From the time of the nation's founding, immigration has been crucial to the United States' growth and a periodic source of conflict. In recent decades, the country has experienced another great wave of immigration, the largest since the 1920s. However, for the first time, illegal immigrants outnumbered legal ones. The number of illegal immigrants peaked at an estimated 11.9 million in 2008. About 11.2 million illegal immigrants were living in the United States in 2010, a number essentially unchanged from the previous year, a 2011 study showed.
Republicans and Democrats have agreed for years on the need for sweeping changes in the federal immigration laws. President George W. Bush for three years pushed for a bipartisan bill before giving up in 2007 after an outcry from voters opposed to any path to legal status for illegal aliens. Since then the issue had in effect been dormant, as both parties were wary of the divisive passions it can arouse. But immigration reform came back to life in April 2010 after the passage of a new Arizona statute that is the nation's toughest on illegal immigration.
On July 28, 2010, one day before the law was to take effect, a federal judge blocked Arizona from enforcing the statute's most controversial provisions, including sections that called for officers to check a person's immigration status while enforcing other laws and that required immigrants to carry their papers at all times.
While Arizona's law was blocked, the center of activity on immigration began to swing toward the states. In the lame-duck session of Congress in late 2010, Democrats put forward legislation that would would allow illegal immigrant students to earn legal status through education or military service. The measure was meant to bolster support among Hispanics, an increasingly important voter group, and in fact, Hispanic support proved crucial in saving some Democrat seats in the midst of a Republican sweep.
It passed the House but was blocked by Republicans in the Senate. And the Republicans given control of the House of Representatives in the 2010 midterm elections do not support an overhaul of immigration laws that President Obama has promised to continue to push.
Legislative leaders in at least half a dozen states have said they will propose bills similar to Arizona's law, and have announced measures to limit access to public colleges and other benefits for illegal immigrants and to punish employers who hire them. And at least five states have agreed on an unusual coordinated effort to cancel automatic United States citizenship for children born in this country to illegal immigrant parents.
Opponents say that effort would be unconstitutional, arguing that the power to grant citizenship resides with the federal government, not with the states. Still, the chances of passing many of these measures appear better than at any time since 2006, when many states, frustrated with inaction in Washington, began proposing initiatives to curb illegal immigration...
http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/subjects/i/immigration-and-emigration/index.html
In a way I agree with senator Ruben Diaz argument, were are their promises. It is easy to promise something but were is the action, both in this article and in the video it is spoken about the ineffectiveness of the federal government plans for the future, since much is being planed little is being done. The effect of this ineffectiveness is clearly seen in the Arizona bill were the state government went over the federal government and passed a set of racial laws specially to Latinos, but like senator Diaz I think it had to happen since this are the things that force the government to take action. Immigration is a serious social and economic situation in one state, it is a problem that affects every one and it is time that the government get their ideas straight and start tacking action.
No comments:
Post a Comment