Monday, May 29, 2006
# Posted 10:59 PM by Ariel David Adesnik
Sensenbrenner: B+. He's very good at making the case against a rush to reform. I've graded him down in the past for insisting that any path to citizenship for illegal immigrants amounts to amnesty, but since the folks on my side of the debate won't admit that their plan, intentionally or not, rewards illegal behavior, I'm going to give Sensenbrenner a pass.And now for the hosts:
Russert: B.See ya next week. (2) opinions -- Add your opinion
How can you say immigration reform, as represented by the Senate's plan, is an extension of American values.
The problems with illegal immigration stem from the US's inability to enforce its own laws. If you have a problem with the legal immigration numbers increase the numbers allowed to come in legally.
There are thousands, possibly tens of thousands, of people patiently, ok. impatiently, waiting for their applications to be processed by the INS/State Department.
Even when approved they have to wait until their name comes up before the yearly country quota is full.
Then, after medical check ups and a police report, they are allowed entry to the US.
Is there anything in the Senate bill giving priority to these poeple.
Does the Senate bill require medical check ups and a police report for those already illegally resident in the US?
Hey this is very nice and informative article. thanks for sharing this and keep posting amazing article like this.Post a Comment
IT Services In Ahmedabad