesty. When people come here
illegally for 25 years to work, and we allow them to stay and work, that is
amnesty. Any parent who has raised a child knows that you don't
reward bad behavior.
I am not willing to discuss what is to be done with those already hear until the
border is secured.NOBODY is talking about mass deportation. If you
take away incentives, people will leave on their own. If you can't get a job,
you'll have to leave on your own accord.So it is okay if they have
been here 25 years - what about 20? How can we verify how long they have been
here? Sure, they might have been paying taxes (sales). If they have
been paying income taxes, it is because they have committed ID theft, something
for which if I or any other citizen did, we'd go to jail.
This article SOUNDS so moral, faithful, and true.But so does Satan,
disguised as an angel of light, when he speaks. There are several
problems with this editorial. First, it is fundamentally false to
assert -- in the name of family -- that we should not enforce the law.
Americans who value the Constitution and the rule of law know that the
institution of the family faces a far greater threat in an environment of
lawlessness. For this reason, we never assert that because it might result in
family separation, U.S. citizen burglars (for example) should not be prosecuted
or incarcerated. Nor do we, as a nation of laws, unjustly imply
that such separations are the fault of a law-abiding society. Rather, we
rightly place the blame for such separations squarely where it belongs: on the
criminal who chose to break the law. And the notion that families
are "destroyed" as a result of deportation, is false. Sure it may be
inconvenient, but the fact is, deportees are free to take their families with
them. Family members likewise are free to join them. Lastly, family
members routinely are left behind -- separated -- at the time of illegal entry
(continued) The notion that legalization is "moral," and
"only fair," certainly is disingenuous. A 25-year criminal who
disdains America, its laws, and its Constitution, and who almost certainly has
engaged in perjury, identity theft, and otherwise lying, cheating, and stealing,
as a way of life -- should not be rewarded with legal residency while BILLIONS
of respectful, would-be immigrants continue to wait in line politely. It is
grossly unfair AND immoral, and Americans know it. And how truly
"humane" is it to relegate millions to a 2nd-class existence of
indentured servitude -- which is EXACTLY what "legalization that doesn't
necessarily lead to citizenship" would amount to. Other
"core principles?" How about the principle that this is a country of
laws and that without the law -- and RESPECT for the law -- the U.S.
Constitution cannot survive, and that without the Constitution, there is no
safety for families, nor freedom of religion, which enables the family-promoting
churches to even exist. There is only one way for them to
"square themselves with the law:" turn themselves in to ICE -- or, at
least, avoid prosecution, put their affairs in order, and return -- with their
families -- to their home countries.
How much does Deseret management being a chairman for the Salt Lake Chamber of
Commerce affect your viewpoint on illegal immigration?The lack of
compassion towards Utah's workers and taxpayers tends to show the true
motivation, and I don't think it has anything to do with humane.
When someone comes here illegally and works, anything that allows them to stay
and work is amnesty. The Orwellian double speak doesn't register with anyone but
those supporting cheap illegal labor. Our current immigration laws
are fair and just. Coming here illegally is a fine, jail, and deportation. The
US has not fined or given jail time in years, and our laws are more humane than
any other industrialized country. When did we lose the right to deport those who
come here illegally? As far as breaking up families, when people
come here illegally, they know they can be deported for breaking the law. Each
generation that comes here has to decide whether they will come and break up
their extended family, or remain and keep it together. Those here illegally made
the decision to take the chance of having their family split up when they chose
the illegal path and not the legal one. Have we given up on
employing the 10%? out of work? Alabama's law has proven that immigration
enforcement returns Americans to work.
Bachmann pointed out a "2004 letter to the Wall Street Journal in which
Gingrich endorsed "paths to permanent residence to enable more workers to
stay, assimilate, and become part of America."It's more
Same old message.....Yawn!
While the hardliners in the Republican party may not agree with this, I think
the majority of Americans are in accord. I am a hardline conservative
Republican from Texas and fully support what Perry and Newt are doing to bring
common sense to the immigration issue.
This is an editorial that is right on. We need to get away from the knee-jerk
reactions that usually characterize this debate and recognize its complexity.
There are people who have lost jobs, even though they are low paying jobs, to
illegal immigrants. On the other hand, there are industries here at home that
would fall to foreign competition if it were not for the illegal immigrants
working here in the U.S. Immigration can make this country stronger but we need
to deal with the very real issues it brings in an intelligent and human way if
we are to realize those gains. I hope we can elevate the debate beyond the
entrenched bickering between the federal and state governments and the partisan
politics of individuals who refuse to see multiple sides of a complex issue.
Great moral courage Newt! You now have my vote. Has anyone ever considered the
economic impact of removing almost 12 million people from this country. It
would be a disaster to take 12 mission consumers out of the market place. It
would be a disaster to have 6 million new housing vacancies. Crops rotting in
the field like we just had in Alabama would happen nationwide and food prices
would go through the roof. These people have been woven into the fabric of our
society and like it or not, we should carefully consider how mass deportations
would damage this country and our economy. We used to own a
business in the Hispanic area of Tucson, AZ. The day after the first
anti-immigration prop. passed, our business fell off a cliff. All of the
businesses in the area experienced the same disaster and almost half of them,
including ours are now closed. Our recession started the day the first Arizona
anti-immigration law was passed.
We are forgetting the Humane treatment of the US Citizen. Teenagers and college
students have lost jobs due to illegal immigrants and wages are depressed. The
American man has lost there trade jobs due to illegal immigrants and wages are
depressed. This article is siding with the business man who is looking for cheap
labor at the expense of the American worker and middle class citizen.Illegal Immigration is responsible for the collapse of middle class America
along with the practice of shipping jobs to other countries.Illegal
Immigrants along with their children need to be deported back to Mexico that has
a 4 percent unemployment rate due to jobs being shipped there.The middle
class taxpayer needs the expense of illegal immigration taken off of there backs
and they need jobs with wages that fit with inflationary times.Jails need
to be empty of illegal immigrants who commit crimes, another thing that causes
high taxes.Drugs need to be stopped at the border and not allowed to walk
in to be sold. Cartels are terrorists and they are here among us. Humane
treatment for Americans is what we need now.
And they joined the service to get to stay in the country themselves. How many
people should ride those coattails?
In the 80's I supported amnestry but I feel that it didn't work. I am all for
law and order, but I got this deep down feeling, (I don't care what the ACLU
thinks) it is my conscience and it says that the scriptures teach that we need
to be kind to strangers.But, I am sure in favor of putting up a
fence and having border enforcement.
If we are going to have a line for people to come to this country, you can't
reward those that bypass the line. They need to be sent to the back of the line.
That doesn't mean you should stop treating them like people.Do you
remember when you had to wait in line to buy tickets to a movie, and then wait
in line before going in? If you came to the theater and the show was full, you
could buy a ticket to a later show. That was before you could order them at
home, and know then where your seat was and what time to come to the theater.You can't let everyone show up for the same movie or there would be no
place to sit, and you do need some reasonable security and rules.Why
do we make immigration more complicated?We have a new law. Lets use
it. The sponsoring principle of 2011 HB 469 provides a limiting factor of how
fast immigrants can come, makes sure they do not place a larger burden than we
can handle, and is more like co-signing a friends car loan.
This editorial makes the flawed assumption that sending someone home is somehow
inhumane. It is not. Most often that "home" is Mexico. Is Mexico
listed as a refugee nation? No. Do we send missionaries to Mexico? All the
time.To put a finer point on it, most of the illegal aliens from Mexico
come from well within the interior in Guanajuato, Jalisco, Michoacán, San
Luis Potosí, and Zacatecas. That's far from the border violence.So
sending them home is not bad at all.And the policy Newt Gingrich and the
Church seem to endorse is a slap in the face to our minority citizens who are
out of work as well as those waiting to immigrate legally.Then you must
deal with the concept of rewarding bad behavior; never a good idea.Lastly,
what message are we sending to the 165 million third world inhabitants that
Gallup (2009) tells us want to live in the United States?If this concept
were viable, the 245i program would have been a success. It wasn't.
Remember the old soft shoe? Well here it is again. Give the lawless legality?
And then down the road after a few years of the old soft shoe the then legals
will want citizenship and Politicians who see a gain for themselves will be
selling citizenship instead of just legality. Giving the lawbreakers legality?
Who will still pay for the costs of having them here? Not the employers who
benefit from their cheap labor, but the taxpayers. And don't tell me then they
will be paying taxes because the cheap labor will allow them tax credits!If
they are not working at cheap labor they will be competeing with citizens for
better paying jobs ie construction,manufacturing etc. This is a scam where
business, churches, and politicians benefit. Bonafide citizens lose again!
What is the statue of limitations on border hopping?
I believe that we do need to secure our borders, but at the same time we don't
need to be rewarding the law breakers, if you are here ilegally they should be
deported and made to enter this country the legal way. When you marry someone
and you know they aren't legal here, then you too are breaking our laws and
should be accountable for all the actions that are there. I am not against
breaking up families,but lets get real about the ilegalls and say enough is
enough. Most do put a strain on the system and it's already costing alot of
taxpayers money, and I aam getting tried of my tax dollars going to support
them. Money that is made in the U.S.is being sent out to support their famlies
in other countries and they should have to pay an added fee for that.
The articles are always about family. What about the family these illegals have
left behind in their home country. I've read articles about the disabled and
elderly that are trying to survive back in their home country without family
support. This really isn't about family. Deseret News, why not tell it like it
really is, "It is about cheap labor for the businesses of America".
The camel's nose is under the tent now at 25 years.How about 24
years? Why not 23? 22, 21, or 20 years? Why discriminate against 19 years?
Or 18, 17, 16, 15, 14, 13, 12, 11? Do I hear 10 years from the
Democrats? We have 10! Maybe, 9, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, or merely 1 year?SOLD! We have amnesty for everyone!The Deseret News
editorials and the amnesty advocacy pawned off as news stories has become
pervasive, and I can guarantee there will be another one tomorrow, like every
Monday.After slashing the formerly excellent staff it sure appears
that the paper has hired a bunch of illegals "to do the jobs Americans
won't do" and write pro-amnesty stuff.Legal immigrants are
welcome and needed, but illegal immigrants must be stopped at the border, and
those already here returned home! Any form of amnesty just creates a magnet
attracting more illegals who hope (or know) there will be another amnesty
program if they wait long enough.Enforce our laws- all of them!
Nothing like a common-sense editorial, full of pragmatism a sense of what's real
to bring out the narrow-minded haters. I agree with this editorial completely,
and have been saying similar things for a long time. But, along with
securing the border (that means making it nearly impossible for bad guys to
cross it), a matter of equal import is to fix our immigration laws, which are
ridiculously fouled up, making legal crossing almost impossibly expensive,
time-consuming, and bound with bureaucratic paperwork. The main reason folks
swim the river or brave the desert is to avoid the unnecessary hassle of doing
it legally...and, to provide for their families' immediate needs. Finally, if an immigrant with a visa is allowed to serve his/her country,
putting their life on the line, why would we deport his/her family while they
are in harms way...for us? Meanwhile, all of you who have NEVER
broken a law, please escort a friend back across the border...and do it at your
expense while telling them how it's best for them.
This newspaper continues with the dishonest claim that it favors enforcement, so
long as it's "realistic" and "humane." Yet time and again,
when any new proposal is made to reduce the number of illegals in this country,
the Deseret News finds some reason to object - it is "unworkable" or
"unconstitutional" or "inhumane." So the News isn't pro-open
borders and pro-dirt cheap labor - they just conveniently can't find an
enforcement measure they support.When the economy was good we had
~500,000 illegals coming each year. It's slowed substantially since the
recesssion, but the 12 million or so who were already here have mostly remained.
Any real enforcement policy - "comprehensive" or otherwise - needs to
yield a substantial year-over-year reduction in illegals. The News wants
leniency in certain cases? Fine. What I'd like to know is in which of the 12
million cases besides murderers, rapists and arsonists they don't think leniency
is merited. Scant few, I'd wager.Which leaves us with a paper that
thinks America doesn't belong to its citizens, and that any or all of the 6.7
billion people living elsewhere are entitled to come here whether we want them
Here's a crazy simple (yet effective) idea!Hire illegals? Lose your business and go to prison!All of a sudden Utah employers
would run to hire legal workers. All of a sudden those who are illegal will
either go through the necessary steps to become legal or leave! They'll stop
coming if businesses would only stop hiring them!I know I know, it
makes TOO much sense.
There is a great problem with giving people the "right" to live in the
United States without giving them "citizenship". That problem is that
they are people without the right to vote. That is exactly what we had before
slavery was overturned. Now, those who favor the return of "pseudo
citizens" are telling us that those who entered the United States illegally
should be allowed to stay here with all the rights and obligations of citizens,
but without the right to vote.Sure, let them work for sub-minimum
wages. Let them live three or more families per apartment. Let them be our
"slaves", but don't let them vote!Fairness requires that
they first comply with all rules and regulations relating to entry into this
country. AFTER they have complied with those rules and regulations, they
deserve ALL the privileges and responsibilities of every other citizen -
including the right to vote.
There are 7 billion people living on this planet. Most of them don't live in the
US, and yet they still manage to live happy lives, get married, feed their
families, raise their children, and die peacefully at an old age. Mexico?
According to data from the Mexican government the life expectancy there is 75.8
years - about the same as for Hispanics in the USA.There is nothing
at all "inhumane" about safely repatriating illegal aliens to their
home countries via airplane or bus - two of the safest methods of travel ever
invented. You think bus travel is inhumane? We just celebrated Thanksgiving. Try
crossing the North Atlantic in October aboard a late-16th Century era sailing
vessel, the way the Pilgrims did."Tearing apart their
families"? Their 5 year old anchor babies aren't obligated to stay here
because they're citizens. They can take them, and always do. As for extended
families, how many people in America live hundreds or even thousands of miles
from parents, grandparents or adult siblings? Tens of millions.So
spare us the dreck...
My esteem for DN has shot to the heavens. I hope that you will be careful not
to change to an elitist approach to immigration however. Mathematical and
science skills are not the only measures of worth to America.
We have Americans in prison, their children in foster care. There families are
broke up, yet no one complains about that. We have legal immigration
that lets in over a million people each year, we have guest worker programs
(visas) that can keep people here for up to three years. What we don't have is
enforcement, politicians putting the heat on dishonest businessmen, and media
that is consumed with forcing amnesty on us. None of these people are doing a
thing to stop people from coming here illegally. In 10 years you'll read their
sob stories, remember it could of been stopped by responsible people who acted
humane in counseling people to come here honestly. We already have
unlimited visas for agriculture, and Americans will do any job if the price is
fair. If companies want illegal help, let them move out of the country. Bringing
them here requires American taxpayers to subsidize the business cheap illegal
labor. Welfare for the rich. There is no statute of limitations for
Gingrich is nuts. He can't have it both ways. If he allows for any illegals to
stay in the US, he has to allow all to stay. Why? Because they all come here
for essentially the same reason... to take jobs (jobs, by the way, that
unemployed Americans should be taking).And another thing... any
verbiage to secure the border is a red herring. Like the woman in the picture
holding her baby who came here legally on a visa but overstayed, fully forty
percent of all illegals came that same way.The only way to stem
illegal immigration is to stop them from obtaining employment by enforcing
Federal E-Verify laws. And by the way, how is it that they can get jobs as
illegals? Don't they need an ID such as a Social Security number, which is only
given to citizens?
Thank you so much for this reasoned editorial. While I think Newt Gingrich
should be disqualified from being the Republican presidential nominee on the
same moral grounds as those that brought about the impeachment hearings for Bill
Clinton, I do agree with Gingrich on this issue. (For the party of "Family
Values" to nominate him, with his history, would be hypocrisy at its worst,
in my opinion.)This is an extremely difficult issue, one that cannot
be solved by the angry spouting of bumper-sticker slogans. Gingrich's nuanced
approach seems to understand this complexity. Hopefully, compassionate and
reasoned leaders will indeed find the best possible solutions for all concerned.
Another dubious message of the Gingrich plan, "No citizenship for
you," is an obfuscation. It sounds like a compromise but is not.Of
those offered amnesty in 1986, only about 40% actually naturalized. By
comparison, 56% of those who came here legally (and thus didn't need amnesty)
became citizens.(Source: Nancy Rytina, IRCA Legalization Effects: Lawful
Permanent Residence and Naturalization", summarized by CIS)Citizenship is not considered a prize or even a goal for third world
immigrants. They are here for the jobs and the quality of life; not for any
altruistic pursuit of the American Dream. What makes us believe that illegal
aliens have any regard for the American way?Newt's citizenship ban is a
@Joe Smith:"I am not willing to discuss what is to be done with
those already hear until the border is secured."Securing
borders? Never happen. Too porous. Furthermore, illegals can fly in. And
still further, almost half of illegals get here via a legal visa but don't go
home when the visa expires. Such is the case of the highlighted young lady in
the article's picture.@Mike B:"We used to own a
business in the Hispanic area of Tucson, AZ. The day after the first
anti-immigration prop. passed, our business fell off a cliff."Perhaps you shoulda been paying a competitive wage instead ripping the poor
immigrant off and treating them as slave labor. And a competitive wage would
only add a few cents to a head of lettuce at the grocers.It is
unconscionable to not hire American workers giving deference to illegals, when
we have so many unemployed Americans.@mohokat:"Remember the old soft shoe? Well here it is again."Yeah, and it's worse than that. Giving any kind of amnesty means more will be
encouraged to illegally come. Soon we will be mostly an Hispanic nation. Can
you learn to speak Spanish?
When an editorial board that includes members of the Chamber of Commerce and
those with vested interests in advancing "cheap labor" continue to
publish editorials that are in direct conflict with both the obvious WILL of the
people, and the existing LAWS, such a pattern goes beyond mere "editorial
opinion" and becomes PROPAGANDA!To DN Editorial Board: Enough!
The People of this State do NOT support amnesty, illegal immigration, and
"cheap labor" cartels. Period. Stop trying to brow-beat us with
repeated "opinions" that amount to re-hashing the same nonsense!
@Petra:"Gingrich's nuanced approach seems to understand this
complexity."Gingrich's nuanced approach ignores complexity,
detail and forethought.He talks of amnesty about the guy who's been
here 25 years. What about the guy who's been here 24 years... or 20, or 1 year?
What about the guy who's got only one traffic or parking ticket in 25 years?
Should he be deported? What are Gingrich's intentions with these guys? He
doesn't say. Someone needs to challenge him on his one-liner sound bites.This whole immigration issue has to be black and white otherwise each
case will have to be adjudicated in a court of law which will cost the US
government billions and billions just to figure out who should go and who is
entitled to stay. Gingrich shows total lack of ability to fathom the complexity
of immigration.As a matter of fact, AG Holder is embroiled in this
very issue. Each potential deportation is run through a court proceeding which
costs the government an estimated $25,000 each. With 15 million immigrant cases
to adjudicate that would be ($25,000 X 15,000,000)... you do the math. My
calculator doesn't go that high.
Let's stop putting people who break ANY federal laws in jail...you know, it
breaks up families.
I think it's time we start boycotting the Utah Compact Businesses like the
Dnews..........The Dnews is the new SLLibso why have two lib papers?Boycott today
The desnews is right, there needs to be a balanced approach. If someone is
breaking the law in a serious way, of course they need to be put in prison, and
then deported. But to make a blanket rule that law abiding people who have come
here without papers need to be deported simply isn't reasonable. There are
people who have been here for years, who are good residents, people who are
contributing, people who have family ties.The reactionary right, or
left is seldom the way to properly conduct affairs. The sensible middle is
generally the wisest course to follow.
This is a good starting point. I do not see why we should have illegals with
HIV or tuberculosis or other communicable disases. English must be the language
of government forms. In Texas if you are in an accident and your car has no
insurance it is impounded. They found all the lots full in 9 days. They were
illegals and could not get insurance. So what are we waiting for.
Next week I would like to see a legal American mother holding her child who has
been a victim of identity theft (along with 50,000 other Utah kids) on her
lap.Then tell about the father of the family who used to work in construction
until he was undercut on his job by invaders from Mexico who have no right to
even be here. That is a real sob story we can all relate to and feel both sorrow
and anger about. Somewhere along the road in the last several years
the DN has ceased being a newspaper and has now become the propaganda wing of
the Mexican government in an effort to aid and abet them in their quest to
colonize the USA. The Gingrich plan is exceeded in stupidity only by the Utah
CON PACT and HB116. We are now supposed to reward those who break the law the
longest and deport the rest? Those who stay can't vote? (think ACLU lawsuit) I
guarantee you that if there are 11 million of them, 10.9 million of them will
show up with phony documents showing they have been here that long.
Mike B makes a good point. Not only will we be paying more for produce but also
our lawn care, houses and other items we purchase. Many of these jobs would not
be filled by the unemployed and the produce will rot in the fields. We want the
cheap services but like having an sub class people to abuse and blame. The
illegal immigrants knew the consequences of coming here but what are the
consequences to those consumers who enjoy the cheaper products/services that
Several years ago before the economy fell and tempers flared I got to see the
special treatment close up. One evening while sitting with our small child at
the local clinic a father rushed in with his sick daughter. He told of a high
fever, sore throat and hurting body. At this point she had the sympathy of all
of us, well everybody but the state of Arizona. It turned out that because of
her enrollment in our states insurance(AHCCCS) she could not be seen and now
needed to be taken another 45 miles to sit in an overcrowded ER. The next in
line an illigal who had been injured on the job. No questions, no payment just
free medical care. Yes he needed care but so did this small child so put up your
sad pictures tell us the sad stories but I can garantee each one can be met by a
matching story of a US citizen that has gone without caused by our selfish need
for cheap service. Those sad feverish eyes along with hearing that father
explain that the Dr. couldn't help her pretty much closed the argument for me.
It's appalling to me to read so much hatred towards immigrants in most posts
above, do you guys have an actual heart beat? You haters don't have a leg to
stand on when you complain about Newt's moral misses. You haters don't have a
place to stand when you call upon the rule of law as some kind of high ground,
you're over the cliff's edge, the law needs to be changed radically.Immigration by our friends from south of the border needs to be practical,
possible, routine, easy. Winnow out the real criminals.The community
attitude of hate, disdain, or even mild dislike towards those of a different
color, or with a different language, or who are poor, NEEDS TO CHANGE. We are a
nation of immigrants. My ancestors were immigrants, except one native American.
I stand for helping our friends from south of the border, into our job market
to compete, into our schools to get educated, into our hospitals if they're
sick. Get the boot of the law off the neck of a bunch of poor people. Get a
life, you haters.
There is nothing "inhumane" about putting an illegal immigrant on an
airplane or bus and sending him back to his rightful country.No
families need to be torn apart by deportation. Deported illegal aliens are free
to take their children with them. They almost always do.Their having
had children while illegally in the USA does not oblige us to raise those
children for them, any more than the American people are obliged to raise my
children.Separating illegal parents from their adult citizen
children is not "tearing a family apart," any more than a family is
torn apart by an 18-year-old who goes away to college, a 23-year-old who moves
away for a job, or, AHEM, a 19-year-old who goes on an LDS mission. If it is,
then the church that owns this paper has got some 'splainin to do.The nonsense spewed by the open borders crowd is nauseous.
The attitude of "good LDS" Utahns on immigration sickens me. Illegal
immigration is a problem, it must be dealt with.But much of what I
read here makes me wonder if the Evangelicals are right, the we are not
Christian - at least those "good LDS" folks sure don't act like it.
You polute my beloved church.Well said dave4197
Newt lost my respect and support when he can out with this. I had my doubts
before, because he fancies himself to be an intellectual--which usually means
some ability to complicate the obvious. I wish those who advocate for giving
away our money, freedoms, and sovereignty were the only ones paying for it.
Ivory Homes hires many illegal alien workers. Ellis Ivory is, I believe, still
a wheel with the Deseret News. See any connection here? One hand washes the
other--but if you're a taxpayer or an unemployed or underemployed citizen, you
get to underwrite the ride. Fun, huh?
Immigration is more complex than tax law. Many who write on the post are
uninformed about the complexities of the law. I wish we would
concentrate more on solving business immigration. Currently, no non-immigrant
investor or entrepreneur options exist for nationals of India, China, Brazil,
South-Africa. Yet, someone from Iran can easily obtain a non-immigrant investor
visa. The above countries could represent a significant investment opportunity
for the U.S. However, this is not enough. USCIS consistently denies investor
or entrepreneur cases despite the businesses successfully surviving in this
economy hiring U.S. citizens. I know of several where U.S. citizens employed by
these foreign nationals lost their jobs because of the inept USCIS denying their
employer's visas. Most of the candidates discuss making visas
easier to obtain for higher educated foreigners who will open businesses and
employ more U.S. citizens, but currently it is all talk as it has been for
years. I wish we would turn the conversation away from illegal alien problems
and focus on ways to assist foreigners grow our economy as they have done for
centuries when able to do so.
The last words in the article are very telling. Moral Courage should be changed
to Political Pandering. It appears we are given a magical potion during
election season where we believe and hang on every word spoken by the
candidates. All since of reality is suspended while we listen to the shape
shifters move reality around. It reminds me of a phrase that an investment
house used, "past performance is not indicative of future earnings".
Well in the case of people it is quite the opposite. Past performance is
directly related to future performance since these individuals don't change.
Character is character and we should judge them by their works not their words.
It is true that we need to reform our immigration laws so that it is easier for
those who come through the front door to do so. It is also true that we handle
these people as such with dignity and respect however amnesty is not an
acceptable policy. It has not worked in the past and will not work now.
Speaking of those illegally here, many have made positive contributions. I
would dare say the majority have made positive contributions Many come to our
shores seeking asylum or refugee status, sometimes we treat them well and other
times not so well. I know of a family who came from Guatemala 20 years ago and
applied for asylum. Many thousands fled Guatemala at the time and applied for
asylum. USCIS boxed all of their applications up for 20 years allowing them to
have work permits. In 2009, USCIS unboxed these applications,routinely denied
the cases, and sent the people to immigration court to be removed. The Gingrich
panel would be a great help to these individuals and they should stay. The
particular family I know of had children serving in the military at the same
time the parents were in removal proceeding. The government attorneys argued
strenuously that the family tried to game the system by putting their kids in
the military to gain sympathy. Fortunately, a much wiser judge, allowed the
family to stay. I agree with enforcement and knowing who is here,
e-verify, but we also must have a compassionate heart.
The picture with the article shows "the wife of a deployed U.S. soldier
holding their son. She entered the U.S. legally but overstayed her visa.
Thousands of American soldiers have family members who could be deported while
they are away."So, soldiers who are away fighting for us should
come home to find that we have deported their wives? And it seems most of you
are perfectly fine with that. Undoubtedly you're also against the commonsense
DREAM act. Never mind what we did to the Native Americans when we
landed here, uninvited. Never mind we are a nation of immigrants. Never mind
how badly the Irish were treated, or the Chinese. Now it's the Mexicans. Never mind the Statue of Liberty in the harbor and her liberal bleeding
heart, her "Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to
breathe free, the wretched refuse of your teeming shore. Send these, the
homeless, tempest-tost to me, I lift my lamp beside the golden door!" I mean, clearly she meant, "I lift my lamp to check their
papers!"This is AMERICA. We are better than most of the
sentiments being expressed regarding this smart editorial.
"Give me your tired, your poor, yada yada yada..." Christy, where in law do these words appear? Oh right - NOWHERE. The Jamestwon
colonists did not write them. The Plymouth colonists did not write them. The men
of the Continental Congress or the Constitutional Convention did not write them.
They have not been added to the Constitution in any amendment, ever. They appear
in a poem written by a woman named Emma Lazarus. Emma Lazarus did not give us
the statue, the French did. They called it "LIBERTY Enlightening the
World" not "Immigration Overwhelming the Nation." Got that?
"Liberty."But no matter what the statue's raison d'etre,
we are still free as a nation to set our own immigration laws, and in the years
immediately following the statue's placement we had some very restrictive,
unidealistic ones.As for your claim that we have to let in an
unlimited number of immigrants because our ancestors did, are you suggesting
that we have to let immigrants displace us because we displaced the Indians?
Such extremism speaks for itself.
@PackersFan:"Not only will we be paying more for produce but
also our lawn care, houses and other items we purchase."It's
about time we started looking after ourselves."Many of these
jobs would not be filled by the unemployed and the produce will rot in the
fields."They will, when they run out of unemployment benefits.
They get 99 weeks now and that's it."... but what are the
consequences to those consumers who enjoy the cheaper products/services that
they provide?"About five cents more per heada cabbage.
No administration is ever going to solve the ongoing immigration crisis in this
country. No law, no president, nor citizens outcry will solve it. How would any
of us United State Citizens/Natives act if our family was separated or if we
lived in complete poverty? We would do anything and everything in our power to
create a better life to provide ourselves and families with a better quality of
life its human nature. The only way to truly solve the problem is to get over it
cause its never going to be solved.
I wonder how many of the hate filled commenters here are LDS and are aware of
the counsel the Lord's Prophet has given on how to treat immigrants?
The American people cannot be apathetic anymore, so it times to enforce our
immigration laws. The E-Verify program that has gained notoriety, but not in the
Liberal press, the special interest lobbyists or open border so called anomaly.
The time has come to build the real fence from Texas to California covering the
whole 2500 miles with double-layer fencing. It is also the time to contact the
Ways and Means Committee responsible for bring The Legal Workforce Act, bill
number H.R.2885 to the House floor in Congress. Only the American voter or legal
resident has a say in this urgent matter, which will produce large numbers of
jobs displaced by the 8.2 illegal workers as estimated. The number to call for
the Washington political phones is 202-224-3121. These people need to listen to
the People, instead of deceiving us anymore. If you have further questions, go
to the NumbersUSA via Google and study the facts of years of the fabrication and
idiom we absorb through the Leftist associated newspapers or the politicians,
who evidently are working for us?
From the official statement on immigration at the LDS Newsroom:"What to do with the estimated 12 million undocumented immigrants now
residing in various states within the United States is the biggest challenge in
the immigration debate. The bedrock moral issue for The Church of Jesus Christ
of Latter-day Saints is how we treat each other as children of God.""The history of mass expulsion or mistreatment of individuals or
families is cause for concern especially where race, culture, or religion are
involved. This should give pause to any policy that contemplates targeting any
one group, particularly if that group comes mostly from one heritage. "And"The Church supports an approach where undocumented
immigrants are allowed to square themselves with the law and continue to work
without this necessarily leading to citizenship."We who profess
allegiance to the church would do well to consider this statement. There are
many possibly political solutions that would fit this definition. We should be
doubly wary of any solution that does not.
Please stop with the "weak and vulnerable" photos! "We must
say no, so that we can say yes." Bachman. "We must be cruel,
only to be kind." Shakespeare.
Why exactly are people surprised that an LDS-owned Deseret News editorial is
supporting an immigration idea that is very similar to something the Utah
Compact, something the church agreed with, would support?
I'm with the Prophet Mormon on this one -- Such a prophetic Warning he
gave us:The Latter-Day Nephites, supporting the Gadiantons,
fully caught up in Materialism, shunning the Lamanites, are
ripening themselves for Destruction....
Should not all law enforcement be humane, fair, and yet swift? Kids are the
hard part of this. These parents know the risks they are taking. The kids are
just collateral damage. A reasonable guest worker program need to
be worked out. One that doesn't lead to citizenship necessarily, but that does
provide opportunity for those willing to take the risk of moving here, and
earning a reasonable living for their families, legally. I am not
even really worried about the back taxes issue. I could see if if we made all
the other trades people who earned cash and didn't report it come clean. Trades
people cheat the system on a regular basis. I refuse to pay them cash because
of it. I pay taxes, so should they. But humane immigration
enforcement. A novel and odd concept. Bush actually had some good ideas on
this. Not politically popular with the isolationist crowd, so they died, but
As LDS, Both Brigham Young and Joseph Smith told us that blind faith was not
demanded by the Church. That if we questioned anything said by the leaders, we
should ask of God. That is the path I have taken.I cannot condone
trying to solve the problem by creating second class residents. It's opening
Pandoras box, and the problems it will cause could continue for decades. I hope
these groups that support this will look to the future and see the problems it
could cause. Children born here of the second class residents will hold
birthright citizenship. In the same family we will have citizens with full
rights, and residents with reduced rights. It's a form of slavery or servitude
that should not be allowed in this country again. It will be one of this
countries darkest hours if it is allowed to happen. On top of that,
it wrongly takes jobs from Americans, and depresses our wages. It does nothing
to solve that, or the required taxpayer support to supply business with cheap
labor. Enforcement and prevention are teachers. Lying and breaking
the law should not get you ahead in the game.
RichardB, I cannot disagree with your post more, you're certainly not hearing
anything divine. Read the Compact. Read the parable of the Good Samaritan.
Listen to recent LDS conference talks about pride and how to treat others.
These are divine. Consider recent history of the reunification of 2 Germany's
who absorbed the poorer economy and built up a new strong economy and community,
there is a story of true friendship across lines of poverty and borders.RichardB, your post misconstues any vestige of what we should do about 2nd
class citizens, as you refer to them. We need to help others less fortunate,
not disclaim them, not call for the boot of on their necks. Those of us in this
continent who have, must share with and lift up those who have not. I'm saying,
RichardB, to you and to many others posting above, your attitude NEEDS to
CHANGE. Laws need to change, let's make that happen.
Why do people here always exclude part of the Churches statement. They also
believe that people need to immigrate legally, and countries have the right to
protect their borders and control immigration. Is it right to demand
that citizens follow their statement, but those here illegally can ignore them
DN pushes amnesty again, couched in tear jerker fashion the editorial board uses
an illegal married to a serviceman to push its case for humane treatment.The legal citizen who has lost his livelihood in construction because of
undocumented workers has never been written that I've seen in the past 6
months.They have children,house payments and may have to move to North Dakota to
support their family which may have to stay in Utah because their home won't
sell.It is always a one sided slap in the face to middle class caucasian men who
work hard and play by the rules. It is time for their voice to heard.
RichardB - I have lived abroad a couple of times, and each time I was a second
class resident because I was not a citizen of that country. Being a foriegner
in anothers country by default resulted in things that I could not do. I had a
higher burden of proof for insurance. Getting a loan on a home was harder. I
could not vote. I had to be a resident over a certain period of time before
civil benefits became available, and certain benefits never did become
available. My rights to work in their country were curtailed.But at
no time was I treated as a second class person. I enjoyed the fullest
protection of the law, and in some cases, more so. For the most part I was
never treated as a lesser person, and was embraced by the people I lived and
worked with.I was a foreigner living in a foriegn land. It was as I
expected it to be as I was not a citizen of the countries I lived. Being a
"second class resident" should not be equated to lessor treatment or
standing - where as being illegal usually does.It's a very fixable
A work permit or visa is much different than a resident that can live here
indefinitely and have children that are citizens. Problems, problems, problems.
If they don't do what the owner says, they can be deported, knowing some of
Utah's business community, they will be abused, that would be a form of
slavery/servitude. If they don't do what the owner wants, are we
going to deport them according to the law, and separate the family as their
children born here are birthright? That's the same problem we face now. The
guest worker bill solves nothing. It just creates a situation where the resident
can't afford to lose their job, and has to do what the boss tells him, including
breaking the law. These will be low wage workers that will not cover
the tax burden they put on the citizens, as non citizen residents will the
business be responsible for the difference, and pay the American wage earner for
losing his job? I don't like the problems it creates either. It
solves nothing, it still causes the same problems we have now. And it makes them
a slave to the company.
So someone here illegally can change jobs now if they are not treated fair, but
once guest workers they can't change jobs? I wouldn't do it. I can see why the
business community likes it.
@DrGroovey "I wonder how many of the hate filled commenters
here are LDS and are aware of the counsel the Lord's Prophet has given on how to
treat immigrants?"Are you LDS? If you are, then you ought to
be aware of the commandment not to bear false witness against your neighbor,
which is exactly what you have done in accusing commenters here of being
"hate-filled," and for implying that to enforce the law is to hate.
Both are lies. Next, you lie by implying that immigrants somehow
are being mistreated, when they are not. Next, YOU SHOW ME where
the Prophet has spoken on this matter. SHOW ME THE SIGNATURE.@Twin
Lights Only the First Presidency is allowed to speak for the Church
(Handbook 2, 21.1.29), and even then the unanimous approval of the First
Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve is required (D&C 107). The statements
you cite are devoid of any express invocation of the specific authority of the
First Presidency. In fact, they bear no name or signature at all. Therefore,
they do NOT constitute official doctrine, policy, nor posture. They represent
someone's personal opinion ONLY.
If you go to work now, in a foreign country, and you loose your job, you must go
home as you are no longer sponsored. That is how it works today for hundreds of
thousands of legal workers.The premiss here is that if you create a
legal way for these people to be here to work, that they will be forced into a
world of slavery and abuse. That is quit the quantum leap. Yes,
there are those that would abuse these people. These people are here today,
now. Even making these illegal people legal isn't going to make the unethical
employer ethical. But rather, with a legal system, rather than chasing down
millions of illegal residents, we would only need to manage and supervise
thousands of employers. By the numbers, it is cheaper and more effective to
make sure the workplace is eithical, rathar than keeping track of millions of
migrant families. Its a matter of management and bandwidth. Where
do you want to enforce the law. Under the guest visa program, we will know who
these people are working for. Under the current system, we have no idea.
Anti-Liar, I am not accusing you of this, but I am going to use your post as an
example. How many times have we been beat on the head about President Ezra Taft
Benson's talks about "liberals" (given before he was President) as
validation of the churches position on politics? This has been written here as
doctrine, that what he said is gospel about what political views a member in
good standing should have.And yet, on issues like this, we see
excuses why we don't have to accept the churches published council on this
subject - because it is not doctrine for all the reason you gave.So
when is it we should follow the brotheren? Conference talks are just
suggestions? There is no gospel doctrine about R rated movies, just talks. No
signatures involved. The list is endless. So when do we take what the Brothern
say at face value, and when are things just guides?I am not saying i
have the answer. But is is confusing on which certain subjects the lines are
very hard and fast (liberalism) where as others, immigration, they are just
suggestions and not doctrinal.Lots of grey space out there.
One area that doesn't seem to get much discussion is how hard it is to immigrate
into this country legally. Everyone clamors for the illegals to go home and
come back legally, which many do. But that process is long, hard, expensive and
fraught with beauricratic bungles and missteps that drag the process out
needlessly. Let's make fixing that part of the solution, too.
@Dave4197 If you love the ilegalls so much maybe you need to foot the bills they
are making on our resouces, such as foodstamps, medical, tutions and the cost to
the taxpayers. They come here ilegally and you want to open them with open arms
and call alot of people not caring, people like you should take care of them or
move with them when they get deported.