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.
I am not sure this is correct. Look at the criteria again:
1. Came to the United States under the age of 16.
2. Have continuously lived in the United States for a least five years prior to June 15, 2012 and currently live in the U.S.
3. Are currently in school, have graduated from high school, have obtained a GED, or have been honorably discharged from United States military service.
4. Have not been convicted of a felony, a significant misdemeanor offense, multiple misdemeanor offenses, or otherwise pose a threat to national security or public safety.
5. Are not above the age of 30.
It's ambiguous as it reads, but if I was 14, and in High School, never been in trouble, was brought here 5-6-7-8-9...years ago by my parents, I would be filling out an application. I don't think this is just for emancipated children.
Also, a side note: Everyone in the country that is not over 30 has been here prior to 16 years old now. How can we prove otherwise? It's a waste of our tax dollars to try and prove them wrong, when it will be almost impossible to do so.
Now we are going to use government money to hire bilingual teachers or bilingual schools? What about Arabic children since they don't have a majority will they be forced to speak Spanish or English? Is that fair? These problems will just keep getting worse then we will hear about white Arabic Latino's calling Latino African American Arabic children names and they will be suspended from school and have sensitivity training
My wife speaks one language. She understands one language. She has no ESL training. She has no ESL certification.
She has 23 children in her grade 2 classroom.
8 different languages are spoken at home. 3 came to her classroom this year speaking no English whatsoever.
And yet she manages to teach and they manage to learn every single day. They learn from each other as much - if not more, oftentimes - as they do from her.
These kids' minds are sponges and acquire new language at remarkable rates.
There's plenty to be concerned about or ask questions about - including cost.
But once again, you (and you aren't alone) are manufacturing worry that's not commensurate with threat. And, I suspect, the entire reason for this post is to punctuate it with your final sentence - this nonsense about 'sensitivity training' which is just a lame, nonsequitur variation on hyperbolic "PC RUN AMOK!" populism
What you should ask yourself is if the entire post leading up to the final point is largely invalid, what does that say about the point itself?
... People aren't coming to milk the system, people are coming to take the job people won't do.
My dad came here and got a paper route and worked it through school and has moved all over the world with it. Cubans, Mexicans, Haitians, Jamaicans, French, polish, African, they are all coming for a better life.
Maybe (like dt says) we can deport people who are already here riding the system like its the tour de France.
Lol. Good point.
I think the objective for obama etal is to expand the entitlement ranks, not reduce it. The next challenge for obama is to get these newly befriended democrats immersed in the entitlement quagmire.
He's made a shrewd political move. As president he has a powerful tool and he's using it. The democrats generally, have played the immigration hand very well. Republicans, the big tent party, doesn't seem to want mexicans under the tent. The only one I think that was close was Rick Perry. But he seemed conflicted about the issue.
I'm curious to see what Romney has up his sleeve to counter Obama.
Ask not what your country can do for you. Ask what you can do for your fellow Americans.
its one of those terrible iinstanfes of " ilike it when my guy does it, hate it when opposition does it."
i think such a decision should be a congressional decision
Agree and disagree.
Agree that we sometimes fall into that pattern of behavior. This is one where most people believe that "it's the right thing to do" opposed to sending them away to a country that they never seen or lived before.
It's politics with the timing though. I wanted him to do this 3 years ago.
I am talking about the procedure - an executive decision - not the substance
No doubt we need congress to move on this, but what choice does he have when Republicans will burn this country down before drafting a bipartisan bill which can be sent to the executive office for a signature? It would look like a win for Obama and that will not happen on the watch of most of the opposing party.
Those of us that actually pay taxes are not happy with this. nuff said.
Speak for yourself (I guess that's what you are doing). I am a taxpayer; have been since the age of 19 (I'm now 63). I agree with the decision both from the fairness aspect, and because we have to get something going on overall immigration reform.
I do think that adults here illegally should suffer some punishment, such as being fined and/or sent to the rear of the line as far as acquiring U.S. citizenship; and if they're not willing to do that, then they should be deported. And employers hiring them should also suffer penalties. The Obama administrative rule on this resulted from Congress not being willing to pass the "Dream Act", which was only the tip of the iceberg as far as immigration reform is concerned.
Something had to be done is right. Crap or get off the pot I say. We have been walking around the issue for far to long and a decision needed to be made. Both sides had a Dream Act version but neither side was really commited to implementing it, and Obama just made a decision. For better or worse, at least the ball is rolling.
If you say something trivial and want it to sound important, just say your age before it.
"I'm 45, and I want a sandwich!"