Immigration and the Constitution Party

[Sojourner]

Here's the [url="http://www.constitutionparty.com/party_platform.php#Immigration"]Constitution Party's platform position on immigration[/url].

Now, in the Open Mic thread, there were two responses to my post that this is a ridiculous position on immigration:
[quote name='Socrates' date='Oct 1 2005, 07:22 PM']What's wrong with it?

I've really seen nothing in the party's principle's I seriously disgree with.  (though I admit I haven't really done a whole lot of research).
I think they're more the way the Republican Party SHOULD be.

I remember some "traditionalists" were opposed to them because they were against state lotteries.  I found that odd (the Trad opposition that is).

But then again, I get the idea I'm generally to the right of almost everyone on phatmass, except popestpiusx.
[right][snapback]743272[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

[quote name='SarahB' date='Oct 1 2005, 07:36 PM']Personally, I don't see a whole lot wrong with the Constitution Party's stance on immigration. Why should we give anmesty to illegal aliens? They've come here.....illegally. Why should immigrants, legal or illegal, get all kinds of benefits when poor Americans can't? Why should we allow a million new people to come into this country every year when we can't even take care of the ones we have here? Etc, etc.

I fail to see how any of this is off-base or poorly thought out. Just my opinion, though.
[right][snapback]743280[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
Since you're both asking basically the same thing, I figured we might as well all get cozy in one big happy post. Where to start, where to start ...

Perhaps, as with any good conversation, we should start with definitions.

So I'm curious, what exactly is an "illegal immigrant"? While an obvious definition might be, "People in the U.S. who are not in possession of proper documentation," there's really much, much more to the question. One big gray area, of course, has to do with the children of undocumented parents. Or, let's take the case of a girl I interviewed not too long ago for a story. Elena moved to the U.S. from Ecuador after her mother died. Her father was nowhere to be found, so her mother's sister -- a legally documented U.S. resident -- took Elena in when Elena was 9 years old. Unfortunately, Elena's aunt and uncle never formally adopted her -- they had legal guardianship, but didn't see any reason to adopt her. Now she's 21 (or maybe 22 now) and as it happens she's without proper documentation -- and getting it is going to be a long, arduous process, if she can get it at all. So you've got a girl who spent the majority of her formative years in the U.S., attended a U.S. school, and for all intents and purposes IS AMERICAN -- but technically she's not. She is just one of millions of kids in similar situations. Do we just send them all back "home"?

I've got more, but let's discuss this ... ooo, yeah, and Sarah, I'm simply [i]dying[/i] to know exactly what benefits immigrants, legal or illegal, are getting that poor Americans can't get.

And one more fun little resource, for those interested in a Constitutional analysis of this topic by a solid Catholic lawyer: [url="http://www.mirrorofjustice.com/mirrorofjustice/scaperlanda/whoismyneighbor.pdf"]Who is my neighbor?[/url]
It's long, and a tad scholarly, but gosh, I just like Michael Scaperlanda an awful lot and he's always got interesting stuff to bring to the table. Happy reading!

[ardillacid]

So you basically believe in open borders then, sojourner?

[ardillacid]

I have an idea, let's just forget about borders totally, I mean who really needs to have seperate countries anyway, we can all get along as one happy family

[Sojourner]

[quote name='ardillacid' date='Oct 1 2005, 11:54 PM']So you basically believe in open borders then, sojourner?
[right][snapback]743405[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
Did you actually read my post? I find that's often helpful when there's a discussion.

[Sojourner]

[quote name='ardillacid' date='Oct 2 2005, 12:30 AM']I have an idea, let's just forget about borders totally, I mean who really needs to have seperate countries anyway, we can all get along as one happy  family
[right][snapback]743426[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
Sarcasm ... such a constructive debate tool.




If you've got something of substance to add to the discussion, I'd love to see it. Right now, I'm hoping to come up with a working definition of who, exactly, we're talking about.

[PadrePioOfPietrelcino]

[quote name='Sojourner' date='Oct 1 2005, 08:57 PM']So I'm curious, what exactly is an "illegal immigrant"? While an obvious definition might be, "People in the U.S. who are not in possession of proper documentation," there's really much, much more to the question. One big gray area, of course, has to do with the children of undocumented parents. Or, let's take the case of a girl I interviewed not too long ago for a story. Elena moved to the U.S. from Ecuador after her mother died. Her father was nowhere to be found, so her mother's sister -- a legally documented U.S. resident -- took Elena in when Elena was 9 years old. Unfortunately, Elena's aunt and uncle never formally adopted her -- they had legal guardianship, but didn't see any reason to adopt her. Now she's 21 (or maybe 22 now) and as it happens she's without proper documentation -- and getting it is going to be a long, arduous process, if she can get it at all. So you've got a girl who spent the majority of her formative years in the U.S., attended a U.S. school, and for all intents and purposes IS AMERICAN -- but technically she's not. She is just one of millions of kids in similar situations. Do we just send them all back "home"?
[/quote]

I don't think that this particular case is one which is necessarly a case of the norm. Are there really Millions of kids in the united states who are under the legal guardianship of aunts, or uncle (probably grand parents too.) Who do not have proper pares? While I feel sympathetic to this case I do have some questions. If the Aunt and Uncle had decided to pursue registering Elena as a legal immegrant would she have been granted the papers? probably, so she would fall under a different class than most illegal imegrants, IMOHO. The point still does stand however that Illegal immegrants do place a burden on Taxpayers. While those taxpayers may feel that is is a good cause to help people outside of our borders obtain a better life, we have an obligation as well to those within our borders currently first. What about those in Appalacia who live in rusting old school busses? There are issues which we need to be able to address, like the United States impacts in the era of Globalization which leads to the poor conditions which people are trying to flee from.

[Socrates]

I'd agree the Constitution Party's complete moratorium on immigration thing might be a bit extreme, but we definitely should cut back immigration drastically, and should crack down on illegal immigration.

A country can only absorb so many foreigners at a time without losing its national identity. There are too many people living and working here who hate America, and don't identify themselves as Americans. This leads to a "Balkanized" America. Corporations exploit cheap illegal immigrant labor, which takes jobs away from Americans.

I'm not saying all immigration is bad, but there needs to be firmer rules and limits, like there was in the past.

[ardillacid]

[quote name='Sojourner' date='Oct 2 2005, 06:10 AM']Did you actually read my post? I find that's often helpful when there's a discussion.
[right][snapback]743545[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

All you say in your long post is that you disagree with the constitution party and you don't know the definition of "illegal immigration." You seem to take the side of the illegal immigrants, so i assume you favor open borders Where did i misunderstand you?

[Sojourner]

[quote name='PadrePioOfPietrelcino' date='Oct 2 2005, 02:30 PM']I don't think that this particular case is one which is necessarly a case of the norm. Are there really Millions of kids in the united states who are under the legal guardianship of aunts, or uncle (probably grand parents too.) Who do not have proper pares? While I feel sympathetic to this case I do have some questions. If the Aunt and Uncle had decided to pursue registering Elena as a legal immegrant would she have been granted the papers? probably, so she would fall under a different class than most illegal imegrants, IMOHO. The point still does stand however that Illegal immegrants do place a burden on Taxpayers. While those taxpayers may feel that is is a good cause to help people outside of our borders obtain a better life, we have an obligation as well to those within our borders currently first. What about those in Appalacia who live in rusting old school busses? There are issues which we need to be able to address, like the United States impacts in the era of Globalization which leads to the poor conditions which people are trying to flee from.
[right][snapback]743809[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
When I said “similar” I didn’t mean “identical.” There are, undeniably, millions of children who came to the U.S. as minors with their parents who came in as undocumented immigrants. Visit the [url="http://www.nilc.org/"]National Immigration Law Center[/url] if you’d care for more information. There’s so much there that I simply don’t have time to highlight all the relevant info ... you might pay particular attention to the DREAM Act section for info on this particular topic. I’d also encourage you to browse through the employment section of this site ... there are some interesting statistics about immigrant workers. I’d call particular attention to the paper on the role of Mexican immigrants in the growth of the U.S. economy.

And, I’ll point out that many, many, many of these workers are doing so using fake Social Security Numbers. What does this mean? It means they’re:
· paying taxes
· paying Medicaid
· paying Social Security
· into a system they can’t benefit from.

Who’s benefiting from who here? I’ve talked to people in this situation. When their landlords or employers or others screw them over, they’re scared to call the police, scared to go to court, because maybe they’ll get deported. How do we not have a responsibility to these people? How are they not our neighbors? How is it that people in Appalachia should rank higher in our priorities simply by right of birth? I don’t read anywhere in Scripture or church tradition that we should first find out people’s citizenship before we give them aid.

Now, before anyone gets all apoplectic on me, I do realize the burden that immigration places on society. We’ve been dealing with that in Indiana for a number of years now, and I know the same is true for other states. Hospitals, police, courts, BMV, businesses, schools, and on and on have all been reeling under the massive influx we’ve had in terms of immigrants. Here, it’s hit big towns and small – some counties have seen increases upwards of 500 percent. It’s been tough, and it’s cost people lots of money. But, let’s not forget that those same taxpayers who are paying more tax-wise to supplement the system are the same people who own stores patronized by immigrants, or who own housing leased by immigrants, and on and on.

In this particular case I outlined above, Elena would have been granted legal status had her aunt and uncle adopted her before, I believe, she turned 16. They didn’t know, and now it’s too late.

[Sojourner]

[quote name='ardillacid' date='Oct 3 2005, 12:37 PM']All you say in your long post is that you disagree with the constitution party and you don't know the definition of "illegal immigration." You seem to take the side of the illegal immigrants, so i assume you favor open borders Where did i misunderstand you?
[right][snapback]744585[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
Actually, I asked for a discussion about the definition of "illegal immigrant." When we're having a discussion about "illegal immigrants" it's helpful to know from the get-go that we're all talking about the same thing ...

Then, in my next post, I got on a massive soap box. silly me

[Sojourner]

[quote name='Socrates' date='Oct 2 2005, 05:51 PM']I'd agree the Constitution Party's complete moratorium on immigration thing might be a bit extreme, but we definitely should cut back immigration drastically, and should crack down on illegal immigration. 

A country can only absorb so many foreigners at a time without losing its national identity.  There are too many people living and working here who hate America, and don't identify themselves as Americans.  This leads to a "Balkanized" America. Corporations exploit cheap illegal immigrant labor, which takes jobs away from Americans.

I'm not saying all immigration is bad, but there needs to be firmer rules and limits, like there was in the past.
[right][snapback]743945[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
OK, so when you say "crack down on illegal immigration" what do you mean? Who falls into this category?

And, from a logistical standpoint, how do you do this? At what point does the taxpayer actually [i]lose[/i] by stemming the tide of immigrants?

[Sojourner]

Oh, and Michael Scaperlanda has another fascinating (and shorter) article on this topic, comparing the rights of the immigrant in our country to the rights of the unborn ... great reading, for those so inclined:

[url="http://www.uffl.org/vol%209/scaperlanda9.pdf"]Membership: Reflections on Abortion and Immigration[/url]

[Carrie]

[quote name='Socrates' date='Oct 2 2005, 07:51 PM']A country can only absorb so many foreigners at a time without losing its national identity.
[right][snapback]743945[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
Don't we identify ourselves as a nation by our diversity?

[Sojourner]

[quote name='Carrie' date='Oct 3 2005, 01:12 PM']Don't we identify ourselves as a nation by our diversity?
[right][snapback]744622[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
Oh, yeah, I meant to make that point too ... it got lost in revision.

[Socrates]

[quote name='Carrie' date='Oct 3 2005, 01:12 PM']Don't we identify ourselves as a nation by our diversity?
[right][snapback]744622[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

In a word, no.

This may be how you (and politically correct "multi-cultural" liberals) view our national identify, but it's not how I identify America, nor was it how America's founder's identified it!

You will find absolutely nothing in the U.S. Constitution or any of the founding documents identifying "diversity" as a founding principle of our nation! (Nor will you find anything identifying "diversity" as a national principle until around the mid-twentieth century.)
(If anything, historically, America has erred towards xenophobia more than to an active promotion of "diversity," but that's another debate topic.)

In the past times of heavy immigration from Europe in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, immigrants were agressively "Americanized." They had to be learn English as well as American history, and express loyalty to American ideals. Some may disagree with this practice, but this is historical fact.
And numbers of immigrants were proportionately lower than today, and they were mostly from European Christian countries.

An unchecked influx of people from another culture will vastly erode or change the original culture. This is a simple fact, not a value judgment.
I am not arguing that all immigration is bad, but simply that there should be stronger limits on it, and especially that illegal immigration be cracked down on.

"Diversity" is not a fundamental American principle, nor is it an unqualified good in itself. "Diversity" has become an almost meaningless liberal buzzword, used to promote everything from unchecked immigration, to affirmative action programs, to "gay rights." (And God forbid that anyone oppose "diversity"!)

I realize people will attack me falsely as being racist or xenophobic, but my point is that immigration should have limits, not that all immigrants are "bad."
While I am open to intelligent arguments against my position, appealing to "diversity" will carry absolutely no weight with me! I am not a "multi-culturalist."

Edited October 4, 2005 by Socrates