# data[].attributes.body
immigrants aren't "bad people" they actually are good its just how people treat them and how they see them. Also they usually work all the time and some people take advantage of that. Also coming from El Salvador usually people come to have a better life and if possible to send money back to their families. they also take alot risks

# data[].attributes.body
They are most of the time, hard working people looking for a better life for themselves and loved ones. They are, before anything else, human with skin, blood, bones and emotions as well as hardships. To escape such hardships, they come to America and they deserve whatever we have to offer.

# data[].attributes.body
Awesome!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

# data[].attributes.body
Immigrants are good workers but they don´t get paid enough to live.

# data[].attributes.body
Immigrants are not bad people. Because most immigrants come to America because they want to have a good life/future

# data[].attributes.body
Immigrants are not bad people. Most immigrants come to america because they think that they are going to have a better life and they try to work hard here to make enough money to send to the people they left where they're from.

# data[].attributes.headline
They benefit tremendously from legal and illegal immigration in the current slow-growth economy. We have a million legal immigrants per year, and the vast majority of them enter the labor market competing with Americans for scarce job opportunities.

# data[].attributes.subject
They benefit tremendously from legal and illegal immigration in the current slow-growth economy. We have a million legal immigrants per year, and the vast majority of them enter the labor market competing with Americans for scarce job opportunities.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Why do we have immigration when unemployment is high? Nobody in Washington will give the honest answer. Employers want cheap labor. They benefit tremendously from legal and illegal immigration in the current slow-growth economy. We have a million legal immigrants per year, and the vast majority of them enter the labor market competing with Americans for scarce job opportunities. The result is wage depression, though there are other factors that restrict wage growth, and persistently high unemployment above the 5 percent level that most economists believe is unhealthy.

Rather than have a million legal immigrants plus more than three hundred thousand more job seekers coming over on temporary work visas year in and year out without a pause, we should ask the simple question, do we need any immigrants? The only constituency that claims there is such a need is employers. And they have essentially written U.S. immigration law for a very long time.

The primary type of immigration is for "family reunification." That means a U.S. citizen can sponsor their immediate relatives for permanent residency and then citizenship. This sounds like a perfectly reasonable basis on which to base an immigration policy. But it makes no economic sense and has disastrous consequences. Spouses, children and parents of citizens may be unskilled, uneducated, and thus likely to become "public charges," the bane of immigration. Economists agree that the U.S. has ample unskilled labor. (The Department of Labor, which is supposed to protect the interests of U.S. workers, has said this for more than twenty years.) But the exception is companies that rely on this labor, particularly food processors, cleaning companies and agriculture. They always want more because more means less pay. These companies could care less about public benefits, unemployment rates and rest of the pathologies that an excess of immigrants can bring. And they turn very nasty when criticized. Anyone who brings up the unemployment is a racist. Or they roll their eyes and tell you American won't do nasty jobs. Tell that to the nation's sewer workers who are mostly unionized, well-paid and American.

There is currently no numerical cap in the number of spouses and children that immigrants can bring over. There needs to be, and that cap must reflect economic reality, the skill level of the immigrants, the unemployment rate in the labor market where they will live, and the likelihood they will become a public charge. If it's likely, then the sponsors should be required to sign surety bonds to reimburse the government for any welfare benefits the immigrants incur. It might seem callous to policy makers to restrict family reunification, but the current system is callous to Americans at the bottom of the labor market. The only beneficiaries are employers.

Noncitizens should not be permitted to sponsor anyone. The idea that green card holders, people in this country on a probationary basis, should be allowed to bring over their children and parents is nonsensical as an initial proposition (if they want to be with their relatives, then why are they here?), but in a tight labor market, without any justification except to employers. We currently allow this.

Our experience with Mexican immigration highlights the domination of immigration policy by employers of cheap labor. In 1907, the country was reeling from three decades of mass immigration, and Congress appointed a blue-ribbon commission to make recommendations for reform of the nearly open-border policy (only Chinese were excluded). The Dillingham Commission recommended quotas limiting immigration by country of origin-but not from Mexico. It found that they were "indolent" and "nonassimilable" but also "a source of labor to substitute for the Asiatics in the most undesirable seasonal occupations." The demand for cheap labor carried the day.

Mexicans have been used to lower wages ever since. The government encouraged this for twenty years with the Bracero program. It only ended when Mexico complained that too many of its citizens were leaving the country, thereby raising the price of labor on that side of the border. That legitimate complaint, not the poor treatment of the Mexican braceros, ended the program in the 1960s. But there have been other guest-worker programs since then, and all are justified by the simple fact that growers don't want to pay Americans market wages to work in the fields. Are fields worse than sewers?

Pages

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
"Rather than have a million legal immigrants plus more than a 300,000 more job seekers coming over on temporary work visas year in and year out without a pause, we should ask the simple question, do we need any immigrants?"

# data[].attributes.body
They are good because maybe they just want to be somewhere safe and have a good education.

# data[].attributes.body
immigrants are good because they are only trying to find a better life but sometimes the immigrants are also trying to do something else like terrorizing other people. other than that most of them are just trying to find new homes for a better life. lots of immigrants are hard working and don't get paid much than us in the U.S .

# data[].attributes.body
This is America!

# data[].attributes.body
They are people who are born in another place to have a chance to do better

# data[].attributes.body
There are 2 types of immigrants and there is a big difference. People think all immigrants are bad but once you notice it, immigration shaped how we are

# data[].attributes.body
are they good or bad?
they are good because they just want a good life a better life.

# data[].attributes.body
They are people that are porn in another country but go to another country to get better stuff like food

# data[].attributes.body
There is 2 types of immigrants good and bad.

# data[].attributes.body
They're good because their  just people who go to other places to either get a better education or sometimes just to have a better life.

# data[].attributes.body
Immigrants are persons who come from a different country. They come to the U.S. to work hard and get a better life. But the immigrants take a lot of risks because they don't know when they are gonna get deported or get stop from police and ask them to their documents. To immigrants are good person because they are trying to get a better life. I feel like different have there own ways to think about the U.S. as their home. To me immigrants are persons working to get to there goal. And succeed in life and help their family. Most of immigrants are Latinos.

# data[].attributes.body
Immigrants are people who move from one country to another. Immigrants can be good and the can be bad. Yes, they may create diversity in the U.S. and other places, but if it's somewhere like America they can be bad. America has a population of about 310,000,000 people , if you add a lot more people to the "equation" America will get overpopulated and  make it harder for people to live here. Immigrants can be very good to bring new types of food and /or religions. Immigrants are a home to the U.S. as long as they don't overpopulate our country.

# data[].attributes.body
immigrants are people who just go places {to different countries} in order to get a job i guess

# data[].attributes.body
I think that immigration would have shaped the whole world differently if it had never happened.

# data[].attributes.body
Immigrants are a good thing because they improve the economy and bring new and interesting culture to the country they immigrate to. The United States is a home for immigrants because it was founded by immigrants and it is one of the most diverse countries in the world.

# data[].attributes.body
Well I think that immigrants are good because if latinos were not in    United States this place would not be nothing because we do all the work in the field and we basically do all the dirty jobs and Americans are just basically working in technology and they do work hard but not like the latinos. When my mom came to America she came because she wanted to make money and make houses in Mexico and send money to my grandma for she could buy medicine to my grandma we she is sick and yeah my mom always since when she came to America.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Conflicting views within their party over what to do about the nation's 11 million undocumented immigrants is dogging House Republicans.

The disagreements in the party run so deep that it is even getting in the way of the release of a bipartisan House comprehensive immigration reform bill that had been in the works for several years, according to published reports.

The 500-page proposal is said to include a path to legal status for many of the nation's undocumented immigrants, said The Hill, a political publication in Washington, D.C.

Members of the bipartisan group previously have said it would also include provisions tightening enforcement - a key element for more conservative House lawmakers.

What many Republicans on different sides of the immigration debate have said in no uncertain terms is that they will not rubber-stamp the Senate bipartisan immigration measure that passed 68-32 in late June.

But beyond that, it's just about anybody's guess.

The Senate measure gives certain undocumented immigrants a path to legal status, aims to boost border security and workplace enforcement and create new legal means for hundreds of thousands of high- and low-skilled workers to come to this country.

House Speaker John Boehner, an Ohio Republican, said: "It's too early to predict what we will or won't do."

One aspect that the House does seem more ready to act on is providing a legal status to undocumented immigrants who were brought to the United States as minors.

"These children were brought here of no accord of their own, and frankly they're in a very difficult position," Boehner said. "And I think many of our members believe that this issue needs to be addressed."

Boehner's comments at a news conference came in response to a question about legislation being drafted by House Majority Leader Eric Cantor, R-Va., and Judiciary Chairman Bob Goodlatte, R-Va., that would offer citizenship to certain immigrants brought here as children.

Details of the bill have not been made public but Goodlatte's committee is holding a hearing on the issue next week.

"These in many instances are kids without a country if we don't allow them to become full citizens of our country," Cantor said. "It is not only an issue of fairness, as the speaker said, it's an issue of decency and compassion. Where else would these kids go?"

Boehner is among the House Republicans who have pledged not to bring the Senate immigration bill to the House floor, and to proceed instead in a step-by-step fashion with individual bills, focusing first on border security.

But his comments indicated that at the least, the House may act to give citizenship to those brought as children, though Cantor's legislation is expected to be narrower in scope than DREAM Act bills that have failed in past congresses. The Judiciary Committee has also approved bills dealing with enforcement of immigration laws, agricultural guest workers, high-tech visas and workplace enforcement, along with a border security bill approved by the Homeland Security Committee.

A package of these bills could end up being the vehicle for the House to enter into negotiations with the Senate on its comprehensive bill - though there are some House conservatives who oppose any negotiations with the Senate, fearing the outcome could be a far-reaching path to citizenship that some condemn as amnesty.

Whatever the approach, no action is expected on the House floor until after lawmakers return from their annual month-long summer recess in August, which will give them an opportunity to hear from their constituents on the issue.

Immigration advocacy groups are watching with concern that the momentum for comprehensive reform could be slowing to a crawl and eventually evaporate.

"Conventional wisdom states that House Republican leadership has an intractable problem on its hands regarding immigration," said America's Voice, a Washington D.C.-based group that favors more lenient immigration policies, in a statement. "[The problem is] an unruly anti-reform caucus that is resistant to sensible reform because its members fear primary challengers, worry about Tea Party opposition and think their bleached districts insulate them from Latino backlash."
The Associated Press contributed to this report.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
House Republicans In Deep Disagreement Over Immigration Reform

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Conflicting views within their party over what to do about the nation's 11 million undocumented immigrants is dogging House Republicans. The disagreements in the party run so deep that it is even getting in the way of the release of a bipartisan House comprehensive immigration reform bill that had been in the works for several years, according to published reports.

# data[].attributes.body
Immigrants are good because they create culture and a lot of different things in america.

# data[].attributes.body
Immigrants are good because they create a diversity in the U.S. They make it a different place when immigrants are around. They make you see a different type of culture.It is a home for immigrants because they moved to America because they wanted a better way of life.

# data[].attributes.body
So, after our quick introduction to our U.S. Immigration Unit, I'd like you to share your opinions and thoughts on U.S. immigration.  So complete these steps:
1.  Hit the pink [+] sign to start a new text box.
2.  Write 2-3 sentences that answer the following prompts:

Explain why immigrants are good or bad.

Explain how the United States is a home OR not a home for immigrants?

3.  Embed a picture that shows your view of immigrants to the U.S.