Immigration Response Essay
Sydney Sharp
Mr. Hanson
ENG 310
16 December 2013 The first article reinforced my opinion the most. Fitz and Wolgin address all the right ways this reform will help America rather than hurt it. The second article’s author has its own idea on reform that might work but I believe is too harsh. It punishes illegal immigrants for cheating their way into America. Illegal immigrants come here illegally because it’s very hard to come to America. They’re only looking for hope and a new life. Punishing them by making them wait fifteen years for any compensation is mean. It also doesn’t make sense to make legal immigrants wait five years to receive benefits. They didn’t come here illegally so why make them wait? The second article criticizes the senate and decides to make a new reform that is unfair. The first article sticks up for the senate and their passing of the bill. Fitz and Wolgin even prove all the fallacies created by their opponents wrong. They do effectively with facts. I also agree personally with the reform bill. The first article favors the bill while the second article calls the senate insufficient and makes a new bill that is cruel to immigrants. The first article has lots of information and facts. There are numbers and stats. Both of the authors are involved in immigration. Fitz is Director of Immigration Policy and Wolgin is a Senior Policy Analyst for immigration at the Center for American Progress. Their backgrounds ensure that they know what they are arguing about. The second article just states opinions about the senate and immigration. There are no numbers. It’s only the author’s opinion. Most of the articles the author’s supposedly full proof reform that will work. I trust the authors in the first article more than I do the second.
Mr. Hanson
ENG 310
16 December 2013 The first article reinforced my opinion the most. Fitz and Wolgin address all the right ways this reform will help America rather than hurt it. The second article’s author has its own idea on reform that might work but I believe is too harsh. It punishes illegal immigrants for cheating their way into America. Illegal immigrants come here illegally because it’s very hard to come to America. They’re only looking for hope and a new life. Punishing them by making them wait fifteen years for any compensation is mean. It also doesn’t make sense to make legal immigrants wait five years to receive benefits. They didn’t come here illegally so why make them wait? The second article criticizes the senate and decides to make a new reform that is unfair. The first article sticks up for the senate and their passing of the bill. Fitz and Wolgin even prove all the fallacies created by their opponents wrong. They do effectively with facts. I also agree personally with the reform bill. The first article favors the bill while the second article calls the senate insufficient and makes a new bill that is cruel to immigrants. The first article has lots of information and facts. There are numbers and stats. Both of the authors are involved in immigration. Fitz is Director of Immigration Policy and Wolgin is a Senior Policy Analyst for immigration at the Center for American Progress. Their backgrounds ensure that they know what they are arguing about. The second article just states opinions about the senate and immigration. There are no numbers. It’s only the author’s opinion. Most of the articles the author’s supposedly full proof reform that will work. I trust the authors in the first article more than I do the second.