essay 4 - finished draft
McCain on Illegal Immigration 2008
Illegal immigration has been a highly sensitive and a largely hot button issue facing decision-making politicians in the last decade. Although very few decisive actions were taken by the most recent president with regards to this extremely sensitive topic, the presidential candidates of the November 2008 election, Senator John McCain and Senator Barack Obama realize that the issue is more important than ever and are fighting to establish a platform that will not only make legal U.S. Citizens happy but the enormous illegal immigrant communities, which are primarily Hispanic, happy as well. The two candidates have been sure to voice and document their opinions on what should be done if and when they are elected, however, before deciding that Obama has the better plan try to practice making more intelligent and informed decisions, as Brooks Hall and Kathleen Hall Jamieson say in their book, “Unspun-finding facts in a world of [disinformation], “to avoid error requires a bit of simple mental discipline, but adopting the proper thinking habits doesn’t take a genius IQ or even a lot of work, and can save us from looking foolish.” (Unspun 153) It is perfectly clear that Senator John McCain’s plan for the reform of illegal immigration is more intelligent, comprehensive, and achievable than Senator Barack Obama’s.
“We must prove we have the resources to secure our borders and, use them, while respecting the dignity and rights of citizens and legal residents of the United States.” (McCain 08) McCain’s first step in his five step plan to fix the illegal immigration problem is the secure our borders, this is the most important step in implementation of a plan to reduce terrorist attacks, job reduction, higher taxes due to non-payment of taxes by illegal immigrants, and violent crimes committed by unknowns in the Hispanic community, just to name a few. Other steps provided by his outline to secure our borders include, but not limited to, “ensuring adequate funding”, “Deploy Unmanned Aerial Vehicles”, and to “continue US-VISIT comprehensive visitor security program”. (McCain 08) A current Rasmussen Report polls find “American voters believing, by a 63 percent to 28 percent margin, that it’s more important to control the border than resolve the status of people here illegally.” (Yakima) The US-VISIT program, an important step to securing the borders by land and air, was “launched after Sept 11th…US-VISIT is intended to automate the processing of visitors…using fingerprints and digital photographs to help find criminals, potential terrorists, and people who overstay visas and join the nation’s illegal immigrant population.” (Washington Post)
The second step is to find the Employers who are hiring illegal immigrants for inexpensive, and sometimes cheap, labor for skilled and un-skilled positions and to prosecute them for their unlawful hiring practices. A new option to complete the step, which is included in McCain’s plan, is to use biometric data to authenticate and employee’s person. Biometric data uses biological information to ascertain the person’s real identity. For example, one of the verification tools may be DNA, blood types, fingerprints and hair samples which are all unique to a person’s identity. Another asset of this particular plan would be to “find employers that are hiring illegally by using targeted auditing by the Dept. of Labor” and to “provide responses about an employee during hiring process” (McCain 08). The most agreed on portion of this step by citizens and lawmakers alike is that the “only serious way to deter illegal immigrants is to crack down on the people that employ them” (Yakima).
To “Meet America’s Labor Needs” (Needs), McCain’s plan has outlined broken down skill-sets to ensure specific requirements and wishes are being met by implementing “temporary worker programs” for highly skilled, low-skilled non-agricultural worker, and low-skilled agricultural workers. McCain has already had some practice and success with a program parallel to the one he is proposing in step three of his plan to reduce, and to alleviate all together, the non-stop incoming flow of illegal immigrants. The Wall Street Journal writes that “Sen. McCain played a pivotal role in the 2005 and 2006 immigration debate when he introduced a bipartisan measure with Sen. Ted Kennedy (D., Mass). The bill included and essential worker visa for immigrants seeking to come to the U.S. and a version for those already her illegally.” As Jackson and Jamieson write , “when you see numbers being used, be sure you know what’s being counted and what’s not” (unspun 162) this advice will come into play when trying to evaluate exactly how many members of the country’s work force is being met through the employment of illegal immigrants. How bad is our unemployment rate exactly if employees had to account for their legal job status?
McCain’s final step in his plan to decisively resolve the complex illegal immigration conflict is to both “Address the undocumented” and “Eliminate the Family Backlog” (McCain 08). These two steps involve several key elements, including requiring illegal immigrants to “learn English, pay back taxes and fines, and pass citizenship course” (mccain 08) This plan also includes eliminating of the family backlog which is defined as “no person here illegally receives green card before those who have been legally waiting outside the country” (mccain 08). This plan would also entail all people residing in the United States of America to have a valid Social Security Number which would be available for accountability at all times for identity and responsibility reasons.
Obama’s immigration reform has some similarities to McCain’s in small but distinct ways i.e. He wants to increase security at our nation’s borders, he wants to make employers responsible for hiring know illegal immigrants to provide inexpensive skills and labor, and they both want to bring families together that have been waiting to come into the United States legally. Again, McCain’s immigration plan is a lot more encompassing than Obama’s but one thing that McCain doesn’t have on his agenda is something Obama does, which is to “increase” the number of “legal immigrants”. Senator Obama’s plan is to “support a system that allows undocumented immigrants who are in good standing to pay a fine, learn English, and go to the back of the line for the opportunity to become citizens.” (Obama 08) This move would increase the tax dollars brought into the country, increase the monies collected by the school for all the attending students, the question of cheap immigrant labor would be settled (because there wouldn’t be any), and the families and children would be fluent English speaking, taxpaying, legally employed citizens of the United States of America.
Senator Obama is trying to make his self look good on both sides of the issue of illegal immigrants and all the issues that come with it. In a recent town hall meeting not only did he say that U.S. citizens should learn Spanish but then went on to say, ''I agree that immigrants should learn English.'' But then he went on to poke fun at those who argue that ''we need English only'' and Americans who ''go over to Europe, and all we can say is 'merci beaucoup.' '' (Rohter) He also states that instead of deporting and prosecuting immigrants who have come into the country illegally and may have made no attempt to become a legal citizen, the government should have them pay a fine (a “reasonable” one at that), learn some English, and take a test. Are these illegal immigrants possibly going to become American Citizens before the men and women who have been waiting, in some cases all their lives to come into the country legally? What fine would be enough to cover the job loss based on lack of positions available due to cheap labor being offered? Would the “fines” ever recoup the taxes paid for their free education and health coverage? The money to be paid as a “fine” would never be collected, first a driver’s license and/or social security card would have to be issued which would take more years than Obama would ever see. There is absolutely no way that this would ever conceivably work and “Saying It Doesn’t Make It So” (unspun 115) and to make such “Extraordinary Claims Need Extraordinary Evidence” (unspun 117).
As fully shown McCain’s plan for immigration has comprehensible steps to complete his goal. Senator McCain states, “I don't want to fail again to achieve comprehensive immigration reform. We must prove we have the resources to secure our borders and use them, while respecting the dignity and rights of citizens and legal residents of the United States. When we have achieved our border security goal, we must enact and implement the other parts of practical, fair and necessary immigration policy. We have economic and humanitarian responsibilities as well, and they require no less dedication from us in meeting them” (mccain 08) When faced with the decision of which immigration policy works the best for the American people remember the wisdom that the writers of “Unspun- finding facts in a world of [disinformation]” Kathleen Hall Jamieson and Brooks Jackson bestow, “avoiding spin and getting a solid grip on hard facts requires not only an open mind and a willingness to consider all the evidence, it requires us to have some basic skills in telling good evidence from bad, and to recognize that mere assertion is not a fact and that not all facts are good evidence.” (Unspun 106)
Works Cited
Elizabeth Holmes. Wall Street Journal (Eastern Edition). New York, N.Y.
Jul 8, 2008.pg.A.6
Karen Trojanello.Yakima Herald-Republic.Yakima, Wash:
Jul 10,2008.pg.A.4.
Spencer s Hsu, Del Quentin Wilber-Washington Post Staff Writers. The Washington Post. Washington,D.C.: Apr 22.2008.pg.A.8
Immigration, Obama 08. www.barackobama.com
Aug 12, 2008.
McCain 08. John McCain on Border Security and Immigration. www.johnmccain.com
Aug 12, 2008.
- mbaker's blog
- Login or register to post comments
I'm Confused
I understand your annoyance about the illegal immigration stance that I take in the paper however I believe that was the whole point right? You said to write something that would make someone want to argue against, or for. You happened to want to argue against, however, someone else may be reading this thinking that they feel very strongly for what I've written. There are not very many statements made in the paper that were not out of an article or a presidential website, however, I may have changed the words around to make them my own.
I'm not trying to be smart, I really am just confused. I thought the paper was supposed to evoke responses exactly like I received from you.
Mary B.
p.s. My granparents are from Poland and Germany and my mom's grandmother and grandfather that came from Poland died from the Black Plague. My great-aunt Cecia (polish for aunt) was the eldest at 14 and raised six children including my grandmother who was not even a year old. My great-great grandmother from Germany died in the concentration camps.
Mary B
no annoyance
I'm not annoyed about the stance, so don't worry about that. (Hope I didn't use the word annoy in my response.) I'm just pointing out the sort of thing you can expect from someone who doesn't agree, which is the whole point of writing an argument, about getting people who disagree to see why they should consider your point of view. You are right. You were supposed to provoke a response. Use what I had to say to see what you can do to counter opposition to your argument. The whole idea is to make the essay and argument stronger by addressing the concerns that will arise from someone who disagrees.
When it comes to the statements from the sources, what you've describe is text-book plagiarism. Be careful about that. Even if you take someone's ideas or words and tweak them to read differently, you still owe them a citation.
Bradley
to mary
The introduction does a good job of setting up the discussion and argument and it is clear where the argument is headed because the thesis is clear. What is needed in the support points is a paragraph development approach that makes this more YOUR argument and less a collection of source materials presented in support of a particular point. The way to do this is to develop paragraphs much as has been expected with the preceding essays. Open with a topic statement about indicating the point to be developed, in your own words. Explain, as much as possible, in your own words why the topic matters. Then provide an example or two from your sources that illustrates, develops and substantiates your views. Then explain why it all mattes in relation to the thesis, why it is an intelligent thing in and of itself. Don't worry about Obama until the opposing view and refutation/rebuttal, if at all.
You're right that this is a hot button issue, but there are a few things that bear further looking into. You write twice about illegal immigrants not paying taxes, or their fair share, but this isn't so, and needs some backing up with reliable sources. When illegal immigrants get a fake social security number to work, they have payroll taxes deducted. However, they tend to not file tax returns, so they don't get refunds, nor do they get social security benefits. In that respect, at least t some degree, they are paying taxes without receiving benefits. When it comes to schools, it depends on how those schools are funded. In Washington, the bulk of the funding comes from sales taxes, so whenever anyone spends money, they pay taxes, without regard to being legal or illegal. However, do these taxes offset the expense of English language learner classes? That I don't know. This does bear some looking into so as to get the facts right on this because contentious issues are scrutinized. Remember that you want to get someone who is at least undecided to see the validity of your views, so take into account their need for evidence.
When it comes to the cheap labor question, one thing I've found with some students who have worked in these jobs, that there is no one else who will take them because they are lousy, hard, dirty jobs. I've had students who worked in a packing plant have to do the work of several people, for the pay of one person, because the plant couldn't find the people willing to do the work. Most of these families are also bent on learning English. When my family came from Germany, they were told by the school to stop speaking English (late 19th century) at home or their kids would never learn English. All that really did was speed up the process. It's the second and third generation kids who historically have been able to master the language, and that's nothing new in our history. Perhaps new attitudes have slowed this acquisition, but the kids will still pick it once they are born here, as they have always done. I've always seen this as a red herring issue. And given the census reports showing that whites will no longer be a majority, though a plurality, in about 30 years, we may have to adjust out thinking.
The flip-side to why this sort of thing is important, and we can see it in the "don't let Seattle steal this election" campaign signs for Dino Rossi as well as the Russian invasion of Georgia, is that if we polarize and divide, if we go into an us and them bunker mentality (real Americans versus illegals and those who look like them), we stratify our national identity. This is what happened in the South during the battles over slavery and reconstruction. Poor whites were made to feel superior to all blacks, but it was still the wealthy whites who reaped all the benefits. Are we doing the same with poor whites today, pitting them against illegal immigrants for partisan gain? Could there be a similar dynamic at play in immigration today? It's something to consider as you revise. What harm does illegal immigration do to the nation and its citizens? Which citizens? Who suffers because of immigration? Who benefits (do you want your fruit and veggies to triple in price if farmers have to pay real wages?)? These are all big picture question as is the whole English only point and Americans' general ignorance of other languages, particularly among those who don't go to college where some foreign language is required. The joke among many Europeans I've met is this: "What do you call someone who knows only one language? American." How can we be a global leader if we don't better understand other cultures and peoples, a big part of which is being able to understand how language shapes thought, and the only way to do that is to learn a language.
Small picture questions concern the nitty-gritty of each paragraph. Be sure it is explained to the reader why each point of the McCain perspective will be a good thing for them to embrace. That's not happening at this point. Instead, the early support paragraphs are a collection of source material stitched together to make a point rather than a point being made by you, in your words, with source material to validate your thoughts. Get more of your thinking in there.
I didn't intend to write so much about the topic itself, but being the product of an illegal immigrant (my grandfather deserted the British Navy in Vancouver, B.C. during WWI and skipped south over the border because his captain wouldn't give him and some others shore leave. Not very noble, but he got sent back to France (he was English) via the American Army at the time, which later helped him become a citizen). It was easier for him then because he was white and they nation wasn't so up in arms about white immigration, only non-white, and tends to still pretty much be the case. Earlier it was Vietnamese era boat people, before that it was Japanese during WWII and before that the Chinese with the railroads and before. On the east coast, it was the Russians, Slavs, Germans (and other N, Europeans) and Italians and Irish who drew the most ire, but once they got a generation or two into the culture, they could better blend in. It's a sticky and contentious issue for sure.
Bradley
Introduction: Good narrowing
Introduction: Good narrowing to the topic. You might want one more sentence before your thesis. I felt it jumped. Also, the name of the book must be capitalized Un-Spun: Finding Facts in a world of [Disinformation]
Essay Focus, Thesis and Main Idea: You give a clear idea of what you are going to discuss.
Organization, Structure and/or Paragraphing Effectively: Make sure your topic sentences directly relate to what is being said in the paragraphs. Also, it would be good to put in more of your own opinion. You might want to try looking at Professor Bleck's example to search for places to add your opinion.
Wording, Sentence Structure and Conventions of Standard American English: Paragraph two you have a run on sentence. Try breaking it like this - McCain's first step in his five-step plan to fix the illegal immigration problem is to secure our borders. This…
Also, I don't think “Deploy Unmanned Aerial Vehicles” needs to be capitalized. There are a couple more like that.
When citing, put the period after the cite. i.e. (Yakima). (Un-Spun).
Works cited should be last name first and alphabetized i.e. Holmes, Elizabeth.
Adequacy of Response to Assignment: You could use a stronger argument against Obama to sway my opinion.
Appropriateness of Topic Treatment for College Reading Audience. I enjoyed reading about this issue.
Intro: You tied in the book
Intro: You tied in the book very well, but it’s a little word-y. The reader doesn’t know where you’re going to go until the last statement.
Essay Focus: You thesis is sharp and to the point.
Development of Ideas and/or Experiences: As the person before noticed that each paragraph draws back to the intro. And the paragraphs flow well together.
Organization: The essay is very well organized and directly address the thesis and supports it with quotes.
Wording/ structure/conventions: There are a few places that have slight grammatical errors. Ex: In your seventh paragraph “is trying to make his self look”, instead of his self himself might work better.
Adequacy of response to assignment: I don’t feel that you opposing view paragraph was truly an opposing view paragraph. It didn’t fully show the other side of the argument.
Appropriateness of topic: word choice was age appropriate as well as the content.
Introduction:Strong intro
Introduction:Strong intro with good use of quotes , used book and authors names correctly.
Essay Focus, Thesis or Main :You have a thesis.
Development of Ideas and/or Experiences: Each paragraph has its own topic and draws back to the intro.
Organization, structure and/or paragraphing Effective :You made strong points in each paragraph and backed them up with quotes and found facts online.
Wording, Sentence Structure and Conventions of Standard American English: Your citation is off for MLA format(last names first then first name second) plus out of order (needs to be ABC order).
Adequacy of response to assignment: yes followed assignment somewhat. You had intro, several point paragraphs, you had two opposing view paragraphs(only one is necessary)but still in need of a strong rebuttal paragraph and conclusion.
Appropriateness of topic treatment for college reading audience: Yes, very it was thoughtful and informative.