1005_Group_P3

Position Paper – Part Three

Name: Gunnar Sterne HB 1005

Instructions: Please use this form as an organizer for writing your portion of your group position paper. You will be writing the third part of the paper. You should clearly and thoroughly document the results of your interviews regarding the final solution that your group has decided on to solve the problem that you are addressing. You may use your own research and the research from other members of your group to address any objections or concerns that were raised by those interviewed. Be sure to follow the MLA citation format that you used when completing your JRP. Your portion of the paper should be a minimum of one page in length.

V. We interviewed individuals to see what their response would be to my plan. Their responses are as follows.

Mr. Provenzale interviewed both his neighbor and a family friend and they both agreed that there is a problem with illegal immigration. While his neighbor thought it would be a simple solution he also had concerns that the police would not be able to identify illegal aliens in larger areas compared to small towns and cities. His friend, John, also agreed that it would be hard to pick out and identify if someone was a citizen or an illegal alien. Along with John’s concerns he liked the fact that this solution would only benefit because it wouldn’t require much money. He also made a remark that citizens should not feel offended for being asked to prove their citizenship because being asked is proving that their tax money is actually helping them in the end (Provenzale). Both people agreed more with the proposed bill then disagreed. Mr. Sauer interviewed his mother and his father and they both agreed that there is a problem with overpopulation in the U.S. caused by illegal immigration. Mr. Sauer’s father thought that once any illegal immigrants were caught and detained, there were multiple things that could be done to them then including being put in jail or being deported back to their country of origin. Mr. Sauer’s mother thought that if an illegal immigrant wants to go through the process of becoming a U.S. citizen then that should be allowed. Both interviewees thought that this plan would be a good start to controlling illegal immigration but couldn’t be a full solution (Sauer). Mr. Sterne interviewed his mother and his sister. His mother agreed that illegal immigration should be dealt with at a state level instead of federal, although she felt that the questioning should not be done randomly. She suggested that maybe everyone in the U.S. should have to prove their citizenship annually. His sister was unclear if anyone would be open to questioning or would there be guidelines to who could be questioned and who could do the questioning. She has noticed that even today many police officers abuse the law and question people anyways without them knowing that they are not obliged to answer their questioning (Sterne). Mr. Bangert interviewed Tali Bangert and she also felt that there needs to be a way to better control the illegal immigration that has built up in our country. She felt that this bill could drastically reduce the number of illegal immigrants. She also thinks that if all law enforcement has the power to question anyone for citizenship then the country can have more control on everything because we have more trained people looking for illegal immigrants, and if this bill doesn’t help the way that we hope than it still isn’t hurting anyone. Mr. Bangert also interviewed Buddy Plumlee and he said that he thought this bill would be a great solution to over population, that is becoming a problem that we might have to deal with in the near future. He also thought that this bill will help the economy because illegal aliens are not paying taxes and are taking jobs from U.S. citizens. He also felt that this bill would be easy to implement and would not be an annoyance to anyone because showing proof of citizenship would only take a few minutes (Bangert).

VI. Our answers, based on our research, to their objections and concerns are:

In response to the concerns that Mr. Provenzale’s interview brought up, it will still be hard to find illegal aliens because of how they are not actually people known by the government but under this new bill it allows state officials to question anyone they suspect to be an illegal alien. This will ultimately lead to more illegal aliens being caught than there are right now. In response to Mr. Sauer’s interview, our bill does not have to deal with what will happen to the illegal aliens once they are detained. Our bill solely gives the state the right to give their officials the right to question anyone they feel to be illegal. They are then detained. Also allowing illegal aliens to be U.S. citizens once they are caught will only lead to more illegal immigration because of the strict laws that our country has to allow only immigrants that meet certain requirements. Our response to Mr. Sterne’s interview is that questioning will not be done randomly but power will be given to the state officials so they can question they feel to be an illegal. A state official has to give a reason for his questioning of that person; he will not be allowed to question anyone randomly. Also anyone will be open to questioning, as long as the official that is questioning them has a reason for questioning. Overall, this bill is pretty simple. Licensed state officials that have gone through the appropriate training are allowed to question anyone they feel to be an illegal alien. If that person can't provide proof or citizenship they will then be detained.