I’m sorry but I just can’t equate an “otherwise law abiding” illegal immigrant to Bernie Madoff and his crimes and theft from so many. NOT a good example.
So where do you draw the line? Clearly not at disobeying immigration laws.
What about:
Driving without a license and insurance?
Identity theft?
Fraudulently obtaining a government ID?
Tax fraud?
Not paying taxes?
Drunk driving?
Assault?
It’s unfortunate that so many seem unable to see the many positives of exposure to other ethnic groups and not just the differences they perceive to exist. I have seen the many benefits of the multicultural policies that Canada has, rather than the melting pot that the U.S prefers. Learning about other cultures is always a good thing, in my opinion.
Toronto is probably the most diverse city in North America and I have never known anyone who felt that someone else’s culture was being forced upon them.
Alwaysamom, Canada is very different in terms of who, how many and where immigration has an impact on communities. Here in the US, it is primarily poorer communities where significant numbers of illegal immigrants are placed. Communities which are already fragile and less well served in terms of employment and other resources. A couple of years ago, this issue made national news in my community. The organization I work with was able to move a large number of immigrants who were, as they often are, young and unattached males. They were moved into an area that had been a middle class black area, and in a very short time crime and violence had broken out. Of course, the usual suspects howled racism, but when the real cause became known, they were no longer interested. The problem had been that the immigrants acted on their assumption that black women were available in a sexual way, and the black women and men were not pleased. Point being, wealthier communities are rarely impacted in the same way. And from my work I know that is absolutely intentional.
@zoosermom, I’m well aware of the differences between the two countries. My comment was not specifically about illegal immigrants but rather immigrants, in general. The attitudes of some in this discussion who made comments about how people coming from other countries don’t make enough if an effort to ‘meld’ into American cultural norms. Many Americans would benefit from being exposed to other cultures.
In the US, most evidence suggests that illegal immigrants are less likely to commit non-immigration-related crimes than US citizens: http://www.politifact.com/california/statements/2017/aug/03/antonio-villaraigosa/mostly-true-undocumented-immigrants-less-likely-co/ .
Or even just other Americans. In some major cities, like Detroit and Chicago, many people live is very racially segregated neighborhoods. See http://www.censusscope.org/us/m2160/chart_exposure.html . Residential segregation by SES is also quite high.
There’s a middle ground between complete assimilation and complete refusal to assimilate. There’s also a difference between learning about and being exposed to other cultures and believing that every aspect of every one of those cultures would be a positive addition to United States society.
I don’t think anyone on this thread expects or wants immigrants to give up most of the various cultural traditions that make them unique in the name of becoming American. That’s not inconsistent with some concern over specific ideologies or practices that seem fundamentally incompatible with our own values.
That being said, I don’t think this is the major concern underlying the immigration debate in America, as I’m not convinced that most immigrants coming here are substantially different, in respect to values and tendency to assimilate, than any earlier waves of immigrants.
One difference is financial. A hundred years ago, a foreigner may have come here to become American and have the opportunity America offered. That may still be true today as apprenticeprof says. But a hundred years ago there was no federal government welfare system offered.
Yes, Bernie was a terrible thief. But to my knowlege, he was “otherwise law abiding”. I’ve never heard of him being charged with rape, arson, sexual assault, murder, etc. That demonstrates my point exactly of why I am uncomfortable with those that use “otherwise law abiding” as part of a defense. The idea that- this is the one thing they did wrong, and/or the only thing- so let him go! just doesn’t seem right. It demonstrates very well why one can’t just look the other way if he (Bernie) or others are “otherwise law abiding”.
More than half of immigrants are on some form of welfare, using welfare more than native born people.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2015/09/01/immigrant-welfare-use-report/71517072/
And according to this study, this remains true even when they’ve been here for 20 years.
And that study is completely unbiased, right?
I don’t think it’s any surprise that immigrants, particularly illegal ones, are in the main poorer than American citizens.
The group who published that study is biased and has an agenda. Here are some other articles on the topic:
http://www.9news.com/news/verify-are-most-immigrants-on-welfare/462235133
the problem is the difficult in finding sources that are not biased one way or the other…
The third chart shows consistently foreign born citizens have higher median incomes than native born citizens.
^^The above does not deal with welfare. I don’t think there is a ‘study’ out there that isn’t biased. For example, government statistics on many things dealing with illegal immigration making doing a study more difficult. Unless one can find fault with the methodolgy, just saying that the group sponsoring the study is biased doesn’t answer any questions. Groups with a political outlook can do valid studies.
Another sob story in the LA Times today, Steve Lopez column if you want to look it up. A father of four who has been deported before for petty theft and using cocaine is being deported again. This time based on a reckless driving charge for which he did 10 days community service. (The article tellingly did not state whether he caused an accident with the reckless driving or not).
The article goes on to say that people are being deported for ‘minor’ crimes like DUI and petty theft. If it’s a crime it’s not minor. IMHO.
“Unless one can find fault with the methodolgy, just saying that the group sponsoring the study is biased doesn’t answer any questions.”
The links I provided do find fault with the methodology if you read them. 
Instead of arguing about averages one needs to look at which categories of immigrants really use public welfare services and which do not. Obviously, the country will benefit from the immigrants that mostly do not use public welfare services. It seems the proposed bill is trying to accomplish just that.
The difference between calling Bernie Madoff “otherwise law-abiding” and saying the same of an illegal immigrant is both severity and motivation.
First of all, when it comes to non-violent crimes that don’t cause direct, significant harm to the lives of others, courts sometimes do use discretion in charging and sentencing when they are permitted to do so. Things like pre-trial diversion programs exist in part to avoid saddling first-time offenders with criminal records.So, essentially, they are shown clemency for being “otherwise law-abiding.”
On the second count, many illegal immigrants come here out of desperation. Desperation doesn’t, of course, give a person carte blanche to do anything he pleases, but it is and should be a mitigating factor. And to anticipate objections, no, I don’t think this means people who steal should be forgiven if they are poor enough, first of all, because we have at least enough of a social safety net that very few people, thankfully, are actually facing starvation, and because theft is often a crime that does have a direct victim. But what some immigrants are facing goes well beyond that, and I’m not going to condemn someone who comes here fleeing violence or seeking to escape horrendous poverty too harshly, even if they have to break the law to do it.
Another issue here is proportionality. I recall at least one case of a mother being prosecuted for falsifying her children’s address to give them access to a better school, a crime that, in terms of motivation, has some similarities to that of the illegal immigrant. I don’t remember, and may never have known, what the outcome was. But a) I recall that this was considered an unusual prosecution, as normally, the child would simply be kicked out of the school without charges being filed, and b) I strongly suspect that the penalty was not going to be, among other things, permanent separation from her family.
Hence, I reiterate that I feel no need to engage in punitive deportations of people who have otherwise been law-abiding and have developed deep ties to this country in the form of marriage and children. I know it isn’t a cost-free proposition. But, weighing everything, I think it is the right thing to do, and something we can afford to do.