Legal and illegal immigration are connected. For example, when we hear about some business being prosecuted for hiring illegal immigrants, you have to ask yourself, "How are these illegal immigrants hired and managed?" There must be somebody there in the business, maybe even the owner, who speaks the language of the illegals they are hiring. Either the employer is a legal immigrant, or in all probability, an anchor baby themselves.
Yes, we need to have a moratorium on immigration. But not only that, we need to start cracking down on citizens too. If you are a citizen claiming citizenship because you are an anchor baby, and you are hiring illegals, then you need to be deported. Of course this should follow from putting the legal claims of citizenship made by anchor babies into question and in prosecutions like this, this is a natural place to start throwing them out. Of course, anyone who does not claim citizenship who is hiring illegals needs to be deported.
How many people in this country who falsely claim citizenship do not speak English? Because so many anchor babies have the benefits of a public education, this is where many of them learn to speak English. But it remains that many of them have no cause to speak English and so the skill fades, we hope. And of course we still have illegals from English speaking countries like Canada. If you cannot speak English, you cannot be a citizen and so we have another sound test for real candidates for testing legitimate citizenship.
We need to keep pushing and hammering away at this problem at every possible and conceivable angle. Stopping at legal immigrants is just foolish, it really shows a complete lack of grasp of the problem. I would go so far as to say that you cannot sincerely be opposed to illegal immigration if you do not support confronting legal immigration and even some who claim citizenship. The problem really is that bad and illegal immigration is really just the natural consequence of a failed and profligate immigration practice. It is a "practice", one could hardly call it a "policy", certainly not a government policy.
|