Quote:
Originally Posted by KSig RC
Well . . . the majority of people would rather go through the arduous, expensive and dangerous process of crossing illegally instead of using the established legal process. That pretty much indicates the legal process is broken, by definition - it clearly is not working in the intended fashion.
It seems pretty clear there has to be a better way. Whether or not the process is "wrong" is irrelevant at that point (indeed, it seems that immigration policy was intended for European/Asian immigration and educational opportunity, and not low-income immigration).
As far as what needs fixing, it seems similarly clear that there are two fundamental angles of attack that need to form the basis of any reform:
1 - End the system of employers essentially enforcing immigration policy by proxy - employers have no incentive to enforce, and actually have disincentive (cheap labor, tax burden, etc.).
2 - Shift the risk/reward axis to give better incentive to legal entry rather than illegal entry, whether that is by establishing a new, "temporary worker working toward citizenship" class or whatever other method.
|
being illegal is a quick fix. can it be streamlined? likely. can a lot of red tape be removed? likely.
but no matter how short you make it, coming here illegally will always be easier and quicker. we can wax philosophical on what exactly about the process needs to be changed, but the fact of the matter is that many people would rather cross the rio grande than file the paper work.
Threaded Mode
