And they left another little loophole. The green cards from that time period don't have an expiration date.
And what about people on a green card who drop a little bundle. Yes they have the right to petition on the grounds of a family member.
(Like they can't fake a green card! There is a lawsuit going on right now in Canyon County , Idaho against four businesses who not only knowingly hired illegals, but at least one of their executives gave everyone instructions how to obtain a fake id and apply for services!)
Wake up and smell the coffee before your own livelihood-whatever it is gleaned from-is at risk due to illegal--->legal immigrants!

__________________

Also just in case you didn't catch it. I am in favor of continuing our constitutional right to be deemed a citizen if born in this country no matter the circumstances of our parents. Thought that fact might have gotten lost in all the rhetoric.

__________________

Yes, I know, we are on the same page on that. I just wanted to make sure that the facts were clear on this whole "anchor baby" business. Back in the 70s, if a woman did have a baby, she got automatic residency from that baby born in the US. That law was changed around 1972.

As far as green cards without expiration dates, my best friend has had his green card for 27 years now (don't ask me why he doesn't apply for citizenship - that's another story), and he just had to renew it. So these "unexpirable green cards" are at the very least prior to 1982 (the year he came to this country, at the age of 10).

Now, I certainly hope you are not stating that children from legal residents fall under the same umbrella as children born to illegals (???!!!). All legal immigrants come here on a resident visa first, and can only become a citizen after 5 years.

Lastly, have you seen a green card??? If employers would like to pretend they were duped that is one thing, but that they were actually duped is doubtful. The last one I saw had the faces of all 52 presidents on a magnetic strip that you could only see with a magnifying glass.

Yes, I am well aware farmers don't even look at the cards. Hence the big lawsuit in Canyon County, Idaho. Court dumps lawsuit targeting companies that hire illegals | Immigration | eastvalleytribune.com


9th district presided plus some say it was presented in with a flawed approach.
A lady friend of mine from near that area told me her husband ( a farmer) would have trouble finding workers if he didn't hire Mexicans and Guatemalans (she didn't specify legal or illegal, but it's pretty well known in those parts "papers" are not scrutinized). I asked her if I was younger and in good health and walked up and asked him for a job picking, what would be my chances. She never answered me.
Yet the same area just saw two life blood processing plants shut down. One went to Canada- and it processes veggies grown in that town! This was a result of buying off the old school union employees and getting a crappy new contract. Thing that's funny the place is owned as a co-op by local farmers.
Bet they'll be singing a different tune when they have to compete with NAFTA partners on the vegetable market!
The other point is the people who were laid off at the plants (whole towns in some cases) could be out there picking fruit. They worked with Mexican Americans and white Americans at the plant-why should it be any different in the field?
To answer my own question-because the field is full.
We don't need legal or illegal pickers in that town. In some others like little desert casino towns, I can see they would have a hard time getting workers without recruiting from Bolivia and such.
But our immigration policy needs updating as it has been updated throughout the years. (I might add Texas has never complied).
What people were against (on both sides of the political fence) is another amnesty. Because every time the American people went along with it we were lied to. There was the amnesty and nothing was done about illegals much less revamp the work visa system. All we got out of the Regan amnesty program was a national I.D. card! (S.S.)

__________________

I agree. The last time the amnesty was done, it was the time to close the borders and solve the problem so more illegals did not come through. Of course this is the whole issue in the other thread we've been discussing. I truly do not know the answer or the solution, unless the government does it right this time. I just feel (to relate to this topic) that all said it should not be American children that are penalized. To a certain degree the government does hold some responsibility in allowing people to filter through the border (because it is hard for me to believe that with all our technology, that can see through walls in Iraq we are unable to secure a desert area - - but again, off the point, lol). Will they do it right this time? I doubt it, because one thing is if they can, quite another if they want to.

If the solution is to deport all 12m+ illegals, I feel bad for them I do, but if that is the solution so be it. The state of the present economy, unemployment rates, high fuel and food costs, etc. have to do with bad governance, not with illegals.

I agree with most of what you are saying. But the economy right now is a multi issue problem in some ways. Bad choices by individuals. Unscrupulous dumb witted lenders. The war. And with all this, we cannot afford to have as many non Americans here as we could a few years ago.
I would love to see ( my fantasy) an immigration policy that is built with these economic down turns in mind. One that automatically reduces the number of immigrants and guest workers with a synchronized employment/welfare system to get the people who are laid off in one area working again at a job immigrants used to fill. That -I believe- would also keep a check on safety and environmental standards as a new comer may not want to rock the boat by being a whistle blower.
Anyway you have some great points and are obviously concerned. Thanks for the exchange!

__________________

I think it should absolutely stay. The way to prevent anchor babies is to open the borders, that way you get guest workers just coming and going, rather than staying in for fear of not being able to come back. Of course, we should reform welfare while we're at it (or just scrap it altogether).

-Dr House

And how do you see the open border thing playing out on the Mexican side? Just curious, cause I never actually considered an open border policy. Tell me more of your thoughts on this. How do you think it will probably look.
Do you think Mexico will eventually empty itself? Do you see a benefit to Americans?

__________________

Salty I think we agree. I just want the laws followed that already are in place but not used a much as they should be. If it get worst we will suffer in the long run. There are Congressmen calling for education for illegals and that means in time they will compete for jobs in the high wage range. Which the real wealthy want so they can lower the wages some more and drop bennies.