Skip to content

“Mother, May I?” – Immigration Reform

March 29, 2011

We continue in America to argue over the immigration situation – neither side willing to give ground to find some way to solve the issue, or even move forward in attempting to solve the issue.    So, time for some thinking outside the box somewhat.  Here’s my thinking on the issue of immigration reform.

First of all let’s consider the principle of freedom.  Freedom infers that each person has the right to take actions as they choose that are not, in any way, harmful or violent to another individual.  Carry that thought a step farther it would also not be harmful or violent towards society as a whole.

Using that thought of freedom then one could ask “why control immigration?”  If the basic truth of freedom is that we each follow the path of our choosing, without harming others, then there is no need for any immigration control.  To control immigration is to impose a restriction of freedom upon individuals.  Yet, our national society believes in controlling those who enter the nation for the sake of the security of the nation, regardless of the loss of freedom to individuals.

So, for the purpose of this discussion, we will acknowledge that the nation requires control over immigration into the United States of America. With that said I propose that we change the immigration laws and allow anyone not acting in a true criminal manner (I’ll explain that momentarily) to legally enter the country for whatever reason they desire to come to the USA for.  All the person does is show up at a legal entry point to the country and after passing a background check (similar to an insta-check for buying a firearm) they are issued a visitors identity card (green card) and allowed not only to be here but to be productive in society.

They could work and would be subject to taxes, and would be required to file tax returns just like everyone else.  They would openly and freely participate in society.  The only aspect they would not receive is to be a citizen unless or until they meet all necessary requirements for citizenship.  Citizenship implies that one then has the right to participate in the selection of those governing the nation, whether that is at a local, state or the national level.  Citizenship has been determined by the national society to be a privilege that may only be gained by meeting established requirements.

One of the many complaints in the immigration debate is the fate of the immigrants who enter the country illegally.  There are many reasons that individuals seek to be within the country.  One of those reasons is to take advantage of improving their economic situation through better wage earnings.  These individuals are restricted in their job opportunities by a lack of proper documentation.  This lack of documentation allows these individuals to be exploited by unscrupulous employers.  The workers are in the shadow of the workforce, earning less and suffering the inequities of lesser protections than legal workers.  If we bring these people out of the shadows by legalizing their existence in the nation we will do away with the draw for businesses to employ illegal immigrants, even though that may increase our costs for goods and services somewhat.

Now we should consider the insta-check of the person’s background.  Anyone requesting entry that has felony level criminal histories would be denied entry at the border point and sent back across the border.  Keep in mind that a prior history of illegally entering the USA would not generally be considered a reason for denying entry.  The insta-check system could be conducted by a simple fingerprint scan of the individual requesting entry.  A system utilizing fingerprints would negate the attempts to provide fraudulent documentation to establish the identity under which to conduct the insta-check.  However, in order to make an insta-check system viable all state fingerprint records would require nationalization to insure that a criminal record from a state was not missed in determining the status of any individual requesting entry into the country.  Simply put, this would mean the loss of some freedom to reform a broken system currently in use to control immigration into the nation.  Others would be denied entry at the border if they were found to be dangerous to national security (terrorists for instance), or were attempting to smuggle prohibited goods/items (drugs for example) in at that time, or were attempting to smuggle in an individual who was prohibited from entering.

But what about those who enter the nation and then commit crimes against society?  Anyone allowed entry would, upon being convicted of a felony-level offense by any state or the federal government be immediately deported upon conviction and would be denied future entry into the country for the term of their sentence.  In other words say a person received a five year prison or probation sentence – then five years must pass before they would be allowed entry.  If that person is caught inside the country during the prohibition period then they serve the remainder of their sentence in custody before being freed.  One would hope the idea of five years of freedom would outweigh guaranteed imprisonment while waiting to be able to legally enter the country again?  Periods of time being “served” for any criminal convictions would not count towards requirement periods to gain citizenship.

This is the outside the box thinking that I’ve reached at the moment.  I believe it would be a better good for the nation as well as all individuals in the nation.  There would be very little to no “illegal” immigration under this idea.  Such a system would work to the advantage of society, a win-win for us all under our current political and government structures in America, especially since we are going to deny freedom by not having open borders.

Advertisements
16 Comments leave one →
  1. March 30, 2011 12:28 am

    Interesting idea.

    I don’t like the insta check and sharing of records but I like the concept.

    One issue I see coming is the claim that we can’t deny entry based on the police records created in a corrupt country. You know, those poor victims of political persecution.

    Why not let anyone in the door who hasn’t been classified as criminally insane?

    Why should we deny a person the chance to start a new life?

    • March 30, 2011 11:50 am

      I would agree with you JAC, why not allow unrestricted entry? “Controlling” entry into the nation is prohibiting freedom IMHO. Plus, our society is a reactive enforcement one so if a person is peaceful then why can they not be here?

      The US Border Patrol has only been in existence for 80 years, so effectively prior to that the US really cared not about who crossed the border.

      I wouldn’t like the insta-check idea either, but I was trying to meld both the Democratic and Republican positions on immigration into some workable model they might – and only might knowing them – find acceptable. 🙂

  2. charlie miles permalink
    March 30, 2011 6:50 pm

    my feeling is if you didnt follow the the law and the rules that are in place regarding immigration your not going to live by our laws when you get here you have heard all the total bullshit thats going on in arizona schools . you and i have to obey the law.illegalis as it states is just that! come in the front door the right way i wellcome you.if you are here illegally get the fuck out!

    • Nora M. Velasquez permalink
      April 28, 2011 2:54 pm

      Law and Justice when it comes to immigration are NOT the same!
      Let’s think what would Jesus do?
      Be nice and learn to share.

      • anita permalink
        April 28, 2011 3:15 pm

        Jesus would say follow the rules

  3. charlie miles permalink
    March 31, 2011 12:13 pm

    reguarding the reconquista movement i think this has already begun. last year when the good people of arizona voted to handle their immigration problem bytaking matters into their own hands because the federal government refused to address the problem;they were slammed by our own congress! president calderoneof mexico stood on the floor of congressand said it was illegal and immoral. the sad part is that some members of our house and senate including that idiot nancy pelosi stood and applauded him.calderone needs to clean up his own back yard before he starts talking down to our people.and im being nice.like i said come in the front door i have no issue with that.this country was built by immigrantswho came here towork and build a better life for themselves and their families notfor a welfare check and free health care like they get now!

    • March 31, 2011 12:33 pm

      I agree with you CM, let them come in the front door. However, with the current state of political stances of the two parties that isn’t happening with any common sense application.

      With a border patrol only 80ish years old there is then the unspoken understanding that America cared not who, or what, flowed across our borders (north and south) for over 150 years. For the most part we took no action as long as those crossing in and out were “peaceful.”

      We need to get two parties off their collective duffs from their entrenched positions and have them consider new views of how to accomplish solving a problem that has been growing for decades and will continue to grow without something being changed.

      Since the idea of open borders is not acceptable by the political establishments, or society in general it would seem, then what I have suggested is nothing more than getting immigrants in through a front door by re-framing that door to make it more useful.

  4. March 31, 2011 5:42 pm

    As a timely addition to my post I give you an article from CNS News on how little of the US northern and southern borders are “secure.”

    http://cnsnews.com/news/article/federal-auditor-border-patrol-can-stop-i

    Take a few minutes and realize that what has been attempted over the past several administrations to bring about control of the US borders has been a miserable failure and extremely huge waste of taxpayer monies.

    Why would we – as a nation – be stupid enough to continue such idiocy?

  5. charlie miles permalink
    March 31, 2011 7:04 pm

    they have to do it the right way plainlyspoken .first send the message to calderone that if he doesnt get control of these drug cartels and take care of his side of the border we will handle it our way.of course thisadministration and those previous are to afraid of the a.c.l.u. and are to politicaly correct .there is no nice way to do this. in the meantime the american peaple are paying the price. more troops on the border.have them build the fence while they are there. you have to send the message.this will not be tollerated anymore!

  6. Chudleigh permalink
    April 2, 2011 4:07 pm

    My BS meter pegged on this article.
    No other country on the planet would act like like the U.S. Motel Six.
    They would kill invading interlopers, or make it so unpleasant no one would ever try to enter illegality.

    I live in the Hispanic section of Los Angeles.

    It’s called L A.

    • gmanfortruth permalink*
      April 2, 2011 4:11 pm

      I’m not sure what it is your getting at, could you explain further?

    • April 2, 2011 4:13 pm

      I agree with gman, I’m not sure what you’re trying to say in your comment and would ask for more of an explanation so that I could respond to any point you make.

  7. April 4, 2011 5:57 pm

    PS,

    Nice article. I don’t have an issue with immigration as much as I do entitlements and anchor babies. What made the US a success in the past was assimilation. This was a natural process that immigrants came here for the chance to make a better life for themselves. And that is still the case for a percentage of immigrants. But it seems we are being overloaded by the other class of immigrants, the dead-beats. I have no issue with any who come, work and earn their place. Add to that, learn our language. As stated above, the reconquista movement is real, and a threat. For us to be a good host, they need to be good guests.

    • gmanfortruth permalink*
      April 4, 2011 6:04 pm

      Very well put!

    • April 4, 2011 6:22 pm

      I do not disagree with you LOI. I believe though we can limit the drain from the dead-beats. If we make all welcome and able to lawfully be productive then they must give back in the same way we all are forced to – through taxes. At the same time we can, and should, change the welfare system in this nation (though I’d prefer to do away with it all together) and tighten up who, when, and how long one may receives assistance.

      Most immigration laws didn’t come on the scene until the 20th century, and in fact the immigration law placing caps on western hemisphere immigrants didn’t come into existence until 1965 – before that one can only think it was almost a “come one, come all – if from this hemisphere” and we’ll let you legally enter. Why should that be different today?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: