I would like to appreciate one who has written attribute to this letter and was able to see all concerns factual about the issue of illegal immigration particularly among nurses.

Illegal immigration refers to the immigration of people across national borders in a way that violates the immigration laws of the destined country. In politics, the term may imply a larger set of social issues with disputed consequences in areas such as economy, social welfare, education, health care, slavery, prostitution, crime, legal protections, public services, and human rights. Illegal emigration would be leaving a country in a manner which violates the laws of the country being left.

We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!


order now

“Illegal alien” is the official term used in legislation and by the border patrol for a person who has entered the country illegally or is residing in the United States illegally after entering legally; for example, using a tourist visa and remaining after the visa expires.”Undocumented worker” is often used by supporters to refer to all individuals lacking legal documentation, including children and those who do not work. They argue that it is offensive to describe any human as illegal, whether or not their behavior is illegal. George Lakoff, a University of California linguist and progressive strategist, has argued that “the terms ‘aliens’ and ‘illegals’ provoke fear, loathing and dread” and should thus be avoided.

The National Association of Hispanic Journalists recommends “undocumented immigrant. Victor Davis Hanson, neo-conservative historian and author of “Mexifornia: A State of Becoming” has argued that “undocumented worker” is a euphemism or politically correct term for “illegal alien.” He states: “‘undocumented worker,’ for example, is the politically correct synonym for ‘illegal alien.’ [4]. David Ray, of the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR) a proponent of immigration reduction, has also criticized the use of the phrase “undocumented immigrant”.

He states: “referring to an illegal alien as an ‘undocumented immigrant’ is “like calling a bank robbery an ‘unauthorized withdrawal.Many illegal immigrants seek higher wages and standards of living than available to them in their country of origin, as well as many forms of welfare available to them in wealthier nations. Another driver of illegal immigration is an attempt to escape civil war, repression, military servitude (such as conscription or national service), or sexism in their native country. Yet another reason, especially in the United States, is for the purpose of setting up illegal drug networks, which are necessary for the smuggling and distribution of illegal drugs.

Some undocumented immigrants seek to live with loved ones, such as a spouse or other family members.I have been surprised at the virulence of the response to the President’s proposals for dealing with the problem of illegal immigration. I had not realized there was so much hostility to illegal immigrants, who are mainly from Mexico and Central America.

Many Americans seem to regard anything short of expelling the entire illegal-immigration population, which may be as large as 12 million (though my guess is that it is much lower), as a form of “amnesty” that would be immoral because it would reward illegality.Well, that is what amnesties do; they forgive crimes. But they are a conventional policy tool, and should not be despised.

They are particularly common as a means of dealing with tax evasion. Tax evasion is extremely common because it is so difficult to detect. A tax amnesty in effect sells the tax evader immunity from punishment in exchange for payment of back taxes due.

The amnesty is attractive to the government because it raises revenue and to the tax evader because it enables him to buy his way out of the risk of being prosecuted should he be caught. It is a mutually beneficial trade. The objection to amnesties is that they increase the incentive to commit the amnestied crime in the future by holding out the prospect of future amnesties. The objection is superficial.

The government will (if it is being sensible) trade off the gain in revenue from the amnesty against the future loss of tax revenues that is likely to be caused by the prospect of future amnesties, and so it will set the amnesty “price” at the level that maximizes the net gain in revenue. For example, if it reckons that the prospect of future amnesties will lead to significantly more tax evasion in the future; it can condition the amnesty on the tax evader’s paying not merely the back taxes he owes but a substantial penalty as well.;In September 1995, the five-year H-1A program instituted by the Immigration Nursing Relief Act of 1989 (INRA) to bring in foreign registered nurses expired.

At that time a multi-sectoral advisory committee recommended to the Secretary of Labor that extension of the program subject to a few modifications.Surely the American national interest, particularly the welfare of the nation’s rapidly growing ranks of the elderly, necessitated some sort of rational policy to replace the expired program or at least guide the transition period. And certainly there is a moral dimension to this that the U.S. government could not possibly ignore, namely the abrupt displacement of thousands of productive, loyal, tax-paying professionals who answered its call to service and labored in remote corners of America while many American health-care workers fled for the comforts of the big city.

But that is precisely what happened. Thousands of Filipino and other foreign nurses are literally being put on the street by nursing homes, home health agencies and other health-care facilities, albeit reluctantly, by employers who undoubtedly need and value their services. The system is discarding them like squeezed lemons.Credit much of this to the swirling winds of election-year politics, which reinforced immigration as a low-risk, high-impact issue.

The immigrant voter constituency after all is seen as negligible. Many in government and media advocated informed, sober and well-meaning reservations about the state and direction of U.S. immigration policy. Too many, however, dished out plan political demagoguery, triggering knee-jerk reactions from information laced with fear and cynicism.I must say that I find it disturbing that we are actually contemplating a contravention of Constitutional and civil rights as expressed by the 39th Congress. I would hope that we as a country, and as elected representatives, are, if anything more enlightened than the American society and Congress of 130 years ago.

Following its passage, the Fourteenth Amendment was interpreted by the Supreme Court as an affirmation of the traditional jus soli rule and in Wong Kim Ark v. the United States the Court held that the ”Fourteenth Amendment … has conferred no authority upon Congress to restrict the effect of birth, declared by the Constitution to constitute a sufficient and complete right to citizenship.

” It would be very difficult for the Court to be clearer on this point, and I think it casts much doubt on the constitutionality of any of the bills purporting to alter the right to citizenship at birth.While immigration to America entails both benefits and challenges, the melting pot that is America remains a symbol of tolerance and a model of assimilation across the globe. I find it extraordinarily ironic that many of the same people who espouse the need for us to unite under one language and one religion would seek to divide us according to the circumstances of our birth.This legislation is also offensive because it would disadvantage some of the most vulnerable members of our society-infants. How are babies born in the U.S. different from each other? The obvious answer is that they are not.

The damage to the Constitution and to our democracy that these proposals would render by itself is reason enough to reject them. While many in our country have concerns about unlawful immigration, we should measure carefully any remedies to ensure that any remedy does not have more long term problems than the issue we are attempting to address.However, I also believe that it is interesting to look at the practical effects that would result from the enactment of this legislation.One result would be that many American-born, would-be citizens, would instead be rendered ”stateless,” citizens of no country. Many countries do not automatically ascribe citizenship based on parental citizenship. For instance, the child of an American born overseas can obtain derivative citizenship through its parents, but only if she returns to claim it within a set period of time.

The first common misconception about libertarianism. Libertarians don’t believe “everyone is so kind and respectful of others”. On the contrary, they believe that everyone will always act in their own best interests, and that it’s a proper role of the state to protect citizens against the force and fraud of others, but beyond that, to allow people to choose their own courses of action as long as they don’t infringe on others.

So in that respect, what matters it to me or you whether we are kind and respectful towards each other or not, as long as we allow each other the freedom of our own choices?A corollary to that is that since those in government are just people, and people always act in their own self-interest and are not required to be kind and respectful, it makes sense to severely limit the power those in government have over those not in government – again, not because people are kind and respectful, but because they’re not.Nursing thought process, gone MAD:  Anything that can go wrong will go wrong and if nothing has gone wrong, you obviously don’t understand the situation. You believe if you can keep your head among all this confusion, you obviously don’t understand the situation. You can drink a pot of coffee and still go to sleep in the morning.

You believe every patient needs TLC: Thorazine, Lorazapam, and Compazine. You can’t see it; it’s probably not there. Your sense of humor seems to get more warped each year. “Why am I here?” Everyone gets treated exactly the same, until they piss you off. When you get a call telling you the name of your next admit and they ask if you can do the care plan before the patient gets to the floor.

When called for orders, the MD says, “Write them yourself; you know the patient better than I do.” You can look your evil male patient in the eye and tell him.Each has to be vigilant and law abiding so as to not compromise whatever bad evils comes along. It’s more confident if you and the rest of the concerned citizen should have to be aware of the surroundings they live in. In contrast those bad elements will never have its escaped if you do know what evil acts are. If ever nurses did wrong even whatever c citizen they come from should have punished accordingly to what offense accuse or evil done by the latter.

Generally what we after for most of the concerns is the good or what is right to do for the sake of everybody’s welfare not just for few.      References:http://andrightlyso.com/2005/06/23/mad-nurse-thoughts-lol“entry archive”. http://www.becker-posner-blog.

com/archives/2006/05/the_illegalimmi.html“From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. Illegal immigration”. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illegal_immigrationhttp://commdocs.

house.gov/committees/judiciary/hju43144.000/hju43144_0f.htmhttp://www.nap.

edu/books/0309042771/html/18.htmlhttp://www.saltshaker.us/HispanicHope/Subcommittee.htm“Red Country”.

http://www.ocblog.net/ocblog/2005/11/polls_turning_s.html