The US Senate passed a bill that outlined key changes in the debate about immigration. The primary focus of the bill was securing the border. In fact, none of the changes that offer a path to citizenship will take place unless the "border is secured." The border will be considered secure if 90% of the people trying to cross are caught or turned back. If these thresholds are met, then there is a path to citizenship. This path includes requirements such as being in the US before 2011, a $500 fine and a 10 year "provisional status" after which people can apply for permanent status and pay another $1,000 fine. There are also special programs to bring in both high skilled and low skilled workers, as well as a requirement that all employers use an electronic verification system to ensure that workers are documented. However, the House has not supported this bill. Why would members of the House not support this? Do you think the border can be 90% secure, really the question is how reasonable are the requirements in this bill?
Friday, October 18, 2013
The US Senate passed a bill that outlined key changes in the debate about immigration. The primary focus of the bill was securing the border. In fact, none of the changes that offer a path to citizenship will take place unless the "border is secured." The border will be considered secure if 90% of the people trying to cross are caught or turned back. If these thresholds are met, then there is a path to citizenship. This path includes requirements such as being in the US before 2011, a $500 fine and a 10 year "provisional status" after which people can apply for permanent status and pay another $1,000 fine. There are also special programs to bring in both high skilled and low skilled workers, as well as a requirement that all employers use an electronic verification system to ensure that workers are documented. However, the House has not supported this bill. Why would members of the House not support this? Do you think the border can be 90% secure, really the question is how reasonable are the requirements in this bill?
Governor Jerry Brown signed a bill, which allows immigrants in the country illegally to obtain a California driver's license. Immigrant supporters have asked for the change so immigrants could drive without fear of being pulled over for a ticket, which could cause them to be deported. The licenses will carry a special designation on the front and a notice that says the document is not federal identification and cannot be used to prove eligibility for work or public benefits. Ten other states have passed measures to allow immigrants in the US illegally to receive driver's licenses. These actions reflect the growing support for immigration reform across the country, especially in states that have large undocumented populations. While this law does not change the status of many immigrants, it is a step out of the shadows similar to what the 1986 Immigration Reform Act did for many immigrants that were here before 1982. Do you think this will have a major impact on immigrants' lives? Do you think most Californians support this law, why or why not?
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)