Bill O’Reilly backs Marco Rubio immigration reform as fair and good

Rubio has some bright ideas, they should be explored. As to the agricultural workers, let's take a look at the Canadian system. Temp workers are brought into BC and other provinces in a formal govt to govt program, wages and work conditions are monitored and workers seem happy to work hard and be able to support their families back home.

Has Rubio checked his plan out with the agricultural industry in his state. They have little interest in paying legal workers mandated wages or provide mandated benefits. Tey are doing just fine with the illegals, and let's not forget, the general population has a problem not just with the illegals, but also the legals since they are not like 'real Americans.

Why spend ink on looney tune

Senator Mark Rubio's ideas for immigration reform are sound and fair and well within legal practice found in most of the rest of the civilized world. Irish and most legitimate applicants from any country would benefit to a greater extent with this than as past practice. (Just because you heard it on O'Reilly does not make it a bad idea.)

While I have not read Rubio's plan, what is stated in this article seems like a good outline from which to work. Seanmor's clarification of the two catagories of undocumented also would make sense for prioritizing citizenship petitions. The major sticking point in Rubio's and Obama's stated steps that I see is that both vaguely mention a secure border. What does a SECURE border look like in their minds and what must be done to achieve it? I also think that a temporary work permit is important so that our agricultural businesses have a LEGAL way of hiring foreign workers since American workers reject that type of employment. This would reduce the number of people trying to enter illegally, reduce the number of undocumented here and would increase the number on the government's "radar." It is good that we are having an meaningful discussion of this massive problem. Dare we hope that it will lead to similar bipartisan discussions on our many other problems.

No law should be enacted that rewards foreigners for illegally entering and living in the U.S. However, Rubio's plan, which in backed by O'Reil;ly may be a move in the right direction. The above article seems to suggest Yes, illegals who have committed criminal acts should be deported. In assition to fingerprinting these criminals, all other illegals should also be finger-printed (as I was before I joined the marines, and again when I applies for U.S. citizenship). In addition, only those who are flenty in English should be considered for citizenship. Finally, a very clear distinction should be made between those who LAWFULLY entered the country but remained here when their visas expired and those who ILLEGALLY came and Illegally stayed.