And Obama Drops the Bomb!
kapeluza
Posts: 3,434 Member
Obama administration stops deporting young immigrants Washington (CNN) -- The Obama administration said Friday it will stop deporting young illegal immigrants who were brought to the United States as children if they meet certain requirements.
The election-year policy change will cover people younger than 30 who came to the United States before the age of 16, pose no criminal or security threat, and were successful students or served in the military, the Department of Homeland Security said.
It also will allow those meeting the requirements to apply for work permits, the statement said."
Your thoughts?!
The election-year policy change will cover people younger than 30 who came to the United States before the age of 16, pose no criminal or security threat, and were successful students or served in the military, the Department of Homeland Security said.
It also will allow those meeting the requirements to apply for work permits, the statement said."
Your thoughts?!
0
Replies
-
No one?! Really? Dang, and here I thought this would have 10 pages by now!
0 -
I disagree with it. My family has a well recorded family history. Those who immigrated here did so legally. I'd like to add that when settlers came here, there was tons of unclaimed land and no immigration system so they were not "illegal" immigrants.
There are many citizens of this country who struggle to work and go to school, it's a slap in the face to allow people in deportation proceedings to stay and take up limited space in schools and the workforce. If they are here illegally, they need to be sent home. Period. If there parents had them BORN here, then they need to blame their parents, not the government, for breaking the law.0 -
Great way to keep unemployment high and give more of my tax dollars to illegal immigrants.
He needs to GO.0 -
Well, I wouldn't call this a "bomb," but it is a definite policy shift.
It comes off as election year pandering, but it he's definitely been trying to shore up his 2008 base: gays, young people with the college tuition stuff, and now Hispanics. I don't expect him to do anything specific to excite the African American base, he's not at risk there.
As to the issue, I think it's a good thing overall. I think that we're a nation that needs immigration. Our population isn't declining like we see in Western European countries, and it's because of immigration. I do wish, however, that we had a coherent policy on the southern border, as opposed to whatever it is that we have now.0 -
The election-year policy change will cover people younger than 30 who came to the United States before the age of 16, pose no criminal or security threat, and were successful students or served in the military, the Department of Homeland Security said.
It also will allow those meeting the requirements to apply for work permits, the statement said."
Your thoughts?!
I'm not an Obama fan at all, but I support this policy change.0 -
I am a conservative but I agree with the Dream Act. What I do not like is Obama circumventing Congress to buy the Hispanic vote.0
-
They would no longer be legal, so they'll be able to work legally and pay taxes.Great way to keep unemployment high and give more of my tax dollars to illegal immigrants.
Agreed.He needs to GO.0 -
I am a conservative but I agree with the Dream Act. What I do not like is Obama circumventing Congress to buy the Hispanic vote.
While it's not November yet, and if we put any faith in polling, he already had the Hispanic vote. If anything he's buying Hispanics going to the voting booths in larger numbers.
Buying votes or energizing his base? Sort of depends on how we look at it.0 -
Isn't this following through on an act that was proposed during the 2008 election or soon after? The DREAM Act? As someone who legally emigrated at immense personal and financial cost to a country I consider my home, and consequently endured ten years of worry and fear that the rules would change at any instant and I would somehow be sent back to a country where I no longer had a life or many links (until earlier this year when I finally achieved permanent residency), I have a small modicum of the experience of these young people, and I think this act is a rare example of common sense and compassion trumping political posturing.
To deport a young person whose entire life experience is in the USA, who likely has little or no connection with their country of origin, may not even speak their 'native' language, who is 'illegal' because they were brought to a new country not by their own will and choice, but by their parents' to me seems like a petty act to be committed by one of the worlds' greatest powers. A country founded on the principles of freedom from oppression and chances for all. That is not to say that the US should declare open borders, but to suggest that penalising young people so severely for the decisions of their parents is neither just, nor sensible.
Surely there is more for the US to gain if DREAMers - those who have served in the military or achieved highly under great strains in an academic setting, suggesting they will be creators of tax revenue, can become productive, contributing members of society than there is for it to lose? Yes, from a cynical perspective it probably appeals to the Latino vote, but I'd guess, from the reactions I've seen, that Obama will lose as many votes as he wins through this.0 -
Great way to keep unemployment high and give more of my tax dollars to illegal immigrants.
He needs to GO.
They would be legal with this policy change. You know what, I'm all for it. I am sick and tired of paying taxes while there are millions who don't. And unemployment is already high as it is. Legalizing these people who are ALREADY working would mean that they would be accounted for.0 -
I support it - of course I'm a huge Obama-supporting left wing commie, too!
I mentioned this in another topic, but just to clarify, illegal immigrants can and do pay taxes - sales tax, sometimes non-under-the-table paycheck withholdings, and indirectly property taxes with rent (oh and the IRS had been issuing ITINs to folks without SS numbers - not sure if that's still the case).0 -
I am not sure where the downside is to allowing these folks to legally work, get an education and pay taxes.0
-
If they are here illegally, they need to be sent home. Period. If there parents had them BORN here, then they need to blame their parents, not the government, for breaking the law.
Says someone who has obviously never lived in a third world country. Look up what's going on in Juarez, Mexico right now and tell me if you're a parent you wouldn't do everything in your power to get your kids out of there. I sure as heck would. And are you serious about people need to BLAME their parents for bringing them to the United States for opportunities at a better life?0 -
If they are here illegally, they need to be sent home. Period. If there parents had them BORN here, then they need to blame their parents, not the government, for breaking the law.
Says someone who has obviously never lived in a third world country. Look up what's going on in Juarez, Mexico right now and tell me if you're a parent you wouldn't do everything in your power to get your kids out of there. I sure as heck would. And are you serious about people need to BLAME their parents for bringing them to the United States for opportunities at a better life?
But we are ALSO letting in the crime and troublemakers from Mexico. The criminals get to stay as long as they haven't been caught and don't have a felony on their records. Then there are some who come and never get noticed or go back and forth. So our options are have compasion for the anchor babies and basically reward their parents for breaking the law but at the same time allow our country to be in ruins too? Or we can tell them "too bad, you broke the law. We have to PROTECT our own". After all, that is the job of our federal government. To protect our boarders and people....
Eventually, their problems down there are going to be our problems. Then what do we do when Americans need to start fleeing the country to find opportunity? I'd like to see what country is going to take us when Mexico and their problems take over the U.S....0 -
There are plenty of legal US citizens doing the same.But we are ALSO letting in the crime and troublemakers from Mexico. The criminals get to stay as long as they haven't been caught and don't have a felony on their records. Then there are some who come and never get noticed or go back and forth.
It's a social justice issue to me. I don't really anticipate Mexico taking over the United States.Eventually, their problems down there are going to be our problems. Then what do we do when Americans need to start fleeing the country to find opportunity? I'd like to see what country is going to take us when Mexico and their problems take over the U.S....0 -
There are plenty of legal US citizens doing the same.
Yeah this isn't unique...and criminals flee to other countries elsewhere, too
eta - **US** native criminals0 -
There are plenty of legal US citizens doing the same.
Yeah this isn't unique...and criminals flee to other countries elsewhere, too
There is a huge difference. In mexico, the criminals have taken over. Their military and police can't even get a grip on them, but we want to allow massive inflow into the U.S.?
I'd say that is a bit different than the much smaller number of immigrants going to and from OTHER countries where crime can usualy be limited or controlled.0 -
I am a conservative but I agree with the Dream Act. What I do not like is Obama circumventing Congress to buy the Hispanic vote.
While it's not November yet, and if we put any faith in polling, he already had the Hispanic vote. If anything he's buying Hispanics going to the voting booths in larger numbers.
Buying votes or energizing his base? Sort of depends on how we look at it.
Or responding to one of the top concerns of one of his important constituencies. It can be a combination of all three. It is an election year and so actions will be presented and shaded to have political impact. That's been a part of American government since.......well, since there first was an American government. So, yes--cover the the children's ears--there is a *political* strategy behind this as well. Doesn't make it the wrong thing to do.
And if we are going to play the "political" card, let's not forget that, until very recently, the DREAM Act enjoyed bipartisan support--it only became an anathema after the more extremist republicans ascended to power within the party, and Obama was elected.
I think it is somewhat ignorant and/or disingenuous to accuse Obama of "playing politics" with the issue when the other side has been playing politics with it as well for 7 or 8 years now, at least. And using "who hates brown people the most" as one of the standards by which they selected their nominee. (Anyone remember how Rick Perry became a "liberal" overnight?).
In an election year, it's all politics. IMO, at least with Obama, you have someone still trying to do the right thing while he is campaigning.0 -
There are plenty of legal US citizens doing the same.
Yeah this isn't unique...and criminals flee to other countries elsewhere, too
There is a huge difference. In mexico, the criminals have taken over. Their military and police can't even get a grip on them, but we want to allow massive inflow into the U.S.?
I'd say that is a bit different than the much smaller number of immigrants going to and from OTHER countries where crime can usualy be limited or controlled.
This isn't about allowing further immigration. It is about allowing a path to citizenship for those who were brought here at a young age and are still here. There are also stipulations for having graduated High School here or serving in the military and not having a criminal history. Its not like we are kicking the gates open and telling everyone to come on in.0 -
There is a huge difference. In mexico, the criminals have taken over. Their military and police can't even get a grip on them, but we want to allow massive inflow into the U.S.?
You don't think it's the drug cartel "massively inflowing" into the US; do you? It's the people wanting to escape that crap.0 -
You don't think it's the drug cartel "massively inflowing" into the US; do you? It's the people wanting to escape that crap.
Exactly..0 -
There is a huge difference. In mexico, the criminals have taken over. Their military and police can't even get a grip on them, but we want to allow massive inflow into the U.S.?
You don't think it's the drug cartel "massively inflowing" into the US; do you? It's the people wanting to escape that crap.
Not only that, unfortunately, many professionals cannot find work. It's not only the U.S. they are trying to seek refuge in. I know many people who have sought life in other countries like Spain, Germany, Norway, etc. Since the U.S. is so hostile towards immigrants many of these people have looked elsewhere for opportunities. Unfortunately, Spain has closed the doors to Brazilian and Mexican immigrants. Now, Mexican and Brazilian citizens require a "letter of invitation" to enter the country. Many have been turned away at the airport and not permitted access into the country without this letter.0 -
I see immigration almost in physiologic terms. Essentially, you have a huge pressure gradient along a membrane--i.e. the US-Mexican border. The pressure comes from the tremendous disparity in economic opportunity, as well as the larger population. For example, we see almost no "illegal" immigration from Canada, despite a much longer, much less defended, border.
It is because of this pressure that I have pretty much zero confidence in the "build a bigger fence and throw them all out" approach to immigration reform. For one, the cost would be astronomical. Two, it wouldn't work.
I think it's a complicated issue and is going to take a multifaceted approach. That means border control methods that are effective, but it also means promoting economic growth and government stability in Mexico, coming up with quota systems that are realistic, going after employers who hire illegals, and, periodically, managing the numbers that are already here and finding ways to bring them into our society in a constructive way.
I don't think immigration can be "stopped" anymore than you can stop a glacier with a picket fence. I think the best approach is to put ideology aside and manage it.0 -
The point being missed here is that Obama doesn't make the law, he enforces it. If he wants to do this, then a bill needs to pass both houses. Obama doesn't set immigration policy.
He broke his oath of office with this one.0 -
This has less to to do with DREAM and more to do with immigration generally.
This is just my personal experience with the immigrants I've met and/or had as my neighbors (some of whom could very well have been illegal), they are some of the hardest working people I've met. It's not a universal, but overall they placed a lot of value in working. I just don't understand the resistance to incorporating that kind of ethic into the country.
I don't really want to play the cultural takeover card (read racism there), but sometimes I have to wonder. I just don't think we can claim to be (or want to be) a land of opportunity for people who work hard and also attempt to keep people who want the same thing out--and spend resources booting them out instead of actually generating revenue from them in the same way we do everyone else.0 -
The point being missed here is that Obama doesn't make the law, he enforces it. If he wants to do this, then a bill needs to pass both houses. Obama doesn't set immigration policy.
He broke his oath of office with this one.
And if he did nothing, people would simply say he's completely ineffective. When the GOP say they want him to be a real leader, what they really mean is that they want him to just approve everything they say. For the last two years (after the red tidal wave), Congress has done very little in the way of actually being productive, and the POTUS takes the hit for that. And now he's going to take a hit for actually doing something positive when Congress won't? In fairness, it's not as if the Dems didn't take their sweet time doing things when they were in control too, it just wasn't quite this obstructionist.
So what kind of a leader do we really want?0 -
There are plenty of legal US citizens doing the same.
Yeah this isn't unique...and criminals flee to other countries elsewhere, too
There is a huge difference. In mexico, the criminals have taken over. Their military and police can't even get a grip on them, but we want to allow massive inflow into the U.S.?
I'd say that is a bit different than the much smaller number of immigrants going to and from OTHER countries where crime can usualy be limited or controlled.
This isn't about allowing further immigration. It is about allowing a path to citizenship for those who were brought here at a young age and are still here. There are also stipulations for having graduated High School here or serving in the military and not having a criminal history. Its not like we are kicking the gates open and telling everyone to come on in.
But naturally, once they learn of this new acceptance, I'm sure it WILL turn into a flood. That's why so many come here in the first place giving birth to children.0 -
There is a huge difference. In mexico, the criminals have taken over. Their military and police can't even get a grip on them, but we want to allow massive inflow into the U.S.?
You don't think it's the drug cartel "massively inflowing" into the US; do you? It's the people wanting to escape that crap.
I do. Recently the Zetas cartel was busted for launduring money in the US by breeding American racehorses. The bad guys of Mexico are all over the country here. In fact, according to the DEA, Mexican cartels are the #1 gang threat in the United States. As the Mexican immigrant population in the U.S. has grown, so has the crime from Mexico into the U.S.0 -
The point being missed here is that Obama doesn't make the law, he enforces it. If he wants to do this, then a bill needs to pass both houses. Obama doesn't set immigration policy.
He broke his oath of office with this one.
A leader that follows our laws of governing.
And if he did nothing, people would simply say he's completely ineffective. When the GOP say they want him to be a real leader, what they really mean is that they want him to just approve everything they say. For the last two years (after the red tidal wave), Congress has done very little in the way of actually being productive, and the POTUS takes the hit for that. And now he's going to take a hit for actually doing something positive when Congress won't? In fairness, it's not as if the Dems didn't take their sweet time doing things when they were in control too, it just wasn't quite this obstructionist.
So what kind of a leader do we really want?
it doesn't matter if the congress does nothing for 2 years, the president doesn't have the authority to enforce parts of law over the other. Isn't justice supposed to be blind?
As you said in a previous post, the Dream Act was defeated. This is Obama going around congress to implement a law that was defeated by elected reps. this is not the way the branches of our gov are designed to work.0
