I have no problem with another amnesty act. Reagan's amnesty act (Disclaimer: I was 14 in 1986) did not destroy the country by ultimately allowing 2.7 million (out of a possible 3 million) become citizens. If the country did not self-destruct at that point, I don't think that (for the sake of argument, I'll use the same 90% ratio for the 690K that are still on DACA) allowing 621K will destroy the country either.
The country didn't "self - destruct", but it did give us a way bigger illegal immigration problem than we had in the 80's, in no small part thanks to the amnesty bill giving hope to incoming illegals that they too might get amnesty down the line.
Like what DACA is
I'm not hearing a realistic solution. However you feel about why they're here or whether they should be here in the first place, they're here. Mass deportation is not a realistic solution and continuing to kick the can down the road won't help matters either. Keeping them in some form of quasi-citizen/economic slave status isn't a viable option.
not_shawn_z posted...
Mal_Fet posted...
ThePyreThatBurns posted... I have no problem with another amnesty act. Reagan's amnesty act (Disclaimer: I was 14 in 1986) did not destroy the country by ultimately allowing 2.7 million (out of a possible 3 million) become citizens. If the country did not self-destruct at that point, I don't think that (for the sake of argument, I'll use the same 90% ratio for the 690K that are still on DACA) allowing 621K will destroy the country either.
It didn't destroy the country but as the above poster said, things did change, and it completely altered the demographic and electorate of california. California never went red again, just a year or two after that passed
And that's a problem?
(Although, if CA employers suddenly have to pay their slave labor force a living wage and health benefits, that might not help the blue cause as much as you think.) ---
As I would not be a slave, so I would not be a master. This expresses my idea of democracy-Abraham Lincoln