The Instigator
Cayden.C
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
Anonymous
Tied
0 Points

The United States Federal Government Should Create a Moral Plan for 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  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 12/22/2018 Category: Politics
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 515 times Debate No: 119570
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (2)
Votes (0)

 

Cayden.C

Pro

This debate will consist of myself (pro side) providing a plan that the United States Federal government should impose for stabilizing immigration. The con side can either state how my plan fails, Or create a plan that would be more beneficial.
Plan:

The United States Federal Government should create a plan to stabilize immigration, And to aid immigrants. My plan is straight forward, And is as follows. Every 3 years there will be a United States Government Approved Immigration Draft (USGAID) where the U. S. Will grant only a number of immigrants from foreign countries citizenship to the United States (with requirements) the immigrants will go before a Immigration Court or Supreme Court. (as many already do) The United States will ONLY accept these immigrants if they do not have a criminal background, Or were on the 'No Fly' list in their home country, Or other factors in which indicate they could cause harm to the United States or its citizens. The U. S. Government would decide the number of immigrants they would consider granting citizenship. In the status quo, About 1, 000, 000 immigrants immigrate to the United States every year. This draft period that would take place every three years would last for a total of 2 months. (for example: in 2019, The Immigration draft would take place at the beginning of January and end in late February. Then in 2022, The immigration draft would take place in January again and end in late February, Again, And so on. ) Now, Just because the draft would be taking place for 2 months straight, Does not mean the U. S. Will be accepting as many immigrants that can immigrate within that time period. It is just to assist the immigrants and the government. Once the draft is over, The United States government will no longer accept migrant caravans in the United States, Or other migrants WITH EXCEPTIONS. The United States government would have a Non-Draft Emergency Immigrant Consideration Policy (NDEICP) where if a immigrant needs to come to the U. S. For emergency reasons, Or their reason is factual, Evidential and is a actual emergency they will be sent before the Supreme Court. While the courts are considering their citizenship, They will be held in a detention center. If the courts accept, They will be granted citizenship to the U. S. , If not they will be deported. Just to make clear, Immigrants who migrate illegally will be deported back to their home country. Once the draft that takes place every 3 years occurs, The immigrants who were accepted will be aided in finding a job, Housing etc. This plan will be beneficial to stabilizing the number of immigrants and would be a stable immigration policy.

Debate!

Con

The US Federal government should not create a moral plan for immigration because thats bad
Debate Round No. 1
Cayden.C

Pro

Cayden.C forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
Cayden.C

Pro

Cayden.C forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
Cayden.C

Pro

Cayden.C forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by Anonymous 3 years ago
levi_smiles
My first impulse is to interrogate the necessity of stabilization. As you note, The US accepts about one million legal immigrants per year- that's been true since 1990, With peak legal immigration in 2000. Illegal immigration also peaked around the same time & has been in steep decline over the past two decades, Now roughly a quarter of what it was. . . . Sounds pretty stable and trending positively. Does the US really want or need any major policy change?

What's the advantage of closing for business 34 months out of every 36? How many govt. Employees does it take to process, Say 6-7 million applications in a 60 day period? Low tens of thousands, I'd ballpark. What do those thousands of govt. Employees do for 34 months until the next draft?

Migrant caravans are generally associated with illegal immigration, Aren't they? I doubt the US ever has or will accept migrant caravans, However worthless that term soon proves. That is, The group you traveled with to the US border, Or the means by which you traveled don't count for much towards an application for asylum. Do you suppose that limiting legal immigration to a 2 month window will impact illegal immigration?
Posted by Anonymous 3 years ago
omar2345
@Cayden. C

Great starting argument. Hopefully you find someone to debate this since I agree with you. It is sensible to have restrictions.

Try and paragraph your points. It would be easier for the opposing side to read and also readers. In context one paragraph should have the practical application of it, The other why it is beneficial and lastly or in between the other two supporting evidence to say what you are proposing is a good thing.
No votes have been placed for this debate.

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.