Bruce Bialosky has a brilliant column today on how to solve the immigration mess. Great, thoughtful ideas that will never, ever be implemented. Why? Because it involves allowing illegals to stay in the U.S. but not being allowed to vote. Ever. Do you know any Democratic representative who would support that kind of legislation? Isn't that kind of their purpose in supporting illegal immigration and amnesty programs? To get more voters?
Bialosky's first priority is, of course, the border must be secured. We all know this. Any comprehensive immigration reform will NOT work unless the border is first secured. The triple fence has clearly worked as indicated by the substantial decline in illegal immigration in Southern California. President Obama put a stop to its construction as soon as he took office. It's time to finish the darned thing!
Also on the list, ban anchor babies. There is nothing in the Constitution that supports giving citizenship to a baby born here to illegal parents. It's a ludicrous policy and no other country in the world does this. Why do we?
Here are Bialosky's other ideas regarding citizenship for those already illegally here. Give them a choice of going to the back of the immigration line or agree to the following:
- They will become citizens in 10 years.
- They will never be able to vote (remember that they came here illegally and have chosen to stay here in an extraordinary fashion, and thus have not earned the right to vote).
- They must maintain both automobile and medical insurance, verified by the INS or a related agency.
- They can receive no governmental benefits – no unemployment, no food stamps, no WIC, and no welfare. If they do not abide by these rules, they forfeit their right to stay here. They can participate in the Social Security and Medicare systems while they are earning their citizenship.
These are common sense measures that would allow those who are already here to work and benefit their families. It would eliminate abuse of our generous system and those who come here simply for the benefits.
An interesting idea, but as I said above, I don't see many liberals agreeing to it ... if any.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Thanks for giving your opinion. Have a nice day. :-)