What our other readers have said:
Last updated: 12:25 p.m. 05/31/07
US Should use point system, screen immigrants
Yes, the point system, as used in other countries for many years, in which education, job experience, and earnings level are the criteria which have to be met to qualify for entry, would benefit our country. Just because more than half of the citizens in Mexico want to live in the US, does not make it a good idea for our government to ignore the needs of our country, nor the long-term direction of the United States.
The government of Mexico should improve the quality of life in their own country in order to retain its citizens. This also applies to the other poor countries whose citizens come to the US illegally, due to home country corruption, poor economic planning, lack of law and order and a lack of, or poor, public services.
Virginia Coty, Las Cruces, N.M., USA
The importance of family
Families represent the most stable entity in our society, from a financial, emotional, legal, and societal perspective. Any policy that perpetuates their separation and dissolution to the advantage of other entities, such as corporations, ... works to our collective disadvantage as a nation. The "Family Values" this President rode into the White House seem only to apply to his own family. He seems bent upon providing cheap labor at any cost, ... even children and families.
David E Dillman, Berwyn, Pa., USA
Remember JFK's instruction
"And so, my fellow Americans: ask not what your country can do for you - ask what you can do for your country." John F. Kennedy in 1961. Why do we not ask the same of would-be immigrants to the United States? We consider ourselves the land of opportunity, where Horatio Alger is possible, yet we don't reward those who wish to bring their skills to our country and test their mettle on a level playing field.
The simple fact is that immigration in the US and in Europe has become a social safety net for other national governments' destructive and regressive policies, and irresponsible decisions made by individual members in those societies. The US needs more immigration, absolutely, but why should we not ask potential immigrants what they can offer the US, like Canada or New Zealand for instance?
Benjamin Garrett, Charlottesville, Va., USA
Immigrants have always been welcome
My maternal grandfather arrived in this country in 1906 from Moravia in what is now the Czech Republic. It was not until some six years later that he was able to raise enough funds to bring my grandmother and my eldest uncle to this country. Should the Boys of Sudan who have moved to this country be allowed to bring their families? Yes. Should Filipinos who enrolled in our nation's Navy and served this country be allowed to bring their families? Yes. Should Hispanics who work our fields, work in low wage factories, or serve as busboys or cooks be allowed to bring their families? Yes.
"Give (us) your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free..."
Robert Burgess, Stevensville, Mich., USA
Family ties should matter
America has historically devalued family (maternity leave policies, 40 hour week as full time, media, etc.). It would be nice to see us not drop the ball on this one. Family ties should matter, and be given first priority. With family support there is a strong base to have educational support, job skills/training, etc. Have we ever stopped to think that our society was very different when family mattered? At a time when our television shows, home life (mom at home, family taking care of aged grandparents, etc.) were structured differently?
Debronya Jones, Miami, Fla. USA
New bill imposes unfair hardship on mixed families
The bill as it stands currently would cap the number of green cards issued to spouses and children of US Citizens at 87,000 per year - approximately 15 percent of the levels at which they are currently issued. If this means a corresponding backlog in applications processing, then a process that currently takes about 2 years could take as many as 20.
Personally, this means that even though I am a US citizen, have lived most of my life in the US, and payed US taxes for over 10 years, that I would not be able to bring my foreign-born husband to live with me in my home country before our infant daughter is in college.
The hardship this imposes on mixed families like mine is cruel and unwarranted, and certainly does not reflect the treatment that I as a citizen expect from my government.
Sarah Cohen, San Francisco, Calif., USA
US needs more contributors
What is wrong with putting the good of the nation first? We have a shortage of doctors. So bring in more doctors. We have a shortage of engineers. Bring in engineers.
The US government has enough mouths to feed, legal and illegal. So what is the argument about? What this country needs is more people who will contribute to the nation, not to the welfare roles.
Joseph Rich, Dothan, Ala. USA
Citizenship for illegal migrants sends the wrong message
The point system is the only good idea in this new immigration bill, but we should keep it balanced, which means we should give the same weight or points to both education/skills and family ties for immigration.
If there is amnesty with citizenship for the illegals, it will guarantee another illegal immigration explosion. The most effective way is to penalize the employers heavily. Most illegals are good hard-working people. If there are no jobs, they will go home. There will be no need for walls or deportation. When they stay home, they can increase pressure in their own country for a better life.
We should synchronize our immigration policy with our international trade agreements, but granting citizenship to illegals definitely sends the wrong signal to the law-breakers and our own younger generation. They will see how being illegal can be rewarding. If we are not going to enforce the laws, why not keep it status quo and save the precious time for something more critical? For example, how to advance our education?
Our immigration needs corrections, not just action from the politicians. If we cannot enforce the return of guest workers, don't even start the program. We have obesity problems in the country. It's time we get more active and do more work that we need to do ourselves. It may even reduce our health care spending by not hiring illegals.
Jose Card, N.Y, N.Y., USA
Base an immigration bill on a national population policy
We are a superpower in the 21st century competing in a global economic environment. The focus on extended families and low-skilled workers has to change to a focus on bringing in skilled people from countries around the world with national quotas reinstated so no country dominates immigration. The current immigration bill is not "comprehensive," but a rehash of the disastrous 1986 "reform." Congress and the executive branch have long been negligent in enforcing the immigration laws of the country – and already are backing away from the commitment they made last year to build a fence. They cannot be trusted.
Border control and employer sanctions must be fully enacted immediately before there is any discussion of "amnesty" or "guest workers." A truly comprehensive immigration bill must be based on a national population policy that outlines whether we need to increase our population, how we can create the best of lives for our citizens, and what type of immigration is needed to maintain the prosperity of our country and people.
Will Shaw, Rockville, Md., USA
Try for control
I think President Bush said it all in a speech last week. He said he would rather see illegals here with bona fide alien cards than be stuffed in the back of a semi truck and brought over. Sounds to me like he's saying; we can't stop them from coming over, so lets try and control them.
Rocky Wallace, San Antonio, Tex., USA
Immediate family only
Family should include only spouse and children. All other family members should apply individually and stand in line. As for "skilled workers" they also should stand in line, no special priority.
Arthur Van Buskirk, Lenox Township, Pa. USA
Felony a prerequisite?
It's laughable to think that one of the requirements to qualify for a Z visa is to have been working illegally in the US which means using false/forged documents. Just think, committing a felony is a requirement to be eligible for the new visa. CRAZY
Jeff Ewing, Erie, Colo., USA
'Education is no indication of character'
Many immigrants, though not as well educated, have more ambition, more willingness to learn, work harder, have closer family ties, and a greater desire to participate in the democratic process than some of us who have been here for generations. It is precisely the under-educated, disenfranchised of the world that need the opportunities the United States can offer. Education is no indication of character. These people come to America for the same reason our illiterate, poor grandparents came, and these are exactly the kind of people who make America great. If education or job skills were a criteria for immigration in our grandparents time , how many of us would be here today?
Debra Goebel, Bridgeville, Del. USA
Talent vs. skills – and auctioning visas?
I think this is too narrow a range of choices. The US gets over 10,000,000 applications for immigration each year-and legally admits around 1 Million of these(excluding amnesties like one currently proposed).
There is literally no skill that can't be produced somewhere in the world less expensively than the US. That doesn't mean importing people with those skills is a win for the existing US population. Whatever criteria we use, we must take care that these criteria don't drive Americans out of the Bridgeable world economy (as skills-based visas like H-1b have done).
I tend to think that talent-based visas or admitting specially high talent individuals with distinguished careers would be better than skills-based visas. However, in those cases, we'd need to take steps to protect the Americans that occupy those same economic niches. Otherwise, these visa grants are like paying foreigners to displace Americans.
American immigration rights are quite valuable. If green cards were available for auction, they'd sell for between $100,000-300,000 each. That means these should be given out for clear national priorities – and not as a corporate perk. If a foreigner can do something that no American would do for say $225,000, then maybe we should consider a citizenship grant. We could auction off a few visas for those with the ability to pay – and use the proceeds for helping those of urgent need throughout the world.
Overall, I think the American public would be better off with a much lower level of net immigration.
Randall Burns, Washougal, Wash., USA
Why not both?
Whatever happened to "Give me your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, The wretched refuse of your teeming shore. Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"? Uniting families has always been the priority, and for good reason I believe. Why not create an immigration program that both unites families and gives work opportunities to the deserving?
Jennifer Hilton, Santiago, Chile
Welcome workers, but leave extended family at home
Those who have the most to contribute to the US should be the most welcomed in the US. Sure, family is important, but if people really want to be with their parents, siblings, and cousins that badly then they should stay in their home country.
Logan Roubo, Saco, Maine, USA
'Earned, not given'
Citizenship should be earned, not given. Giving amnesty to all illegal aliens that was done under the Reagan administration is not the answer. Lack of enforcement of existing immigration laws over the past 30 years created this threat to our national security. Citizenship must be based on a point system which must include: education, skilled labor, work history, and criminal background to name a few.... We are now part of a global economy which requires all citizens to acquire job skills.
Stephen McCann, Audubon, Pa., USA
Better education is important
The Mexican immigrants in my area of N.C. are dependable, hard workers. They work in building construction jobs, and many other jobs other minorities will not take. Many speak English, and others are studying to learn the English language. Priority must be given to those with an education that allows them to learn the English language, and with job skills that contractors and businesses need.
Charles Gehring, Hampstead, N.C., USA
Narrow the definition of 'family'
I think it would be better to simply rein in the definition of "family" to include only one's own spouse and children, and NOT one's siblings, their spouses, one's parents and in-laws, cousins, ad nauseum. Additionally, children born to illegal immigrants or those only here on temporary visas should not be automatically given US citizenship. Once that happens, then it is almost impossible to send the non-citizen parents back home.
Overall, chain migration allowed to run amok simply limits our nation's ability to have any say over who enters. I should think that the only requirement be that a person is willing and able to work at something, and have some prior work experience doing something useful, and not show signs of intending to go on welfare.
Jean Hess, Knoxville, Tenn., USA
Why not both?
Why has it become an "either this or either that" argument? I think both, qualifications and family ties, should be equally a factor in the path to citizenship. The United States does not give much weight to qualifications therefore including this aspect is a good move. It is certainly not a good move at the expense of lowering the priority of family-based immigration.
Hamood Aleem, San Jose, Calif., USA
