The Instigator
norin
Pro (for)
Winning
12 Points
The Contender
CongressmanDrew
Con (against)
Losing
9 Points

The United States Federal Government Should Substantially Change its Policy on Illegal Immigration

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Vote Here
Pro Tied Con
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 4/22/2008 Category: Politics
Updated: 6 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 2,878 times Debate No: 3749
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (5)
Votes (7)

 

norin

Pro

Nearly four hundred years ago a fantastic event occurred on the shores of America. The Mayflower, carrying one hundred and fourteen immigrants sailed into a small harbor. The leader of this expedition, a man named John Winthrop, wrote what he sought this colony to be. He said that they were seeking "to create a shining city on a hill, for the whole world to see." This principle remained the policy of America until the 1920's. It is my great honor to stand with my partner, Jason Kosloski, in affirming that the United States Federal Government SHOULD change its policy on Illegal Immigration.

All definitions may be requested as necessary.

Today, we as the affirmative team would like to present to you a case based on a goal, or value that we believe the United States Federal Government's policy should reflect. This goal is Liberty. Defined by the Merriam-Webster dictionary of law as "Freedom from external restraint, compulsion, or interference in engaging in the pursuits or conduct of one's choice to the extent that they are lawful and not harmful to others.", Liberty is the value that America was founded on and the reason that we are special. For generations this goal was upheld in our immigration policy, but today, that is no longer the case. At the end of the debate round today, we urge you to vote for whatever team can bring more liberty into the world.

The current policy that the United States Federal Government has towards Illegal Immigration is simply to enforce laws that can not be enforced.

Daniel Griswold, director of Cato Institute's Center for Trade Policy Studies, May 16th, 2007, (http://freetrade.org...)

"For the past 20 years, the U.S. government has pursued a policy of "enforcement only" in its effort to curb illegal immigration. Since the late 1980s, spending on border enforcement has grown exponentially. The number of Border Patrol officers grew threefold between 1986 and 2002 and will double again before President Bush leaves office. Various operations at the busiest crossing points on the U.S.- Mexican border have resulted in miles of fencing being built through urban areas and into the surrounding desert."

However, this policy fails
Daniel A Scharf, March 21st, 2005 http://pewhispanic.org...

"Ever since the 1986 immigration reforms, the United States has consistently ramped up enforcement against illegal immigration. But this has not slowed illegal immigration. Between 1992 and 2000, the apprehension rate, the most common measure for illegal immigration, rose from about 1,200,000 to 1,600,000, a rise of 33 percent. Right now, illegal immigration has created a shadow population that ranges from 10 to 20 million."

Unfortunately for America there are huge problems that are caused by this policy

Problem 1: Liberty is violated
Dr. Harry Binswange, April 2, 2006
http://www.capmag.com...

"Immigration quotas forcibly exclude foreigners who want not to seize but to purchase housing here, who want not to rob Americans but to engage in productive work, raising our standard of living. To forcibly exclude those who seek peacefully to trade value for value with us is a violation of the rights of both parties to such a trade: the rights of the American seller or employer and the rights of the foreign buyer or employee."

Problem 2: The Government wastes billions of dollars
Daniel Griswold 22 May 2007,
http://www.freetrade.org...

"If Congress fails to reform America's immigration laws in a way that reflects the reality of our market economy, the problem of illegal immigration will only grow worse. Without comprehensive immigration reform, Congress and the administration will waste billions of dollars more trying to enforce an unenforceable law."

To eliminate the proven cause of these Problems, we offer the following PLAN, to be implemented by any necessary legal means.

1. Agency and Enforcement: Congress, the President, and the Dept. of Homeland Security

2. Mandates:
A. Except for those mentioned in Mandate B, all restrictions and quotas limiting legal immigration into the United States shall be abolished. Any immigrants coming through legal ports of entry will be allowed to enter, apply for Social Security numbers, work and settle legally in the United States. For two years after entry immigrants will be monitored by the DHS for criminal activities.

B. All legal points of entry will screen entrants for contagious diseases, felony records, and prior or current membership of terrorist organizations in accordance to current standards. Any person caught trying to enter America through a point of entry not officially delegated will be immediately returned to their country of origin and filed into the DHS records so as not to allow reentry.

C. Existing illegal immigrants already in the U.S. will not receive amnesty. They must exit the country before reentry. Any illegal alien who does not leave the country will be filed into the DHS records and permanently barred entry into the US.

D. In order to prevent abuse of the welfare system, immigrants coming with our plan will not be eligible for welfare. Extreme cases will be considered by the social security administration.

3. Funding shall be through a 12 billion dollar governmental appropriation, and normal means.

4. Timeline. This plan takes effect one year after an Affirmative ballot.

5. All Affirmative speeches may clarify the plan further as needed.

Besides removing the problems in the status quo, and upholding liberty, by passing our plan you will gain immense advantages

1. We Improve the Economy
Prof. Benjamin Powell PhD 22 Dec 2005 http://www.independent.org...

"We need not fear that immigrants will burden our economy, take more jobs than they create, or depress our wages. Quite the contrary, immigration brings economic benefits, so it should not be artificially limited."

2. We reduce illegal immigration
Daniel T. Griswold May 10, 2006
http://www.freetrade.org...

"Illegal immigration continues to grow because our immigration law has no legal channel for a peaceful, hardworking immigrant from Mexico or another country to enter the United States legally to fill those jobs even temporarily. The result is large-scale illegal immigration."
Because Illegal Immigration is driven by a lack of legal channels, adding those channels will reduce illegal immigration

3. We restore the vision of American liberty while bringing the world's best people to America
Dr. Harry Binswanger, 2006,
www.openimmigration.com

"The vision of American freedom, with its opportunity to prosper by hard work, serves as a magnet drawing the best of the world's people. Immigrants are self-selected for their virtues: their ambitiousness, daring, independence, and pride. They are willing to cast aside the tradition-bound roles assigned to them in their native lands and to re-define themselves as Americans. These are the people America needs in order to keep alive the individualist, hard-working attitude that made America. The right is unquestionable. So let them come."
CongressmanDrew

Con

I'm going to keep my argument very simple and get straight to the point...

The problem with Illegal Immigration is that we have policies that are not being enforced. I believe it is wrong to say that many of these policies are impossible to enforce. Obviously when you have such a huge border to the North and South, logistically it becomes very difficult to monitor even in the highly advanced technological age that we live in.

With that being said, I know setting up a border fence and adding thousands more border patrol is NOT the answer to solving illegal immigration. In order to stop illegal immigration you must cut off the magnet that brings illegals here in the first place.

Step One: End Birthright Citizenship immediately.
Essentially, this new policy would prevent "anchor babies" from popping up as a means to receive government benefits and legal status. This would also eliminate any possibility of separating children from their parents.

Step Two: Heavily increase penalties on employers that hire illegal workers.
This step is a way to cut off the magnet that attracts illegal immigrants to the US. Illegal Immigrants are not coming to the US to embrace our culture like immigrants of the past, they are coming here for financial benefit.

Step Three: Deny health care to all illegals except in emergency circumstances.
Hospitals across the nation are being ravaged by the flood of illegal immigrants using hospitals as a general health clinic. Not only is this an egregious use of hospitals, but it diminishes the quality of health care for all legal residents that need serious medical treatment.

Step Four: Deny any social welfare to illegal immigrants.
This is another economic resource that attracts illegal immigrants to the US. If you cut off every financial/economic resource, it will serve as a disincentive for illegal immigrants to migrate to the US.

Step Five: End NAFTA Now!
NAFTA has created deplorable working conditions in many factories in Mexico. It speaks volumes when many Mexican citizens are willing to migrate to the US to work under less than stellar conditions for very little compensation. By allowing the flow of illegal immigrants to enter the US, you are essentially giving an unspoken endorsement of Mexico's economic policy and Mexico would have no incentive to alter their policies.
Debate Round No. 1
norin

Pro

No one said it more eloquently than Emma Lazarus in her poem engraved on the Statue of Liberty: "Give me your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, The wretched refuse of your teeming shore. Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me, I lift my lamp beside the golden door!" For centuries that was the promise of America, but it is no longer the case. As my opening arguments have shown, changing the policy on illegal immigration can once again bring that promise to reality. In this round I will be continuing on that theme.

First off I just want to say that my opponit has essentially agreed with the resolution before us to day. He is saying that the USFG policy on illegal immigration should be changed, same as me, we just disagree on how it should be done.

Secondly, he has not addressed the goal of liberty, and since silence is omission in debate we can assume that he has consented to that value as the scale by which we judge the entire round.
Now lets get into the actual arguments that my challenger has brought up.

Starting off with his opening arguments about the enforceability of our current policies I would like to say two things.
1) The policies themselves are not unenforceable, it's the fact that the USFG uses them on their own. Instead of adopting a comprehensive program they chose to attempt a policy of "enforcement only", which fails alone.

2) Enforcement only will always fail, no matter what it is. In fact it is this policy which has put us in the mess we are in today.
Margaret D. Stock and Donald Kerwin October 31, 2006
http://law.bepress.com...

"The immigration system has not just failed to stem the flow of the undocumented. It has contributed to it. At a time when globalization has reduced barriers to the free flow of goods, services, and information, the United States has tightened its immigration policies related to the corresponding flow of immigrant labor. This anomaly explains the growing U.S. population of undocumented laborers and border crossers. Simply put, the U.S. immigration system does not offer sufficient legal avenues for needed workers and family members to enter the country. U.S. employment-based visas overwhelming go to highly skilled and professional workers. Not more than 10,000 visas per year are available to less skilled workers. The inadequacy of this number is evidenced by a multi-year backlog in this visa category and by the hundreds of thousands of undocumented migrants who find work each year in the United States."

As we can see, simply enforcing the laws won't solve the problem.

On to his five steps that he has proposed.

His first step was the end birthright citizenship. However, this won't solve for the majority of illegal immigrants who come to America for economic reasons.

His second step is to increase the penalties on employers. I would assume he is proposing something like a nationwide EEVS of Basic Pilot system. However, this will not do anything to stop the hiring of illegal immigrants because employers work in cooperation with the illegal immigrants and the economic benefit to hiring them would outweigh the penalties. It would also push the illegal immigrant population farther underground, something that we definitely don't want.

His third step would be to deny all non-emergency healthcare to illegal immigrants. But what sort of message does this send to the rest of the world? It sends a message that America treats people that are in a situation that it created for itself (by pursuing enforcement only and not offering enough visas) as second class citizens with no rights.

The forth step is to end welfare. I addressed this in my plan. No welfare should be given to illegal immigrants or to the legal ones coming though my plan.

Fifth step, end NAFTA. This really wouldn't solve the cause of the Mexican economic situation which is basically corruption within the mexican government. Ending NAFTA would also mean a huge blow to the free market.

In concussion lets look at the arguments that my challenger has not addressed, and therefore agreed on. He has not addressed the value of liberty, leaving us to agree on that standard for this round. He has not adressed both of the problems with the status quo, so they stand in the round. He has not addressed our plan, essentially agreeing that it would work. And he has not addressed my advantages, so they would occur. All he has done is argue about enforcement only, and propose a counter-plan. Both arguments which I have addressed fully.

At the end of the round today please vote for liberty, vote for America, and vote for the Affirmative.
CongressmanDrew

Con

CongressmanDrew forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
norin

Pro

norin forfeited this round.
CongressmanDrew

Con

CongressmanDrew forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
5 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Posted by Shorack 6 years ago
Shorack
4 reasons:
1) i don't have that much time these days (heck, cut the these days part) to take on extensive policy debates
2) i don't like the debating system that much on debate.org, won't go into detail, but it totally hinders the type of debate i like. (i like the comments far more, because it allows for conversation. no need to bring forth everything at once, counter everything in one round or be limited in rounds. i'm interested in the dialogue)
3) reality is quite complex and exists of lots of nuances, i already mentionned one. So in many cases, there is no outright pro or con for me.
4) "At the end of the debate round today, we urge you to vote for whatever team can bring more liberty into the world."
Although there is no obligation whatsoever for anyone to take the criteria into account, it is still mentionned.
And sure, what you claim brings forth more liberty.
But that is a totally different discussion from wheter immegration policy should change or not.
Posted by norin 6 years ago
norin
Candice, yep, this is a messy room.

Shorack, if you disagree why don't you debate me?
Posted by candice 6 years ago
candice
Norin... you need to clean your room.
Posted by Shorack 6 years ago
Shorack
With the current social security and other stuff, it simply is impossible.
Many would come and put only extra stress on that system.

However, in a true free country, that only keeps itself occupied with the very core business of a nation, immigration can be a great thing.

Alas, the US is no longer the second.
Posted by Dyankovich 6 years ago
Dyankovich
I am with Norin in this argument, I will see how he debates though. Good luck and good topic.
7 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 7 records.
Vote Placed by desertrose 5 years ago
desertrose
norinCongressmanDrewTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by katiecita 6 years ago
katiecita
norinCongressmanDrewTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by attrition 6 years ago
attrition
norinCongressmanDrewTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by norin 6 years ago
norin
norinCongressmanDrewTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by rubbersoul 6 years ago
rubbersoul
norinCongressmanDrewTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by b3rk 6 years ago
b3rk
norinCongressmanDrewTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by LiberalLaura 6 years ago
LiberalLaura
norinCongressmanDrewTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30