From: John Beckett 

Gary Britt  wrote in message
news::
> 2.  Therefore people like me say first show us that illegal crossings at the
> border have been reduced by MORE than 90% BEFORE you even start
> talking to us about what to do with the people already here.

Your points 1 and 2 are compelling. I can see how politicians would talk
grandly about their plans, but somehow after they attend a few citizenship
granting ceremonies (think of the new votes!), the follow-up would be
forgotten.

> 3.  Immigration reform isn't granting citizenship and voting rights just to
> 12 million illegals.  Its really 20 or 24 million illegals by some counts
> and when the family members are added its granting citizenship and voting
> rights to not 12 to 24 million illegals its granting voting and citizenship
> rights to 120 Million illegals and their families over the next 10 to 20
> years.

Yes - that's another solid point. While I have some sympathy for the
"but you're all immigrants" argument, I believe that changes
should be very gradual.

> 4. Last on the list would be concerns that we are rewarding law breaking
> with citizenship, but that concern is magnified by the belief that the
> border will never be secured and we will forever be rewarding continued law
> breaking with citizenship.

Yes. It would be hard to strike a deal for the current illegals without
giving hope to millions more for a future deal.

So thanks - I've got a better undertanding of the objections now.

It seems obvious (perhaps due to my ignorance) that the solution to all
this nonsense is to work out how to REALLY provide assistance to Mexico and
neighbours so they build up their economies and provide decent jobs and
lifestyle to their own people.

I know that there would always be a bunch of people who imagine that
getting into the US would allow them to live in zillion-dollar mansions
etc, but I imagine that the vast majoriy of illegals are compelled by their
lousy circumstances, and wouldn't leave their homes unless their situation
was desperate.

> Fox News Channel would be far more representative of the  views
> held by the majority of the population on this and most (perhaps not
> all) other matters actually.

OMG - I'm not strong enough for that yet!

John

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5