Illegal_Immgration

------------------------------------------------- Spoon Letter Anthology ------------------------------------------------- Short subjects and letters to the local media Monday, July 31, 2006 Alert! Hoards of Illegal Aliens To Vote For Dems!!! When in doubt, when you're a House Republican, play the fear card. With congressional elections just three months away, politicians across the country are hoping to whip up a wave of anti-immigrant sentiment and ride it to victory. Few are pushing this distasteful strategy as hard as John Doolittle, the Republican congressman from Rocklin,[CA]. In a recent e-mail to constituents on his congressional letterhead, Doolittle is conducting what he calls a "poll" on the question, "Should illegal immigrants be allowed to vote in our elections'" This is nothing but scaremongering and electioneering. The question itself is silly, and Doolittle knows it. Of course illegal immigrants should not be allowed to vote, and they are not. There are laws against it and stiff penalties for those who break those laws. And all of the available evidence suggests violations are rare. SacramentoBee.com As reprehensible as this California Congressman's bogus poll is, just watch, within a few days we'll all be inundated with this thing from gullible friends. I'm sure Iowa's Steve King is planning on frowarding Doolittle's e-mail to The Register, and claim it as his own. Economics and labor markets The net flow of illegal immigration pattern is almost entirely from countries of lower socioeconomic levels to countries of higher socioeconomic levels, and particularly from developing countries to developed countries. While there are other causes associated with poorer countries (described below), the most common motivation for illegal immigrants is the pursuit of greater economic opportunities and quality of life in the destination state.[3] Under the basic cost/benefit argument for illegal immigration, potential immigrants believe the probability and benefits of successfully migrating to the destination country are greater than the costs. These costs may include restrictions living as an illegal immigrant in the destination country, leaving family and ways of life behind, and the probability of being caught and resulting sanctions.[4] Proposed economic models, based on a cost/benefit framework, have varying considerations and degrees of complexity. Neoclassical model The neoclassical economic model looks only at the probability of success in immigrating and finding employment, and the increase in real income an illegal immigrant can expect. This explanation would account for the economies of the two states, including how much of a "pull" the destination country has in terms of better-paying jobs and improvements in quality of life. It also describes a "push" that comes from negative conditions in the home country like lack of employment or economic mobility. Neoclassical theory also accounts for the probability of successful illegal emigration. Factors that affect this include as geographic proximity, border enforcement, probability and consequences of arrest, ease of illegal employment, and chances of future legalization.[5] This model concludes that in the destination country, illegal workers tend to add to and compete with the pool of unskilled laborers. Illegal workers in this model are successful in finding employment by being willing to be paid lower wages than native-born workers are, sometimes below the minimum wage. Economist George Borjas supports aspects of this model, calculating that real wages of US workers without a high school degree declined by 9% from 1980-2000 due to competition from illegal immigrant workers.[6] Large scale economic evidence supports neoclassical theory, as may be seen in the long-term correlation of relative wages/unemployment and illegal immigration from Mexico to the US. However, immigration scholars such as Gordon Hanson and Douglas Massey have criticized the model for being oversimplified and not accounting for contradictory evidence, such as low net illegal immigration from Mexico to the US before the 1980s despite significant economic disparity.[5] Numerous refinements have been suggested to account for other factors, as seen below. Trade liberalization In recent years, developing states are pursuing the benefits of globalization by joining decline to liberalize trade. But rapid opening of domestic markets may lead to displacement of large numbers of agricultural or unskilled workers, who are more likely to seek employment and a higher quality of life by illegal emigration. This is a frequently cited argument to explain how the North American Free Trade Association may have impoverished Mexican farmers who were unable to compete with the higher productivity of US subsidized agriculture, especially for corn. NAFTA may have also unexpectedly raised educational requirements for industrial jobs in Mexico, since the new maquiladoras produced export products requiring skills and education that many unskilled workers did not have.[7] Structural demand in developed states Douglas Massey argues that a bifurcating labor market in developed nations creates a structural demand for unskilled immigrant labor to fill undesirable jobs that native-born citizens do not take, regardless of wages.[8] This theory states that postindustrial economies have a widening gap between well-paying, white-collar jobs that require ever higher levels of education and "human capital", which native-born citizens and legal immigrants can qualify to take, and bottom-tier jobs that are stigmatized and require no education. These "underclass" jobs include harvesting crops, unskilled labor in landscaping and construction, house-cleaning, and maid and busboy work in hotels and restaurants, all of which have a disproportionate number of illegal workers. Since the decline of middle-class blue-collar jobs in manufacturing and industry, younger native-born generations have chosen to acquire higher degrees now that there are fewer blue-collar careers that a worker with no formal education can find. The majority of new blue-collar jobs are the "underclass" work mentioned above, which suffer from unreliability (i.e. temporary jobs versus a career in a factory), subservient roles, and, critically, a lack of potential for advancement. At the same time, entry-level white-collar and service jobs are much more appealing. These they offer advancement opportunities for native-born workers to enter the dominant educated class, even if they currently pay the same or less than manual labor does. Hence, this theory holds that in a developed country like the US, where now only 12% of the labor force has less than a high school education, there is a lack of native-born workers who have no choice but to take undesirable manual labor jobs. Illegal immigrants, on the other hand, have much lower levels of education (about 70% of illegal workers in the US from Mexico lack a high school degree).[5] They are still willing to take "underclass" jobs due to their much higher relative wages than those in their home country. Since illegal immigrants often anticipate working only temporarily in the destination country, the lack of opportunity for advancement is less of a problem. Evidence for this can be seen in one Pew Hispanic Center poll of over 3,000 illegal immigrants from Mexico in the US, which found that 79% would voluntarily join a temporary worker program that allowed them to work legally for several years but then required them to leave.[9] The structural demand theory posits that simple willingness to work undesirable jobs, rather than for unusually low wages, is what gives illegal immigrants their employment.[10] Structural demand theory argues that cases like this show that there is no direct competition between unskilled illegal immigrants and native-born workers. This is the concept that illegal immigrants "take jobs that no one else wants". Massey argues that this has certain implications for policy, as it may refute claims that illegal immigrants are "lowering wages" or stealing jobs from native-born workers.[8] Poverty While economic models do look at relative wealth and income between home and destination countries, they do not necessarily imply that illegal migrants are always impoverished by standards of the home country. The poorest classes in a developing country may lack the resources needed to mount an attempt to cross illegally, or the connections to friends or family already in the destination country. Studies from the Pew Hispanic Center have shown that the education and wage levels of illegal Mexican immigrants in the US are around the median for Mexico, and that having family who have emigrated or being from a community with many emigrants is a much better predictor of one's choice to emigrate.[9] Other examples do show that increases in poverty, especially when associated with immediate crises, can increase the likelihood of illegal migration. The 1994 economic crisis in Mexico, subsequent to the start of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) was associated with widespread poverty and a lower valuation for the peso relative to the dollar.[7] It also marked the start of a massive swell in Mexican emigration, in which net illegal migration to the US increased every year from the mid-1990s until the mid 2000s. There are also examples where natural disasters and overpopulation can amplify poverty-driven migration flows.[11] Overpopulation Population growth that exceeds the carrying capacity of an area or environment results in overpopulation.[12] Spikes in human population can cause problems such as pollution, water crisis,[13][14] and poverty.[15][16] World population has grown from 1.6 billion in 1900 to an estimated 6.7 billion today. In Mexico alone, population has grown from 13.6 million in 1900 to 107 million in 2007.[17] In 2000, the United Nations estimated that the world's population was growing at the rate of 1.14% (or about 75 million people) per year. According to data from the CIA's 2005–2006 World Factbooks, the world human population currently increases by 203,800 every day.[18] The United States Census Bureau issued a revised forecast for world population that increased its projection for the year 2050 to above 9.4 billion people, up from 9.1 billion people. We are adding a billion more every 12 years. Almost all growth will take place in the less developed regions.[19] Family reunification Some illegal immigrants seek to live with loved ones, such as a spouse or other family members.[20][21][22] Family reunification visas may be applied for by legal residents or naturalized citizens to bring their family members into a destination state legally, but these visas may be limited in number and subject to yearly quotas. This may force their family members to enter illegally to reunify. From studying Mexican migration patterns, Douglas Massey finds that the likelihood of a Mexican national to emigrate illegally to the US increases dramatically if they have one or more family members already residing in the United States, legally or illegally.[8] Due to inability to marry, same-sex couples in which one member has an expiring visa may face an "unpalatable choice between leaving and living with the person they love in violation of U.S. immigration laws".[23] Wars and asylum Illegal immigration may be prompted by the desire to escape civil war or repression in the country of origin. Non-economic push factors include persecution (religious and otherwise), frequent abuse, bullying, oppression, and genocide, and risks to civilians during war. Political motives traditionally motivate refugee flows - to escape dictatorship for instance. It is important to note that the status of "illegal immigrant" may coincide with or be replaced by the status of "asylum seeker" for emigrants who have escaped a war or repression and have illegal crossed into another state. If they are recognized as "legitimate" asylees by the destination state, they will then gain legal status. However, there may be numerous potential asylees in a destination state who are unwilling to apply or have been denied asylum status, and hence are categorized as "illegal immigrants" and may be subject to punishment or deportation. There are numerous cases of mass emigration from poor or war-stricken states. These include examples from Africa[24][25][dubious – discuss], Colombia, and El Salvador. After decades of armed conflict, roughly one of every 10 Colombians now lives abroad.[26] For example, Colombians emigrating to Spain have "grown exponentially, from a little over 7,000 in 1993 to more than 80,000 in 2002 and 244,000 in 2003."[27] Also, figures from the U.S. Department of Homeland Security indicate that Colombia is the fourth-leading source country of unauthorized immigration to the United States. According to its estimates, the number of unauthorized Colombian residents in the United States almost tripled from 51,000 in 1990 to 141,000 in 2000.[28] According to the US Census Bureau, the number of authorized Colombian immigrants in the United States in 2000[citation needed] was 801,363.[29] Census data are important because, as the Department of Homeland Security states, [U.S.] "census data are more complete and reliable [than INS's data] because of the national scope of the data collection, the vastly larger data sample, and the extensive preparation and follow-up activities involved in conducting the decennial census."[30] Rising health care costs put focus on illegal immigrants Updated 1/22/2008 7:42 AM | By Richard Wolf, USA TODAY BENSON, N.C. — Juan Perez had stomach pains for a month before deciding to visit a health clinic here that is open Thursday nights so migrant farmworkers don't miss a day working in the fields. As an illegal, uninsured immigrant, Perez has had problems in the past — not only with his health, but with navigating the U.S. health care maze. In Michigan, there was no interpreter at his local health clinic, the bills had to be paid in installments, and co-workers warned that a visit to a doctor could lead to deportation. In North Carolina, he's found a health care home at Tiffany Revels' weekly clinic — providing he can hitch a ride there. "The biggest concern is getting sick, because you don't have anyone here," Perez says after Revels, a family nurse practitioner at the federally funded clinic, prescribes two antibiotics and Pepto-Bismol tablets for his bacterial gastritis. "You are here by yourself." As the debate over the residency status of the nation's estimated 12 million illegal immigrants boils, another battle is simmering over what — if any — benefits they deserve while they're here. Some of the most heated arguments on the issue focus on health care. So far, immigrants are losing: •In Texas, where the state comptroller estimates illegal immigrants cost hospitals $1.3 billion in 2006, the University of Texas Medical Branch in Galveston is considering denying cancer care to such immigrants. On a national level, an effort to add legal immigrant children to the State Children's Health Insurance Program was blocked in the Senate last year. Instead, lawmakers added language to ensure that illegal immigrants were excluded. Illegal immigrants can get emergency care through Medicaid, the federal-state program for the poor and people with disabilities. But they can't get non-emergency care unless they pay. They are ineligible for most other public benefits One thing is clear: Undocumented immigrants are driving up the number of people without health insurance. The Pew Hispanic Center estimates that 59% of the nation's illegal immigrants are uninsured, compared with 25% of legal immigrants and 14% of U.S. citizens. Illegal immigrants represent about 15% of the nation's 47 million uninsured people — and about 30% of the increase since 1980. Global Issues Social, Political, Economic and Environmental Issues That Affect Us All Immigration Author and Page information * by Anup Shah * This Page Last Updated Monday, May 26, 2008 * This page: http://www.globalissues.org/article/537/immigration. * To print all information e.g. expanded side notes, shows alternative links, use the print version: * http://www.globalissues.org/print/article/537 Immigration seems to be making more headlines in recent years. As the world globalizes in terms of nations’ economies, trade and investment, borders are opened up more easily for “freer” flow of goods and products. People are supposedly freer to move around the world, too. * Worldwide, there is an estimated 191 million immigrants; * The last 50 years has seen an almost doubling of immigration; * 115 million immigrants live in developed countries; * 20% (approximately 38 million) live in the US alone, making up 13% of its population; * 33% of all immigrants live in Europe; * 75% live in just 28 countries; * Women constitute approximately half of all migrants at around 95 million; * Between 1990 and 2005 * There were 36 million migrations (an average of approximately 2.4 million per year); * 33 million wound up in industrialized countries; * 75% of the increases occurred in just 17 countries; * Immigration decreased in 72 countries in the same period; Sources» A Passage to Hope; Women and International Migration; UNFPA State of the World Population 2006, September 2006, Introduction and Chapter 1 in particular Pros and Cons of International Migration, by Thalif Deen, Inter Press Service (IPS), September 15, 2006 Back to top Why do people emigrate' People emigrate from one country to another for a variety of complex reasons. Some are forced to move, due to conflict or to escape persecution and prejudices, while others may voluntarily emigrate. Although such a move may be necessary, it can be quite traumatic on top of the challenges experienced so far. From another perspective, immigration can also represent an act of courage. For example, Moving to a different country with different culture and norms can be quite daunting; The potential loneliness to be suffered is not always easy to overcome; There may be the additional pressure to earn enough to live (in a more expensive-to-live-in country) and send back meager savings. An economic migrant, a person searching for work, or better opportunities, will be stepping into the unknown—an exciting prospect if the person is already well-to-do, or daunting at least, if out of desperation. As Inter Press Service (IPS) reported, the European Union has recently acknowledged a concern about immigration that has not received much media attention. That is, a large number of people are attempting to leave the devastation of their own country caused by the current form of globalization and other political and economic policies, which, as well as creating winners, is creating a large number of losers, and increasing inequality. Tackling poverty and addressing issues of development and opportunity are important aspects of tackling this type of immigration. Back to top Effects of Immigration Immigration can have positive and negative impacts on both the host (recipient) country, and the original country. The recipient country is usually an industrialized country in Western Europe, or the United States. For these countries, immigrants offer various benefits such as the following: Immigrants will often do jobs that people in the host country will not, or cannot do; Migrant workers often work longer hours and for lower salaries, and while that is controversial, sometimes exploitive, it benefits the host country; Immigrants, when made to feel welcome in the host society, can contribute to the diversity of that society, which can help with tolerance and understanding; For the host country’s economy, immigrants offer an increased talent pool, if they have been well educated in their original country. But there are also numerous drawbacks: Immigrants can be exploited for their cheap labor; Developing countries may suffer “brain drain” as the limited resources they spend in educating their students amount to very little if that talent is enticed to another country. (The UK for example is often accused of actively hiring medical staff from developing countries. The previous link details this issue further.) Immigration can also attract criminal elements, from trafficking in drugs and people to other forms of crime and corruption; Immigration can become a social/political issue, where racism can be used to exploit feelings or as an excuse for current woes of local population; Where there is a perception that immigrants and refugees appear to get more benefits than local poor people, tensions and hostilities can also rise; Concerns about illegal immigration can spill over to ill-feelings towards the majority of immigrants who are law-abiding and contributing to the economy; Many die trying to flee their predicament, and this can often make sensational headlines giving the appearance that immigration is largely illegal and “out of control.” Despite what appears to be large population movements, Gary Younge, from the Guardian noted some time ago that people still are not able to move as freely as commodities. In some places around the world, there are additional restrictions being put up on people’s movements. Back to top United States New York-based Human Rights Watch reports on how the US Immigration and Naturalization Service treat immigration detainees as though they were criminals by putting these otherwise innocent people in jail, indefinitely. US immigration policies, (especially noticeable during the economic boom at the end of the 1990s) are interesting in that they are really designed to bring in immigrants with a certain level and type of education to help enhance the nation, economically. While at first thought this seems reasonable, there are a few ramifications: * A disproportionate representation of that ethnic population becomes part of the American culture; * As a result it affects the stereotypical image of such minorities seemingly in a positive way as always being hard-working but also as only interested in the pursuit of financial gains, for example. * However, a strange twist occurs: * Some politicians use such stereotyped groups to show how other immigrant populations in the US who have been around longer should follow newer immigrant’s examples * Some even using that as a basis to argue for a further cut in social welfare subsidies for example, unfairly blaming such people solely for their economic problems. * So, as an unfortunate example, South Asian Americans are inadvertently looked upon negatively by many in the Black and Latino communities, and vice versa. For more details on this aspect, see for example, Vijay Prashad’s books, The Karma of Brown Folk (University of Minesota Press, 2000) and Everybody was Kung Fu Fighting, (Beacon Press, 2001). Legislature to take up effort in 2011 to bar illegal immigrants from state colleges Saturday, Dec. 11 by Stephen Groves, Virginia Statehouse News | 60 comments | Email this story Virginia’s immigration debate will be flooding onto public college campuses this winter as a bill to ban admission to illegal immigrants comes up for debate in the General Assembly. Del. Chris Peace, R-Mechanicsville, made preliminary plans to introduce legislation this week to make sure people who are in the United States illegally are not admitted to public colleges in Virginia. But a prominent Democratic lawmaker labels it a “solution in search of a problem.” The issue of illegal immigrants and higher education is a hot topic across the nation as Congress debates the Development, Relief and Education for Alien Minors Act (The “DREAM Act”) this week. Several states, such as Georgia, have barred undocumented students from public universities. “There’s wide-spread sentiment that public benefit should not be going to those who are here illegally,” Peace said. Peace said he is sponsoring the bill to ensure taxpayers are receiving the benefits of the tax dollars they pay into the state’s institutions of higher learning. “We’re not trying to be mean-spirited here,” he said. “We’re trying to open our doors to Virginians.” Currently, Virginia’s schools are left to create their own policies for admitting students. In the past, the University of Virginia (UVA) has not enrolled students lacking proper immigration documents. The dean of admissions declined to comment on the policy. But others, like Virginia Tech, do not check students’ immigration status. “We admit students on academic credentials,” said Mark Owczarski, spokesperson for the school. He said they had no way of checking the status of the 20,000 to 25,000 applications the school receives. But students without immigration documents are not eligible for in-state tuition even if they grew up and attended high school in Virginia. Advocates for illegal immigrants say barring them from college is not fair. “The problem with it is you are punishing children for the sins of their parents,” said William LeoGrande, Dean of the School of Public Affairs at American University in Washington, D.C. He also contends that many illegal immigrants pay taxes even if they don’t get credit for it because they are using false Social Security numbers. According to the Tax Foundation, it is difficult to track how much money illegal immigrants pay in taxes, but it is clear that many do contribute through payroll taxes, income tax, corporate income tax, and sales tax. LeoGrande said many illegal immigrants are here for good, and opening the doors of colleges and universities can be a plus. “Allowing people access to higher education is not just a benefit to them, it is a benefit to society,” LeoGrande said. As lawmakers prepare for the 2011 session in January, the debate over immigration will certainly be tense as several bills will bring up questions of law enforcement, public services, and now higher education. “Right now, we’re stuck because the Democrats and Republicans can’t agree on the broader issue of dealing with immigration,” LeoGrande said. Even FOX Business says Illegal Immigrants benefit the economy! News Type: Opinion — Seeded on Mon Jul 12, 2010 10:28 PM EDT Article Source: FOX Business Network In a 2006 study, Texas earned more in taxes than it spent on public services to illegal immigrants. State and local governments spent $1.16 billion to provide services, but raised an estimated $1.58 billion in tax revenues. The Texas taxpayer made a $424.7 million profit on its illegal immigrant population in 2006. Illegal immigrants contribute mostly to state and local through sales and property taxes. A majority of illegal immigrants pay federal, state and local income tax as well. Arizona and Texas' economies and tax policies are similar, suggesting Arizona may also receive net economic and fiscal benefits from illegal immigrants Economic output of illegal immigrants in Texas was estimated at $17.7 billion in additional gross state product in 2005 alone. Experts estimate Arizona benefits from similar revenue and economic gains from its illegal immigrant population because of similar tax structures and proportionate illegal immigrant populations based on state populations. Calls for closing the border and deporting all illegal immigrants – which some extreme anti-immigrant groups have called for in Arizona – would have dramatic negative impacts to state economies. Other sources of information about the positive economic impact of undocumented workers: Americans believe that undocumented immigrants are exploiting the United States' economy. The widespread belief is that illegal aliens cost more in government services than they contribute to the economy. This belief is undeniably false. [E]very empirical study of illegals' economic impact demonstrates the opposite . . .: undocumenteds actually contribute more to public coffers in taxes than they cost in social services. Moreover, undocumented immigrants contribute to the U.S. economy through their investments and consumption of goods and services; filling of millions of essential worker positions resulting in subsidiary job creation, increased productivity and lower costs of goods and services; and unrequited contributions to Social Security, Medicare and unemployment insurance programs. The New York Times Magazine The Immigration Equation By ROGER LOWENSTEIN Published: July 9, 2006 You can find economists to substantiate the position of either chamber, but the consensus of most is that, on balance, immigration is good for the country. Immigrants provide scarce labor, which lowers prices in much the same way global trade does. And overall, the newcomers modestly raise Americans' per capita income. But the impact is unevenly distributed; people with means pay less for taxi rides and household help while the less-affluent command lower wages and probably pay more for rent. The debate among economists is whether low-income workers are hurt a lot or just a little — and over what the answer implies for U.S. policy. If you believe Borjas, the answer is troubling. A policy designed with only Americans' economic well-being in mind would admit far fewer Mexicans, who now account for about 3 in 10 immigrants. Borjas, who emigrated from Cuba in 1962, when he was 12 (and not long after soldiers burst into his family's home and ordered them at gunpoint to stand against a wall), has asserted that the issue, indeed, is "Whom should the United States let in'" Los Angeles Times In the News: Sen. John Ensign obama in L.A. Frank McCourt kings-sharks lakers-hornets Times wins RFK Award for Haiti coverage Readers' Representative Journal A conversation on newsroom ethics and standards April 19, 2011 |  5:40 pm In November 2007, this office addressed an e-mail hoax that was citing The Times as the source for 10 "facts" about immigration: Probably five times a week, the readers' representative office gets a question like this one received recently from Harvey Akeson of Tucson: "Please help me, an e-mail is making the rounds stating the information is from the L.A. Times.  It may or may not be true. Can you verify' Thanks." Such inquiries have come in for more than a year -- most by e-mail, some by telephone. From the beginning, the notes have shown signs of having been forwarded to many others, who then forward them to many others, before one of the recipients decides to check with the alleged source. The answer is: The L.A. Times never ran such a story. Two and a half years later, this office still is receiving this e-mail, several times a week. "If this doesn't open your eyes, nothing will!" the e-mail begins. It continues with these 10 purported facts: 1. 40% of all workers in L.A. County (L.A. County has 10.2 million people) are working for cash and not paying taxes. This is because they are predominantly illegal immigrants working without a green card. 2. 95% of warrants for murder in Los Angeles are for illegal aliens. 3. 75% of people on the most wanted list in Los Angeles are illegal aliens. 4. Over 2/3 of all births in Los Angeles County are to illegal alien Mexicans on Medi-Cal, whose births were paid for by taxpayers. 5. Nearly 35% of all inmates in California detention centers are Mexican nationals here illegally. 6. Over 300,000 illegal aliens in Los Angeles County are living in garages. 7. The FBI reports half of all gang members in Los Angeles are most likely illegal aliens from south of the border. 8. Nearly 60% of all occupants of HUD properties are illegal. 9. 21 radio stations in L.A. are Spanish speaking. 10.  In L.A. County 5.1 million people speak English, 3.9 million speak Spanish. 11. Disadvantage of Illegal immigration 12. Ads by Google 13. Published at Sooper Articles - Find Articles http://www.sooperarticles.com In recent years we have been constantly listening to illegal immigration. It has become a major problem for law enforcement officials and in front of Government of any developed country. In general, illegal immigrants are people who just want a better life. In fact, the victims of chronic unemployment, poverty, oppression and the possibilities down to flee his hometown. Well, there are many difficulties in the immigration process and the rule of law. There can be many disadvantages take place because of illegal immigration. Global Visas Complaints department are listing those as follows: 1. It adds a lot of pressure on financial resources. Sometimes it pays billions of dollars to taxpayers. 2. If the applicant is seeking to enter illegally because he has difficulty in prosecution and justice. 3. Illegal immigrants to get as much discrimination against legal immigrants. 4. On a trip through the desert on the border becomes a high risk of life involved. 5. Those who crosses the borders, encouraging others to do the same, but they do not understand that they will be caught one day and inspire people to lose their lives during this operation. 6. Illegal immigrants are raising unemployment in other countries as they break down jobs deserving citizens. 7. The government will never pay any interest, because the maintenance costs for illegal immigrants. These problems are enough to force him to give a second thought, if he / she are planning for an illegal immigration life. Than their life has already become very unhappy in the world because doing such actions are like hell. People in many countries are already feeling the pain of unemployment, poverty, poor education, low-paying jobs, stress, hunger and many other things because of these intruders. For building their palaces, they are destroying the small houses of innocent people who really deserve. Global Visas Complaints Department dynamically tries to help people by sending these counterfeiters behind the bars. If you do not want your life to be destroyed by these illegal immigrants, complaints about them at Global Visas Complaints department of global visa as soon as you are. . Before they ruin our family, crush them. Illegal immigration in the U.S. is a main concern to the government to the government and it s citizens. This was not a major concern until lately in the past twenty years. There has been an alarming increase of illegal immigrants in the U.S. A debate has arisen over the amount of action that has been exerted on the behalf of the national government to control the amount of illegal immigrants in the country. This debate has brought up a controversial topic about if the national government or the state government should be in charge of controlling illegal immigration. Most of the illegal immigrants at this time are coming from Mexico, which means the bordering states are the major concern. Some of the illegal immigrants are not people that sneak into the country, but rather those that overstay their visa limit. Most of the visas over stays are for work purposes. The most concern at this time is Mexico. Smuggling aliens has become more common every year. The smugglers are willing to go to huge steps to smuggle people across and are escaping before they get caught. Very few are actually caught and the illegal immigrants enter this country and disappear. Some people believe that the state government should have the control to limit their own immigration. This could be positive or negative depending on the case. If the state had control many things would get done that are not getting done by the national government. The citizens of that state would deal with problems and more control would probably be had by the border patrol in those states. Another topic in favor is that the constitution does not say who should be controlling illegal immigration. A few positives of the state controlling illegal immigration are the guaranteed effort put in to control the amount of illegal immigrants that enter their state. They could guarantee more power to the border patrol. Unlike, the national government that does not have much control from all the way in Washington and are not hiring more border control to bring the flood of illegal immigrants under control. Citizens and companies within a state plagued by a high number of illegal immigrants should not have to pay extra taxes and fees to support essential social services provided by the state to the illegal immigrants. This expense should be borne by the federal government as it is the government s responsibility to prevent illegal entrance by anyone into this country. (Daniels 206) Some negatives of the state limiting it s own illegal immigration are because of events that have happened in the past and are happening now. One of these examples are of major factories hiring illegal aliens to work in the factories for less pay. Some government officials were paid off to let illegal immigrants into the country. Along with that this would open a door for prejudices if any state decided as a whole that the majority did not like certain people then they would not be allowed into that state from another country. Other people believe it is better to have the national government in charge of illegal immigration. Since this is an issue effecting the whole country the national government should be the one to handle this problem. The constitution say that any disagreement between the national government and the state sides in favor of the national government. A few positives are that the government has the funding to carry out the plans for border patrol. If the money was given to the states they may not spend all of it on the illegal immigration problem. There are problems with some of the people being allowed over now as cheap labor for factories by big factories paying off state governors and such. If the government did not control the illegal immigrants might over run a state and shut it down economically. A few negatives of the national government involving illegal immigration are the processes it takes for anything to get through with the three branches. If a state were to write a letter to the government requesting more funds to help with the border patrol they would be denied by one of the three at least. Another problem would be that the taxes would be raised in the states where there was the problem of overpopulation due to the great amounts of illegal immigrants. I believe that the government should be in charge of controlling the illegal immigrants in this country. I believe this because there is less chance of corruption to go on due to the many branches of government. They will check each other and determine if this is the best idea. In conclusion, the debate over either the state government or the national government controlling immigration in their states is very controversial. Both sides have their positives and their weaknesses. The best one will end up being the one with the least amount of negatives. Whichever way there needs to be action taken to stop the great increase in illegal immigrants in this country. The movement of people between countries is known as immigration. Immigration is an expression of the right to freedom of movement that is guaranteed by the Constitution as a civil right. Immigration has been taking place since historical times but that of the modern times implies a long-term stay in a non-native country. People of today cross their nation's boundaries in search of better opportunities in education and careers. Many seek a business growth and migrate to foreign country with an intent of making money. People immigrate in search of a new lifestyle, a new experience and an exposure to everything that lies beyond their nation's boundary. Immigration can neither be said as being completely advantageous nor can it be blamed for its cons. Let us look at the pros and cons of immigration. Pros of Immigration At times, immigration becomes a person's need. In case of personal reasons such as shifting a person's family, in case of a marriage with someone staying abroad and in case of family needs to move to another nation, a person is forced to move out of the country. The immigration laws that facilitate the migration of people between the two countries are of great help in such cases. Immigration leads to an exchange of cultural values. It results in an exchange of knowledge and expertise between two nations. Immigration serves as an opportunity to interact with people of other countries. It gives a platform for people from diverse backgrounds to come together and share their views. Immigration brings in new opportunities for the people of different countries. It exposes the people of a nation to the atmosphere of another country that may be very different from one's motherland. Immigration has resulted in gifting the knowledge of one nation to another, thus resulting in the creation of new fields of education and newer career options. Immigration results in an open global market. It gives a global perspective to the social and economic growth of society, thus widening the horizons of the development. Supporters of immigration believe that immigration has the potential of bringing about a global prosperity. Cons of Immigration Crowding is one of the basic disadvantages of immigration. The migration of people from one country to another leads to crowding in one nation. It implies an excessive use of the resources of one nation that may lead to an imbalance of the natural resources. Immigrants may bring in diseases that prevailed in their country. Pathogens, viruses and certain serious infections have a chance of being transferred between countries through the immigrants. To reduce the risk of such transfer of diseases, many nations have started carrying out a screening of immigrants on their arrival. Reportedly, AIDS was transferred to the United States in 1969 through one infected immigrant from Haiti. Those opposing immigration argue that the jobs and the wealth of a nation are its property and that allowing immigration implies the distribution of this property among the non-natives. Immigration implies the distribution of a nation's wealth to those who do not have a right on it. The costs incurred in the provision of resources such as education and health facilities to the immigrants are a burden on the nation that hosts immigrants in large numbers. Critics say that the economic growth brought about by immigration is nullified by the costs that the nation's government has to bear in providing the immigrants with the resources. Less educated immigrants are believed to increase theft, violence and other malpractices in a nation. The different kinds of people that migrate across national boundaries may put the nations' security at stake. Illegal immigration that has emerged in some parts of the world has proven being a curse to the nations' economy and their social welfare. Ethics opposes immigration on grounds on brain drain that results from it. What some call an exchange of expertise between nations can also be seen as a drain of knowledge from one country to another. When a nation loses its people to another nation, it also loses its talents. A poor country might end up donating its educated minority to other richer countries, thus suffering from a severe loss. Thus we see that while immigration can lead to an opportunity for a blend of cultures, it can also lead to an imbalance in the natural wealth. Moreover, can patriotism be transferred' For hundreds of years people from all over the world have fled to America from their native lands in hopes of finding a better life here. After all America is a country that takes great pride in our freedom and accomplishments. Who wouldn’t want to live in such a great nation that seeks life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness for everyone' And that is just what happens. America is viewed as a “melting pot” and a nation of immigrants, but is this truly the American identity' Columnist Ben Wattenburg gives one such label; he claims that the United States is “the first universal nation”. He goes on to say, “In America, we now come from everywhere, becoming one people, getting along pretty well with each other, and vastly enriched by our pluralism”. This approach is quite valid, but can this country go on allowing millions each year, who knock on the door or simply sneak in, to stay forever' When immigration is so deeply rooted in our heritage, how can we refuse individuals the same right and privileges that our ancestors sought years ago when they arrived on this land' America can for the same reason any other nation can. After all, are not all nations “nations of immigrants”' That after hundreds and thousands of years, they were shaped to be the countries they are today. Yet because America is a fairly new country, and has not had the convenience of such a gradual process, she is seen as hypocritical for refusing any such individuals. We can write a Custom Essay on Immigration for you! The United States may have such a history and immigration should not cease over all, but when the U.S. Census estimated in 2000 that 8.7 million unauthorized immigrants are living within our borders, America’s immigration policies are in dire need of revising. The numbers of unauthorized immigrants are short of those that are let in legally each year. Although immigration may contribute positive aspects to society, it also has many downfalls. Immigration puts a strain on our economic system, environment and resources, and our culture. One of the most significant factors of immigration is our overall welfare and safety within the country; which seem to be taken away on September 11th. With the seemingly infinite number of immigrants coming to America to escape the political instability, civil war, and poverty of their homelands, immigration has become one of the most heavily debated issues in the modern world. On the receiving end, the government has been forced to change the existing laws as well as create new ones where none were present in the past. In recent years, admittance was based on family reunification and work-related circumstances, but these qualifications are criticized for the lack of attention of the country’s economic well-being. Most migrants seek to live here to better their material circumstances. Their lives are not endangered in their country, but they are at a disadvantage of living in a poor economic society. Is it the United States duty as a country to provide a safe haven for these individuals merely because they were at a disadvantage from where they originated' As a country, there are enough problems internally without worrying about the well-being of outsiders. Peter Brimelow emphasizes “our moral obligations to our fellow citizens take precedence over those to others. Receiving immigrants is in any case, a hopelessly ineffective way of using our wealth to help people; it can help only a small number of people, and at the cost of overwhelming the very economic system which is producing that wealth in the first place”. Many countries do not desire to welcome newcomers. This is often due to economic reasons. Individuals fear that the migrants may take away job opportunities that word otherwise be theirs. Most incoming aliens will work for lower wages and also in poorer working conditions. Welfare is also taken into consideration. Taxpayers are not willing to pay for poor newcomers. With open immigration policies, Americans are freely helping unauthorized illegal individuals to obtain the benefits for which citizens have worked so hard to acquire. Illegal aliens may receive the same health benefits and a free public education as native- born citizens. Taxpayers are even paying for illegal aliens to attend college. In 2001 the California legislature passed a bill allowing illegal immigrants to pay the same in-state tuition as legal residents. In addition to the United States economic welfare, immigration also alters the country’s way of life and the surrounding environment. The average immigrant today is not as skilled or as well educated as those newcomers in the past. The country should attempt to attract those that will benefit society instead of leaving a burden. America honors diversity, but how much is too much' Immigration tends to overshadow common values and ideals that Americans share. Not to mention a common language and government. The nation needs to focus less on diversity and more on the values that it takes pride in and which the country was founded on. Recent immigrants are persistent in holding on to their ethnic identity. This creates a problem for assimilation and American to find a common culture. Roy Beck believes the way of “the American people” may worsen with the addition of outsiders. Beck considers “High immigration tends to lengthen travel time; increase in air pollution; add pressures to already vulnerable resources; lower quality of schools; diminishes social cohesiveness, decreasing public safety, and generally changing the ambience and lifestyle. It is quite foolish to allow entry to those from other countries when the economy is low and resources are overwhelmed as it is. With the growth of the population, the environment also stands as one of the most prominent issues especially in developed countries. The earth does not contain an infinite amount of resources. Immigrants contribute to even more pollution. They take away land from plants and animals, pollute the air and water, and use up the already limited natural resources. Beck states “immigration makes every bad environmental situation worse”. The lenient immigration policies of the United States pose the greatest problem to our national security. On September 11th the nation witnessed this first hand. Afterward, many Americans failed to feel safe and secure in their own homes. Because of our poorly written laws, the country assisted in the terrorist attacks. Those terrorists found no resistance entering the country and took advantage of weak system. Our government failed to keep track of the individuals for the duration of their stay as they plotted the attack on our soil. In 2000 there were more than 100,000 individuals from the Middle East, where the terrorists originated, living illegally in the U.S. These numbers do not include the more than two million people who overstay their visas each year. The Canadian border extends over four thousand miles, for which there are, three hundred patrols. Of these three hundred patrols, there is rarely any coverage after midnight. When entering into the country, the records of the individuals coming in are rarely checked to see if they are possible terrorists. More so, airport security companies have not upheld their duties in doing background checks either. Those terrorists on the flights of September 11th are required by Federal Law to be citizens, but the screeners at the airport were not diligent in doing their job and the planes were hijacked as a result. The Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) was created to regulate immigration. The INS is largely at fault for the easy access that the terrorists obtained in the attacks. They allowed each one of the terrorists to receive legal visas and failed to deport them after their visas had expired. None of the applications for the visas were checked appropriately. Many of which were missing vital information in the process for obtaining such a visa. The country has had to suffer because of the carelessness of such agencies. The location and the intention of the individuals entering the country should be monitored at all times. After the expiration of the visa, such an individual should be immediately deported. Overall the current immigration policies do not fulfill their basic tasks in regulating immigration. There is no clear outline of who shall be admitted as immigrants, who shall stay temporary, and who will have no access at all. It is hard to say to what to what extent our nation is responsible for the different policies of immigration, but one such model by Hardin may pose some questions. Hardin says the world is made of “lifeboats” at sea. A lifeboat represents America with fifty people with the capacity of sixty. One hundred swimmers from other boats want to enter the American boat, but obviously it is not possible. What should America do' They may choose “complete justice, complete catastrophe” and fairly allow all onboard, and the boat sinks, “moral dilemma” allow ten onboard, but which ten do they choose, or “situational ethics” allow no one on board, maintain comfort of original fifty because they did not put the swimmers out there in the first place. This is the dilemma the U.S. faces daily with their approach to immigration. America represents a land of freedom and equality, but to what extent are they obligated to share these aspects with the rest of the world' It is not possible to give it to other countries, nor is it possible for all those who want to be associated with these to come here either. High immigration brings a lot of strife to our country, even though it may have advantages also. No matter the circumstance, the policies of immigration are far too lenient and are frequently take advantage of. The country not only has the problem of those waiting for legal citizenship, but also those that have crossed the border illegally or taken advantage of their expired visas. This country allows too many individuals who are not qualified to live here. As a result it has placed a strain on our environment, the economy, and to some extent our overall well being. And there is a clear danger of our national security. The overall level of immigration needs to reduced a great deal. Immigration to the United States is basically a movement of the non-residents that has been helping in stabilizing US population since 16th century . However in 21st century it has caused economic , social and political controversies in the nation . According to analysts there are about 10-12 million illegal immigrants living in US and about 500 ,000 more add up to this alien population every year (fairus .org , 2007 . The illegal immigrants bring many problems for the citizens . Weissinger (2007 ) has pointed out that taxpayers have to bear the costs in education , emergency medical care and crime for illegal immigrants because most of them have false US documents . It is believed that American taxpayers every year pay about US 45 billion in taxes due to illegal immigrants . However there are others who argue that the controversy is proving tough for immigrants . The New York times (2007 )has mentioned that ``immigrant advocacy groups may be right in fearing that new naturalization exam from US Citizenship and Immigration Services will be too hard .The politicians have their own views about illegal immigrants . For example the Marion city Mayor John Neiland wants `` to rid his town of illegal immigrants , and is asking other cities in eastern Iowa to join him . The reason he mentioned is that illegal immigrants are taking jobs from the city middle class (Times Republican , 2007 . The Virginia House of Delegates approved a proposal to strip charities and other organization to stop support for illegal immigrants . The Attorney General Robert F . McDonnell is pushing for tougher laws related to illegal immigrants (Para pundit , 2007 . On the other side President Bush is reserved about illegal immigration issue . The New York Times editorial (2006 ) has pointed out that President Bush is `` realist on immigration issue . The Tribune Chronicle (2007 ) has pointed out that President Bush wants to ``make it easier for those who broke our laws to get into the United States to become American citizens . The immigration is an issue which will haunt the American nation for a long time and it will take time to overcome this issue .