Lawmakers at odds on immigration

WASHINGTON -- With congressional elections on the horizon, lawmakers on Capitol Hill are preparing for a major showdown over immigration reform, an issue that carries an explosive mix of national security concerns, social pressures, and financial realities -- and that has exposed deep regional splits within Congress and the Republican Party.

Hard-liners in the Republican-controlled Congress are insisting that the country tighten its borders and deport all undocumented immigrants with few exceptions. President Bush and business interests want temporary work permits for people from other countries who break the law to fill jobs few Americans want. And Democrats are joining with some Republicans to insist that those immigrants follow paths to legal US residency.

Conservatives Graham and Senator Sam Brownback of Kansas, considered a GOP presidential prospect, indicated they would support a plan that allows undocumented immigrants to gain legal status. They're backing a proposal offered by Kennedy and Senator John McCain, Republican of Arizona, that would allow undocumented immigrants to apply for green cards after six years of good behavior -- provided they also pay back-taxes on their wages and $2,000 in fines

Link

Requires registration, or you could just check out www.bugmenot.com

-------------

My solution to the immigration problem:
1) Abolish income tax
2) Institute a national flat sales tax
3) Grant residency and/or citizenship upon application (exceptions may include known criminals, etc)

This way, even undocumented immigrants are paying their share of taxes.

3) Grant residency and/or citizenship upon application (exceptions may include known criminals, etc) solving the problem, or sticking your head in the sand?

That there are 11 million undocumented workers in this country who are vital to the health of the economy but bear no responsibility, financial or otherwise, toward it?

numbers that are either stolen or belong to dead people.. They pay into social security, and they pay taxes.. They just can't collect social security or get a tax refund.. There are MANY that are paying into SS right now, that will never get the benefit back..

there are 11 million undocumented workers in this country that a) violated our laws to get here, hence are criminals, b)drive down the wages of the American working man. there are no jobs that Americans won't take, only jobs that they won't take at the wages offered by employers who can exploit foreign workers. c)are a drain on the taxpayer, not because of the taxes they don't pay, but becasue of the services they consume. d)refuse to assimilate and try to retain the third-world culture that makes their existence in their own homes such a hell that they flee to the United States, the most imperialistic, war-mongering, callous country on Earth in order to find a better life. Ironic, isn't it.

Just search for "fairtax" here at DU why.

or check out one of the top returns from Google:

http://www.jpfo.org/fairtax.htm

wouldn't a sales tax hurt lower wage workers, and help the wealthy?

benefit the majority, instead of the rich minority?

with a minimum cutoff availuable to those who make barely enough to survive. Not only that, but we need to roll back the tax cuts that Bush set forth, Capital Gains taxes, Estate and Inheretence taxes, etc, need to be restored to the levels before Bush entered office, and more than that, some need to be increased to help offset the HUGE deficit that many of these rich fucks are milking off of.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

to replace the Income Tax supposed to help alleviate illegal immigration, by making being poor at all in this country too damned expensive? You institute this policy and you'll see poor Americans FLEE this country for Canada and/or Mexico really quick. Such an idea is stupidity run amok, why INCREASE taxation on the poor and not the rich?

worse?? Thanks, but no thanks...

It will just confuse him!

Besides which, there is nothing in either the Constitution nor the law that says EVERYONE is to be taxed at the same rate, nor should it be. A poor family living in a Government Housing Project is actually LESS of a burden on the government infrastructure than a CEO for an Oil Company, why should they pay the same tax rate? Also, if the tax is to be implemented, will food be exempt? What about Utilities, big ticket items(Cars), or luxury items? Do you really think that destroying all opportunities to improve our lives in any way, shape, or form is really a good idea?

He didn't say this:

"Do you really think that destroying all opportunities to improve our lives in any way, shape, or form is really a good idea?"

You did.

I don't necessarily agree with his solution either but at least stick to what he proposed and not stoop to bush type rhetoric.

so why not put it on the table to begin with? I mean, its to punish the poor, that much is obvious, and it would also put a damper on many opportunities that people would normally have even under the current, unfair structure, we live under now. Really, with a HUGE, and I do mean huge, increase in sales taxes, even if you don't have to pay for income taxes, no one would be able to start small businesses, as an example. Its punishment for the poor, at least be honest about it, that's all I ask.

Let's be generous here and assume a National Sales Tax at a rate of about 20%, not unheard of, and given our current deficit, it would probably be MUCH higher. But assuming that it replaces the current Federal Income Tax, not Social Security, not Medicare. OK, so a low income worker will save what? About 11% or so in Income taxes, yet have to have their cost of living increase 20% by default. That's no savings, and it also leads to other problems, such as putting people further into debt, making running small businesses become prohibitly expensive, and therefore would also lead to inflation, making the system even worst, I could go on, but its simply a bad policy overall.

I just took issue with your implying that the poster wanted to destroy all opportunities to improve our lives in any way, shape, or form.

I doubt that is their intention even if the policy advocated would result in that.

I was basically asking him if he actually thought through what the cause and effect would be of the policy, call it reverse psychology if you will. Could I have worded it better? Sure, I probably could, but it was a question he has yet to answer, so its a moot point anyways. I have no clue as to whether he actually thought through the consequences of regressive taxation, nor do I know his answer. I'm sure he has the best intentions, but as the saying goes, good intentions are what the road to Hell is paved with.

destroy opportunity, and would make life for many worse than it already is.. I don't see what the problem is.. He didn't put words in anyones mouth, he just asked a question..

"put words" in anyones mouth? Thanks..

edited for clarity

This clearly implys that this is what the poster thinks when the poster never said anything of the sort.

"Do you really think that destroying all opportunities to improve our lives in any way, shape, or form is really a good idea?"

because of all of the downfall comes with it.. It's a question, and a damn good one at that..

on edit- How could one possibly construe that as putting words in ones mouth?

Yup, soak the poor & middle class, let the rich coast. A Flat Sales Tax is even worse than the usual proposal.

Clue: Quite a few "illegals" already pay taxes. Some have fake SS#'s, from which they will never see any return. Everyone pays State and/or Local Sales Tax. Texas has no State Income Tax, so Sales Tax keeps getting higher. And even renters pay Property Tax indirectly--trust me, landlords don't just eat the difference when their tax bill goes up.