Prof: Dr Taylor
October 17th 2013
America’s immigration dilemma
Illegal immigration has always been at the forefront when it comes to the domestic policy issues that this country faces and it has divided the nation from deep patriotic Americans to those that have emigrated to the U.S and call it home; all the way to the halls of Capitol Hill along the political lines. The question that is on everyone’s mind is what to do with the millions of undocumented immigrants already settled here for years, mass deportation that would result in breaking up families or do we grant them amnesty and a path to legalization? Many presidents have come along and were not able to ...view middle of the document...
(Smith,2013).Many experts have various views on the economic benefits of immigration reform especially when it comes to tighter border control versus a looser and less restrictive work visa program, Peter Dixon and Maureen Rimmer estimate that annually U.S households lose about 80 billion dollars due to the effects of tighter border control as compared to an annual gain of 180 billion dollars as a result of a good visa entry program. (Matthews, R. B., Robertson, T. J., & Griffin, M, 2013).
For most of its history, the United States had the loosest sorts of border control (Alden,2008) and it wasn’t until the 1980’s with the rise of illegal immigration from Mexico that a slow change began to take effect when it came to border control.(Alden,2008). Immigration reform in the United States has always been a source of heavy division amongst the population and amongst the politicians in Capitol Hill and numerous Presidents. In July 1998, the U.S. Senate approved on a 68-31 vote the Agricultural Job Opportunity Benefits and Security Act of 1998, or AgJOBS program, which would have created a new guest worker program for farm workers. The House did not act (Martin, 2000). In 2001, US President George W. Bush and Mexican President Vicente Fox wanted immigration reform but were unable to get it through Congress. The events of 11 September 2001 halted this effort, and it could not be revived in Bush’s second term. In 2006 the House of Representatives passed that Border Protection, Anti-terrorism, and Illegal Immigration Control Act of 2005, and the Senate passed the Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act, but the two houses were unable to reconcile their differences. In 2008 President Barack Obama promised immigration reform but has yet to deliver. Meanwhile, certain states have taken action to strengthen enforcement of existing immigration laws, triggering litigation o The Arizona law has been upheld in part and denied in part. The U.S Supreme court has decided to uphold one of four provisions of the controversial and what some describe as anti-immigration bill as constitutional and has deemed the other three provisions to be unconstitutional. The “show me papers” provision allows local authorities the power to ask for the immigration status of those that they stop, something that only federal authorities had the power to do previously (National Journal Daily, 2012).Some scholars and experts have condemned the Arizona immigration bill as racist, unconstitutional, backwards and unhelpful towards true progress in immigration reform, whereas in contrast, supporters of the bill see it as a response to the federal government’s inaction over the years on drafting a comprehensive immigration reform bill that would tackle the growing illegal immigration problem in this country and specifically in the border States such as Arizona, Texas and California, States that are crippled with crime and drug trafficking that many see as a result of weak border security,...