Fighting For An immigration Reform

Miriam Duran
English 102
Yvonne Warner
7 November 2015

The Fight for an Immigration Reform

It is estimated that there are about 10 million illegal immigrants living in the United States (ibtimes). According to a GOP poll only 65% of Americans agree that an immigration reform would solve this problem (ibtimes). The issue of whether or not there should be an immigration reform has been a very controversial topic for a very long time. Although not all Americans believe in a reform, there are also those who believe an immigration reform would be an essential part of America's culture. Those against an immigration reform can maybe have a better understanding of how important it is to come to an agreement. If only they could understand the millions of stories of hard working immigrants that are only here because they want to make better lives for their families. Throughout this research paper different points of views and options on an immigration reform will be discussed. Fighting for an immigration reform will not only benefit those seeking a reform but is a controversial issue that is important to everyone living in the United States.

"The U.S. government has attempted for more than two decades to put a stop to unauthorized immigration from and through Mexico City by implementing " enforcement only" measures along the U.S. Mexico border and at work sites across the country" (economic benefits). A comprehensive immigration could be the solution to an immigration reform that would legalize immigrants and create American jobs that would also help the U.S. economy according to Hinojosa, Ojeda the federal government's current policy is only to step up its enforcement only plan without legalizing the millions of undocumented immigrants (the economic benefits). The purpose of a comprehensive reform is not only to benefit undocumented immigrants but also the U.S. economy. Hinojosa makes it clear in his article that such measures such as sb1070 in Arizona would have devastating economic consequences if its goals were accomplished (economic benefits). A comprehensive immigration reform is not necessary except as a stratagem to make some form of substantial amnesty palatable to a majority in congress (comprehensive immigration). Although the ideal idea of a perfect immigration reform is far from existing giving options to the American people is the right path that wills someday the information will not contain incoherent and contradictory components. The task for anyone who is making comprehensive immigration reform proposals requires the proposal to go through about three steps. The first step would offer basic value oriented goals of immigration policy. Second step would be to evaluate the basic value oriented goals and see which ones are most likely to achieve positive outcome. The third step is that all these proposals have undergone a treacherous process and at the end with the hope of a realistic chance of survival. It is believed by the Brookings- Duke Roundtable that current efforts of a comprehensive reform is being affected by the fails of the 1986 immigration reform and control Act (comprehensive immigration). The Roundtable proposals are as follows, the elimination of the right of U.S. citizens to sponsor the entry of their adult children and siblings, the elimination of diversity visas, and the rejection of a guest worker program (comprehensive immigration). As easy as these proposals may seem they are all complicated as they would have negative impact on immigrants and Americans as well. Although a comprehensive reform is probably the easiest solution to a reform as it would allow immigrants to pay fees and fines and be up to date on all legal statuses. This would legalize the more than 10 million undocumented immigrants in the U.S.

There are more than eleven million undocumented immigrants that are living in the U.S. (Peter Markowitz). Peter quotes "these individuals have become integral members of American families and vital components of the American economy" (Peter Markowitz). The prospects of soon seeing an immigration reform emerge will not happen as the thought of an immigration reform has been warped by powerful inaccurate accusations. There hasn't been enough support by congress to the point where undocumented immigrants can become part of an American society. Promoting the power of inclusive state citizenship will help create an immigration reform statewide. In this article Peter argues that states have the power of federal government to grant citizenship to undocumented immigrants (undocumented no more). Such schemes would help integrate immigrants leading to more stabilized families and would also encourage a better economy. This type of movement could have more power and a positive outcome that would help us more to a closer federal reform. States have been creating new laws that didn't have results in congress but directed by the state's role in policy making they have a more powerful impact resulting in positive results. "Indeed If integrationists aim to leverage state power to reorient our national discourse on immigration" (undocumented no more). Example laws that have shown what kind of power a state has are the marriage equality and legalization of marijuana. "State is increasingly the engines that drive progressive national political changes" (undocumented no more). In its article Peter L. Markowitz states that there are those states that can develop solutions and act as policymaking laboratories (undocumented no more). The only concern many of those who oppose will argue that granting undocumented individuals citizenship through the states would interfere with federal government's power. However the use of state power does not infringe upon the federal government's power. State citizenship laws would exercise a power that the federalist structure of the constitution vests in the States a power that congress is not constitutionally authorized preempt. A properly drafted state citizenship law would not conflict or interfere with the federal immigration scheme (Peter L. Markowitz). It is important to understand that state citizenship cannot substitute a comprehensive reform. However if the states were to craft a citizenship regime this would still pose normative objections by congress leading to an unsolved problem once again. Although this should be taken into consideration by many states might help the federal government come up with a solution.

Undocumented immigration has been a long standing component of the U.S. labor market as most illegal immigrants enter the United States in search of work (Catalina). The reform Act of 1986 enabled 2.7 million undocumented immigrants to acquire legal permanent residence status in the United States (Catalina). The entire purpose of this amnesty was to improve labor market outcomes it would bring undocumented immigrants "out of the shadows", this also improved working conditions. This is why it's necessary now days to come up with a solution for an immigration reform, but not only to benefit immigrants but the overall economy of the United States. All of these programs are not paid for by taxpayers rather immigrants themselves (journal). For those who oppose an immigration reform because they say taxpayers are paying for all expenses might need to reevaluate their point of views. "The prospects of accruing such enormous societal benefits at literally no cost to the taxpayer represent a rare opportunity for U.S. society (JOURNAL). It is very important that our federal governments build and sustains an infrastructure with an expanded capacity to reap the many benefits of a broad- scale legalization program (Journal). According to Alfonso Aguilar who served as chief of the U.S. of Citizenship under President George W. Bush, legislative efforts have been few and far between this has been ever since the senate passed a comprehensive immigration reform bill in June 2013 that failed (A way forward). The amnesty of 1986 increased labor market efficiency (the impact of). Therefore it's most likely that a well structure immigration reform would benefit our economy.

"We need leadership. But we can't just have hearings. We need actual legislation" (U.S. news). This was said by Alfonso Aguilar when he was asked what his thought on democrats and republican support was. Many Americans like Alfonso believe that congress only proposes comprehensive bills but if they don't start legislating then it's not going to get them anywhere. There's no doubt that an immigration reform needs to be put into place so there won't be any more controversy on this topic. Coming to an agreement in regards to a comprehensive immigration reform is a better start then no start at all. The American people need to start leading again not just proposing. Coming to an agreement won't be an easy challenge but if people opposing an immigration reform would take the time to really understand how important this topic is. While this issue is being debated there are families that are being torn apart. Several options were discussed in this research paper and none of them only benefit illegal immigrants. With an immigration reform the United States economy will benefit from this. Yes, there are certain rules and regulations all immigrants should be a part of a process in a reform that is approved. It's up to State and Federal power that can be beneficial together and overcome this long debated issue that has had no results for the past 30 years.

 
Works Cited
Markowitz, Peter L. "Undocumented No More: The Power of State citizenship". Academic journals. Spring 2013:10-1. Web. Oct. 30.2015

Freeman, Gary P. "Can comprehensive immigration reform is both liberal and democratic?" Society 47.2 (2010): 102+. Biography in context. Web. 30 Oct. 2015

Rodríguez, Néstor. "Immigration Reform". Contexts spring 2013: 10-1 ProQuest. Web. 30 Oct.2015.

U.S. News. " A way forward" articles American principles intl. business. 30 Oct. 2015

I think is pretty good. Check the way you cite the books.

... living in the United States (ibtimes,year ).
... would solve this problem (ibtimes,year ).

Miriam, after going through your paper, here's my thoughts;

- the paper is written pretty well
- paragraphing it and the overall presentation may still need improvement
try to put a little bit more space after each paragraph, I'm not sure if this is just how you present it
when posting here on EF but be sure to create a space like a breather for the reader, more so
for the defense panel who needs to go through your paper thoroughly
- grammar and sentence construction can be enhanced as well however it's already written good
- citation, I'm not sure of you consider the open and close parenthesis (...), a citation already because when you
do citation you have to include the necessary information.
- page number
- book or manual or the origin of the material matter of facts of course
- author and accreditation if you have is way better to be included
You do have it written at the end of the essay but it would be best if you can incorporate it already
in the paper.

As what I mentioned, overall the research paper justifies it's purpose, all you have to now is to have other EF contributors to share more

insights that will help you out in enhancing the paper further.