“This site is dedicated to preying on peoples vanity, ignorance, or loneliness, gaining their trust and betraying them without remorse.”

Wednesday, June 12, 2013

Why confer an unmerited reward of citizenship on those who entered the country illegally? There is simply no benefit for rewarding an unlawful act.


Legalization, yes. Citizenship, no.

Ross K. Baker
6:18 p.m. EDT June 10, 2013



USA TODAY


Naturalization is a precious gift. So why grant it to those who didn't play by the rules?

There is something for almost everybody in the Senate's immigration bill, which was recently approved by the Judiciary Committee and is headed for the floor this week. At more than 1,000 pages, it lives up to its boast of being "comprehensive."
There is something for the high-tech industry in expanded H-1B visas that ease the way into this country for foreign techies.
There is a generous allowance of temporary workers for agribusiness. Big labor and big business sat down months ago and decided how many construction workers would be allowed in — not so many as to deluge unionized labor and not so few as to disappoint the American business community's thirst for cheap labor.
Sen. Michael Bennet, D-Colo., even got a generous visa allowance for foreign ski instructors.
What about public interest?
The interest that was not served in this giant auction, however, was the public interest and the values that we purport to uphold.
There is a lofty term in common use among conservatives who oppose the kind of reform that is making its way through the Senate. The phrase is "rule of law." Translated into every day speech it means "playing by the rules," a principle deeply embedded in our culture. You don't jump the line. You don't shortchange. And if you do, you shouldn't expect to be rewarded for it. The reward, in the case of the comprehensive immigration bill, comes in the form of "a pathway to citizenship."
Citizenship is the most precious gift that America can confer. For many people outside our borders, it is equivalent to winning a megabucks lottery. So why are members of the Senate so determined to grant it to people who did not play by the rules?
Democrats want to reward a constituency that has proved itself both loyal and influential. Republicans see it as a form of damage control, hoping to ingratiate themselves with Hispanic voters whom they have systematically alienated. Each party sees a political dividend in creating millions of new voters who could be registered upon receiving citizenship.
But conservatives might have a good point. Why confer an unmerited reward of citizenship on those who entered the country illegally?
Proponents of a path to citizenship argue on their behalf that they are living "in the shadows." But bringing them out into the sun light can be accomplished by legalization and registration. Our security will be enhanced because we will then know who and where they are. They will be spared from deportation and able to lead normal lives. For most, legal resident alien status will be enough. It is unlikely that removing the path to citizenship will cause many to pull up stakes and return to their native country.
DREAMers are exception
Now, there are about 2 million people judged as illegal who are completely blameless and should be placed on an expedited path to citizenship: the people brought to this country as children by illegally entering parents. For them, called the DREAMers after the DREAM Act, the shadows need to be lifted. They are certainly worthy of citizenship, much like non-citizens who served in the U.S. military after 9/11.
While lawmakers are at it, they might want to reassert the validity of the birthright provision of the 14th Amendment, which states that those born in the USA are citizens. Enough of the disparaging term "anchor babies," used by those who quibble with the amendment's plain language. They are our babies because they were born on our soil.
A long road ahead
The immigration process still has a long way to go. It will be subject to amendment on the floor of the Senate and then be taken up by the House, where many Republicans consider the citizenship provision objectionable.
Rather the risk losing the bill in its entirety, senators should be prepared to abandon the path to citizenship portion when they sit down with their House colleagues.
To endow a pathway that began in a violation of the law with the gift of citizenship is to venture down a road of moral hazard and perverse incentives that invites the gaming of the system.
Ross K. Baker, a political science professor at Rutgers University, is a member of USA TODAY's Board of Contributors.

29 comments:

  1. My niece would make a great citizen. I suggested it. She is thinking about it.

    Her sister at the U of Illinois Medical School is going through the process.

    It is people like these two that we need.

    Not twenty million illiterates from the south.



    bob

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Did you know English is the main language of communication among people in India? That is what she said. They have over 300 main languages there, and 1500+ local variants, so many that are educated rely mainly on English among themselves.

      bob

      Delete
  2. .

    It is interesting to see the Turkish situation unfold as well as to note the similarities (to a degree) between those there and those in Egypt and Syria, disgruntled protests by portions of the population following by strong official reaction.

    In unusually strong criticism of Erdoğan, Ashton said that many people in Turkey felt they were not being listened to.


    At least, we can't complain of that in this country.



    http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/12/turkey-prime-minister-raises-fears?guni=Network front:network-front main-3 Main trailblock:Network front - main trailblock:Position1

    .

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. They can't either; they just don't know it. :)

      Delete
    2. Not being listened to.....

      "At least, we can't complain of that in this country."

      Fess up, you got that from some late night comedian.

      bob

      Delete
  3. Ruf supports the Spook State. He said so.

    He therefore makes that Book About Oddities.

    First and only Mississippi Moonshiner to support the Espionage State.

    heh

    Proving once again that.....


    bob

    ReplyDelete
  4. .

    John Morrell, Acting Director of the CIA, he of the Benghazi talking points fame has resigned.

    .

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. .

      Interesting, and maybe even appropriate, a 33 year bureaucrat is being replaced by a politically appointed White House lawyer.

      .

      Delete
  5. .

    I watched the Senate hearings on the NSA today in which Gen. Alexander (NSA Director of Cybersecurity) was questioned.

    Never saw anything like it. Every time a Senator, Dem or GOP, started to ask a tough question for the General, Senator Mikulski who was chairing the hearing, would interrupt and delay, start to answer the question herself or ask Dianne Feinstein (Intelligence Comm Chair)to make a comment before letting the Senator proceed with his question.

    Alexander, IMO, was less than forthcoming. He was aware of the hearings for some time yet when he was asked a tough question, his answer was inevitably the same: "I want to be as transparent as I possibly can, however, I don't want to make a mistake give you a wrong answer that could jeopardize an important security program, and since I am only one of the votes in making these decisions, even though I really, really want to give you an answer, I will have to get back to you.

    Despite this there were tough questions asked.

    One GOP senator asked: General, in citing Section 215 of the Patriot Act (the section being used to justify the metadata collection) what limits if any do you have in the types or information you can gather on anyone or everyone? In response, after an interruption from Mikulski, Alexander gave him the pat answer mentioned above.

    Patrick Leahy then demanded to know what good the program had actually done, what it had accomplished. Alexander then said it had "helped" solve dozens of terrorist cases thus saving American lives. That is the section of the testimony you will see on CNN. However, Leahy continued to pin him down and demand what plots were 'directly' stopped by the program. The General appeared a little flummoxed and admitted that the program was just part of a multi-dimensional/multi-departmental series of programs all geared towards the same end.

    But Leahy didn't let it drop. He brought up statements by Sen. Mike Rogers (Houseindicating that the program was directly responsible for stopping the NY subway bombing. In the end Alexander admitted that the NSA program "contributed" to the investigation.

    Here's what other have to say about that incident.

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/12/nsa-surveillance-data-terror-attack?guni=Network front:network-front aux-1 top-stories-1:Bento box 8 col:Position1:sublinks

    Others raised questions about the legality of the NSA program and how it could be justified under section 215 of the Patriot Act.

    See this CBS video link of Senator Merkley's questioning (the video is on the CBS page and you might get a slight pause around 1:40).

    http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=50147418n&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+cbsnews%2Ffeed+(CBSNews.com)

    My impression of the hearings? People like Feinstein and Rogers and others who were kept in the loop will continue their CYA support for the programs.

    Serious questions were raised in the hearing regarding the scope and overreach of the program, the effectiveness of the program, and on the legality of the program. However, since the hearings now go behind closed doors, its unlikely we will hear any more about it except from guys like Snowden or Rand Paul.

    .

    .

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ron is worried Rand may drone Snowden if he gets anywhere near a liquor store.

      bob

      Delete
  6. Rufus would make a great Acting Director of the CIA.

    All in favor of spooking, let him spook his heart out overseas.

    And, the bonus, for most here, he wants to stay home.

    Don't let him near the FBI, though.

    bob

    ReplyDelete
  7. Quirk would do well as an Inspector General.

    bob

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This is meant as a compliment, believe it or not.

      bob

      Delete
  8. The United States is committed to helping the Syrian opposition (al Qaeda) salvage victory, Secretary of State John F. Kerry said Wednesday, as the Obama administration held crisis talks on whether to shift policy and begin arming the increasingly desperate (al Qaeda) rebels.

    “We are determined to do everything that we can in order to help the opposition to be able to . . . save Syria,” Kerry said. “And that stands.”

    President Obama’s top national security aides met at the White House on Wednesday to air options for expanding aid to the ((al Qaeda) rebels after a disastrous battlefield setback last week. Neither Kerry nor White House press secretary Jay Carney would discuss the outcome, but both blamed the widening violence on Syrian President Bashar al-
    Assad.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Save Syria Now!!


      bob

      Delete
    2. We are truly toast. Why have we been fighting al Qaeda for 12 years? Now we are trying to help them to save Syria for al Qaeda? No one could honestly believe this bull shit. No more than can anyone with a brain believe the immigration bill will work.

      We are terminally stupid. Remember when everyone was on AOL, using a computer, attached to every other computer via the internet, and they thought that they were anonymous? Dumb and dumber.

      Now the party of the truly stupid thinks that giving Mexican peasants a chance to raid the US federal larder of benefits will cause them to rethink their entire cultural experience and become Republicans. I have news for these fools: The average lottery winnings in Latin America is less than the annual value of US social benefits!

      A nation of dumb fat ass know nothings. Olé.

      Delete
  9. Sometimes I can't believe it.

    This country is almost nuts now.

    We're almost to let in another group of twenty millions of illiterate Mexicans, our e-mails are read, our phone calls recorded, our travels tracked, and we are supporting the sunnis in Syria who will murder the remaining Christians, and 12 year olds can buy morning after pills at check out with Reeces Pieces and bubble gum and we have a 'President' who supports killing American citizen children who survive an abortion, and claims he is a Law Professor. And we don't know for sure where he was born, or who was his real biological father, though we know he was mentored by Frank Marshal Davis and one of his books was written by a cop killer and terrorist.

    OK, I'll say it, we're almost good and truly fucked, now.


    bob

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Just a little morose today.

      It's a great country, and a great life.

      bob

      Delete
  10. .

    Watched a few news channels tonight, NBC, CNN, etc. they all had the video from today's Senate hearing showing Gen Alexander saying that the NSA metadata program 'helped' prevent dozens of terrorist events.

    All the channels pointedly ignored Senator Patrick Leahy subsequently making the general admit he couldn't point to a specific event where the program was 'directly' responsible for stoppong it.

    No wonder half of America is oblivious to what is actually going on.

    .

    ReplyDelete
  11. .

    We've seen the criticism of the SD ARB report on Benghazi. In fact, it is the subject of a Office of the Inspector General investigation. Now we see that it's alleged that another IG report covering possible misconduct and illegal activities at State was squashed and covered up.

    In light of this, it is interesting to note that for the past for 4.5 years there has been no State Department Inspector General, merely a number of political appointees doing the job as acting IG's. Obviously, it's difficult to set policy or assign responsibility given that situation.

    .

    ReplyDelete
  12. .

    Legalization, yes. Citizenship, no.

    I saw someone, I think it was Rand Paul, suggest that there be two lists for those currently in the country illegally.

    The first list would make them legal. The second list would be the same one every other immigrant goes on; however,they would start at the back of the list.

    In other words, while they were working here legally they would also be working their way up the list towards citizenship.

    It seemed to make sense to me. It would not punish them but still address the fairness issue by making them go through the same process as everyone else in order to get citizenship.

    .

    ReplyDelete
  13. Yes indeedy. It teaches them they can have all the advantages of citizenship, access to our schools, benefits, food stamps, compete for our jobs, driving privileges, the protection of our courts, the whole free lunch, and be rewarded with the 'path to citizenship'. Yes, indeedy.

    Legalization, no. Citizenship, no. Deportation, si.

    bob

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If the government has the ability to track my every movement, and yours, why aren't they tracking and arresting and deporting those who have no right to be here? What ever happened to the Fence? Why are we all paying taxes to support these people when many of us are having trouble supporting themselves and their own families?

      bob

      Delete
    2. Marco Rubio is the Jack Kevorkian of the Republican Party. (Coulter)

      Marco Rubio is the Jack Kevorkian of the United States.

      Delete
    3. The entire country will become LA, California, Phoenix, Arizona....

      We need people that are educated, that can think, that can contribute....we should have a skills test for immigrants. It is no longer the 1800's.


      bob

      Delete
  14. .

    Sen. Michael Bennet, D-Colo., even got a generous visa allowance for foreign ski instructors.

    Reminds me of an incident during my first marriage. I was nineteen, wife was pregnant with our first child, Christmas was coming, and I was hurting for money.

    Sears was hiring for the Christmas season so I took a job with them and was placed in sporting goods. They paid you a salary as kind of a minimum and then a commission once you got past the minimum. However, they expected you to get past the minimum something I was having trouble doing. Sooo, I read up on the ski equipment (some of the most expensive sports equipment they sold at the time) and tried pushing that.

    Well, anyway, sometime near the end of November, they decide to bring in this ski pro from one of the local ski resorts to provide instructions right there in the department. So the Manager comes by and tells me and this other guy we need to help the pro.

    So here's the deal. We come in one night and there's this ramp with a treadmill on it sitting there simulating a ski hill about six feet high. There a ladder next to it leading up to a platform where the ski pro can get onto the slope. The idea is the treadmill rotates and the pro can ski in place. Our job? Me and the other guy had to sprinkle corn starch on the treadmill to allow the skis to slide properly.

    So any way about the time the show is supposed to start, a crowd starts forming near the ski slope. The pro shows up. Can't remember his name but they all had Norwegian or Scandinavians names like Thor Lemming or something like that. Guy was handsome, like the male lead in some B movie, great accent, a great draw for the women and young girls. Anyway, he's all dressed up in his ski equipment and we get introduced to him. Then me and the other guy go over and start putting the corn starch on the treadmill. We turned on the treadmill and kept putting on the corn starch as it turned.

    Someone comes up, may have been the manager, and introduces the pro to the crowd. Thor then takes the mike and explains what he was going to do, the various moves he will be showing them. Then he climbs up to the platform and puts on this short pair of skis, waves to the crowd, and jumps on the treadmill, skis half way down the slope before his skis catch, he shoots up the treadmill backwards, hits the low railing at the top of the treadmill, and careens over the railing and into the bikes below.

    There was an audible gasp from the crowd, then a moment of stunned silence, then something that sounded like 'son-of-a-bitch' in a Scandinavian accent coming from behind the simulated ski slope. Three or four of us rushed to dig him out of the bikes. Luckily, about the only thing that was hurt was his pride.

    I'll give him credit. He was spunky. He tried it again but it just wasn't working. No matter how much corn starch we put on, at some point his skis would catch. So they finally gave up on it.

    A short time later, I was transferred to women's shoes which was totally unfair in my opinion. I blame it entirely on faulty equipment, poor equipment placement (come on, right in front of the bikes), and inadequate corn starch spinkling training. Clearing a management problem.

    Unfortunately, womens shoes didn't work out either and I was out of there by the end of December.

    Yeh, I guess we can use more ski instructors.

    .

    ReplyDelete
  15. :):)

    Some SuperSalesMan you were. Right down to women's shoes. No wonder you took that Carnegie Course. You skied right down that slope too using the force of gravity to your benefit to your position in society today.

    ;)

    bob

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Why do you remind me so much of the one Congressman I love, Charlie Rangel?

      bob

      Delete