Question: Should the government allow illegal immigrants to become citizens?

Title: Should the US allow illegal immigrants currently in the US to have a path to citizenship Content: Question: Should undocumented immigrants already in the United States, be allowed to become U.S. citizens? The answer is no, when illegal aliens come over they can only get small salary jobs at the risk of the U.S. government finding out about their presence. By taking these jobs away from a country whose unemployment rates are already over 7%(Bureau of Labor Statistics), they are stealing what could be a "bread on the table" job from hardworking American citizens. Aside from the fact that our jobs are being taken away, the thought of providing them with jobs, welfare, housing assistance, food assistance, and student loans is legally ridiculous. Why would we reward them for coming over illegally and stealing jobs and other resources from legal citizens? Common since dictates that if a person within your authority breaks the law, you don"t reward them for their actions. This year half a million fewer students nationwide enrolled in colleges, but the number of Latinos enrolled spiked by 447,000, 17% of those students were illegal immigrants from the southern border of the U.S. In 2012 the number of Latinos enrolled was at 3.4 million, an all time high, (NPR.org). By allowing illegals into the country, who are not only stealing government support or low class jobs, they are stealing education from students and taking even higher class jobs from people who are legal American citizens. Our country is funded by taxes. When illegal immigrants come into the picture our country as a whole loses money. Whether it is income tax, or health care our country is losing money for every transaction they make. While it may seem to be a useful way for businesses to save money by hiring unlawful immigrants, in the long run it"s a practice that is harming our country more than not, as 11% of all lower and middle class workers are illegal aliens (NPR.org), and giving them citizenship would only invite others to take more jobs. When it"s all said and done rewarding illegals for breaking our laws is counterproductive to our country as jobs are being stolen, colleges are being filled, and taxes are being dodged. To give these people citizenship would only harm the U.S. more then not. When illegals living in the U.S. get citizenship it only invites more people from other countries to come in illegally in hopes for free citizenship. Granting them amnesty may give the U.S a slight economy boom at first, but in the long run will lead to our demise.

Title: U.S. Immigration policy is too harsh on the southern border Content: Wow...where do i begin? first, one of the sole purposes of a government is to protect ITS citizens. A government cannot allow anyone and everyone in who wants in without going through the proper channels. This means that if an immigrant wants to become a citizen, there is a means of doing so, in which they will then recieve all the rights of a natural born citizen. along with protection, it is necessary for a government to know who is coming into the country. Are you suggesting that we allow any and all to just walk across the border and call themselves a citizen? that would have been great for America during the cold war when soviet spies and sabatours could just walk right in and out to never be found again. This goes for terrorists today as well. Is it worth risking American's lives? Illegal immagrants are breaking the law...PERIOD. besides that fact, should not an American wanting a job take precedence over that of an illegal? Is it fair that illegals should be allowed to live in this country and reap all the benefits without paying taxes like everyone else? Also, an increase in illegal immigration is directly proportional to an increase in crime. Besides the negative effects of that fact alone, this leads to a strain on government resources - police, jails, etc. which are paid for by taxes, which are bad enough, but lead to a strain on funding for other needed things. And you think the US gov. is too tough? I say make it tougher, build a fence, do what is necessary to reduce illegal immigration.

Title: The United States Government should immediately repatriate all illegal immigrants. Content: Regarding the education of the children of illegal immigrants, unless the requirements of becoming a naturalization are rewritten (a topic outside the boundaries of our proposition of expatriating illegal immigrants as they are currently defined), any child born on American soil is guaranteed U.S. citizenship. The immediate expatriation of the parents of such children would have one of two effects: either the family would be split up, as there would be no legal grounds for forcing the child with citizenship to leave the country, and any economic costs their schooling would incur would be unchanged, or the child would return with their families to their country of origin, where in many cases the quality of education is much poorer. We would effectively be denying U.S. citizens access to the public education system on the basis of the actions of their parents. Were expatriation forced, the only way to eliminate these costs would be a gross miscarriage of justice, blaming children for circumstances they cannot control. In regards to community colleges, if we are discussing the U.S. born children of illegal immigrants, such individuals would ostensibly have to pay their taxes and the tuition associated with community colleges if they wished to attend. In the end, the drain they cause on the system is no different from any other citizen (never mind that educating such individuals allows them access to a wider variety of jobs, increasing their overall productive capabilities and having a positive effect on the economy as a whole). In the case of illegal immigrants themselves attending community colleges, the system here in the state of North Carolina has already found a way to take advantage of this. Illegal immigrants can be accepted to community colleges, but at the out of state tuition rate. This additional cost means that the colleges generate a $2000 profit for each illegal student (1). In the end, to immediately expatriate illegal immigrants would cause a loss of future taxes collectable from legitimate U.S. citizens as well as dry up a source of potential revenue for community colleges. In regards to the crimes attributed to illegal immigration, an immediate deportation of all the illegals that DHS could capture would do little to reduce their rates. Drug and arms dealers have demonstrated their ability to operate without being detected by the authorities. A new campaign to remove all illegals would tax already overstressed law enforcement resources that could instead be used to target these criminals specifically, removing a great number of immigrants whose only crime was entering the country at the cost of ignoring many of these hardened criminals. Instead of a mass deportation, we should instead focus on apprehending only these individuals, understanding the weaknesses in our border security they use to transport their goods, and endeavoring to close these gaps. (1) http://www.wral.com...

Title: should illgle immagrants be allowed citezenship Content: I think you forgot the topic question. "Should illegal immigrants be allowed citizenship?", is the question we are discussing. You repeatedly state that illegal immigrants are taking jobs away from American citizens, and yet if we were to give illegal immigrants citizenship, then they would be citizens. There are currently an estimated 11,100,000 illegal immigrants residing in America, according to a recent survey taken by The Department of Homeland Security. America doesn't really have any choice but to give these immigrants citizenship; it'd be impossible to send back that many people to their homelands. In order to find and deport every illegal immigrant, the U.S government would need to undergo a massive bureaucratic expansion, in order to hire more workers to find the immigrants. You stated that "illegal immigrants take up jobs that are for us." Employers should be allowed to hire whoever they chose to, and not be forced to hire based upon legal status. Businesses will increase in size the more people that they hire, which will help support America's economy. In conclusion to my argument, America needs to face facts; millions of illegal immigrants currently reside in America, and the vast majority of them are hardworking, taxpaying and law abiding. We should give them complete amnesty and work together to help make America a greater nation.

Title: Americans oppose the deportation of all illegal immigrants. Content: A USA Today/Gallup Poll dated March 2007 asked, "Should the government deport all illegal immigrants back to their home country?" In response, only 24% of American citizens believed the government should deport all illegal immigrants. Furthermore, 59% of American citizens believed the government should allow illegal immigrants to remain in the United States and become U.S. citizens, but only if they meet certain requirements.

Title: Illegal Immigrants Content: As an born bred American Citizen I believe that allowing illegal immigrants into our country then giving them citizenship just like that is beyond wrong especially for those who are currently do the process right so that they may become a legal citizen of the United States. Now I don't want to hate on the Illegal Immigrants due to the fact that being human we strive to live better lives and most of us knowing that the U.S.A even in it's current condition is still very high on the scale for new opportunities, it's just that people have to want it bad enough, I digress but to my point if illegal immigrants were to enter the country it should be only on one term and that is to work. Now people are like oh those illegal are taking our jobs away but in reality if they were to pay attention in life rather than listen down the grape vine they would know that most illegal immigrants take jobs that most Americans wouldn't such as helping farmers pick food, they also pick up trash, and so on. These jobs are looked upon very unfavorably by the tens of millions of Americans. So to end my opinion, I shall state this, Illegal Immigrants under no circumstances should be allowed sanctuary in a country they do not belong to , only and mean only if they have a working visa and are monitored very closely to where they could not just fit into the populous and just disappear. There shall be tight restrictions to what they may do. As for the illegal immigrants that are currently in the country i feel they need to be found and deported to their home countries and be encouraged to become a U.S. citizen but there shall not be any automatic citizenship. You cannot just be forgiven and be granted something that you haven't earned. Only those that follow the rules shall get access and sometimes they don't even fit the standards.

Title: Allowing Illegal Immigrations To Still Get Benefits Content: Before I begin, your argument was fine. And thank you for posting, I thought you disappeared, ha ha. [1] The counter-argument Con is making that the plan established is incoherent was expected, and is relatively rinsed and repeated by the Right-Wingers. Thus, a generous rebuttal will be supplied to refute the points made:1a) Illegal immigrants coming into the country do not have to remain illegal immigrants. They can always gain citizenship. Barack Obama has become, as previously stated, more of a Social Democratic president and many of his foreign policies let free-flowing immigration occur, which has increased the amount of illegal immigrants significantly. However, the federal benefits in question that would be hypothetically given to "illegals" are already being given to "legal" immigrants and citizens. Yes, adding a couple thousand or even million more people into the country with these benefits would logically make the government spend more to be able to supply the higher demand for them. But this is a strawmen argument that is found easily debunkable by most: The benefits being given to people more since Obama's election into office are not even scratching the surface of the debt bucket the U.S now owns. In fact it doesn't even hit the top six causes of the U.S's debt. Bush Tax Cuts in 2003 and 2001 were the main source at around that time of deficit, adding an approximation of $1.6 trillion to the already built-up debt. And the other five reasons the economy is so trashy and in the negatives are; health care, medicare, war, economic stimulus [Obama's fault], Great Recession. All of these problems are nowhere near giving people who cross the U.S border "illegally" benefits. And the debt ceiling was rising even without that. While yes, it would wildly increase the amount of debt raining in to terrify the administration, it's not the only thing that would, and it has a minimal effect. And the numbers Con has supplied to state so are wildly over the top. [http://theweek.com...] Yes, what Con is saying about it adding to the debt ceiling is logical, but it would have the least impact. Taxes would have to be raised to keep up with the debt that would become added to the already horrible deficit staining the success of the American economy, but it would not add anymore than the current wars being faught in Iraq and Afghanistan are already costing the U.S. Well after reading quite a few articles, it has been retrieved that these numbers were much higher than most expected. Well, the government does have to sell war bonds, raise taxes and still pay for supplies such as food, armaments, water, rations, armour and vehicles that would be given to soldiers fighting on the front, so it is only logical to assume that the amount of money these wars since 9/11 have costed the U.S a lot of money. https://www.nationalpriorities.org... http://costsofwar.org... http://www.globalresearch.ca... 1b) It was described that the State is responsible for rounding up and deporting illegal immigrants back to their home land. Well, this logical does seem sensible. People coming across the borders to come into a country in order to save their lives from the tyrant rule and horrible, unbearable crime rates down south? Undermining the legality of those waiting to get their paperwork done? Hmm..Seems like a problem. Well that is, until it is examined closer. To go back to a point previously used, every American in the U.S with the exception of an extremely small minority (actually just 2%), is an illegal immigrant in one respect or another. European colonists (as mentioned in the first round) did come to the land and pillage it, killing people, raping them and exploiting natural resources and the weak technologies the Natives had to try and fend off the newly self-proclaimed enemy with. So if the U.S really wanted to eliminate the problem of illegal immigration, everyone would be kicked out and the Natives would be left to remake their civilization but now with these better technologies. Yes, this argument is almost viewed as irrelevant now, but all sides of the story must be considered when the word 'immigration' comes up. And again, a driving motive for many illegal immigrants to come to the U.S is to find conditions of better living. At one point, immigration should, yes, be trafficked better so over-population does not become an issue, but it's not the U.S needs to be surrounded by electric fences. And the U.S is nowhere near its maximum population. And on top of that, if illegals going to the U.S eventually found there was no space, there would be one more country they could turn to. A country that gets swept under the rug and labeled irrelevant to most new world events...Canada. Canada has a massive amount of land and an extremely limited national population. So, for what it's worth, immigrants coming to the country could literally be passing through to go to Canada because there is space. Work is more affordable there and in most provinces the weather is reasonable. In fact, just going to Nova Scotia, one could easily find available commercial jobs. The U.S is not the only country to be considered with Western immigrants travelling upwards, be it legal or illegal means of travel. [2] The point that providing illegal immigrants benefits would attract more in more significant numbers is actually quite laughable. Because the exact same thing could be said with normal citizens. Implemented Social systems like Welfare and S.S.I could easily draw more citizens to the programs. So the argument is applicable to even legal citizens, not just illegal immigrants. 2a) Illegal immigrants could become legal if they are given the time. Not everyone can afford to waste time waiting in line for a couple of papers to be stamped and approved of by the federal government and U.S border patrol, so sometimes urgency kicks in, and the people will do whatever they have to do to get across the border. Some empathy is needed here. Illegal immigrants should be given a considerable amount of time to get on their feet, then should be provided paperwork, fill it out, and be able to attain citizenship. And another thing, it was never stated that all illegal immigrants should be given these benefits. It would have to be monitored in the same respect that giving these social benefits to legal citizens works. It would just be different in the aspect of legality, because the citizens would not have citizenship for a certain period of time, because again, it is expensive to move between countries, and desperate times call for desperate measures. It would only be ethical to allow illegal immigrants some space at the table. And economically speaking, it's not the worst thing the U.S has gone through to just simply give some of them benefits, granted they are willing to go through the process. 2b) Illegal immigrants can work just as legals can and that was something considered in round one, but it was not necessarily touched upon to a very hard extent. All that was said was that the unemployment rate dropped below 6% for the first time since recession, and that should be able to speak for itself, because it happened upon immigration being made more a free-flowing thing by President Obama, but there's more to the work ethic these illegals provide that is beneficial to the U.S: Military service. Not only are the immigrants in so much of a hurry that they need to pass through the border unseen and without paperwork, but they are literally willing to die for the U.S, a country that would once turn them away. So going back to the point Con made about it being the federal obligation of the U.S government to deport these immigrants, that is false. Obama and the administration of the Pentagon are both allowing illegal immigrants to enlist in the military. Wars often raise taxes but also make countries richer because of that. Not to say that the U.S should constantly go to war until it's out of debt, but this certainly does help the economy push towards the positives. And the military soldiers would also be leaving the country overseas to fight in the Middle East, and it would not be until they had made it out alive that they would receive benefits such as checking into VA hospitals and checks for their service to the country (which those kinds of benefits have been cut anyways lately, which is unfortunate). http://www.politifact.com... https://news.vice.com... http://www.usatoday.com... [3] All immigrants to the U.S, even illegals, are more than capable of making a contribution to the success of the country. Contributions that legal citizens are no more capable of doing than their illegal counter-parts. Being completely honest, immigrants should not have to prove their worthiness to the 'holier-than-thou' U.S anyways, or any country for that matter. Humans should naturally have the right to free exploration, in which they may travel between countries without having to pay ridiculously expensive amounts of money, or proving their legality or anything of the sort, because it's marginalizing and demonizing. It's about as insulting as being referred to as a number tagged onto your chest in a prison.

Title: U.S. Immigration policy is too harsh on the southern border Content: First of all, I want to make clear to anyone that is reading this that I NEVER ONCE SAID THAT THE U.S. SHOULD LET EVERYONE THAT WANTS TO COME IN INTO THE COUNTRY. I said simply that the U.S. government is too harsh on immigrants. PERIOD But anyways, we are too harsh on them because we make it extremely difficult for them to become u.s. citizens. I'm curious...have you seen the test that they have to take to be legalized? I have (my mom is a French immigrant, and yes, she is legal) and they ask you questions that even you or me wouldn't be able to answer as being taught in an American school system. If educated people like you or me cannot answer these questions, how do we expect uneducated, poor, and non-English-speaking Hispanics to answer them correctly? WE DON'T The fact is that our government, democrats and republicans alike,(and most citizens) don't want these people in our country, so they make it extremely difficult to get in the country. Cause and effect, the immigrants come in ILLEGALLY,(so they don't have to suffer through the rigorous and irrational expectations of our government) and this gives people the chance to complain and say, "Hey, I don't want these illegals coming in, not paying taxes, reaping the benefits of our society, and stealing our jobs!" This is a justifiable statement-I don't(I don't think anyone does) want anyone freeloading off of my hard work. But it is our country's own fault that there are people doing things like this. If these same immigrants were legal, -There would be more people paying taxes to the state and federal governments -There would be more people = more demand = more jobs = more workers = more people living better lives -There would be no need to spend billions of taxpayers' dollars into a giant fence that will do virtually nothing to stop the incoming of illegals anyways Also you said that increase in illegal immigration is directly proportional to an increase in crime. Well technically, you are absolutely correct. But what you didn't take into consideration is how being an illegal immigrant affects your living conditions and monetary income. Let me remind you that poverty is also directly proportional to an increase in crime. Illegal immigrants come into the country to look for work. It is more difficult for them to find work because -they are illegal(duh) -they are uneducated -they are a risk for their employer Once they find a job,(which will no doubt be low paying, harsh, physical labor) they need a place to sleep. But, again, problems arise, for they are illegal and poor. So what do they do? They do what anyone would do-it's human nature. They find someone like them. This leads to a concentration people of a certain race and background. This leads to ghettos. Now, if they were legal, it would be much easier for them to find better paying jobs and places to live. So, -They would be richer, and would not resort to crime as much -Their legalization would strongly reduce the chance of the formation of ghettos Also, if you say that it is wrong for them to come into our country, remember this. YOU ARE AN IMMIGRANT TOO!!!!! Your ancestors came into America just as abruptly and illegally as the illegal immigrants do today. I they could do it then, why is it such a big deal now?

Title: U.S. Immigration policy is too harsh on the southern border Content: Let me begin by saying that it is a privilege to be allowed to become a citizen of this country - not a right. No government has to allow people in, and when the country in question is the wealthiest nation in the history of the world, the privilege of becoming a citizen has even greater worth. As we have already established, it is necessary to have a process of legalizing immigrants rather than allowing all in, so here are reasons why the legalization process is difficult. - the admitance test should be challenging. Im not at all saying it should be near impossible to pass, but it should require studying of the testable info. It is important that new citizens understand the history of this country and the basics of our government. Which is the basis for the next two points: -This allows them to better contribute to society and the political process. This is another reason for the tediousness of the process. When there is a pool of billions who want in, those who become citizens should prove that they can and will contribute to society. The best way of doing this is to teach them many vital aspects of the US. -Also, the more one knows about their new home, the more a "part" of it they feel, which leads to greater assimilation. Assimilation is vital to our country's survival (united we stand,devided we fall)- if new citizens dont become part of the American culture then it creates division and competition among groups (im not saying that immigrants should forget their native culture either). -I want those who apply for citizenship to be scrutinized. Not just anyone should be allowed in. As i previously stated, it is a privilege. I dont want other country's criminals and others that will contribute to problems in our country. Also, this step of the process is even more critical post 9/11 for obvious reasons. Yes, the process is long, tedious, and slow; and i concede that it is not perfect. But for many reasons it requires more than just a sign-in book to become a legal citizen. A few quick notes on other comments you made: I beleive that it should be mandatory for immigrants to speak and read english (at least enough to operate in society). Not being able to speak the country's primary language (basically im proposing english should be the national language) obviously leads to many problems. The proposed fence is a double fence meaning a two fences with a patrolled space between (in addition to the patrolled US side). The design and proper implementation of the fence would be very effective and would make a difference.

Title: Illegal immigrants should be granted the rights of legal citizenship Content: Illegal immigrants should mot be granted the rights of legal citizenship. And why should they? They come into the United States and want to be treated like a citizen, but they are not. If they come to America searching for a better life, than wouldn't it be better for them to become a legal citizen anyway? If they come here illegally, than why do they deserve the rights of legal citizens? Yes, they do deserve human rights, but not the benefits of being a citizen of the United States. They do not pay taxes, they do not deserve the benefits of our educational systems, our roads, our public buildings, anything payed for with taxes. I invite anybody to agree or refute this.

Title: Government protection (from illegal immigrants) is a const. right. Content: Governments are required by their Constitutions to protect their citizens from crime and foreign threats. In so far as illegal immigration threatens citizens, governments are required to respond aggressively. Arizona, who's citizens have been terribly affected by illegal immigration, is required to respond robustly in fighting the problem.

Title: America should create a pathway to citizenship for illegal and other immigrants. Content: What I mean is illegals and other immigrants should have the legal right to become citizens provided that they are not career felons. This would improve the economy by puytting these ableds to work, and getting them off welfare, reducing crime, and providing opportunities for people who would be an asset to the US of A. I take the affirmative position, make the first move.

Title: The US government should cease regulating its borders Content: The United States government should continue to regulate its borders. The borders need to be secure and the country needs to be careful who they let in on a temporary basis. The more agents we have at the border the harder it will be for illegal immigrants to enter the country. Research shows that illegal immigrants find jobs and housing. If the government establishes a database for employers to enter information about their employees it will be harder for the illegal immigrants to find jobs. It will also open up more jobs for the legal citizens. Also if the government cracks down on the employer's that are giving the immigrants jobs by ticketing them, they will be less willing to hire the illegal workers. Presumably the United States government will continue to regulate the borders.

Title: America should support blanket amnesty for illegal immigrants. Content: While undocumented aliens do infact recieve some benifits, they should still be grated blanket amnesty. An article about the postives and negatives of illegal immigration states, "Whether you fine illegal aliens or stick them in English classes or make them say a hundred Hail Marys, at the end of the day, illegals would be allowed to stay and become citizens... That's amnesty. And that's a good thing for America. Amnesty won't depress wages - globalization has already done that. Amnesty will not undermine the rule of law. [...] It sounds counterintuitive, but with immigration, forgiving a crime may be the best way to restore law and order. Amnesty won't necessarily add to the social-services burden. [...] Amnesty would offer millions... a fighting chance at self-sufficiency and social mobility" ("Top Ten Pros and Cons, 1). Also, just because they crossed the border illegally doesn't mean that illigal immigrants will continue to commit crimes or be encouraged to continue to break the law. "According to the conservative Americas Majority Foundation, crime rates during the period 1999""2006 were lowest in states with the highest immigration growth rates. During that period the total crime rate fell 14% in the 19 top immigration states, compared to only 7% in the other 31. Truth is, foreign-born people in America, whether they are naturalized citizens, permanent residents, or undocumented, are incarcerated at a much lower rate than native-born Americans, according to the National Institute of Corrections" (8 Of the Most Vicious Myths About Illegal Immigrants, 1). It is more likely that native born people will commit a crime than people such as illegal immigrants. In conclusion, illegal immigrants should be granted blanket amnesty as doing so would be beneficial for America and they are less likely to commit crime than native borm United States citizens. "Top Ten Pros and Cons." Procon.org. 2009. Web. 22 October 2013 "8 Of the Most Vicious Myths About Illegal Immigrants." PolicyMic. Web. 22 Oct. 2013.

Title: "That Arnold Schwarzenegger should be able to become president" Content: As much as I support immigrant rights, I don't think that immigrants should be allowed to become presidents. Only because if an immigrant became president, he/she might have conflicting interests with America and their home country. I'm not saying all immigrants are out to infiltrate the US government, but to ensure that American interests are being preserved, citizens whom have been born and raised in the States would be less bias. Of course, there is always the opportunity to become a representative, governor, or even senator. In these offices, immigrants can still be represented without taking executive control. Again, it's not that immigrants aren't able or would only pass laws benefiting their demographic, but we need a citizen that has been born and raised here in order to ensure that American interests are put first.

Title: Open Borders for Living/Travelling Content: If we open our borders, then terrorists can go in and terrorize our citizens. Illegal Immigrants will come in here with no intent of becoming citizens and live off welfare and food stamps. You say that we should be able to go wherever we want. You are proposing that we allow drug dealers to come into this country and trade drugs. National Security will be threanted because Terrorists and spies will come in here and kill innocent children and take military secrets. In our Bill of rights, no where does it say that we can go wherever we want. I will wait for your response. Sources: http://en.wikipedia.org...

Title: The United States Government should immediately repatriate all illegal immigrants. Content: Another argument is that if we don't have strong borders then we are opening ourselves up to overpopulation that would tax all cities. There is also the issue of weak borders allowing terrorists easy access to our country. By allowing illegal immigrants to stay in this country we are telling the world that we are an easy target. Come and get us. We won't do anything about it.

Title: US cannot be a nation of permanent illegal immigrants Content: Jared Bernstein. "Path to citizenship and out of poverty." Economic Policy Institute. June 29, 2006: "The policy implications should be obvious. We must not let ourselves become a nation of permanent illegal immigrants, who toil in the shadows; nor should we become a nation of 'guest workers.' We are a nation of immigrants who have trodden the path toward citizenship. A central goal of reform should be to clear that path for those who deserve the privileges, economic and otherwise, of being an American citizen."

Title: Should illegal immigrants be allowed to live in the U.S. Content: Of course not, it is in the title illegal. If something is illegal it isn't allowed. Immigrants are allowed and should continue to be allowed, but illegal immigrants should not. If someone really wants to get into the U.S. they should go through the legal way and get a real citizenship. Would it make sense to allow people that haven't passed tests to freely live in the states without having to pay taxes, no. Any illegal immigrants currently in the country should be forced to leave until they can legally register as a U.S. citizen. This is necessary to gain the rights and duties of a U.S. citizen. However, people who are the children of illegal immigrants and never had a life outside the U.S. should be required to apply for citizenship, but not forced from the states unless they fail to do so. Only legal citizens are allowed to live in the U.S. long term as this is what preserves the structure of our country and it should stay this way.

Title: Effort to regulate our countrys borders Content: yeah it would make things easier if become a U.s. citizen but not all immigrants wish to contribute to all that it takes to be a citizen. most illegal immigrants that are in our country come for economic reasons because their country does not have much of an economy or avaliable jobs, if they already face problems economically which is why they come to our country leads in unwilling tax payers that do all the same we do. im not referencing to all. its unfair but it should be harder to get granted citizenship because all that has happened in our country, we cant just let anyone in our country...how is that safe or reasonable?

Title: America should support blanket amnesty for illegal immigrants. Content: America should not necessarily grant Illegal Immigrants citizenship, however they should be granted the right to all educational and health benefits, and legal rights that American citizens receive. According to the CAIRCO's section on Immigration Issues, since the 1986 amnesty, Congress has passed a total of 7 amnesties for illegal aliens allowing over 6 million total illegal immigrants to be granted blanket amnesty for a variety of reasons ("Immigration Issues"). Many illegal immigrants have already been granted a path to citizenship and amnesty, and more opportunities should be made available. For example, President Barack Obama reasons a plan to possibly grant the 12 million illegal immigrants that reside in America Amnesty. President Obama explains, "'We are not going to ship back 12 million people, we're not going to do it as a practical matter. We would have to take all our law enforcement that we have available and we would have to use it and put people on buses, and rip families apart, and that's not who we are, that's not what America is about. So what I've proposed... is you say we're going to bring these folks out of the shadows. We're going to make them pay a fine, they are going to have to learn English, they are going to have to go to the back of the line...but they will have a pathway to citizenship over the course of 10 years'" ("PROPOSED IMMIGRATION REFORM"). Simply removing illegal immigrants from the country would be much too costly and a waste of time. Individuals would be ripped away from their families and communities and there would also be negative economic consequences from removing millions of hard-working residents from the domestic labor pool. Instead, a proposed path to citizenship is a better solution. Illegal Immigrants offer benefits to the United states in a variety of different ways. For example, Undocumented immigrants contribute to our economy as workers, taxpayers, and consumers, they account for 5 percent of the total U.S. labor force, and at least a quarter of the workers in industries like construction, agriculture, grounds keeping, meat processing, and textile production. All undocumented immigrants pay sales and property taxes, and most pay federal and state income taxes as well, even though they're not eligible for Social Security, Medicare, or the many other programs their tax dollars help fund. Undocumented immigrants also spend billions of dollars each year, which supports our economy and helps create new jobs. The New York Times explains that 'a 2006 study by the Texas State Comptroller estimated that the 1.4 million undocumented immigrants in Texas alone added almost $18 billion to the state's economic output, and more than paid for the $1.2 billion in state services they used by generating $1.6 billion in new state revenues' (Ewing). The contributions of undocumented immigrants would be even greater if they were able to earn legal status. Workers who are not part of an underground economy and don't live in fear of deportation are better able to acquire new job skills and move up the career ladder. That turns into higher wages, more money paid in taxes, and more money to spend to support other businesses. Also, most illegal immigrants are for the most part law-abiding. As I previously explained, there is a greater percentage of citizens who commit crimes than there are illegal immigrants. Immigration is a natural right that is attained at birth. The idea that immigration needs to be authorized by the government goes against that freedom. Immigrants who come to America seeking the opportunity to work and pursue happiness, or those brought here at too young an age to have any say in the matter, ought to be able to stay to pursue those opportunities, thus proving that illegal immigrants should be granted blanket amnesty. Works Cited Ewing, Walter. "Are Illegal Immigrants Good for the U.S. Economy?" The New York Times. Web. 30 Oct. 2013. "Immigration Issues." Cairco. Web. 29 October 2013. "PROPOSED IMMIGRATION REFORM." US Amnesty. Web. 29 October 2013.

Title: America should support blanket amnesty for illegal immigrants. Content: Undocumented workers do not receive full Social Security benefits because they are not United States citizens " nor should they be until they seek citizenship legally. Illegal immigrants are legally obligated to pay taxes, and they owe the government for allowing them to live and work in this country. One must remember that, whatever their reasons, immigrants who have come to this country without legal documentation have broken the law. Just as criminals lose their rights when they break the law, so should illegal immigrants have to face the consequences of their actions. Granting illegal immigrants the same rights as citizens would encourage them continue to break the law instead of seeking the approved path to citizenship ("Is it...Illegal Immigrants?"). Obama's plan to grant amnesty to illegal immigrants involves awarding visas to immigrants who have waited patiently in their countries of origin and to those who broke the law to come here ("Is it...Illegal Immigrants?"). If we award illegal immigrants legal rights, then we are essentially condoning crime. Furthermore, it is inaccurate to assume that illegal immigrants are not benefiting from living in this country already - even without full Social Security benefits. For example, money sent home by illegal immigrants is one of Mexico"s largest sources of revenue after oil sales and exports ("Top Ten Pros and Cons"). This revenue drains money away from the millions of unemployed and poor Americans who need help, and proves once again that illegal immigrants should not automatically be granted legal rights and receive the same benefits as citizens. Works Cited "Is it a Bad Idea to Legalize the Illegal Immigrants?" Illegal Immigration Statistics. 2013. Web. 21 October 2013. http://www.illegalimmigrationstatistics.org.... "Top Ten Pros and Cons." Procon.org. 2009. Web. 21 October 2013. http://immigration.procon.org....

Title: America should support blanket amnesty for illegal immigrants. Content: Undocumented workers do not receive full Social Security benefits because they are not United States citizens " nor should they be until they seek citizenship legally. Illegal immigrants are legally obligated to pay taxes, and they owe the government for allowing them to live and work in this country. One must remember that, whatever their reasons, immigrants who have come to this country without legal documentation have broken the law. Just as criminals lose their rights when they break the law, so should illegal immigrants have to face the consequences of their actions. Granting illegal immigrants the same rights as citizens would encourage them continue to break the law instead of seeking the approved path to citizenship ("Is it...Illegal Immigrants?"). Obama's plan to grant amnesty to illegal immigrants involves awarding visas to immigrants who have waited patiently in their countries of origin and to those who broke the law to come here ("Is it...Illegal Immigrants?"). If we award illegal immigrants legal rights, then we are essentially condoning crime. Furthermore, it is inaccurate to assume that illegal immigrants are not benefiting from living in this country already - even without full Social Security benefits. For example, money sent home by illegal immigrants is one of Mexico"s largest sources of revenue after oil sales and exports ("Top Ten Pros and Cons"). This revenue drains money away from the millions of unemployed and poor Americans who need help, and proves once again that illegal immigrants should not automatically be granted legal rights and receive the same benefits as citizens. Works Cited "Is it a Bad Idea to Legalize the Illegal Immigrants?" Illegal Immigration Statistics. 2013. Web. 21 October 2013. http://www.illegalimmigrationstatistics.org....... "Top Ten Pros and Cons." Procon.org. 2009. Web. 21 October 2013. http://immigration.procon.org.......

Title: Should the US allow illegal immigrants currently in the US to have a path to citizenship Content: For my final argument i will focus on your statement "Immigrants could account for the population increase." Yes the overall population increases, that is a known fact, when you have one group combined with another group you get a bigger group. Now ill ask, is that a good thing? for an example i will bring the country of Kenya into the picture. the Kenyan government was lax about the immigration of Ethiopians into the country but now kenya went down on the DTS scale to a 2 from a 3. When the immigrants joined the kenyan population the government had to mine resources at a dizzying rate and built massive cities that we know as "slums." If we keep letting immigrants in the country will falter but at this point nothing but the extreme can be done. If we give these illegals a pathway to citizenship we are just inviting more immigrants into our country creating more of a problem. thank you for this debate but i believe my case is made and there is nothing more to say.

Title: should illgle immagrants be allowed citezenship Content: How is an immigrant (albeit an illegal one) so different from an American Citizen? So long as they pay taxes like everyone else, how are they anymore detrimental to society? All immigrants want is a chance to gain a brighter future through hard work, they aren't looking for the easy way out. In fact, it makes far more sense to grant illegal immigrants full citizenship, because illegal immigrants don't have to pay taxes, and citizens do. If you give an illegal immigrant citizenship, then you guarantee that they pay taxes to the United States Government. The immigration policy is far more complicated than many might be led to assume. An honest foreigner will have a hard time getting into America as a citizen. Despite the fact that on our symbol of freedom: The Statue of Liberty; it states, "Give us your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free." America should be the land of opportunity for those who so desperately need a chance to restart their lives in a new place.

Title: In the US, illegal immigrants should not be deported. Content: ac1. They came into this country Illegally, so my opponent, pro, wants them to be rewarded citizenship, because they broke the law. Jobs are lost by American-born citizens to the illegal immigrants, since they do not have to be payed minimum wage (because they are not legal in the first place). ac2. The cost to the citizens, taxpayers, and the government to keep them is extravagant and not worth it. No economic benefits are gained from keeping illegal immigrants. (Reasoning right below) #1 57 percent of all households that are led by an immigrant (legal or illegal) are enrolled in at least one welfare program. Taking money (if illegal then without paying taxes) from the government and the taxpayers, for an extended period of time, which could eventually cost more than deportation. #2 According to one study, the cost to U.S. taxpayers of legalizing current illegal immigrants would be approximately 6.3 trillion dollars over the next 50 years. (even more money stolen from taxpayers.) #3 The Obama administration has distributed flyers that tell illegal immigrants that their immigration status will not be checked when they apply for food stamps. #4 The Department of Homeland Security says that it has lost track of a million people that have entered this country but that appear never to have left. #5 One out of every five children living in Los Angeles County has a parent that is in the country illegally. #6 In one recent year, taxpayers in Los Angeles County spent 600 million dollars on welfare for children of illegal immigrants. #7 Thanks to illegal immigration, California"s overstretched health care system is on the verge of collapse. Dozens of California hospitals and emergency rooms have shut down over the past decade because they could not afford to stay open after being endlessly swamped by illegal immigrants who were simply not able to pay for the services that they were receiving. As a result, the remainder of the health care system in the state of California is now beyond overloaded. This had led to brutally long waits, diverted ambulances and even unnecessary patient deaths. At this point, the state of California now ranks dead last out of all 50 states in the number of emergency rooms per million people. #8 It has been estimated that U.S. taxpayers spend $12,000,000,000 a year on primary and secondary school education for the children of illegal immigrants. (even more money than deportation) #9 It is estimated that illegal aliens make up approximately 30 percent of the population in federal, state and local prisons and that the total cost of incarcerating them is more than $1.6 billion annually. #10 The federal government actually has a website that teaches immigrants how to sign up for welfare programs once they arrive in the United States. #11 The Obama administration recently introduced the very first "unmanned" border station along the Texas-Mexico border. #12 The Obama administration has sued individual states such as Arizona that have tried to crack down on illegal immigration. #13 According to the FBI, there are approximately 1.4 million gang members living in our cities. Illegal immigration has been one of the primary factors that has fueled the growth of these gangs. #14 As I have written about previously, there are only about 200 police officers assigned to Chicago"s Gang Enforcement Unit to handle the estimated 100,000 gang members living in the city. #15 Mexican drug cartels make approximately 6.6 billion dollars a year"exporting" illegal drugs to the United States. #16 It is an open secret that Mexican drug cartels are openly conducting military operations inside the United States. The handful of border patrol agents that we have guarding the border are massively outgunned and outmanned. #17 According to the Justice Department"s National Drug Intelligence Center, Mexican drug cartels were actively operating in 50 different U.S. cities in 2006. By 2010, that number had skyrocketed to 1,286. #18 Overall, more than 55,000 people have been killed in drug-related violence in Mexico since 2006. That same level of violence will eventually show up in major U.S. cities unless something dramatic is done about illegal immigration. #19 It is being projected that the Senate immigration bill will bring 33 million more people to the United States over the next decade. http://www.infowars.com... c1. My opponent is obviously speaking only of legal immigrants. Illegal immigrants rarely pay taxes. Should we broadcast a message to the rest of the world that anyone that can find a way to enter this country and somehow get to a "sanctuary city" can sign up for a plethora of welfare benefits and live a life of leisure at the expense of hard working American citizens? Yes, those questions sound absurd, but what I have just described will essentially be official U.S. government policy if the immigration bill going through Congress becomes law. And unfortunately, Democrats now say that they have the Republican votes that they need to get "immigration reform" through the House of Representatives. If this amnesty bill becomes law, it will encourage even more illegal immigration and it will be one more step toward making the U.S. border essentially meaningless. c2. BoP is still on pro.

Title: Illegal immigration Content: Alright lets begin this final round with a little bit of clarification. Starting with the education point, this specifically was something Arnold can do to solve for the deficit in his state. In no way does this have anything to do with illegal immigrants. Next my opponent states that everyone should have an equal opportunity and they do, everyone can apply for citizenship. I would totally agree with my opponent on this point except for two things. 1. Everyone who applies for citizenship is not granted such. 2. Natural born citizens don't have to apply, therefor the very process of applying is a difference in opportunity. From here my opponent goes on to point out that America without a doubt has a jobless and homeless population. This is true, but it is without a doubt not caused from a lack of jobs rather than a lack of people who desire to do certain jobs. I gaurantee I can go to any city in the United States and find at least a few 100 extra jobs that are available because no one wants to do them. Furthermore my opponent states that this people will be payed so little in the United States that they will not be able to support themselves and thereby will become homeless and jobless. I will grant him it is a possibility, but the chances of them being such remain less likely than those in Mexico where they will get payed even less. Furthermore the sanitation in the United States is better so just by them being here they have a lower chance of getting sick. Finally I would like to remind everybody that being homeless and jobless has no impact on society as a whole. There are a couple homeless people in my town but they do not have an effect on anyone else. The same is true of immigrants. If they become homeless and jobless that is too bad for them, but it won't hurt us. Furthermore being homeless and jobless in the United States is far safer than being the equivalent in Mexico. Also there is a higher chance not to be homeless and jobless in the United States. Next we have the hospital scenario. I'm going to ignore the fact that doctors are already payed atrocious amounts of money and having to care for a patient for free wouldn't hurt them. I'm ignoring this because in our capitalist system it doesn't happen, if you don't have insurance, if you don't have money then a hospital is probably not going to bother treating you. Yes my friends, it is in a hospitals rights to reject you on your death bed. Que Triste! In fact I will submit the idea that these people will be hurt less than the normal citizen because they have a greater motivation not to be hurt, this will of course make them a great asset to our lower end labor force. Finally we go for the criminal argument. My opponent pointed out the irony in my last statement and I must agree that the statement was rather ironic. However the point still stands. Under my alternative universe we are speaking of legalizing immigration thereby these people would not inherently be criminals. My opponent puts forth the idea that perhaps 5% of these people would be criminals thus we should reject the whole population. However this is not a paradigm in which to reject people on, as the same can be true of any population. I could look at America today and say that 2% of white middle class males are criminals (see rockin the suburbs - Ben folds) , therefor we should we should not allow them in this country. Obviously this line of thinking is rather fallacious, we should not group criminals as a population but rather we should group criminals as individuals. To say that a whole population has the potential to harm our nation would be the same sort of logic that was used by Hitler to promote the Holocaust. This is a type of logic that not only should but literally needs to be rejected. Criminals need to be evaluated on a case by case basis not a population basis. Finally I must once again push the equally opportunity argument. It was by no fault of the immigrant that he/she was born into a third world country where he/she has to scrape for food every day. On the flip side of the coin it was by no fault of ourselves that we were born into this country, therefor birth should not be a reason to disallow people opportunity.

Title: The United States government should substantially strengthen regulation of immigration to the United Content: P1: The topic says regulation of immigrants TO the U.S, not IN the U.S. That does not mean regulation of United States citizenship. If that were the case, that would be the topic. P2: "notario fraud will prevent an individual who wishes to do so". If notario fraud prevents immigrants from wanting to come here, why would YOU (as pro) want to strengthen regulation against it? That would only make it happen less, which would allow for more immigrants to want to come. That's something that I should be arguing P3: Strengthening the regulation of immigrants TO the U.S. would not allow the "same platforms for immigrants that we have for American citizens", because there would be more control over them (who can come in, the conditions they are allowed in under, etc.) A stronger regulation would deter them from wanting the come. The reason most come to the U.S. is because the immigration system is as is. C: The U.S. government should not substantially strengthen regulation of immigration to the U.S.

Title: Failing to remove illegal immigrants undermines public confidence in the government and its migratio... Content: Governments need to rethink migration policies as a whole and make an attempt to communicate the benefits of immigration to their citizens. There need to be more opportunities for foreign workers to operate legally, allowing them to leave and re-enter the country as they wish. This will remove the current incentive for many illegal immigrants to stay in their host country for life, as at present they know they are unlikely to be allowed back in should they ever leave.

Title: Deporting illegal immigrants maintains moral goal of security. Content: The primary purpose of the government is to maintain national security of its people. Deporting illegal immigrants, who potentially pose a security risk to US citizens, is morally consistent with US aims to protect its citizens.

Title: Mexican Border be torn down and illegal immigrants become legal and are allowed in the U.S. Content: Still your only argument is that illegal immigrants do the jobs Americans do not want to do. But as one of the comments says if illegal immigrants come over they lower the pay of those jobs to almost nothing. So why would Americans want to do it. If there where no illegals theses jobs would still have to be done so companies would raise wages and hire the unemployed Americans decreasing unemployment. So illegals are rebuilding New Orleans if you where not here someone would rebuild it and that someone would be Americans. If we let everyone come to America there may be a few more jobs but because most of the immigrants will be poor theses jobs will be very low paying. There will be an increase crime, cities will become over crowded and our infrastructure will become overwhelmed and fail. Illegal immigrants might not come hear to hurt people but the numbers do not lie and it seems like many do and just by being in America illegally you are hurting Americans. By being here illegally you are putting a strain on our infrastructure with out paying for it. This then causes taxes to rise in order to cover the cost of paying for your use of government services and just the use of our infastructor. I also fail to see how by letting illegal immigrants in and allowing them to join the millaray would make America a better country. By destroying our border we are risking our sovereignty and our safety because anyone good, bad or evil could just come here.

Title: Should the US allow illegal immigrants currently in the US to have a path to citizenship Content: For MY final argument, I am just going to attack Debate339. First of all, America is in a lot better shape in it's building and economy. So we don't have to worry about the "slums" popping up across America. Therefore, I still stand on the fact that immigrants are a help to America.

Title: Allowing Illegal Immigrations To Still Get Benefits Content: Thanks, Pro. == PRO CASE == R1) Causes 1. This is just a moral case for allowing illegal immigration; that is not what this debate is about. In fact, Pro is actually hurting his case by showing that the US has such superior living conditions that simply allowing them to be here is a substantial improvement on its own, regardless of whether or not they are receiving benefits. I could agree with every word Pro has said here and it still would not prove Pro's position. Reject this argument because it is inapplicable to the resolution at hand. 2. Regardless of how much strife illegal immigrants may have to go through, the state is first and foremost obligated to serve the best interests of its own citizens, and I have shown with my C2 that giving benefits to illegal immigrants puts a significant strain on the government budget and, by extension, the citizens. Moreover, the majority of academic studies on immigration conclude that the presence of illegal immigrants is harmful to the well-being of America's poorest citizens by competing with them for the same jobs. Therefore, the government shouldn't do anything that makes it easier for illegal immigrants -- including the provision of federal benefits -- and instead take action to reduce their numbers. https://www.hamiltonproject.org... 3. I have no idea what point Pro was trying to make with his tirade about European colonization and Columbus Day. He's going to have to explain how that connects to the resolution for it to even be considered an argument. R2) Work 1. The part where Pro actually connects "immigration is beneficial" to the resolution is extremely ill-warranted. He provides absolutely no evidence that illegal immigrants "need" benefits more than native citizens do. Considering Pro's claims that immigrants benefit the economy by filling in high-demand jobs, we would expect that they would be making ample money to be financially self-sufficient. 2. I have provided actual academic studies demonstrating that illegal immigrants hurt the job security and wages of America's poorest. Pro has just noted a decrease in unemployment rate without making any attempt at linking it to immigration. Unemployment rate is affected by thousands of variables, so to just arbitrarily attribute it to increased illegal immigration is absurd. Prefer my evidence, obviously. == CON CASE == C1) Incoherent Pro's only response is that illegal immigrants can become citizens, and thus the government doesn't have to deport them. But that is NOT within the parameters of the resolution. If that is what Pro wanted to debate, he should have made the resolution something like "The USFG should grant all illegal immigrants amnesty". The resolution we are debating specifically states that *illegal* immigrants should be given benefits, implying that they would still be "illegal" when they are receiving benefits. Thus, my criticism stands -- Pro's plan cannot be implemented because of its paradoxical nature. Also, cross-apply (in advance) this counter to all other mentions Pro makes of making illegal immigrants citizens; the resolution is not about ammesty. C2) Cost 1. Pro essentially says that our debt is already so high that even 500 billion extra dollars makes little difference. That's nonsensical. We have to start paying off our debt eventually, and Pro's plan just makes it harder to do that any time soon. Pro's response is akin to a smoker who refuses to stop smoking because his lungs already seem to be beyond repair. It simply isn't tenable in the long run. 2. Pro is blatantly false in his claim that most Americans are illegal immigrants. Even the first settlers could not have been considered "illegal immigrants" because there was no state to "immigrate" into; Native Americans did not have the bureaucratic governments, citizens, or official immigration processes necessary for such classifications to exist. Pro's rebuttal fails. 3. Pro dismisses the notion of giving benefits attracting more illegal immigrants as being "laughable". However, I provided academic analyses demonstrating that it *does* happen. If anything, Pro's flippant dismissal of empirical evidence is "laughable". Pro says that if that were the case, having a welfare state would attract more legal immigrants... and he's right. It does. So, again, he has just hurt his own case. It is rather intuitive, really -- people respond to incentives. Providing benefits *does* attract illegal immigrants en masse. C3) Unjust Again, cross--apply the point that this debate is not about amnesty -- it's about providing federal benefits to immigrants who are currently classified as being here illegally. It is unfortunate that Pro has spent so much space on amnesty, because it is completely non-topical. == CONCLUSION == I don't feel like writing one. It's 3am again. Resolution negated.

Title: Birthright Citizenship should be retained in the United States Content: ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION . I Still, the point remains that you haven't explained how my case is wrong. I will simply list what policies I would find acceptable for citizenship. . II Illegal immigrants still are protected by the police force and use the public education system. That really is not fair, giving them an education and allowing them to work in establishments for the same pay as regular citizens is unjust. Illegal immigrants do not typically go to college or produce nearly enough money to be worth their income, they also are a minority who has the most typical involvement in crime. REFUTES . I Your source is correct but then adds "Rich Chinese moms" which I don't think is statistically backed up anywhere so therefore its legitimacy is dismissed until you back it up. . II Still even so, doesn't matter if the mom intends to if the baby is born there and she is already there illegally in the first place its the same outcome. I don't see the difference if intended or not she is on the soil illegally and therefore having a baby is still abusing the system. . III Yes, but they still cause competion and many still go through public school. In the end still costing the government money and in the process possibly making real US citizens lose jobs. Citizenship subtext to post . II under Illegal Immigration * Parents must both be legal citizens of the USA * Legal immigration remains the same as current policy CONCLUSION Whatever my opponent may believe, Illegal immigrants cost some portions of money and sometimes take jobs from real US citizens. Meaning they cause problems and many more come a year. Illegal immigrants due to being poor also are a big source of getting drugs over the border. Source: . http://www.cis.org... . http://www.usillegalaliens.com... . http://www.mnforsustain.org...

Title: whether the government should enforce illegal immigration Content: America is a free nation where anyone should be free to come and live. America is a free nation dictated by laws to ensure that is remains a free nation. Those individuals who want to take part in this free nation must fall subject to the laws; There are no exceptions. Currently, this country has laws that dictate Immigration. These laws are for the protection of the citizens who have accepted America as their country of origin, by means of legal birth(not birth right) or legal citizenship. America owes nothing to any other individual.

Title: Birthright Citizenship should be retained in the United States Content: Thanks Con. My opponent ASSERTS that illegal immigration is bad, with literally no analysis. He only states: "giving them an education and allowing them to work in establishments for the same pay as regular citizens is unjust"The first part can be turned, since these immigrants will be here anyway, it's better to have them educated than condemn them to manual labor because they have no education; that's a way to throw away talent. THe argument could also apply to Poor citizens. Sure, illegals dont pay taxes (although they generally make so little that they would pay nothing or next to it under our tax codes) but neither do citiznes in poverty; at the end of the day, the major reason for having public facilities is to help the poor, so my opponent needs to draw a moral distinction between citizens and those he deam illegal. That will be hard to do. The second part of his argument is: " Illegal immigrants do not typically go to college or produce nearly enough money to be worth their income, they also are a minority who has the most typical involvement in crime. "Straight up, no sources or warrants on these correlation causation fallacies. Secondly Turn: Education reduces crime and poverty, this turns his education argument and his implied economic argument. However, most important is that NOWHERE has he linked illegal immigration with birthright citizenship! This is incredibly significant, because his only impacts aren't even linked to the resolution. He's already lost this debat because hes given you no reason at all to change the status quo. My Framework has been dropped and therefore conceded. This means that he needs to prove uniqueness on his impacts, as well as justify an amendment and he hasn't tried to do that at all. He attacks my second contention saying that my source is "dismissed", while apparently ignoring the citation it offers from Time magezine. He hasn't offered any counter statistics, so we have to go with mine anyway. His second two points have nothing to do with my case, and make no actual attack on them. So my Contention two stands. My Contention one has been totally dropped, and therefore conceded. Extend the impact that this sets a dangeerous precedent, and extend that argument that birthright citizenship doesnt warrant a constiutional amendment.

Title: Illegal Immigration: Should we deport all illegal immigrants we find in the U.S. Content: Good Day, I still say that your way isn't going to work about the illegals ALREADY in our country right now. Your solution would only make it easier for those outside the country now to become citizens. It would do nothing to stop the ones already in. That is why mine is the best way to get the illegals OUT and yours is the best way to STOP. Harlan you keep insisting I'm changing the subject I'm not. I'm agreeing with you that yes they have a life here, which is obvious, if they didn't they would leave. But I'm saying just because they have life here isn't a good reason to allow them all to stay. I will admit...YES!!! Deportion is a PUNISHMENT ITS SUPPOST TO BE!!!!!! They came here illegally they should be punished. Now let me rephrase something I said that illegals have been a problem with poverty) shortened) After think it it over realistically I want to rephrase that. Illegals are a problem with lowering the poverty rate. With the illegals taking jobs for lower wages the impoverished who need the money at the bare minimum wage arent getting the job. So they aren't even being paid minimunm wage b/c they don't even have the job. So because the illegals have lower standards the illgals take jobs from employers who want to save a buck or 2. Here's a solution to that. AFTER we deport a good majority of illegals we help Mexico set up a system of minimum wage which will ensure the Mexicanos will make more in THERE OWN COUNTRY. Now the employers will be able to hire the impoverished who's legal families really need it, at a true minimum wage or more. Thus helping get impoverished more jobs to lower the poverty rate. Now the drunk ones who are just boozed underacheivers will probably not bother but th etrue impoverished with a family to feed will finally get a job and get back on track. yes there will be a lot of children orphaned and sent back to Mexico and other sorry countries but it has to be done. The children born on American soil shouldn't get deprived of being Americans based on there parents actions so let them grow up in America. When they turn 18 give them a choice of going back to there homeland or staying like ANY dual citizen. For the ones born in the secondary country bring them back. Yes, they shouldn't be punished for there parents but its what has to be done. If we let the kids stay. orphanages will be fill with little Mexican children. Yes, I agree with your everyone deserves a good life...IF they earn it. Should a homeless family who is barley making it by be given money so they can have a good life? No the people should take responsibility that they have to work up the latter. That is the Capitolist way. The govermnet doesn't mess with your money but you have to work hard to get that money. the illegals shouldn't get a free pass because of where they come from. First let them become citizens through the right way to first of all be covered by the Constitution that gives CITIZENS the right to life liberty and the pursuit of happiness. The thing w/ the Constitution is it gives all the rights to CITIZENs not anyone who decides to want to be Americans. You have to work (believe it or not) to have those rights. Then after they become a citizen they can..."pursue Happiness" Goverment is there to help the Citizens of its society. illegals are people who cost that goverment much more than they provide. As you say if the illegals cost us 789,263,000,000 billion dollars compared to 16,000,000,000 they bring in its the goverments duty to do whats best 4 the people to GET RIDE OF THEM AND DEPORT DEPORT DEPORT!!! To make a proposal for a solution that..."compromises" We deport as many illegals as we can lets say clean the lint trap of america. When we have a good majority of illegals out of the U.S. we establish your solution to make becoming a citizen easier. Lets not go overboard to make it easier but still do something so the illegals don't have to resort to breaking in. This way we deal with getting a good amount of illegals out and help prevent future break ins.

Title: The United States government should substantially strengthen regulation of immigration to the United Content: P1: strengthening the regulation of immigration means strengthening the system which permits and regulates United States citizenship. Unauthorized practice is one aspect which I would like to introduce in terms of regulation. "Notario Fraud" is a serious issue to the regulation simply because it sets a precedent for the way in which immigrants will interpret the United States laws and in which they first come in contact with United states legal system. P2: Some immigrants that come to the U.S willingly come to the U.S and leave their families to start a better life, as stated. Notario fraud will prevent an individual who wishes to do so if they are misguided by actors and gate keepers of the law. If we accept that immigrant come to the U.S to start a better life, we most also enforce better practices of people who interpret the law, if the United States allows them to engage in such practice. P3: Some immigrants are granted the opportunity to create their own business as well as many American entrepreneurs. There are social programs, and community opportunities that also offer many job opportunities. The important aspect is that we allow the same platform for immigrants that we have for American citizens. If immigrants are misled, misinformed, and become intimidated by the legal system, this can have consequences and effects in which citizens and potential citizens relate to laws and the legal system. Regulation comes in many forms the most important is education; informing immigrants of all of their rights and accesses. we can possibly consider creating more confidential organizations for immigrants in which they can access information. C: The U.S. government should substantially strengthen regulation of immigration into the U.S.

Title: This allows illegals to masquerade as normal immigrants. Content: Allowing illegal immigrants to get drivers licenses is a security issue for America. Illegal immigrants are a threat to the US because they have not gone through the necessary background checks that all immigrants are supposed to go through before being allowed into the US to ensure that they are not going to harm American citizens. Giving illegal immigrants documents that- as proposition argument three says- could grant them access to state services and to a wider range of private services is dangerous[1]. There is no way for frontline state and business staff to determine whether drivers licence holders are migrants who have undergone appropriate police screening, or criminals with a history of dishonest or exploitative behaviour. The resolution may, therefore, allow disreputable individuals to falsely claim to be normalised American citizens. Alternatively, and more likely, the resolution will undermine the value and utility of state drivers licences – for Latin-American US citizens at the very least. As it becomes known that immigrants from the south bearing licences might be more likely to be dishonest, banks, stores and hospitals will become less willing to accept drivers licences as conclusive proof of a Latin-American individual’s identity. If the degree to which service providers will trust a driving licence is reduced, the improvements to illegal immigrants’ quality of life that the resolution brings about will be short lived. Moreover, legally resident Latin-Americans will find that their lives become much more difficult. Service providers will adopt a stance of suspicion toward Latin-American individuals, assuming that a Latino-American’s driving licence offers no useful indication as to his immigration status and background. Therefore, this policy constitutes a large security threat to America and its citizens, and a significant danger to the integration and lifestyles of thousands of Latino-American individuals. [1] "Position Paper: No Drivers Licenses for Illegal Aliens." News Blaze. Realtime News, 23 Sep 2001. Web. 30 Nov. 2011. http://newsblaze.com/story/20070923120657tsop.nb/topstory.html

Title: The US government should cease regulating its borders Content: This was an enjoyable, quick debate. I heartily thank my opponent. == Closing Remarks== 1. The Con argues that "The use of physical... the U.S. illegally." Certainly, border patrol stops *some*, but that statistic of 9000 does not include all the immigrants that the system *failed* to stop. As immigrants will always be able to find the chinks in the fence, we should focus inland on law enforcement. 2. Next, the Con states that "Illegal immigration is estimated... in each state." I must agree; illegal immigrants are like citizens in that they utilize government programs. However, if we cease border regulation, that will free up monetary resources to cover immigrant social program costs. Even better, the border patrol personnel could be put to work in the Immigration Service. If they can stop "9,000 people trying to enter," they can file 9000 more immigration applications. Now the immigrants are citizens paying taxes, a true solution compared to funneling them to holes in the fence.

Title: Illegal Immigration Content: You obviously are not understanding my argument. Illegals do not and should not have the same rights that we do. They have come over here illegally. We, as a nation, require certain standards to be met before you can become a U.S. citizen. I know that they have it rough in Mexico but they should not come in the United States illegally and reap the benefits of a law-abiding country. What kind of signal are we sending to the world, or to our citizens, when we legalize millions of illegal immigrants? We say, "Go ahead and break our laws because there are no consequences if you do." Let's just tell everyone to do what they want, legal or illegal, because in the end we all need to "modernize" and times will change to allow this type of behavior. That's not very logical to me. I say that we begin to deport all of those that have entered into the U.S. illegally. I don't think that we will be able to get rid of them all but we can try. This will send a signal to everyone that wants to become a U.S. citizen that they must follow our laws and must submit to the process that we have in place. I also believe that we need a fence. I don't know any of the logistics, but I would say that it needs to go from the southern tip of Texas all the way to west coast of California. Hiring more Border Patrol agents is also a necessity. I ask you this question, why should we have a Border Patrol if all we are going to do is allow anyone that wants into the U.S. to go ahead and come? Why do we have laws against illegal immigration? Should we allow anyone that wants in to the U.S. to freely enter? I'm not insulting you, I just believe that you do not understand the magnitude of the entire illegal immigration situation. You're solution is to legalize illegal immigrants. That completely goes against what our justice system is all about. Let's just legalize crystal meth because their are people that "need" to sell it to provide for their family. Let's legalize murder because some people can't control their actions and we shouldn't punish them because of their lack of self-control. This is a policy of appeasement. It never works.

Title: Should the US allow illegal immigrants currently in the US to have a path to citizenship Content: Ok, So now that I have waited for a few hours to get this statement, this is what you give me. This is too easy. First of all, Immigrants could account for the population increase. Therefore, We could have alot of workers to fill in some of the jobs that no one would want to take. So that's a plus. Second of all, the American people are becoming lazy, so if there is a ethnicity race to the jobs, the immigrants might take them or the American's will have to shape up and quit being so lazy. So I still agree with the fact that Immigrants be allowed to have citizenship in America.

Title: The United States Government should immediately repatriate all illegal immigrants. Content: The US should immediately repatriate all illegal immigrants due to the drain their presence creates on our economy. Never mind the fact that they are "illegal" and therefore don't belong here.

Title: The US government should cease regulating its borders Content: Against your first point, the government is patrolling the border strictly to prevent "weak spots." In what way is this damaging the region? For many years natives have been walking our land for years, they made paths, trails, etc to accommodate their own travels. These "weak spots" have been made check points and they could not possibly harm an entire ecosystem. how could we control our staggering number of illegal immigrants in the United States if we can not control the number of people entering? Obviously the government must use all that they can to accommodate both sides by an equal amount of action at home and on the borders. This could provide a large number of job opportunities for the law enforcement agencies across the border and within the government. This would decrease the unemployment rate and boost our economy. Illegal immigrants often take jobs that were once overlooked,but are now necessary to make a living away from legal taxpaying citizens.

Title: Should the US allow illegal immigrants currently in the US to have a path to citizenship Content: first is for acceptance

Title: Non Citizens Should Not Be Allowed to Vote In U.S. Elections Content: Argument: The main idea of allowing migrants to settle in the United States of America is for the fulfillment of the capitalist needs. When there is a surge in the employment opportunities, the government makes processes for the visas as seen during the Bracero Program period thus allowing people to settle and to spur the growth of the economy. When there is a deficit, which cause unemployment for the citizens, and-migrant policies like have been formulated so as to not lose the best minds but expel the less productive people who have slowed the growth of the economy. Counter: It should be worth noting some things left out when speaking of the Bracero Program. Workers were brought to the U.S. to fulfill manual labor jobs with the following basic human rights: Adequate shelter, food, sanitation, and a wage. Furthermore the promise they would not be discriminated, like exclusion from white areas. No where did the agreement promise any kind of political contribution in the areas of which they worked. Why? The purpose of their stay was work related only. Today's Non-Citizen, here legally, is required to be here on a work or student visa - both having clear implications as to their purpose, or a Green Card. Green Cards reflect a legal right to reside and work in the United States, and holders are required to pay taxes, register for selective service, and social security. They are also required to renew the Green Card. Why? Because they are here at the benevolence of the United States. You have to follow the rules, but if you want to have a say in the process, you must become a citizen. Argument: Morally, every person has a responsibility towards the state, and subsequently every state has a moral reciprocity towards their people. Non-Citizens have been an integral part of the American population, thus helping the society to evolve and transform for the good. But it is unfair that the state alone remain the oppressor, not allowing the people to have their say in the governance of the country. Argument: A non-citizen has the responsibility to follow the rules and laws of the state, by merit of the benevolence of the United States granting them the opportunity to reside and work in the United States. Utilizing the Bracero Program as an example, there are human rights which must be afforded by the state, but no-where is it required a non-citizen have political rights, or rights granted to those who fall under the Constitution. Remember, they are guests seeking to come here, not the other way around. I was stationed in Japan for three years. I had to pay Japanese tax, and abide by Japanese laws, and was afforded basic human rights- participating in their elections, and political system, however, was not an option. Argument: The purpose of an election is to represent the views and the ideals of the people and allow it to make a large scale impact. It is integrally defined as "by the people, of the people and for the people". When a person is denied this chance to represent himself in a national sphere, it is same as stripping him of his rights. Counter: If we were to take the view of every person who is not a citizen, and incorporate it in our political system, you would have legislation being passed on the part of individuals who can, at any time, decide to pull up, and move back to their country. There is standard of loyalty. Laws must be passed and rights afforded to people who have a vested interest in their country, not for those who can leave anytime they choose. Argument: Legally it is illegitimate for the oppression of minorities and disadvantaged communities, as supported both by the American law and more importantly International law, ratified by America. Stripping people of the right to vote, not only affects them but also their communities ability to make the problems heard and resolved. When this as the basement of empowerment is not fulfilled, any other minority empowerment program will fail thus wasting the taxpayers money Therefore it is counterproductive to allow the non-citizens to vote. Counter: Minority populations which are citizens. Given we have been living in times where the job market has been difficult, I would find it difficult to believe non-citizens are part of the disadvantaged group of which you speak. First, they are here for jobs - and are obviously getting them. Secondly, per your argument in the first paragraph, we would only be seeking to keep the best minds - I would think that would correlate to a well-paying job, only granted because it benefits the United States or the interests of the United States in some way. The compensation in such cases is monetary and quality of life. Political contributions are not part of the sign-on package. For the reasons I mentioned above. Argument: Going by your argument, where you have stated that the Oath refers to the law several times there is no instance of the first clause of "I hereby declare, on oath, that I absolutely and entirely renounce and abjure all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, state, or sovereignty, of whom or which I have heretofore been a subject or citizen" anywhere as a formal law. So for this debate we will be analyzing the case from your viewpoint excluding the first clause due to the absence of legally backed support which your argument is built upon. Counter: Actually the Oath of Enlistment becomes legally binding when administered by a public official. Ergo it infers law, even if it does not have the actual word 'law' other parts of the Oath. Argument: Every non-citizen is required to bear allegiance to the state, without disbanding his homeland when he has to enter the country - This can be inferred from the persecution of several non-citizens for treason, which indicates that law requires them to remain so. They should not actively criticize the constitution which fulfills the demand of being supportive to the constitution as a whole The US Army does not allow all the non-citizens to participate in military activities. This is the inability of the government to not provide opportunities and not their discretion /choose to refuse it. Finally contribute economically to the society, which is the main reason for immigration into America. Counter: First, it's not every non-citizen. You're talking about the term "Allegiance". When it comes to the United States, the following is noted: On the day before the Fourteenth Amendment was enacted, Congress declared in the preamble of the Expatriation Act, "the right of expatriation is a natural and inherent right of all people, indispensable to the enjoyments of the rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." and Section I one of "the fundamental principles of this government" (United States Revised Statutes, sec 1999). A natural born citizen of a different country and a legal citizen of the United States can possess dual citizenship. The same goes if a person is a natural born citizen of the United States and moves to another country, they can become a citizen. However, if the two countries become adversaries, the individual must make a choice, and renounce the citizenship of one when it comes to the allegiance. That only makes logical sense. Note, in either case, the individual is referred to as a citizen - While another country may allow a citizen to vote, the United States does not, as outlined by law. The U.S. Army does not even allow non-citizens to join the military unless they have a Green Card, and even then, they quickly open the door to the path of citizenship for those who join. I think it could be argued whether the reason for immigrating to the United States is to contribute to the economy. If anything, it's to find a job in the economy, because the economy is probably 10 times better than where they came from. Lastly, the point of bringing up all the Amendments was to point out the verbiage, "Citizen" when it spoke of the "right" to vote. In short, I find it asinine allowing a person which has demonstrated no loyalty to actively pursue citizenship in this country to participate in the political aspects of our country which will have lasting impressions on those who permanently reside within her borders. As I have said before, they could influence legislation, and later on down the line, if they don't like the system of government, up and leave. Citizenship is a privilege, not a right. There are privileges that come with citizenship. You will find the same mandate in many other countries throughout the world. When you take away those privileges, there is nothing to distinguish between a non-citizen and citizen influence in government. So, no. Non-Citizens should not be allowed to vote. Thanks for making me do home-work, and the debate! http://immigration-law.freeadvice.com... http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com... https://en.wikipedia.org...

Title: Illegal immigrants crowd-out Americans for social services. Content: Because illegal immigrants use social services, they crow-out American citizens for those social services, in addition to making them more expensive. These government expenses include government welfare, housing, food, and shelter. This is an injustice, and a major economic expensive for US citizens, all which justify deportation.

Title: Offering illegal immigrants driver's licenses would violate the rule of law. Content: Offering drivers licenses to illegal immigrants provides legal status to individuals that have knowingly broken US laws. The Immigration and Nationality Act clearly states that illegal aliens should be deported. These long-standing laws must be upheld. Offering illegal immigrants driver's licenses clearly violates these laws and the impression that the United States is capable of enforcing them. It also undermines the notion of rewarding law abiding citizens and punishing those that break the law. Why should illegal immigrants be allowed to get away with their illegal acts. US citizens (not illegal aliens) are not afforded this luxury of forgiveness in the face of the law. Therefore, the proposition is an unwarranted and immoral concession that undermines the consistency of US law.

Title: Due process for illegal immigrants Content: The inherent problem of that argument is the ability given to the government to deport anyone they want if they can not prove they are a citizen, naturalized or not. This takes away rights even from the actual citizens themselves if the government wants to deport them. The other question is why the fact that someone is a citizen or not changes their person. Why should a murderer or rapist who happens to be a citizen be paid for, but a responsible but illegal immigrant not be granted the right to due process? They may be wrong, and then they re deported, but at least they were given a fair chance to argue their point? To literally cite the Fourteenth Amendment of our own constitution- "...nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." The key word in the quote here is ANY. The article before this snippet specifically stated 'citizen' ("All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States..."), deliberately separating it from the section mentioning 'any person'. Your argument literally goes against what is stated in the Constitution, and what the Supreme Court has upheld for years; that even illegal immigrants are granted the right to due process.

Title: Illegal Immigration Content: To be clear, I am saying that illegal immigrants should be allowed to stay in the U. S. and apply for citizenship. The Con position will argue that all immigrants should be deported.

Title: The US government should cease regulating its borders Content: The purpose of border control is to preserve American citizens from illegal activities in the best interest of the nation. The use of physical blockade and surveillance increases the possibility of stopping illegal immigrants from entering. Arizona has been the center for crossings by illegal immigrants for many years. In 2009 the system stopped about 9,000 people trying to enter the U.S. illegally. Illegal immigration is estimated to cost the U.S. millions of dollars in lost income tax revenue. Not only is the United States at a loss of millions of dollars but illegal immigration also depletes government spending by overusing social welfare and education programs. TIME magazine states in California alone, $400million is spent on health care for illegal immigrants. CNN says that the care of illegal immigrants in Jacksonville, Florida costs taxpayers $44.5 million. Think of how much money is spent on illegal immigrants across the country, not just in each state.

Title: Illegal immigrants should be granted the rights of legal citizenship Content: Ah, I see where I may have been unclear. I believe that if an illegal immigrant does not become a legal citizen, then they should not get the rights of citizenship. If an immigrant becomes a legal citizen, instead of "jumping the border", than they do deserve the rights that come with citizenship.

Title: Illegal Immigration: Should we deport all illegal immigrants we find in the U.S. Content: Hello, republican view. It appears that you are avoiding many of my points, and we are also getting off topic. In the next round, please look back at the opening argument and answer each point in turn. I originally excused this for you're not having any space left over. I was relying on the fact that you would answer each point more fully in the following round. You failed to do so. I will SHOW you how to answer each point in turn. Nevertheless, here it goes: "for your solution we would only be making future immigrants easier to be citizens. It won't eliminate all the aliens in our borders now. So until you clarify i'll debate your solution now." All right, isn't that the purpose: to make them citizens, if it is easier to become citizens, then maybe they won't break in illegally. And let's be realistic, republicanview; neither of our solutions will "eliminate all the aliens". It's a big country, you can't eliminate "all" of the illegal immigration. We are not here to debate my solution, we are here to debate yours, hence the header. I am glad that you finally concede that they are a part of our society. "you continue to say that immigrants are a important part of our society but I keep showing you its not true" -your opening argument "illegals arte part of our ‘society'" -Your round one. I am glad that I am shedding some light on the issue for you, and that you are beginning to understand more. You then proceeded to talk about how there are a lot of illegal immigrants. Duh. You are evading my points and changing the subject. You talk about them changing our culture. You then reverted back to explaining what a big problem illegal immigration is. WE have already established that I agree that it is a problem, and it is the solution we are here debating. "If we make them citizens that money won't go away. They will be paying taxes but that money will still be gone" Do you think through these things before you post them? Neither solution will repay that money. You seem to want to deport them out of vengeance. You were uncomfortable with the inescapable reality I put in your face, so you started changing the subject, and talking about something COMPLETELY unrelated. What does culture have anything to do with this? I fail to see the relevance. There is one relevance that you so badly attempt at giving and that is the Latino culture promotes poverty. Ummm…WHAT?! Could you please try to back up the idea that some particular aspect of Latino culture causes slavery? Mariachi? Cinco de Mayo? Please try to be realistic. Spain shares many cultural aspects, and they are a moderately wealthy European country. You made a random guess of 1/3 of Latinos are immigrants. Random guesses don't serve as backing in a debate, next time, I want a REAL figure. You ignored what I said about the main causes of poverty in America, and for the sake of not repeating myself, go back and read it thoroughly, and really go back and read it this time, republicanview 8?) Not everyone is as childishly idealistic as to make a life-changing decision based on making a country better. WHO CARES? They are in a state of poverty. They move to America to do better. Anyways, I fail to see the relevance of this. You are seriously changing the subject, republicanview. "Illegal Immigration: Should we deport all illegal immigrants we find in the U.S." Stay on task, this is really frustrating.

Title: The United States government should substantially strengthen regulation of immigration to the United Content: P1. The debate is whether The United States government should substantially strengthen regulation of immigration to the United States. The issue is immigration in relation to United States citizenship. We participated in a debate for 3 rounds defending our premises on whether the substantial strengthening or not strengthening would explicitly explain a sound argument for pro and con. We are not debating the regulation immigrants or as in individual persons not belonging to the U.S, but rather the system in which declares the individual a citizen and allows them into the country. P2: As stated in premise 1 during the first round, Notario Fraud is one aspect of the immigration system that requires attention and revision. In my argument, the issue is not whether I argue for immigrants to enter or not enter the country. The issue is the substantial regulation, in which I argue, will uphold U.S laws, will minimize waste, and will increase education for those interpreting the law as well as increasing the confidence of immigrants who will have their first time experience with an unfamiliar government and unfamiliar laws. I argue to maintain, regulate and revise this legal process to provide a platform for immigrants who are faced with an adversary government, sometimes in an unfamiliar language. Those who study immigration law should gain legal certification and uphold U.S law as well serving those who wish to become legal citizens; they should be well informed, well educated, and make a conscious effort to provide legal aid for families. Fallacies committed: ad hominem debater (con) questions position instead of responding to the given premises and asks a meaningless question. The debater attempts to argue against (pro) based on an assumed ignorance of the topic for debate. P3: Strengthening the regulation of immigration to the United States does not imply a violent, nagging, persistence. It simply suggests research, a revision in legal language, in which U.S individuals who are properly accredited through federally recognized organization can communicate the proper legal information for individuals who seek citizenship. "The reason most come to the U.S is because the immigration system is as is." This statement is unclear, what aspect of the immigration system assumes more control? Your argument assumes that all immigrants come to the United States for the same reason which weakens this argument. To make such a broad statement as argued by you in Round 1 "Immigration creates jobs, because a lot of immigrants create their own businesses which allows for some employment opportunities .If the regulation of immigration is increased, this may cause for fewer immigrants to be let in, and for more immigrants to be deported." such as "immigrants" alludes to begging the question in your premise 3 for round 2. We cannot assume all immigrants create jobs and start businesses. Your argument "Strengthening the regulation of immigrants TO the U.S. would not allow the "same platforms for immigrants that we have for American citizens", because there would be more control over them (who can come in, the conditions they are allowed in under, etc.) does not relate and assumes the same for all immigrants who enter the country. A stronger regulation means a stronger system which prevents fraud and legal consequences for immigrants as well as criminal persecution for actors interpreting the immigrations laws. This argument contains a slippery slope, in which the arguer assumes as a change in procedure, law, or action, will result in adverse consequences such as the control of immigrants. Such regulation does not assume absolute control of the bodies of immigrants. It I don"t understand how the first sentence of your premise 3 for round 2 relates to the idea that a stronger regulation would deter them. The last sentence again, appeals to consequence in which regulation will ultimately control immigrants and also assumes all immigrants seek citizenship for the same reasons. If we are not regulating and remaining current with the legal language in which we use to interpret the law to citizens the immigration system will become burdened with fraud and create corrupt theories which authorized citizens interpret and communicate with immigrants or potential U.S citizens. By creating a fair platform for immigrants, we decrease the risks of deportation, of criminalization, and can maintain the integrity of the legal system and those who come in contact with it. C: The U.S government should substantially strengthen regulation of immigration to the U.S.

Title: Should the US allow illegal immigrants currently in the US to have a path to citizenship Content: I accept your challenge Eric. Maybe this time you can win on your choice of topic.

Title: should illgle immagrants be allowed citezenship Content: You stated that "if you live in a lower state you have to get special shots because of the illegals coming from Mexico." I have yet to see a single scrap of evidence that American citizens are required to take additional shots due to the influx of immigrants coming in from Mexico. You also stated that "plus, all the illegals are taking up the jobs a legal American could have which puts more American citizens into poverty." Most economists in America will find this statement utterly ridiculous. The Brooking's Institution's Michael Greenstone, said that, and I quote, "on average, immigrant workers increase the opportunities and income of Americans." Immigrants (whether they are illegal immigrants or not) increase the job opportunity's for Americans, because they start businesses and hire more workers. Our goal shouldn't be to send back the immigrants, but to welcome them. It's our responsibility to give them more chances to become lawful American citizens. It can take years for close relatives of U.S citizens to obtain Immigrant Visas. This difficult immigration process only encourages people to immigrate illegally. You also state that "also the illegals don't have to pay taxes." That's my point exactly! If illegal immigrants are allowed citizenship, then they will pay taxes! Many illegal or undocumented immigrants actually pay income and sales taxes anyhow. On average an immigrant, regardless of status, will pay 80,000 U.S dollars more in taxes than they use in government services over the course of their lifetime.

Title: Illegal Immigration Content: I FULLY UNDERSTAND ALL OF YOUR ARGUMENTS. I JUST DISAGREE WITH THEM. WELCOME TO DEBATE. - Illegals do not and should not have the same rights that we do. They have come over here illegally. We, as a nation, require certain standards to be met before you can become a U.S. citizen. + If they do not have the same rights we do then: THEY WOULD NEVER GET AN EDUCATION AND END UP IN VIOLENT CRIMES OR LIKE THE MAJORITY IN HOUSE CLEANING, ETC. OR THEY WOULD USE AMERICANS' SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS TO BUY HOUSES both of those take place now. - know that they have it rough in Mexico but they should not come in the United States illegally and reap the benefits of a law-abiding country. + why not? we are not even a law abiding country. this point is ridiculous and illogical. - What kind of signal are we sending to the world, or to our citizens, when we legalize millions of illegal immigrants? We say, "Go ahead and break our laws because there are no consequences if you do." Let's just tell everyone to do what they want, legal or illegal, because in the end we all need to "modernize" and times will change to allow this type of behavior. That's not very logical to me. + If these people are not legal they WILL NOT PAT TAXES, COMMIT SOCIAL SECURITY FRAUD, AND NOT GET AN EDUCATION IN SOME STATES OR ANY COLLEGES. I have made this point in every round and you have not refuted it. Please respomd to all three or you have agreed to them and will lose the debate. - I say that we begin to deport all of those that have entered into the U.S. illegally. I don't think that we will be able to get rid of them all but we can try. This will send a signal to everyone that wants to become a U.S. citizen that they must follow our laws and must submit to the process that we have in place. + SARCASM: Youre right. If we TRY to deport every illegal we can send a message. Logically, the message will be that, if you come to our country, we will send you back to your country so that you can...come back the next day and try again. TRYING to send all illegals back is illogical and no message will be sent. WE ARE ALREADY TRYING TO DEPORT ALL ILLEGALS!!! THAT IS AMERICAN LAW!!! HAVE YOU HEARD OF THE US IMMIGRATION AND CUSTOMS ENFORCEMENT AGENCY!!! - I also believe that we need a fence. I don't know any of the logistics, but I would say that it needs to go from the southern tip of Texas all the way to west coast of California. + this is so ridiculous!!! this fence would not support anything!!! theyve already tried to build a border fence!!! this fence would have to be very long and impossible to guard, therefore cracks would be made!!! walls never work(ed). the great wall of china didnot even work!!! theyll find a way in!!! boats, highways, planes exist!!! this would be tons of money pumped into something that would not work!!! THE NEW BORDER FENCE IS 700 MILES LONG. 1 PERSON A MILE IS NOT ENOUGH. 10 PEOPLE A MILE IS NOT ENOUGH. 100 A MILE IS A STRETCH. BUT JUST TO PLEASE YOU. THAT WOULD BE 700,000 BORDER PATROLS AND THAT WOULD STILL BE INEFFECTIVE. - Hiring more Border Patrol agents is also a necessity. I ask you this question, why should we have a Border Patrol if all we are going to do is allow anyone that wants into the U.S. to go ahead and come? + We dont allow anyone iunto the US. The debate is pro illagal immigration. - Why do we have laws against illegal immigration? + To stop illegal immigration... - Should we allow anyone that wants in to the U.S. to freely enter? + Yes. - I'm not insulting you, I just believe that you do not understand the magnitude of the entire illegal immigration situation. + Well. - You're solution is to legalize illegal immigrants. That completely goes against what our justice system is all about. + Well, imagine that. - Let's just legalize crystal meth because their are people that "need" to sell it to provide for their family. + What repeal laws? Thats ridiculous!!! Slavery is stil legal, you cant buy beer, wine or spirits, and women cant vote. Imagine this: marijuana is legal in some states and some people are for meth legalising. i.e. me!!! Get out of your conservative, protestant, texas bubble. - Let's legalize murder because some people can't control their actions and we shouldn't punish them because of their lack of self-control. + Nobody said that illegals cant control their actions. How is this even relevant? This does not make sense AT ALL. - This is a policy of appeasement. It never works. + ...wtf... ILLEGALS WILL POST LEGALISATION: PAY TAXES GO TO SCHOOL GO TO COLLEGE GET BETTER JOBS IMPROVE OUR ECONOMY BE FORCED OUT OF SOCIAL SECURITY FRAUD TO BUY HOUSES BE ABLE TO SUPPORT THEIR FAMILIES STOP USING UP OUR MONEY TO BUILD 700 MILE FENCES THAT ARE COMPLETELY INEFFECTIVE AND REQUIRE INNEFECTIVE BORDER PATROL p.s. your whole thing was about messages we would send to other controls by legalising illegals but what message would be sent to countries if we built a border fence? america is an isolationist nation that has not evolved from the cold war.

Title: Strengthening US Immigration Regulations Content: I am not sure as to why my premise would be invalid. We are talking about legality of citizens. Because public schools cannot turn down illegal immigrants, I'm sure there are illegal immigrants who have dropped out, along with natural-born as well. There is still the issue of kids in college debt. I am not sure what point you are trying to make in your second premise. You, in more words or less, stated that we should lower the regulations on people becoming american citizens, should we change what the law on murder so we won't have to worry about the issue of murder anymore? Or lower the regulations on sexual harassment so that we can rid of that issue to? Crime is crime, no matter how big and how small and there are no victim-less crimes. If we deport illegal immigrants we are deporting poverty. If they are trying to come here to pursue larger goals in life how can they do that with very limited skills and education? If they came here legally, they could receive government aid such as medicare and medicaid to assist them in making their lives better for themselves and their family. However, that is not the case. They also are obtaining fake documents such as social security cards to work. http://www.nytimes.com... So, not only are they committing the crime of coming into the United States but they are also committing identity theft. They can also use there to illegally receive government aid. While they may be working 2 or 3 jobs, they're are not actually making a sufficient amount of money to be over the poverty line. If they are making the "bare minium", as you say they are. How much could that possibly be? Being in poverty means they are more likely to commit crimes. http://www.americanprogress.org... "In some areas of the country, up to 12 % of felonies, 25% of burglaries and 34% of thefts are committed by illegal aliens." http://citizensforlaws.org... Not only that, 28 percent of the foreign-born workers over 25 haven't completed high school. Which means that the possibly of moving up on the ladder of success is very very little. There's barely any jobs you can get without a high school diploma, even less that a college degree where you can make enough money to support a family. If we take the number of median wage workers who are foreign born (not only illegal) is $511 a week that comes out to $24,528 a year. (Assuming that is gross) http://www.slate.com..., For a family of 4, the poverty line is about $23,850 for a family of four. http://useconomy.about.com... Assuming since those who were foreign born are here legally, those who are here illegally is substantially less. It is also selfish. If you bring your children to the united states illegally and you end p being deported, who is going to take care of your children? Themselves? Seems highly unplausible. It has happened before. Parents were deported back to their home countries, leaving their children behind back in America. Here's an example. http://www.cnn.com... In conclusion, we should regulate immigration of illegal immigrants in the United States, not only because it hurts our economy, it is a crime, punishable by law, just as any other crime is. It would make their lives easier to come into the United States legally and work for their living legally. If they are here legally, they can receive government aid. It is selfish to possibly leave your children behind. They are not as innocent of other crimes either, such as theft and murder and burglary because living in poverty there is a higher change you will commit a crime.

Title: THW give Amnesty for Illegal Immigrants Content: The US Code, Title 8, is very specific about what constitutes 'illegal alien' and the laws concerning the hiring, aiding, housing, etc. of those who are here illegally. If for no other reason, the term 'illegal' should declare why those who are here without proper documentation must be deported. The US Constitution allows for the creation and change of any existing laws. It defines 'citizen' and specifies the protections afforded by it. If we ignore the US Code and the Constitution, then we may as well just declare complete anarchy and have no borders. The reason that people want to come to the US is for freedom and opportunity. Without the Constitution, neither is protected. Without it, we are like every other nation on earth, obliterating the very reasons why the world wants to come to the US. Ignoring it makes us the same as the countries from which they came, and affords no one protection OR freedom. The abolishment of one law is the abolishment of them all. Should murder be ok? Should theft be ok? Do you have locks on your doors? Why? To keep people out? It's no different with our country's 'doors' than it is with the ones in your house, and the reasons are no different, either. You lock them to protect your family. You lock them to protect your valuables. You lock them to keep out things that can bring illness and disease. You lock them so that you can control what goes on under your own roof. Our country has borders for the very same reasons. Without borders, we are no nation. When our founding fathers came to this land and fought for our freedoms from King George, the outline of the reasons, the leadership, the creation of laws, etc. was defended with purpose supporting each one. That is the reason the Constitution is outlined the way that it is, and then further broken down into Articles and sections. They understood the importance of borders to allow freedom of the citizens. They understood the order of law that was needed to make a country, not an open-bordered section of land. To assure it, they took it one step further and allowed for the creation of the borders of states and the creation of state laws and individual preferences within each state, not subject to the overall governance of a federal government. That wasn't by accident and it wasn't unnecessary. They knew that with individual state laws, protected by federal law, the opportunity of a dictatorship or monarchy would be greatly limited. It was important for each state within its own borders, but more importantly for the borders securing the entire country. It wasn't just about keeping away from dictatorship, it was also about allowing a voice of the people within those borders. Without them, we also have no voice. I live in a neighborhood that is 90% Hispanic. Some are here illegally, more are here legally. Ask them. They saved thousands of dollars, pennies at a time, and waited years and years to get here the right way. They will be the first to defend their country, our country, and the first to tell you the importance of following our US Code and the US Constitution. It's why they worked so hard and waited so long to get here. It's everything to them, the same way that it should be to those of us who take it for granted. I've helped some of them with the paperwork to get their families here. They are proud of being here and respect what makes it so very special. We should, too. I understand the desire to live here, the importance of it. But if we open our borders there won't be anything left for others to want to come to. There won't be anything left for us. There won't be any way that we can ever close that gate again and maintain the United States of America.

Title: We should allow illegal immigrants to stay Content: I will be arguing that illegal immigrants should be allowed to stay in America. The first half of this response will focus on pointing out the flaws in Con's assertion. 1) "Illegal immigrants are blood sucking from America". Grammatical mistakes aside, this statement is a metaphor (I hope) and its meaning is null without rigorous explanation. 2) "They are on welfare". If the illegal immigrants you are concerned with are primarily Hispanic, then this statement is null and void of argument. According to statisticbrain.com, only 15.7% of all Americans on welfare are Hispanic or Latin@ in origin. Even if every single one of these people was an illegal immigrant (which I'm sure is a gross overestimation), then the ratio of Illegals on Welfare to Citizens on Welfare would be 3 : 17, or nearly six times more Legal American citizens than illegal americans. 3) "They steal jobs". Or, they go out and get jobs while the white American citizen feels too entitled to work such terrible jobs. Jobs like construction and janitorial services and waste management are, in fact, terrible jobs! But immigrants are willing to work those terrible jobs, which is why they receive them. 4) "They kill our white race". According to statistics released by the FBI, 83% of homicides of white victims, were committed by white offenders. In fact, the percentage of white victims killed by Hispanic or other criminals is less that 3%! This statement is flat out wrong. Now I will argue why I feel illegal immigrants should be allowed to stay in the US. 1) The US was founded by illegal immigrants. No one ever asked the Native American people for permission to live in North America, and in fact European settlers were responsible for a mass genocide of Native Americans. According to David Stannard, American historian and Professor of American Studies at the University of Hawaii, the European Settlers were responsible for the deaths of over 100 million Native Americans. We are all illegal immigrants. 2) "Liberty and Justice for All" does not mean "Liberty and Justice for native-born American citizens". 3) American culture will be positively influenced by the mixing of immigrant culture and what we have now. 4) Like I said before, immigrants are willing to work in jobs that entitled American citizens will not. 5) Let me list for you the names of some American immigrants: Wyclef Jean, Albert Einstein, Arnold Schwarzenegger, Aldous Huxley, Bruce Willis, and Bob Marley, to name a few.

Title: Should we deport illegal immigrants? (Not just from Mexico) Content: What I am saying is that immigrants need to get their citizenship legally. I am not against immigrants in the slightest but I believe that they need to come to this country legally. As for babies, I believe that there is an easy solution. A special building, for the infantile illegal immigrants would be built, and eventually they would be up for adoption by families. They could then learn to speak English and go to school. They would be considered citizens. I do believe that immigration laws are here for a reason. I have read up, and out of the 11 million illegal immigrants that have moved to the United States, of which 820,000 have been convicted of a crime. I think that all immigrants need to apply for citizen ship for the safety of us all. I am not saying that all illegal immigrants are criminals, or that they are more prone to commit crimes, but we need to do background checks to make sure that no immigrants are criminals who would endanger our society. That is why we have a process of citizenship that people need to complete to become a citizen. Now, I think that all illegal immigrants who have been discovered should be forced to apply for citizen ship. If they have nothing to hide, they will accept, and if they are able they will become a citizen. A large percentage of illegal immigrants in the United States have been living here for an extended period of time and that means that they should have adjusted to our society and would easily pass the test and receive their citizenship. They would receive another attempt should they fail the test. If they fail it again, then they are not fit to be in society. The laws of immigration are here for a reason, and those who do not follow them must be reprimanded (deportation) or inducted as a full fledged citizen.

Title: Resolved: Birthright citizenship should be abolished in the United States Content: This is where your whole argument is wrong. If we abolish birthright citizenship we can put a law in place that allows only babies of citizens to become citizens at birth. Also while illegal immigrants come her for opportunity, they can do that but they need to do it in the proper and legal manner. That are protocols and regulations that they need to follow in order for them to become citizens and with this it would cause our country to be more american, rather than many other countries illegal immigrants coming here and immediately becoming citizens because they have a baby. The 14th Amendment needs to be changed because it is outdated. Also when you say that changing the constitution is unjust, you are mistakenly wrong because changes are made all the times. These changes are called Amendments, these Amendments are there to fix mistakes and problems within the constitution. A new Amendment can be made in order to amend the 14th and help to fix the common misinterpretation that we have today. Thus i would like to finish my argument by giving an analogy. Say you are waiting in line at islands of adventure for the hulk, the line is the time average people have to wait and the ride itself is the gaining of citizenship. Now think if someone were to cut you right when you get to the front of the line and they did not have to wait at all. So now in regard to the debate does it seem fair for an illegal person to just be given immediate citizenship over a person who has waited up to 2 years? Do you think that is fair? How would you feel?

Title: Effort to regulate our countrys borders Content: First of all, if the reason they cannot afford to become citizens is because they cannot take time off of their low paying jobs back from their home country to learn all the things that the citizenship test entails, they must get here quickly in order to get a job before they starve to death. Secondly they cannot become a citizen once here without a high risk of deportation which has serious consequences when they are returned to their home country. Sure there are some who are not willing to get citizenship but a large majority of illegal immigrants would like nothing more than the security against deportation of a citizenship in the United States. Finally, I fail to see how illegal immigrants are any more dangerous than the legal ones. I would say that the legal ones are often more dangerous than the illegals.

Title: The United States Government should immediately repatriate all illegal immigrants. Content: So, you make some valid points. However, what about the children of illegal immigrants that we must educate with our tax dollars. Recently, they wanted to even give them access to our community colleges that are already overloaded. Illegal immigrants are also known to bring such problems as drugs, illegal arm sales and gang activity.

Title: Goes Against Wider US Policy Content: So far the prop has framed this debate as being one with a massive problem of immigration, and catching and deporting all of the illegal immigrants as a solution, with racial profiling as the method of doing that. Not only is this not going to be effective, but it is not even necessarily desirable to get rid of all the current illegal immigrants in the US. We agree that stopping future illegal immigration is crucial, but this can be achieved through tighter border control and creating a better situation back in Mexico. A better way of dealing with current illegal immigrants is the 'path to citizenship' proposed by Barack Obama [[http://www.economist.com/node/12321563?story_id=12321563]]. The essential idea is that the immigrants would turn themselves in in return for an amnesty and the opportunity to become citizens by paying a fine, learning English and gaining or continuing employment. As so many of the immigrants are already employed, this third issue isn't a problem. It would also create better circumstances for them, allow them to go to the police for protection (reducing their reliance on crime and gangs as an alternative) and also allow them to integrate more with American society. The route to citizenship is also cheaper than having more police and expensive prisons to detain the immigrants. It doesn't matter whether will provide a greater incentive to people wanting to try to immigrate illegally, when the threat of deportation and being shot at the border currently makes no difference. The prop's motion and the route to citizenship are directly conflicting. Racial profiling paints a picture of these people as evil, illegal aliens when really many of them are working hard to sustain themselves, it puts people off turning themselves in, and it is aimed towards detaining these people and eventually removing them from the country. This aim contradicts the aim of allowing them to stay within the country and try to become good American citizens.

Title: We should keep out illegal immagrants and secure our border Content: That's interesting, because according to the center of immigration studies, 71% of illegal immigrants are on welfare. That means that these people come in undocumented, and take our money. Yes, they work for less money, but that means they they would more likely get hired for a job (illegally because they are illegal and its below the minimum wage) which takes those jobs away from actual Americans. People that were born here and are legal citizens. You know who else it takes jobs away from? Those people who waited in line for a long time, so they could actually become a real citizen of the United States. They are not here and looking for jobs, but its harder because people that bypassed them illegally, took those jobs from them, and their not even legal! Back to your point about "the people you would need to support are those in jail." Yes, we do half to support them, thank you for bringing that up. 29% of the entire U.S. prison population is made up of illegal immigrants according to the The Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR), in an article entitled "Criminal Aliens" on its website (accessed July 10, 2010). Yes, 29%. It costs so much money to support an inmate. On average it costs about $168,000 a year to house an inmate according to The California State Prisons Association. If there is roughly 70,000 illegal inmates, that's around 11.5 billion dollars a year. Really? Just in the category of prison inmates, we lose 11.5 billion dollars a year from illegal immigrants. Plus the 71% on welfare. But your right, some immigrants do pay taxes. About 50% of them do. But you know what's funny? Based on estimates compiled by the Institute for Taxation and Economic Policy (ITEP), the Immigration Policy Center reported that there was $11.2 billion in taxes paid by illegal immigrants in 2010 . So even if you take all the money we get from the illegal immigrants, its still less than the costs of prison inmates. Then you add welfare(It is estimated that states spend between 11 billion to 22 billion dollars on welfare for illegal aliens every year ), and the education system (It is estimated that 12 billion dollars a year is spent on primary and secondary education for illegal immigrants), and the welfare system (Research reveals that 2.5 billion dollars a year is spent on Medicaid for people who have immigrated to the U.S. unlawfully). All in all, we spend $338.3 on illegal immigrants. Ok, just to make you feel better, I will subtract the 11.2 billion that they pay in taxes, so its really $327.1 billion that we spend. That's 2.5% of our entire national debt! We could be using that money to stimulate the economy! Lets just let the people who play by the rules in here, and not the ones who cheat to get ahead.

Title: should all illegal immigrants get amnesty Content: I would like to begin this round by laying down one fact. First, there are between 7 and 20 million illegal immigrants in the United States. http://www.csmonitor.com.... Additionally, I would like to ask my opponent one question: if all these illegal immigrants came into the United States legally, would you turn any away, and would you be supportive of them? America was, of course, founded by immigrants, and is currently populated with the sons and daughters of immigrants, so I think most Americans should be supportive of immigration in principle. Because my opponent has not stated his opinion on this idea, I will assume that he or she is supportive of large-scale legal immigration unless he or she were to say otherwise in a response. This preface leads me to the following argument: Illegal immigrants are often portrayed as being leeches who suck away American jobs, and in most other scenarios, I would be against illegal immigrants. They don't pay taxes, and receive much of the benefits normal citizens do receive. However, I believe the current illegal immigrants should be granted amnesty for one reason: if you are poor, it is nearly impossible to immigrate legally, let alone become an American citizen. Many of America's immigrants in the past would not have been able to immigrate legally, because they would be too poor in the current system. To immigrate legally, you need all sorts of documentation, and while I believe these papers are a noble attempt to stop the people like drug dealers from getting in to America, most of these Latin American immigrants simply do not have the paperwork necessary. When you are living in total poverty under an oppressive government, it is difficult to keep track of things like birth certificates, if you even had them in the first place. http://www.alternet.org... Therefore, I believe that until the immigration process stops becoming a bureaucratic nightmare, all illegal immigrants should be granted amnesty. In addition, the United States should allow its immigration process to be more open, and allow immigration on a larger scale.

Title: should illgle immagrants be allowed citezenship Content: I'm not against immigration thank you very much. I'm against illegal immigration. illegal immagrants take up jobs that are for us that are legal and thanks to Obama we have less jobs and they are taking them, and i live in Colorado were there are a lot of illegal immigrants here because we are really close to Texas and Arizona, and this is true because i have friends that are illegal immigrants. now i think that immigrants that were brought here illegally when they were small children should be granted citizen ship because they had no choice, because they were children. this is my closing argument.

Title: Allowing Illegal Immigrations To Still Get Benefits Content: Debate OutlineThis is a debate about whether or not illegal immigrants should receive the same benefits legal immigrants and citizens would receive in a country. For example: insurance, employment, housing, Welfare, Social Security, foodstamps. Structure: The debate will consist of four rounds: Acceptance Thesis and Opening Argument Rebuttals and Arguments Rebuttals and Conclusions [no new arguments should be made] General rules: Throughout the debate, a set of rules are to abided by, by both contenders. Each time a rule is broken it shall be considered by all voting parties preceding the conclusion of the debate. Standard debate rules apply: no insulting, keep it appropriate, keep bias minimal. And with that said, I wish luck to the person that accepts this debate. Hopefully this will be more fun and insightful!

Title: Illegal Immigration Is Bad For Americans Content: Why should illegal immigrants be able to even get jobs here in the first place? If you are not an American Citizen, you should not be entitled to the same rights that an American Citizen has. I forget the name of the law, but it goes something like this: If you are not a citizen of America and you are in America, you: A) Are not protected under the law by the constitution or it's amendments since they are reserved for American Citizens. B) You are however, held responsible for any criminal acts that you commit. You say that Illegal Immigrants could be a major contributer to the economy if they became citizens. I agree, somewhat. If they are actively applying for citizenship or else taking a citizenship course, they should be allowed to stay. If they are simply here to either commit crimes or steal American jobs, get the hell out. If they come on a visa, okay, but once it runs out, get the hell out. Wouldn't it make more sense for American Citizens to get those jobs first?

Title: Immigration and Amesty Content: Immigrants are not paying the income tax that all American citizens pay from their salaries. According to Jim DeMint, "An exhaustive study by the Heritage Foundation has found that after amnesty, current unlawful immigrants would receive $9.4 trillion in government benefits and services and pay more than $3 trillion in taxes over their lifetimes. That leaves a net fiscal deficit (benefits minus taxes) of $6.3 trillion. That deficit would have to be financed by increasing the government debt or raising taxes on U.S. citizens" (1). Illegal immigrants do pay property taxes; there is no way around that, but they are not paying income tax off of the money they make to support their families. Illegal immigrants take more money from the government than they do paying it back. They take advantage of social services for citizens, abuse them, and then create a deficit, which in turn will raise taxes even more for the citizens of the United States. Granting amnesty to illegal immigrants would be unfair the the citizens of the nation. DeMint also expresses "People the world over are attracted to the United States because we are a nation of laws. Granting amnesty to those who broke the law and putting them on a path to citizenship would be unfair, would encourage more bad behavior and would impose significant costs on American families" (1). People in other nations are attracted to the United States because it is a land of laws and opportunity. By abusing this, illegal immigrants are making the lives of citizens more difficult and expensive to live. In order for someone to become a United States citizen, they should enter the country legally, pay taxes, and not be a reason that increases taxes for people already citizens of the nation. DeMint, Jim, and Robert Rector. "The Burden of Amnesty." Washington Post. 07 May 2013: A.17. SIRS Issues Researcher. Web. 24 Oct 2013.

Title: immigration Content: I am tired your false accusations. I never said about Americans losing jobs. You have a weak argument and you are trying to change the words I say. Also it is unrealistic to say all the illegal immigrants just got up and left in one day. That would never happen, and would be an impossible feat. Also your argument: "a large amount of illegal immigrant come here and then have children. these children are natural citizens. tell me: would you only deport the parents, leaving the children to be orphans, or would you deport the children too, who never broke any laws, are natural citizens, and who you would be putting them in a state of poverty? this is only one of many examples of the various complexities of a project of this magnitude and impact" First of all, I don't think that should be a law. I don't think if you are born in the US or any of its territories you should automatically become a US citizen. It should be if one or more of your parents are US citizens you become one. That would eliminate that problem right off the bat. But since that is not the case it should be the parents decision. It should be the parents decision on whether or not they stay or go with them.

Title: Immigration Content: I disagree with your point about "If everyone is given a path to citizenship, then there would be no need for the terms illegal and legal. We would all be Americans, having all the equal rights and privileges. " I think if the government promote this kind of unlimited immigration policy, the country will be out of control. Actually, almost every country in the world has its immigration restrictive laws, for the reasons of structure of population, national security, cultural protection, trade safety, etc. Therefore, some limitations in immigration to divide immigrants into legal and illegal are necessary.

Title: America should create a pathway to citizenship for illegal and other immigrants. Content: Illegal immigrants already waste a lot of money. Illegal immigrants being given a pathway towards citizenship would show disregard for the federal government's laws. Illegal immigrants also take away jobs that should belong to legal immigrants.

Title: Immigration (w/ 5 rounds) Content: Your first argument points out that most Americans are descendants of immigrants. This is very true. However, it is important to note that even then, many people were turned away. All incoming immigrants, especially the poor and lower classes, were subject to rigorous examinations before they were allowed to become part of American Society. Ellis Island in New York was the gateway for thousands of immigrants and during its peak, could handle 15,000 people a day. Even then, not everyone was admitted into the country. All immigrants were subjected to screening. This screening helped to ensure that those who carried diseases and those who would cause trouble would stay out of the country. Why can this not be done today? Those who enter illegally have not been screened and can be dangerous. THESE ARE NOT AMERICAN CITIZENS, they do not have the same rights. Since it would be impossible to screen all illegals, then they should not be allowed in the country because of the risk they pose to real American citizens. Those who truly want to become Americans for the right reason should seek legal immigration that way all immigrants can be deemed suitable for American society and can mesh well into society without threat. It makes no sense to allow illegal citizens access to America when there is a legal process to do so. If our ancestors could go through the much stricter entrance exams of old, then so can those who want to immigrate today.

Title: This is a gateway privilege that allows these people to integrate into American society. Content: These people do not deserve to use the services of the USA. They are not citizens, they are law-breakers and society has no obligation to make life easier or more comfortable for those who break the law. Regardless of their contributions to society or the economy, illegal immigrants have broken the law. The consequences of their breaches of the law should be remedied. If necessary, illegal immigrants should be punished in proportion to the harm that their act has caused. Under no circumstances should illegal acts allow these individuals to gain access to the status and legal privileges that citizenship confers.

Title: Birthright Citizenship Should Be Abolished In The US. Content: I stand in firm affirmation of this resolution. I believe that it is unfair, unjust, cheating, and not what the creators of the 14th Amendment originally intended. Firstly, it is important to know that birthright citizenship is one of the most controversial issues in immigration policy. The topic rose to the forefront in April of 2010 when Senator Lindsey Graham caused a stir by calling children who obtained their citizen status through birthright "anchor babies." Contention 1: Birthright citizenship allows illegal immigrants to cheat the system and immediately become US citizens - Birthright citizenship gives illegal immigrants a motive for cheating the system and finding way to become legalized citizens. In a recent study there were approximately 11.2 illegal immigrants in the United States. The 14th Amendment gives motive for all immigrants to cheat there way into gaining US citizenship by having children. The process of becoming a United States citizen normally takes between 5 months and 2 years. A person who has a baby on American soil takes one. Because the baby is now a United States citizen the process is sped up immensely for parents. It is almost guaranteed that the parents will get citizenship because the government will not forcibly deport the parents away from the baby or remove a US citizen, this being the baby. Contention 2: Birthright citizenship is unfair, unjust, and does not create an equal society - I believe that if we allow this bill to remain it gives people who have a child here illegally an unfair advantage. Think about the thousands of people that have to wait through the process for 2 years. The people who have to pay and study in order to become a US citizen. Also think of the people who were paying taxes and benefiting the US economy while the illegal immigrants were illegally in the country and used a leu poll in order to become a citizen. Does that seem fair. Our country is based on a place where we are all considered equal. Does a person who has no knowledge of our country and became a citizen over night deserve to be a citizen more than the hardworking man who has been struggling to gain citizenship for the past 2 years, or the man who has studied and payed for tests, or the woman who has been doing local jobs everywhere in order so that she can pay for the documents and tests in order to become a citizen? The answer is no. Convention 3: Birthright citizenship is not what creators of the constitution originally planned - The 14th Amendment was created in July of 1868. The men who created it would have no idea what would happen 144 years later. It was originally made so that recently freed African Americans would have citizenship if they were born here. Present day this is a means for illegal immigrants to unlawfully sneak past the system and gain citizenship. There have been other countries that have corrected laws similar to this. In Ukraine, they recently got rid of their "Tourist Baby" bill. This bill now states that if you have a baby in Ukraine and you are not a citizen of Ukraine you will not be granted citizenship. So now back to us, I believe that if we abolish birthright citizenship we can create a new bill that is geared towards giving citizenship to babies born of legal citizens of the United States. This would create a more fair and just system and would also clear up the controversy that the original founders of the 14th Amendment could not foresee.

Title: illegal immigrants should have paths of citizenship Content: As the audience can see, he has failed to respond to my questions. He has the BOP. I will make a petite argument just for the sake of winning. Illegal immigrants should not have paths of citizenship because then they will have to pay a lot in taxes with very low paying jobs. It is better for them to stay illegal so that they may get through the system without having the United States take their money. Also, they would most likely get on welfare, which would throw the USA into even deeper debt than it is. The United States can not afford anymore debt. (1) By the way, this is not the responce I'd use in a real debate. I am just making a simple arguement that won't be responded to properly. (1). www. usdebtclock. org

Title: illegal immigration and outsourcing: practically similar Content: I didn't reiterate that some use welfare. I addressed government services such as education and subsidized healthcare, which are used by those with and without jobs. Other than the employer's portion of the payroll tax, illegal immigrants with jobs don't contribute to the government's tax income, meaning that they are draining our funds when they use these services without doing their part to replenish them. If we want to keep up these services at the same level then citizens are forced to pick up the slack which takes money out of their pockets and decreasing aggragate demand. The new service jobs created through outsourcing manufacturing are not "beans paying". They range from car salesmen to stock brokers, many new services are demanded when prices go down because then people have more money to spend, as a result employers who provide those services need to take on extra employees. That's just simple economics. This is benefit is unique to outsourcing in that if we kept manufacturing jobs in the U.S. but gave them to illegal immigrants, the benefits would be cancelled by the negative tax-related impacts that I spoke of earlier.

Title: America should support blanket amnesty for illegal immigrants. Content: The benefits of illegal immigration do not outweigh the negatives. First of all, illegal immigrant labor will depress American wages and keep the unemployed or underemployed out of the job market (Dann). Even with wage laws negotiated by unions, granting illegal immigrants a path to citizenship will simply make it more difficult for American citizens to find work and support their families. Proponents of amnesty argue that illegals take care of the dirty manual labor that "Americans wouldn't do," but this absurd assumption is false. There is no job that would not be filled by American citizens if all the illegals in this country disappeared (Hawkins). Even if the "jobs Americans wouldn't do" statement were true, unskilled workers eventually become a burden on society. When they become too old to perform the hard menial labor for which they were hired, the cost of taking care of them will greatly exceed what we pay in taxes (Hawkins). Greedy business owners want to maximize their profits and minimize spending. Therefore, they hire illegal immigrants over American citizens because they do not have to pay them what the job is worth. These employers exploit the tide of illegal immigration selfishly, and increase the hardships of already struggling Americans. Also, awarding amnesty will cause rampant identity fraud and a new surge of illegal immigration. In 1986, Ronald Reagan passed the Immigration Reform and Control Act, which granted amnesty to 1.5 million illegal immigrants that had entered the country before 1982. The law promised to tighten subsequent immigration policies and penalize employers who hired illegals over citizens. However, it merely welcomed another wave of illegal immigration as well as widespread document fraud. As a result, today there are more than 11 million undocumented immigrants in this country (Dann). If amnesty were granted again, it would invite even more aliens to enter this country illegally and be allowed to stay without repercussions. In conclusion, United States citizenship is a precious thing that should not be dealt out to just anybody, especially those whose first accomplishment within our borders was to break our laws. If we reward any and all illegal aliens with amnesty, we are compromising the value of American citizenship and the dignity of the country. Works Cited Dann, Carrie. "Humanity? Practicality? Amnesty? The arguments for and against immigration reform. " NBC News. 12 April 2013. Web. 27 October 2013. http://nbcpolitics.nbcnews.com.... Hawkins, John. "5 Reasons Illegal Immigrants Shouldn"t Be Given American Citizenship." N.p. 23 February 2010. Web. 27 October 2013. http://www.rightwingnews.com....

Title: America should support blanket amnesty for illegal immigrants. Content: The benefits of illegal immigration do not outweigh the negatives. First of all, illegal immigrant labor will depress American wages and keep the unemployed or underemployed out of the job market (Dann). Even with wage laws negotiated by unions, granting illegal immigrants a path to citizenship will simply make it more difficult for American citizens to find work and support their families. Proponents of amnesty argue that illegals take care of the dirty manual labor that "Americans wouldn't do," but this absurd assumption is false. There is no job that would not be filled by American citizens if all the illegals in this country disappeared (Hawkins). Even if the "jobs Americans wouldn't do" statement were true, unskilled workers eventually become a burden on society. When they become too old to perform the hard menial labor for which they were hired, the cost of taking care of them will greatly exceed what we pay in taxes (Hawkins). Greedy business owners want to maximize their profits and minimize spending. Therefore, they hire illegal immigrants over American citizens because they do not have to pay them what the job is worth. These employers exploit the tide of illegal immigration selfishly, and increase the hardships of already struggling Americans. Also, awarding amnesty will cause rampant identity fraud and a new surge of illegal immigration. In 1986, Ronald Reagan passed the Immigration Reform and Control Act, which granted amnesty to 1.5 million illegal immigrants that had entered the country before 1982. The law promised to tighten subsequent immigration policies and penalize employers who hired illegals over citizens. However, it merely welcomed another wave of illegal immigration as well as widespread document fraud. As a result, today there are more than 11 million undocumented immigrants in this country (Dann). If amnesty were granted again, it would invite even more aliens to enter this country illegally and be allowed to stay without repercussions. In conclusion, United States citizenship is a precious thing that should not be dealt out to just anybody, especially those whose first accomplishment within our borders was to break our laws. If we reward any and all illegal aliens with amnesty, we are compromising the value of American citizenship and the dignity of the country. Works Cited Dann, Carrie. "Humanity? Practicality? Amnesty? The arguments for and against immigration reform. " NBC News. 12 April 2013. Web. 27 October 2013. http://nbcpolitics.nbcnews.com....... Hawkins, John. "5 Reasons Illegal Immigrants Shouldn"t Be Given American Citizenship." N.p. 23 February 2010. Web. 27 October 2013. http://www.rightwingnews.com.......

Title: Immigration (w/ 5 rounds) Content: The point is that illegals are not American citizens and should not be treated as such. Your argument wants to give everyone who wants to, the rights of American Citizens just for hopping a border. This is not feasible nor should it be treated as such. Myron Weiner, PhD, a professor of Political Science at the Massachussets Institute of Technology, on ther issue of immigration and illegal immigrant rights stated that "What we don't need--at the expense of workers and taxpayers--is the kind of solution [where] everyone present within the boundaries of the United States ought to have the same rights and benefits. It would be politically irresponsible to turn these legislative issues over to the courts to decide on the basis of constitutional principles. Instead, we need reasoned analysis and public discussion of how we can balance diverse objectives to accomplish what is fiscally possible, what is humane, and what best serves the goals of incorporating migrants into citizenship, deterring illegals, maintaining public health, and protecting children." The constitution protects American citizens, not illegal immigrants. There are difficulties, and genocide, and civil war, and strife across the world. Much like we cannot send our military to protect those around the world, we cannot be expected to take in the refugees of the world. As Americans, we need to dedicate ourselves and our country towards the betterment and portection of U.S. citizens. That should be the nation's top priority. Helping illegals should not take priority over U.S. citizens. As stated before, if someone wants to flee from turmoil, they can escape to America and receive amnesty. There is no reason or need for illegal immigration.http://immigration.procon.org...

Title: Birthright Citizenship Content: My opponent seems to have switched to another account.For educational purposes, I negate.C1: Birthright Citizenship encourages illegal immigrationGiving instant citizenship to kids of illegals provides several incentives to migrate illegally.A. DeportationHaving a child citizen means the illegal parents are less likely to be deported (1). In addition to being an incentive, this is a violation of justice. Immgrants become less likely to be punished for breaking the law, for something as arbitrary as having a kid. If someone comes here against US laws, they should be punished and deported back to where they came from. They shouldn't be able to use a baby as a cop-out.B. AnchoringThe term "anchor baby" was coined when immigrants would come here illegally, have kids, and when those kids grew up, the parents could be in the US at any time despite being illegal. That is possible due to birthright citizenship. By having a baby in the US and it gaining citizenship, illegals become legal despite breaking laws. Also, the parents will be allowed in the US even if the immigration quota (# of immigrants allowed annually) is full. So if a Mexican wants to come here, but she can't because we've already had 90,000 Mexicans come here this year, she uses birthright citizenship as an incentive to come illegally, to bypass the quota. C. WelfareIn Darces v. Woods, the Supreme Court ruled that illegal alien parents are entitled to US welfare if they have an American citizen child (2). So they can come illegally, but still get food stamps and Medicaid? I dont think so. You have to follow the law to benefit from the law. And remember, birthright citiznship enables this by placing immigrant children within the criteria for welfare qualification.D. Empirically provenIts not just theoretics. According to the Texas Review of Law and Politics, almost 10% of all births in the US are from illegal immigrant mothers (3). Additionally, "Many of these mothers frankly admitted that the reason they entered illegally was to give birth to an American citizen."E. Illegal immigration badThe Federation for American Immigration Reform estimates that illegal immigration costs Americans 113 billion dollars a year (4). If even one percent of that can be alleviated by abolishihng the Birthright incentive, thats over a billion dollars you're saving through a Con ballot.C2: Misapplication of the lawThe fourteenth amendment is Birthright Citizenship. But it was passed in 1868. This was shortly after the Emancipation Proclomation by Abraham Lincoln, "freeing" the slaves. The amendment was passed to expand the freedom of African-Americans, so they would be treated fairly as citizens (4). It was NOT passed so that illegal aliens could use it to come to America against US law. Incentivizing crime is probably not what the framers had in mind when they wrote this amendment. So we see that the Bithright Citizenship clause is being severely misapplied. It is being exploited by foreigners who want to bypass the quota and get free baby food. So because the origin of this law has no backing in regards to the current state of affairs, it would be desirable to repeal it.1. http://illegalillegals.com...2. http://law.justia.com...3. http://www.trolp.org...4. http://www.foxnews.com...5. http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk...

Title: America should support blanket amnesty for illegal immigrants. Content: Citizens are more likely than illegal immigrants to commit crimes, but aliens still contribute to the imperative issue of criminality in America. One is more likely to die from a car accident than from drowning, but does that mean swimming safety should be taken any less seriously? In 2011, the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement removed 396,000 people from this country, the highest number ever, and fifty-five percent of them were convicted criminals ("Republicans...crimes"). Therefore, illegal immigrants cannot be granted the rights of citizens because it would only encourage unrestrained immigration and an increase in the crime rate. The threat that amnesty poses to national security should also be considered. The majority of terrorist acts committed in the United States have been perpetrated by people from countries abroad. Granting illegal immigrants amnesty would "open the flood gates," relaxing our immigration policies even further and increasing the risk of terrorism ("Top Ten Pros and Cons"). The highly reputable Center for Immigration Studies predicts that, as the requirements for citizenship become easier to obtain, immigrants will create false documents just to obtain green cards or amnesty, heightening the risk of terrorists slipping through the cracks ("Is it...Illegal Immigrants?"). The risk that illegal immigrants pose to the safety of American citizens cannot be undermined, and granting them amnesty would only put the country's safety in jeopardy. Works Cited "Is it a Bad Idea to Legalize the Illegal Immigrants?" Illegal Immigration Statistics. 2013. Web. 21 October 2013. http://www.illegalimmigrationstatistics.org....... "Republicans decry 'deadly' policy as report shows illegal immigrants committing new crimes." FoxNews.com. 31 July 2012. Web. 23 October 2013. http://www.foxnews.com...... "Top Ten Pros and Cons." Procon.org. 2009. Web. 21 October 2013. http://immigration.procon.org.......

Title: America should support blanket amnesty for illegal immigrants. Content: Illegal immigrants should be granted all educational and health benefits that citizens receive regardless of their legal status. In 1982, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Plyler v. Doe that undocumented children have the same right to attend public primary and secondary schools as U.S. citizens. About 1.6 million undocumented immigrants are children and allowing them education is allowing them a future in life. Not doing so, however, restricts the success which they may have otherwise received as a result of education. Also, preventing immigrants from gaining basic health benefits is actually a technique that will only increase health care spending and add to a sicker U.S. population. Lawmakers have authorized a special Medicaid fund that mostly goes towards providing emergency treatments for undocumented immigrants. The program costs about $2 billion per year, and most of that money is used on delivering babies for pregnant, undocumented women. However, since the $2 billion provided for undocumented immigrants is only set aside for pregnancies, there is still a large gap in the services provided for these people. The lack of access to care services is a problem given that low-income undocumented immigrants tend to have specialized and chronic health care needs such as diabetes and obesity. Everyone deserves a chance at life, even illegal immigrants reasoning that they should be given a chance of education and a chance to attain health care. Works Cited "Should Children of Illegal Immigrants Have the Right to an Education in the US?" People. Web. 15 Oct. 2013. "Why Undocumented Immigrants Should Have Access To Taxpayer-Funded Health Care." ThinkProgress. Web. 15 Oct. 2013

Title: Illegal Immigration In California Content: Our government certainly does not protect illegal immigrants' rights over its own citizens but if you have some examples that would be great. Every human being has innate rights, no matter their immigration status.They get rights because they are human. I assume that my opponent is referring to Sanctuary Cities that basically say to illegal immigrants: As long as you're not harming the society, then we're not going to hound for you and try to arrest/deport all of you. Listen, it's not about being Mexican. Mexicans are not the only people coming into the U.S. illegally. Many people come in on visas and then overstay their visa illegally. We get people from India and Nigeria and China. It's not just Mexico. What it's really about is that a majority of illegal immigrants contribute to society. They actually do pay taxes, they get jobs, and create jobs in their communties. Most of them don't come here just to sell drugs. The belief of sanctuary cities is that it's a waste of time/money to try and catch and deport every illegal immigrant. Most of them aren't harming society so using money to get all of them would require a lot of work and the only return is that we have one less illegal immigrant in the country. Which I would say is kind of a waste. I think that illegal immigrants should be treated on a case-by-case basis. We can't lump them all as bad people who we must get rid of RIGHT NOW. Obviously, the ones harming society must go but we have to realize at the end of the day, these are people. Some of them are families, some of them are breadwinners, some of them are children.

Title: why shouldnt immigrants be able to go to collages or universitys?! Content: citizen ship is stupid in my views...we shouldnt stand as a country (id be proud to do tho)we should stand as citizens of the world not countrys but my point is that illegal immigrants shouldnt have to be citizens.....dou peopl feel threatin by our bothers and neighboors or something?these people have the abiliy to find cures for illness we havnt fond yet,they hve the ability to reach the stars to not only serve our country but our world.....but our goverment stands in their way

Title: Allow illegal immigrants amnesty. Content: I'm very sorry I'm new to this site, I didn't realize the whole "I accept" statement. I really don't see how stopping the whole cycle would be a good thing" Just because we have people illegally entering our country, we have to take it away and spoil it for other people that are trying to enter for valid reasons? Maybe we should propose stronger border laws for illegal immigrants instead of taking the whole thing away. If there was some sort of system where children and adults that felt threatened in their country to send some kind of form into the government" because technically you do need a visa/refugee status when entering the United States. I don't know whether it's fear or lack of time that keeps them from getting a visa or a refugee status but our immigration system is very complicated. I don't think the whole "magnet" idea is going to get as extreme as you propose. The whole world is not made up of terror-struck and third world countries. There are millions of people who are happy where they are. Unfortunately, most people in third world countries probably won't even be able to make it to the United States because they are so far away. Most illegal immigrants are from Mexico because they are close enough to cross the border. When you say "you can't help everyone" that's true. We can't individually help each person that enters the United States, but we can at least let them enter. I feel like you were just wording your statement as another way of saying "we don't have enough room". Forgive me if I am wrong, but that is the kind of feeling I'm getting. There is enough room for these people in the United States. That is a given. Millions of children are being born right this very second, and unfortunately, there are people dying this very second in the United States. We have room for them! Granted, these children are being born into families that will hopefully keep them in their home and won't live on the streets. You prove a very good argument, and I do feel myself losing already (this is my first debate so this was kind of "testing the waters" for me). Just to kind of clear this up, are you proposing that we don't let illegal immigrants into the United States? When they show up at the border, we just make them return to their country? If that is the case, I think that we should have them fill out necessary paperwork in a safe place so they don't have to return to their country. We can see if they are really fleeing for valid reasons, and then we can let them in. Thanks :)

Title: Illegal aliens should not be allowed to stay in the United States Content: I would like to begin by rebutting the three subpoints you made to establish your contention that there is no rational basis for keeping illegal aliens.Rebuttal1. Undocumented immigrants actually do pay the majority of the tax burden we place on them (almost all of state and local and the greater part of federal), contrary to popular misconceptions, while also receiving fewer benefits.The Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy informs us that (http://www.itep.org...) undocumented immigrants already contribute a sizeable amount to state and local taxes. Furthermore, they are currently actually contributing amounts disproportionately large relative to their services from the government.The median household income of undocumented immigrants is approximately $37,000, according to Pew (http://www.pewhispanic.org...). However, on average, the government actually contributes more directly to those with incomes under $37,000 than it collects! Because of this, those undocumented immigrants who aren't meeting their income tax burden (that number is estimated around 25%) are typically costing the government less than naturalised citizens, as they are of course not able to claim federal services while not paying federal income tax. (http://taxfoundation.org...). This is related to the fact around 46% of Americans aren't required to pay income tax as-is (http://www.washingtonpost.com...), and statistics tell us the majority of undocumented immigrants are within this 46%. Similarly, undocumented immigrants contribute many, many times more to Social Security than they take out, as they pay for Social Security through their salary while lacking the Social Security card needed to receive benefits! (http://www.nytimes.com...)And, to bring the point home reiterating and directly attack your unsupported claim, the majority of illegal immigrants are currently meeting their tax burden, (http://www.itep.org...) thoroughly debunking your first subpoint.To connect it to my overall argument, I contend from available data that the vast majority of undocumented immigrants make a good-faith effort to pay all taxes whilst also having to deal with the extraordinary risk they are placed under should they be 'found out' and subsequently deported. However, were we to provide a pathway to citizenship for undocumented immigrants, it is very likely our overall tax receipts would rise even further. I contend that your first sub-point not only can be disproven with factual evidence, but it is logically irrelevant, as undocumented immigrants would be more able to contribute their full share of taxes (although many of them already do) if we didn't pursue a policy of deportation. 2. Undocumented immigrants (and particularly their children) have a relatively similar or in some cases lower crime rate compared to that of naturalised citizens. In fact, American citizens are as likely to traffic drugs as undocumented immigrants!This is another popular misconception that turns out to be largely unsupported by the data at hand. Four out of five busts for drug trafficing by the Border Patrol are by US citizens (http://cironline.org...). This is hilarious, as the Border Patrol exists in large part to prevent undocumented immigration, not serve as second fiddle to the DEA.Take a look at the incarceration rates of US vs Mexican young men without an high school diploma, as this demographic makes up the majority of serious offenders (https://img.washingtonpost.com...). Again, the incarceration rate for naturalised citizens is nearly ten times higher!The (right-wing and nativist) Centre for Immigration Studies, whilst pointing out that there is a somewhat higher rate of incarceration in Federal facilities for undocumented immigrants than for naturalised citizens, itself points out that this shaky data includes those incarcerated for the very offence of undocumented immigration (http://www.cis.org...)! The offence of undocumented immigration is the most common among undocumented immigrants incarcerated in federal facilities, as well, which appears to be more or less entirely for the marginally higher Federal incarceration rate.Your contention that they are here to 'corrupt our world' is unfounded and prejudicial - Emily Ryo, a sociology professor at USC, found that the majority of undocumented immigrants believe they are moral people immigrating only to benefit the US (http://www.latimes.com...). In short, the moral fibre of these people is closer to that of the settlers who made America what it is today (many of whom, I would like to remind you, were themselves literal criminals) than it is to some imaginary menace concocted by xenophobia.To once again more directly address your claim that deporting undocumented immigrants would reduce the crime rate, two law professors at the University of Chicago and New York University found that mass deportation had literally no statistically significant effect on the crime rate (http://www.nytimes.com...). To summarise, undocumented immigrants are not necessarily more likely to commit crimes and deportation does not positively affect the crime rate.3. Your contention that refusing to deport undocumented immigrants will lead to more undocumented immigration is logically unsound, as the majority of those who oppose mass deportation support a less restrictive immigration process.Unfortunately, there are no solid studies or statistics that can conclusively say the effect (whether positive or negative) that deportation has on undocumented immigration. I instead contend that your entire contention is flawed, as a scenario in which we would eliminate deportation would be one in which we have a true path to citizenship and a more open immigration process. My hunch is that there would be more immigration, however there would certainly not be more 'illegal aliens'.Finally, your overall argument that undocumented immigrants are a) bereft of a 'real job' and b) responsible for overall US unemployment is unsupported by both evidence and elementary logic.To address your concluding argument, we currently have no true path to citizenship (with the exception of the restrictive and marginal DREAM Act) making it functionally impossible to 'follow the system legally and become legal residents'. Your suggestion that they 'get a real job' is illogical and absurd, as you also suggest that they are simulataneously 'taking jobs that documented/legal Americans could have'. I would like to offer a rebuttal to your overly simplistic idea that undocumented immigration causes unemployment using some relatively simple economic principles.There are three types of unemployment: Frictional unemployment, or the unemployment of people currently between jobs. These are the skilled, in-demand people who currently don't have a job but are likely to receive one soon. This unemployment is not of concern to economists, and of course bears no relation to undocumented immigration. Note that typically this is the most reliable source of American unemployment. Cyclical unemployment, or the unemployment of people who were fired during the recessionary period of the business cycle. As recessions are thought to typically return to a macroeconomic equilibrium of growth, this unemployment is also not of grave of concern to economists. It also bears no relation to undocumented immigration, as no serious economist would argue that undocumented immigration caused the late 2000s financial crisis (largely a result of deregulation of the financial market). Note that most of the US' late 2000s and early to mid 2010s unemployment is a result of cyclical unemployment. Structural unemployment, or the gap between the number of jobs available and the number of unemployed people. This unemployment is an issue with the overall equilibrium of the economy. You could argue that undocumented immigration increased the number of unemployed people, but this ignores the relatively high (and constantly high) employment rate of undocumented immigrants despite employer screening and comparatively little education. Counterintuitively, this rebuts your argument, as this suggests that the majority of undocumented immigrants are taking jobs that naturalised citizens simply don't want (http://www.npr.org...). If you don't believe me, or Adam Davidson, I direct you to this WSJ poll of 46 economists (http://online.wsj.com...). When asked the question 'Illegal immigrants often benefit businesses by filling low-wage jobs that are difficult to fill with Americans. But illegal immigrants can add to the costs of U.S. social programs. On balance, has the U.S. economy benefited more than it has been harmed by its current population of undocumented workers?', 96% responded 'It has benefited more than it has been harmed'. Argument (introdution/summarisation)My argument is that the net benefit of undocumented immigration is positive as-is. Immigration bolsters the economy & population growth rate. However, the majority of the (comparatively small) harm comes from incidentals, such as fear of government, that would be reduced were they naturalised citizens. Therefore, we should end deportation whilst providing a pathway to citizenship and less restrictive immigration laws.

Title: Border Fence Content: Thanks 32no. Here I go. I'm going to make an opening statement before I proceed. It is the U.S Federal Governments job to protect its citizens at all times, whether the threats are in our own country or from another country. This observation shows: The majority of our immigrants now sneak in through the "back door" that the federal government purposely leaves open. Thanks to the negligence of the federal government, far more people move into the United States illegally than come in through the legal immigration process. [1] So right now the U.S Federal Government is failing its job to protect, here's why: Point 1: Public Safety The U.S Federal Government has a job to fulfill which is (as I stated before) to protect its citizens, this obviously includes public protection. These statistics show: A substantial percentage of young illegal immigrants end up in gangs. U.S. authorities say that there are now over 1 million members of criminal gangs operating inside the United States. According to federal statistics, these 1 million gang members are responsible for up to 80% of the violent crimes committed in the U.S. each year. Latino gangs made up primarily of illegal aliens are responsible for much of this violence. According to the Center for Immigration Studies, some of the most notorious gangs in the country are made up almost entirely of illegal immigrants…. "Gang investigators in Virginia estimate that 90% of the members of MS-13, the most notorious immigrant gang, are illegal immigrants." [1] These statistics clearly show 1) How many gang members there are in the U.S 2) How much violence they are responsible for 3) A large percentage of these gangs are made up of illegal immigrants. If the U.S Federal Government doesn't build a Border Fence then it is not fulfilling its job of protecting its citizens from the public threat of illegal immigrant gangs. The Border Fence can prevent them from coming over or discourage a larger number of them coming over therefore reducing the amount of public danger from illegal immigrant gangs, and protecting its citizens. Point 2: Jobs Another job for the U.S Federal Government that falls under protecting its citizens is to ensure that they have jobs where they can work, earn money, and therefore support themselves. These statistics show: Illegal immigrants take jobs away from American citizens. According to a review of U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics and Census Bureau data, legal and illegal immigrants gained over a million additional jobs between 2008 and 2010 even as millions of American citizens were losing their jobs during that same time period. It was estimated that there were approximately 7.7 million illegal aliens employed by U.S. employers during 2008. [1] These statistics clearly show how illegal immigrants take jobs that U.S Citizens need. The U.S Federal Government has an obligation to its own citizens first which is why we need to build this Border Fence to ensure that U.S Citizens have a better chance at getting a job. When we build the Border Fence we will have less Illegal Immigrants coming across the Border. This results in less jobs being taken by Illegal Immigrants and give American Citizens a better chance at getting jobs therefore the U.S Federal Government will be upholding its obligation. Point 3: Economy This is a BIG issue. To make sure our economy is stable falls under the U.S Federal Governments job to protect its citizens because the country needs money to function. These statistics show: Illegal immigrants generally don't pay taxes. The vast majority of illegal aliens would never even dream of paying income taxes, but Mexicans living in America send billions upon billions of dollars out of the United States and back to Mexico every single year. Although illegal aliens pay next to nothing in taxes, they have no problem receiving tens of billions of dollars worth of free education benefits, free health care benefits, free housing assistance and free food stamp benefits. Many communities in the United States now openly advertise that they will help illegal aliens with these things. The cost of educating the children of illegal immigrants is staggering. It is estimated that U.S. taxpayers spend $12,000,000,000 a year on primary and secondary school education for the children of illegal immigrants. Thanks to illegal immigration, California's overstretched health care system is on the verge of collapse. Dozens of California hospitals and emergency rooms have shut down over the last decade because they could not afford to stay open after being endlessly swamped by illegal immigrants who were simply not able to pay for the services that they were receiving. As a result, the remainder of the health care system in the state of California is now beyond overloaded. This had led to brutally long waits, diverted ambulances and even unnecessary patient deaths. Sadly, the state of California now ranks dead last out of all 50 states in the number of emergency rooms per million people. Each year, it costs the states billions of dollars to incarcerate illegal immigrant criminals that should have never been allowed into the country in the first place. It is estimated that illegal aliens make up approximately 30 percent of the population in federal, state and local prisons and that the total cost of incarcerating them is more than $1.6 billion annually. [1] These statistics clearly show how 1) These illegal immigrants are more than likely to send money back to Mexico than to spend in the United States and increase our economy. 2) Illegal Immigrants pay almost nothing in taxes and they receive tens of billions of dollars in benefits. 3) Taxpayers pay close to $12,000,000,000 just for Illegal Immigrant children to go to public school, AND as my earlier statistics show that these Illegal Immigrant children are more than likely to end up in gangs. 4) California now has less emergency rooms/hospitals to help U.S Citizens because there were so many Illegal Immigrants that couldn't pay and received health care benefits. 5) Tax Payers spend about 1,600,000,00 a year to incarcerate illegal immigrants. This causes our economy to shrink by a rather large amount and it isn't even going to our own citizens. Thanks for reading my arguments and I look forward to 32no's rebuttal. :) 1. http://www.infowars.com...

Title: Illegal aliens should not be given American citizenship at all Content: Good luck. What is an illegal alien, or for the sake of political correctness, undocumented alien? An illegal alien is either an individual who has entered the United States illegally and can be deported if apprehended or an individual who entered legally but has fallen "out of status" and can be deported [1]. Generally, there's nothing much different between a legal and illegal immigrant so immigrants, both legal and illegal, will be mentioned in the points below since if illegal aliens are given citizenship, they will become naturalized legal immigrants. I am going to address Hillary Clinton's position on illegal immigration. She supports a pathway to citizenship for all illegal aliens who have not committed crimes and deport only the "individuals who pose a threat to public safety" [2]. She also defends President Obama's executive action which allowed almost half of illegal aliens living in the country a "temporary, quasi-legal status and work permits" [3]. Currently, many reports estimate that there are about 11 million illegal aliens living in the United States. This may not be entirely accurate as not all of them participate in surveys and the numbers could be much higher. Hillary Clinton will ensure that many illegal aliens will be given a pathway to citizenship as long as they are not convicted of violent crimes. I argue that giving them a pathway to citizenship or legal status diminishes the rule of immigration laws, raises the fiscal deficit on the long run, keeps the American-born citizens and minorities employment rates and wages lower. I will also add that it will obscenely benefit the Democratic Party because only the Democratic Party has supported this immigration reform. My first argument is that the rule of immigration laws are diminished if we give a pathway to citizenship or legal status for illegal aliens. The laws [4] are clear: "Any alien who at the time of entry or adjustment of status was within one or more of the classes of aliens inadmissible by the law existing at such time is deportable" and "Any alien who was admitted as a non immigrant and who has failed to maintain the non immigrant status in which the alien was admitted or to which it was changed under section 1258 of this title, or to comply with the conditions of any such status, is deportable. " All of the illegal aliens are liable to deportation as the laws specify, whether committed a violent crime or not. There is no any other crevices into this and the laws do not state that paying fines or any of that sort is the punishment. Indeed, unlawful presence of an illegal alien is not a crime but a civil offense which has deportation as its punishment [5]. Some states like Arizona, however, describes the presence of illegal aliens as a crime. It's either the rule of immigration law is eradicated or deportation as a punishment. The former yields anarchic results as well as encouragement of illegal immigration. Even if we change the laws, they will not apply to the illegal aliens as they are bound to the former laws like the ones posted above. My second argument is that there will be an immense fiscal deficit if illegal aliens are given citizenship or legal status. This makes sense as all four types of government benefits will be open to them: direct benefits, mean-tested welfare benefits, public education, population based services. The Heritage Foundation report [6] states that college-educated households tend to be net tax contributors, paying taxes that exceed the amount of benefits they receive. A well-educated household pays $54,089 in taxes and receive $24,839 in benefits, leaving a fiscal surplus of $29,250. It is the exact opposite for poorly-educated households and they are net tax consumers. The amount of benefits they receive exceed the amount of taxes they pay. It is reported that a poorly-educated household pays $11, 049 in taxes and receives $46,582 in benefits, generating a fiscal deficit of $35,113. This piece of information is crucial because half of illegal aliens have not completed high school and a quarter only completed high school. Not to mention the Social Security and pension plans that will be available to them. The Heritage Foundation also reports that granting them amnesty will raise the lifetime fiscal deficit to $6.3 trillion in fifty years ($126 billion annually). A piece of information that should not be ignored is that moderate to low-income earners can receive EITC (Earned Income Tax Credit) and many illegal aliens are low-income earners, making them eligible if given pathway to citizenship or legal status. My third argument is that giving illegal aliens citizenship or legal status will keep the native-born and minority groups' employment rates and wages lower. Like what I wrote earlier, about 75-80% of illegal aliens have not received a college diploma and they either have high school diplomas or have not completed high school. This will make them more eligible for unskilled labour which do not require education. Businesses and companies are more likely to hire immigrants (both legal and illegal) because native-born less-skilled workers. which drags blue-collar jobs' wages down. Immigrants [7] depress the wages of blue-collar jobs between 1-3 percent but raise wages by 0.004% for less skilled native workers. Regarding the impact of giving legal status or citizenship to illegal aliens to the minorities, I will use a collection of reports [8] by the United States Commission on Civil Rights in which there are several findings:- 6 in 10 black males have a high school diploma or less - an individual who has a high school diploma or less earns less today than those of the same degree thirty-five years ago- illegal immigration increases the supply of low-skilled, low-wage labor available in the US labor market- illegal immigration tends to depress the wages and employment rates for low-skilled American citizens with black males forming a disproportionate number of themIt is also found by Professor Gordon Hanson's report that black high school dropouts' employment rate dropped massively from 72% in the 1960s to 42% in 2000s; white high school dropouts' employment rate also dropped significantly from 83% to 64%. He also questioned the notion that the lowering wages contribute to the black males quitting the job and turning to crime. His co-authored research suggested that in a 10% immigration-induced increase in labor markets is associated with a 4% decrease in black wages, 3.5% decrease in black employment rate and 0.8% increase in black incarceration rate. Final question is do immigrants (both legal and illegal) create jobs? The answer is yes, they do but most of the jobs they create are provided for other immigrants too. In other words, they take more jobs than they create. I will provide an example to show exactly what I mean. A fictional Chinese immigrant named Ms. Wong lives in a community where many first generation immigrants live in Los Angeles. Ms. Wong works as a hairdresser in a Chinese barber shop where a lot of her co-workers are also Chinese. After work, she goes to a Chinese grocery store and buys some noodles for dinner. On a weekend, she goes to a Chinese mall where she buys her clothes for a much cheaper price. All the places she goes to are owned by Chinese people that typically hires Chinese immigrants. Sure, she also helps the natives by subscribing on the Internet or visiting museums but she would need help from a Chinese speaker on translating the English words to her language. This will require one of the first to third generation immigrant on the job because from then on, fourth generation (or the native-born) is unlikely to grow up speaking the language. Now if we give citizenship to illegal aliens, it will obscenely benefit the Democratic Party. Why is this a bad thing? This is a bad thing because the party cannot even provide a reason why giving them citizenship will benefit Americans as well as deliberately ignoring the immigration laws in which all of the illegal aliens are bound. It is a perfect time to get rid of all illegal aliens and slow down the influx of legal immigrants for a balanced American society. SOURCES:[1] . https://www.irs.gov...[2] . http://uspolitics.about.com...[3] . http://immigration.about.com...[4] . https://www.law.cornell.edu...[5] . http://www.tolerance.org...[6] . http://www.heritage.org...[7] . https://www.washingtonpost.com...[8] . http://www.usccr.gov...

Title: should all illegal immigrants get amnesty Content: Possibly 40% came to US legally and are now here illegally for some. http://www.politifact.com... Also opponent has stated i didnt quite answer his question ""if all these illegal immigrants came into the United States legally, would you turn any away, and would you be supportive of them? I answered "Many of the illegal immigrants that are here in this country did so by legal means example per visa. But those documentations have so expired and are willingly staying in this country illegally and knowingly. So no I do not support them being in this country when there documentations have expired and there now here illegally. To your otger statement of if all of the illegal immigrants were to becone us citizens then they would be able to pay taxes and more revenue for the government. Buf here is the thing majority of the illegal immigrants are below the poverty line. So realistically they would not pay taxes since they don't make enough to pay taxes or if they do pay tax it would be so miniscule that it wouldnt be noticed. Now if you are under the poverty line you wouldn't pay taxes or if you did it would be very small but the government would actually pay you more for refund then you would pay, if you are paying taxes. Depending on how many kids you have, if you have 4 children i think its betwen 10k-12k. Now that they are citizen it is open doors for all newpy us citizen to apply and get all of the welfare programs available to us citizens. This will sky rocket the us debt in order to sustain this level of cost deficiency. As per your statement of being humane. You don't see people giving away all of there assets or money for humane purpose they do what they can but there family comes first. I really dont have to much sympathy for the ones that came here breaking a FEDERAL LAW and ezpevting something back in return. Who i do have sympathy for are the ones trying to do the right thing and come here legally, but now is harder to the that because of the amount of illegals in this coubtry. Same concept us is drowning in debt and society is further crumbling and us is not coming or showing it is trying to climb out of the defecit but bury itself further. Also criminal activities by illegal immigrants. Illegal immigrants are roughly 5% of the US population but cause 25% of crimes in the US. That is a staggering data for such a small portion of the US population. So if all illegal immigrants were deported rape, murder, robbery, and general crimes would drop 25%. http://www.citizensforlaws.org... A issue of amnesty is this will put a golden plate in peoples mindset. Is that i have a chance because of amnesty i can become a US citizen. This news will spread around the world and everyone will have the same idea. Come to the US you will be granted citizenship if your here long enough and it may become not 7-20 million but 20-60 million within a decade. Yes we both agree the system is broken. But putting more control over the borders, more patrol in the coast, and a better way to track the legal immigrants in this with deporting all of the illegal immigrants will be taxing in the beginning but as time progresses it will balance itself out. The defecit with social welfare will fall the schooling cost will fall and put more money into school books upgrades and possible teachers salary. That is what in my opinion a logical step. In other countries this is not an issue illegals found are deported back immediately, of uou have a child in some countries and they are under 7 they are not recognized as that countries citizen and deported back to the parents country (most cases its within the first year or at when the mother gave birth at the hospital to verify citizenship, and they are not given any welfare or help from the government. Since 1. They broke a law coming into the country illegally and technically a fugitive. 2. Not a citizen and only citizens of the country will be given priority. Which is why US is first choice they can get all of those for free. Come to US you can get free food free housing a new life government help.

Title: America should create a pathway to citizenship for illegal and other immigrants. Content: Illegal immigrants have moved into this country illegally. This represents a clear violation of US law. Although the bible may support illegal immigration(which I highly doubt), illegal immigration creates problems for the Federal government, and problems for the American people. Contention One-Social Aspect Illegal immigration causes an increase in prejudice against the Latino community. The American people are very insecure about the amount of jobs accessible. Illegal immigrants taking these jobs will only add weight to white supremacists' case against the Latino community. Racism only diminishes the idea of America as a world leader. Contention Two-Laws: We should not forget that illegal immigrants entered this country illegally. A continual violation of our laws will invite more people to do the same. Terrorists could take advantage of America's disregard for immigrant laws. Contention Three-Fairness Illegal immigrants are treated unfairly in America. They are taxed unfairly, and are abused by the companies they work for. This injustice should not continue. This injustice will continue, because federal law cannot protect illegal immigrants. Instead, the government should make an effort to bring these people in legally.

Title: Failing to remove illegal immigrants undermines public confidence in the government and its migratio... Content: Failing to remove illegal immigrants undermines public confidence in the government and its migration policy. People believe that allowing those who have no right to remain in the country to stay on means the whole immigration system is broken. Legitimate migrants such as refugees, students and those with visas for work will be lumped together with illegal immigrants, and calls will grow for all forms of migration to be restricted. Populist feeling may also be inflamed against ethnic minorities, with increased social tensions.

Title: Loss of trust in the government Content: Failing to remove illegal immigrants undermines public confidence in the government and its migration policy. In the UK, opposition leader Ed Milliband has acknowledged that Labour had lost trust in the south by underestimating the number of illegal immigrants and the impact they would have on people's wages1. People believe that allowing those who have no right to remain in the country to stay on means the whole immigration system is broken. Legitimate migrants such as refugees, students and those with visas for work will be lumped together with illegal immigrants, and calls will grow for all forms of migration to be restricted. Populist feeling may also be inflamed against ethnic minorities, with increased social tensions. 1 BBC News, 2011, http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-13133544

Title: Illegal Aliens Content: That's fine. I'll just give a quick rebuttal and summarize. "I will not stand still while illegal immigrants invade the United States of America consuming our resources, taking our jobs," --These illegal immigrants are primarily employed in jobs that the average, self-respecting American would never want to do. They often do the menial labor that the rest of society doesn't want to do, so the fact that they are taking these jobs is actually a good thing, because it means the legal citizens of America don't have to. "setting our flags ablaze, disrespecting our nation," --Why would they disrespect our nation? They come here looking for a better life. America comes as a blessing. They have no reason to set out flags ablaze. Rather, it's primarily the legal citizens who disrespect our nation, talking smack about presidents past and present, whing about everything our government does, and taking everything handed to them for granted. The average illegal immigrant probably has far more respect for America than your average citizen. "murdering our citizens, and using our tax dollars." --I don't see why they would commit murder at a rate any higher than your average John Doe American citizen, absent CON's blind assertion. I would also argue that they benefit us, rather than detriment us. As stated above, they take jobs that most Americans don't want, and further, they work for under minimum wage, which gives locally owned businesses the ability to compete with foreign companies. Any minor use of our tax dollars (how do they use our tax dollars, anyway?) is certainly more than recompensed by their hard work in bolstering our economy. --- These illegal immigrants are just as human, and just as deserving of respect, as anyone else in America. CON's assertions are not only unwarranted and most likely false, but ignore the humanity of illegal immigrants. He treats them as no more than an economic issue (do they bolster the economy, or don't they?) rather than treating them as humans deserving of respect. That is why I am PRO for "Resolved: Illegal Aliens."

Title: America should support blanket amnesty for illegal immigrants. Content: Illegal immigrants should not be granted amnesty because it would skyrocket the financial strain on social services. According to the Center for Immigration Studies, 57% of both legal and illegal immigrant homes are receiving the benefits of at least one welfare program ("Is it"Illegal Immigrants?"). If granted amnesty, illegal immigrants would become eligible for full benefits and the burden on legal, taxpaying citizens would increase drastically. In addition, businesses, especially if banned from outsourcing, will turn to the equally as detrimental technique of "in-sourcing," or hiring illegal aliens in the U.S. Although the Senate is demanding that employers prove that American workers are "unwilling or unavailable" to take these jobs before they hire illegal immigrants, they will find ways around the law in order to make the most profit at the least expense by hiring cheap labor ("Is It"Illegal Immigrants?"). For these reasons, only legal immigration should be supported in the United States. Works Cited "Is it a Bad Idea to Legalize the Illegal Immigrants?" Illegal Immigration Statistics. 2013. Web. 14 October 2013. http://www.illegalimmigrationstatistics.org.......