Immigration Reform today

[Saintshizzle]

He will be re-elected. It was well overdue...timing is impeccable. News reports coming:

Edit (sorry about that, there was nothing out there until now...been on the news for a couple hours)

Obama easing deportation rules for young people

The Obama administration is easing its policy of deporting undocumented immigrants if they arrived in the United States as children and have led law-abiding lives...

Under the administration plan, illegal immigrants will be immune from deportation if they were brought to the United States before they turned 16 and are younger than 30, have been in the country for at least five continuous years, have no criminal history, graduated from a U.S. high school or earned a GED, or served in the military. They also can apply for a work permit that will be good for two years with no limits on how many times it can be renewed. The officials who described the plan spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss it in advance of the official announcement.

The policy will not lead toward citizenship but will remove the threat of deportation and grant the ability to work legally, leaving eligible immigrants able to remain in the United States for extended periods.

"Many of these young people have already contributed to our country in significant ways," Napolitano wrote in a memorandum describing the administration's action. "Prosecutorial discretion, which is used in so many other areas, is especially justified here."...

Obama easing deportation rules for young people

Honestly, this is one of the shrewdest political moves I have seen in a while. He was going to do it the whole while, just like backing gay rights. But he is doing it in the final rounds before the fight goes to the cards. Also, its for the kids, leaving Romney and the Tea Party dumbfounded.

[saintfan-n-alex]

i wonder how many of those that he has deported since he has been in office actually fit this criteria and if he will continually deport those that dont

he doesnt seem to go too public as having deported more than any other administration when he claims to be a friends of illegal immagrants nor do republicans seems to use those stats to refute his defense of illegal immagrants.

i have a feeling this is more of a statement that reflects no actual change in policy from GWB to Obama if of course Obama's claims of leading in deportation is true.

[Saintshizzle]

Originally Posted by saintfan-n-alex

i wonder how many of those that he has deported since he has been in office actually fit this criteria and if he will continually deport those that dont

he doesnt seem to go too public as having deported more than any other administration when he claims to be a friends of illegal immagrants nor do republicans seems to use those stats to refute his defense of illegal immagrants.

i have a feeling this is more of a statement that reflects no actual change in policy from GWB to Obama if of course Obama's claims of leading in deportation is true.

Seriously, I was thinking this very thing. Thats what makes it shrewd, because many people have been deported over the past 3+ years, guaranteed some fall into this. The only reason he waited till now is political, and someone has to be directing these moves. I honestly dont see him as that shrewd of a person.

Still, it hits the opposition so far below the belt, that they cannot do anything but just sit back and give golf claps. What negatives can they say? Even if they use the point I made above,it goes against them and the Bush policy. All he have to say is that "I was busy, but wanted to make sure that I kept my proimse and change that terrible policy from GWB that deported people that did nothing wrong..."

[Saintshizzle]

Oh, but make no mistake, it is a change. No deportation is the change. That means one thing...and you Rushonians should have already peeped this:

Those kids are now "anchor babies" according to that ilk...just like kids born here. That means the parents are now safe...

LOLOLOLOL

[dtc]

Punishing the child for the sins of the father is un-American.

The shrewdness of this 'nothing' move is quite American, however.

[Saintshizzle]

Originally Posted by dtc

Punishing the child for the sins of the father is un-American.

The shrewdness of this 'nothing' move is quite American, however.

We have to be fair though D. If we don't acknowledge when someone we supported does something political (mostly the timing), then we may as well be Republican.

He could have done this 3 years ago and stopped a lot of people from being deported.

[dtc]

Originally Posted by Saintshizzle

We have to be fair though D. If we don't acknowledge when someone we supported does something political (mostly the timing), then we may as well be Republican.

He could have done this 3 years ago and stopped a lot of people from being deported.

Agreed. This is a good policy. We need to stem the illegal entry and get rid of the criminals and guilty which he's doing with the help of a weak economy. We need to allow for those who had no choice aren't penalized for the actions of others and move on with more important things.

from a political standpoint, this is a great move and one I support both morally and from a tactical standpoint.

[champ76]

Originally Posted by Saintshizzle

Oh, but make no mistake, it is a change. No deportation is the change. That means one thing...and you Rushonians should have already peeped this:

Those kids are now "anchor babies" according to that ilk...just like kids born here. That means the parents are now safe...

LOLOLOLOL

I don't think that's true; this supposedly isn't a path to citizenship, and that's the only way to have the anchor baby effect.

This is supposedly Marco Rubio's plan in lieu of the Dream Act. But the whole idea that those eligible has to fit into the pigeon hole of a certain age, lack of criminal record, proof of education or military service, etc, reminds me of the scene from The Jerk when he is working on the carnival midway, and he tells the folks they can have any prize they want, as long as it falls within an ever decreasing area, until they are left with only one choice.

I have mixed feelings. I don't like to reward those who have broken the law. I think as long as this is not a path to citizenship, I can live with it.

[Saintshizzle]

Originally Posted by champ76

I don't think that's true; this supposedly isn't a path to citizenship, and that's the only way to have the anchor baby effect.

This is supposedly Marco Rubio's plan in lieu of the Dream Act. But the whole idea that those eligible has to fit into the pigeon hole of a certain age, lack of criminal record, proof of education or military service, etc, reminds me of the scene from The Jerk when he is working on the carnival midway, and he tells the folks they can have any prize they want, as long as it falls within an ever decreasing area, until they are left with only one choice.

I have mixed feelings. I don't like to reward those who have broken the law. I think as long as this is not a path to citizenship, I can live with it.

Champ

A family that brought their kids over 6 years ago are not benefitting from the "Anchor Baby Effect?" If the kids can stay and not be deported...where do you think he parents that supports them will go?

Also...the "not a path to citizenship" is just a bone to stop the crazy-carousel that could ensue if the opposition get upset and start expressing how they really feel about this. By the end of his next term, I would expect that aspect of the plan to disappear.

[champ76]

Originally Posted by Saintshizzle

Champ

A family that brought their kids over 6 years ago are not benefitting from the "Anchor Baby Effect?" If the kids can stay and not be deported...where do you think he parents that supports them will go?

Also...the "not a path to citizenship" is just a bone to stop the crazy-carousel that could ensue if the opposition get upset and start expressing how they really feel about this. By the end of his next term, I would expect that aspect of the plan to disappear.

As I understand it, those eligible are not being supported by parents; they either have to have served in the military or obtained a diploma or GED. Ostensibly, they are supporting themselves.

Now, it may lead to the argument that we shouldn't "bust up" families, but as I said before, I have little sympathy for those that broke the law to get here, regardless of how well they've behaved since getting here. I am in favor of comprehensive immigration reform, which may include work visas, but I am against granting citizenship to those who broke the law to get here. They make a mockery of those who did it the lawful way.

[dtc]

Originally Posted by champ76

I don't think that's true; this supposedly isn't a path to citizenship, and that's the only way to have the anchor baby effect.

This is supposedly Marco Rubio's plan in lieu of the Dream Act. But the whole idea that those eligible has to fit into the pigeon hole of a certain age, lack of criminal record, proof of education or military service, etc, reminds me of the scene from The Jerk when he is working on the carnival midway, and he tells the folks they can have any prize they want, as long as it falls within an ever decreasing area, until they are left with only one choice.

I have mixed feelings. I don't like to reward those who have broken the law. I think as long as this is not a path to citizenship, I can live with it.

Same here, but the "anchor baby" thing is well propagated falsehood aimed to push the same 'conservative' agenda. There is no "anchor baby" law that i'm aware of. If you're illegal, you go home. Your kid can stay if it is an American by virtue of having been born here, but the parents go.

[El Caliente]

I think we need to be more welcoming to those that come here to better their lot in life. If they want to serve in the military, go to college, or prove to be more than just a dimple on the butt of society make them citizens. This country has benefited and advanced from the backs of immigrants why stop a good thing?

The current system in place in messed up. Unless you have money there is no way somebody from Nicaragua, Venezuela, Chile, or El Salvador is getting over here under the current rules. I say open Ellis Island back up, see if a person is fit to make it in this country, and let them stay and be taxed like the rest of us if they are.

[Saintshizzle]

Originally Posted by champ76

As I understand it, those eligible are not being supported by parents; they either have to have served in the military or obtained a diploma or GED. Ostensibly, they are supporting themselves.

Now, it may lead to the argument that we shouldn't "bust up" families, but as I said before, I have little sympathy for those that broke the law to get here, regardless of how well they've behaved since getting here. I am in favor of comprehensive immigration reform, which may include work visas, but I am against granting citizenship to those who broke the law to get here. They make a mockery of those who did it the lawful way.

Its a cunning move and I dont have much more time today to go into the nuances of it, accept to say: Giving them two years, with a "no path to citizenship```wink```" was an awesome move. 50 meter target, when they go to the polls, the thought is we could lose the two years that we just gained of freedom.

Long term, they will have an opportunity in the future to get citizenship and keep parents here, or bring them back.

Also, I could be wrong on the Anchor baby statement, but I thought women were able to stay here if their children are citizens and minors.

[saintfan-n-alex]

Though a position could be taken that this takes jobs etc from citizens of course then you have to go with jobs Americans won't do which is a term I hate

And of course they can't be paid a lower wage

And if entitlements are paid that on the taxpayer though so is deportation

[champ76]

Originally Posted by Saintshizzle

Its a cunning move and I dont have much more time today to go into the nuances of it, accept to say: Giving them two years, with a "no path to citizenship```wink```" was an awesome move. 50 meter target, when they go to the polls, the thought is we could lose the two years that we just gained of freedom.

Long term, they will have an opportunity in the future to get citizenship and keep parents here, or bring them back.

Also, I could be wrong on the Anchor baby statement, but I thought women were able to stay here if their children are citizens and minors.

Two thoughts from the other side:

1) Will these 800,000 newly eligible workers be counted in the employment figures, driving up the unemployment rate?

2) For those unemployed right now, how do they feel about the competition for jobs with 800,000 new competitors?