Kay Hutchinson demands that head of houses return to their home country before getting a green card?
Answer:
It could help bury this Bill. I,m against any type of Bill, I say
enforce our existing Laws.
It's crazy. Many illegals believe that once they leave their job.someone else will just take their place.
Bushie just doesn't get it.....
If these criminals are not returned to their country then it is AMNESTY! NO AMNESTY. Arrest, Enforce, Deport.
IRS definition of Head of Household is the person responsible for the care and welfare of dependents.So unless you are very fertile I would say in a household of 30 as you suggested at least 4 or 5 would be considered as such.Also that would only apply if the head of household would be seeking citizenship or a permanent residency for their family.
Who will help support the families while the head of household is gone? That doesn't seem to make much sense to me. I don't believe in the bill, but regardless, there are parts of this thing that do not make any sense or thought through.
Like the post above me I wonder how the household will be supported while the head of household returns to his/her homeland to begin a legal process?? I am against the bill for many many reasons and like you I am not sure why having the head of household leave his/her family in order to seek citizenship should placate anyone.
Actually, the bill already requires it and even in the bill it says it is a 'touchback'. For example those from India can go to Canada and Mexico and if those from Canada and Mexico are on the opposite side of the country from their country, they can go to the other one (I have NO idea if they cleared this with Canada or Mexico.)
However, Kay Hutchinson would have everyone have to do it, not just heads of household. If it is really a revolving door with a place here reserved unless they fail the background check (and they'll already have had the 24 hour maximum check) then I don't think it buys anything, really. I'd rather have the unedited amendment offered that would have kept out ALL felons, and gang members, and yes that means those who already had us spend a ton on them getting deportation orders then fled. If they ignore a court order, when exactly do we think they WILL follow the law?
Also this bill lets people be legal if they entered before 1/1/07 not 2001 as the last one did. I figured the other would be riddled with fraud and fake documents, but to increase it that much I think we should definitely say 'no twice illegal and no gangs'.
I ALSO think that with legalization we CAN'T have increased legal immigration except maybe raising H1B to 100,000 (max, for 5 years only, to be reevaluated.) It is a numbers thing. We can't provide properly for our OWN people with the numbers we already have.
And I'd only go for any legalization if the bill took care of the problem going forward, whereas this one with its vague 'humanitarian' exemption to enforcement and greater flow of temporary workers and 'sense of Congress to accelerate the SPP' only would make it worse.
In short, we need to start with a blank pad. I have READ this bill I can't see any way I could get happy with it. The boilerplate is warped.
you are right. this part of the bill has mystified me for weeks on end. if heads of households are now in this country as illegal aliens, and the purpose of this bill is to make them legal, why should they leave their children to return to their country and then come back here to go through the citizenship program? (oh, i mean the one that is designed only for MEXICAN aliens, not for others of this planet--that which allows them to return to attain some kind of secretive UNFORGABLE identification--what is that, is that identification by the iris of their eyes and fingerprints and holograms, and why would it apply only to mexican illegal aliens?)
who will mind the shop while they are back in their country? who will take care of the kids, particularly their errant and vicious criminal teenage children that are members of gangs that shoot and kill members of other gangs as well as innocent citizens of the usa?
this is about the only sense i can make of this provision: while the heads of households are back in their mexican homeland, DRAFT the gang members with criminal records and those that are living out their sentences in prison--which we already pay about $40,000 per prisoner, far, far less than the some odd $650 a month (isn't that approximately $7,500 a YEAR for disabled american citizens to live off of?) into the military to act big and tough over in the middle east to get shot at and perhaps take the bullet when they are killed, by "insurgents."
that's how the scumbag illegal alien teenagers should earn their legal citizenship, fighting terrorists, instead of our best and most loyal true citizens--those that come home in bags with their heads taken off by the terrorists. it would work, too. what with heads of households that are parents of these vicious criminals that kill one another even in prison, back in their native homeland--drafting them to fight terrorists might make them men.
it really makes no sense at all. i'd love to hear bush, who i learned has had no time to read this bill (as of 6.12.07--via a speech given by one of his cohort republican senators that finally got the drift of his state's constituents that this bill sucks), tell us why the heads of households must return to their native land first.
i want to hear bush and kay hutchinson stand up at a podium to tell us what purpose it will serve.
if la raza, that vocal nutcase group of legal mexicanos is shouting out to keep families together and even to allow grandparents of an illegal alien to come to live here, then why doesn't la raza cry out against this part of the bill? la raza wants familial status to be the basis of which illegal mexican aliens attains AUTOMATIC citizenship.
i guess that la raza lunatics think that by bringing more mexicanos here, it can indoctrinate more people to eventually become rebels to take over new mexico, arizona, and california as well as parts of other states that used to be part of mexico and 'liberalize' them back into the current geographical country/nation of mexico! (oh, i should refer to it as "azletan," which really refers to the azteca, only one tribe of mexico, who populated the region of la ciudad de mexico, mexico city, at the time that the spanish conquistadors came to the americas to completely rape the natives of everything they had, but particularly, of their religious beliefs and customs like live sacrifice).
yes, please write to your senators asking why heads of households must return to their native land prior to attaining a legitimate green card. ask them the purpose behind it, and while you are at it, ask them this:
who will foot the bill for these "poor" people to go to mexico and then return to the united states? will it be the lawyers that our taxpayer dollars will pay--for them to become legal aliens, free of legal fees? who will pay for them to go back to their homeland for a while, then to come back here?
will the cost be bourne by you or me or them? if they got here by foot, why don't they then return by foot, if kay insists?
in fact, why don't these politicians that are behind the passage of this bill of utter stupidity and insanity to the thinking american people leave their households and go back to their ancestor's homelands for about 4 months, then come back, at their expense, just to show us how this part of the strive act will benefit anyone at all?
Haitians have been arrested and deported, Mexicans not. Is it double-standards or not? Deportation might not be easy- it is ugly, and crime rates will go high- but laws need to be enforce...
The Immigration information post by website user , MyTend.com not guarantee correctness.
More Immigration Questions and Answers ...