The Obama administration announced it will no longer deport younger immigrants who were brought to the U.S. illegally when they were children and will begin issuing work permits to them, The Huffington Post reports.
The permits only would be available to individuals who had led law-abiding lives, the website reported. As many as 800,000 people could be affected by the policy change.
"Today, I am announcing that effective immediately, young people brought to U.S. by no fault of their own and meet several criteria no longer are removed from country or entered into removal proceedings,” Department of Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano said to Fox News.
Fox News reported immigrants will have had to live in the U.S. for five years, be younger than 30, and have arrived before they turned 16 to qualify.
The Los Angeles Times reported House Judiciary Committee Chairman Lamar Smith, R-Texas, said the policy change "ignores the rule of law that is the foundation of our democracy. This huge policy shift has horrible consequences for unemployed Americans looking for jobs and violates President Obama’s oath to uphold the laws of this land."
Florida Congressman Allen West told Fox News that the policy change was an example of "executive overreach." West told Fox that the change should have been debated as legislation by Congress.
The policy change accomplishes many of the goals of the DREAM Act, which passed the House in 2010 but stalled in the Senate, The Huffington Post reported.
What do you think of the president's actions? Should young immigrants brought to the U.S. illegally be allowed work permits? Or do you agree with Congressman Smith, who said this policy shift will have horrible consequences for the unemployed in America?
Everyone forgets that for us to give away to others that we are taking away from our ability to take care of our own.
IN FAVOR: 10 NOT IN FAVOR: 12 So it's a fairly even split. Of course, this "survey" is highly unscientific. For instance, if I only count people who use their full names, the verdict is: IN FAVOR: 10 NOT IN FAVOR: 9 Interesting to note that no one who is in favor of The President's Executive Order chose to hide behind an alias or partial name. However, 25% of those against, did choose to hide behind an alias or partial name (a practice which is at least, frowned upon by Patch). Of course, again, this is a very unscientific survey and one shouldn't draw too many conclusions from such a small, NOT randomized selection.
Let's look at a real poll: June 22nd Rasmussen Poll - Romney 48%, Obama 43% With Romney as President and the Republicans controlling both Houses of Congress, you can kiss your precious Executive Order good bye.
Tell me "mike k", your quoting of some kind of presidential approval rating from some pollster has what exactly to do with the question at the top of the page? If I may quote Daniel Patrick Moynihan, "Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts."
First is when he announced he would no longer enforce the the Defense of Marriage Act, second is his violation of freedom of religion by forcing religious institutions to pay for contraceptives and abortifacients they abhor, and now this immigration ruling. By circumventing the political process, as excruciating as it can be, the president is moving us farther down the road to absolutism, the absolute rule of a man or a group. He seems nonplussed by any concern other that getting what he wants. He seems very comfortable ruling by decree. But I am very uncomfortable with it. I do not appreciate that he does not govern in keeping with our laws and traditions. He sometimes seems like a person unfamiliar with American history and government. He rules, not governs. There is a basic lack of respect for the many Americans who have sacrificed their lives and fortunes to build this country that is the exception to rule by dictate. Our form of government is an endangered species on the world stage. President Obama is a big part of the reason why.
"Please don't call something what it is, because then most people will disagree with my anti-American message."
These kids' parents brought them here illegally knowing they'd be illegal too. It's their fault they came in illegally, and the governments' fault for not providing a legal option. Patting yourself on the back for exploiting the plight of these people (that this move allows to continue) isn't solving the problem. This is all about posturing & appearances. Conveniently, it keeps the real problem around for future exploitation. Move the idea of 'Ellis Island' to a few locations on the southern border. You want to REALLY help these people? This is how. You want jobs? There you go. You want more taxes? There they are. You want to be able to cover the costs of having these people here and keeping them educated, and healthy? Done. You want to end ILLEGAL immigration and a help them begin a better life? Also done. You want to provide them with the same opportunites as every one else. Boom. Again, it’s just another simple solution that seems to elude our politicians due to posturing & politics. That video was rediculous on many levels, but was this really an "honor" student with a scholarship to Harvard that didn't know if he had a Social or not? Now we know how the President got in. Again, stop patting yourselves on the back for exploiting these people to get votes. Do something of substance or shut up. Geez, people are suckers.
They lost me right there. Change leaving us pennieless. hmm.
THANKS and good luck!
Or maybe you should send it to Earl, somebody should at least be being paying him for all of the campaigning he's doing.
Honestly, I don't agree with the whole idea of "big money" politics, politics should be about policy and ideas and making things better for the greatest number of everyday, hard-working American people, not what's best for the almighty $$$. But this is the game we have been handed, and it's the game we must play.