In a few of my previous posts, I have advocated amnesty and a path to citizenship for the existing illegal immigrants living in the United States of America. However, today I came across an article titled "History tells us Amnesty for illegal aliens in destined to fail" that challenges my previous argument in many ways. The article breaks down how amnesty didn't work in the Regan Administration, and how "amnesty means larger government and higher costs". The author also talks about how amnesty encourages illegal immigration by awarding illegal immigrants with rights. Although the article was very informative and persuasive, in the end it offered no alternative to route to improve illegal immigration conditions, which bothered me somewhat.
The illegal immigration issue is interesting because there is no clear cut manner to deal with the issue. It seems that no matter the action taken, there will be minimal benefits with drastic drawbacks. Illegal immigration policy is simply a matter of the "lesser of the evils". Regarding amnesty, I see two outcomes:
1) The illegal immigrants in America are granted amnesty, begin a path to citizenship and become assimilated into American society. Money is lost and illegal immigration continues, but conditions slightly improve on the homeland
2) Amnesty is not granted and conditions remain the same. Money is lost and illegal immigration continues.
While I feel #1 is slightly more constructive, these are the kinds of things legislative bodies have to consider while deciding policies. Should we take a gamble on Amnesty again in hopes of better results? Other than money (which we lose SO much of to the point that it seems worthless anyway) what more do we have to lose?
I like how you acknowledged this article that went against your previous arguments. Though outcome 1 and outcome 2 both don't sound good, I would say option 1 is the road we should take. If we take option 2, nothing really changes. What we have right now obviously isn't working so we have to try something different. Trial and error is the best way to learn right? Money is going to be lost anyway but we are already in so much debt that a little bit more lost won't make much of a difference. Also, if we take the first path, conditions will improve even if only slightly.
ReplyDelete@ beachgirl5892, I agree with you. Like I said, either way we "lose" something, and hopefully if amnesty or a path to legalization is granted things will change this time. Even if it failed during the Reagan Administration, I think it is better to try and fail and fail without trying.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThe potential outcomes regarding the immigration policy are hard to put on a scale to measure to find out which will have the lesser impact, because both "solutions" come with a number of factors and flaws. By granting a pardon to immigrants, is there a specific limit? When should the government change its policy, and Is it possible that the number granted amnesty can become out of hand? In a country that values rights so highly, it is vital that every person who lives within the borders has access to them, but at what cost to the government? It is also very important to look at the money factor to find out how much more would America would lose by granting amnesty. All in all, it is obvious that our current method is not an adequate solution, so a change is for the best. We will never know unless we try. The idea leaves me wondering what other countries grant amnesty and what is the success of the policy in other governments. Great post Mr. Senor!
ReplyDelete