Domestic
Justice
Reforming Our Corrections System
Our corrections system has become a mess built upon profit, recidivism, and vengeance. It no longer rehabilitates criminals or makes reparation for disorders. It has lost the meaning of human dignity. Over 2.3 million Americans find themselves incarcerated – numbers unmatched by any other nation in the world, for America houses 22% of the world’s prisoners. We support positive approaches to punishment that build hope, responsibility, and a sense of belonging. Prisons should be the sentence of last resort, reserved for violent criminals. Those convicted of non-violent offenses should be handled by alternative, community-based programs. We must stop our obsession with incarceration and focus on preparing criminals to lead productive lives within society. We look to rebuild our corrections system by reducing the number of offenses that lead to incarceration, reforming bail, building prisons into communities, implementing alternate forms of correction, and ending mandatory minimum sentences.
We support legislation which would replace bail, in many instances, with pretrial service programs. The accused would be assessed to determine if they are a flight risk or dangerous to the public. The judge, based on this assessment, decides whether to send the person home, where he or she may be monitored with drug tests, ankle monitors, and phone calls about court dates. We support laws which repeal mandatory minimum sentences and give more deference to judges and juries in sentencing, and we support laws that discourage incarceration for non-violent offenses. Non-violent offenses should be handled by such programs as halfway houses, community service, electronic monitoring, restitution, and rehabilitation. At their choosing, non-violent offenders should be able to spend time in a monastery or other religious and ascetic institution, being tutored by a volunteering monk or nun to pursue holy and reformed lives. We support outlawing private prisons. Prisons should be run by the local communities, and they should be communities themselves, much like San Pedro prison in Bolivia, where inmates have jobs inside the community, buy or rent their accommodation, often live with their families, and participate in their own system of governance. The frequency of repeat offenders should be reduced by providing inmates and the newly released with education and employment opportunities, and by attempting to get them involved with their families and communities. We also support laws to prohibit torture under all circumstances.
We support legislation which would replace bail, in many instances, with pretrial service programs. The accused would be assessed to determine if they are a flight risk or dangerous to the public. The judge, based on this assessment, decides whether to send the person home, where he or she may be monitored with drug tests, ankle monitors, and phone calls about court dates. We support laws which repeal mandatory minimum sentences and give more deference to judges and juries in sentencing, and we support laws that discourage incarceration for non-violent offenses. Non-violent offenses should be handled by such programs as halfway houses, community service, electronic monitoring, restitution, and rehabilitation. At their choosing, non-violent offenders should be able to spend time in a monastery or other religious and ascetic institution, being tutored by a volunteering monk or nun to pursue holy and reformed lives. We support outlawing private prisons. Prisons should be run by the local communities, and they should be communities themselves, much like San Pedro prison in Bolivia, where inmates have jobs inside the community, buy or rent their accommodation, often live with their families, and participate in their own system of governance. The frequency of repeat offenders should be reduced by providing inmates and the newly released with education and employment opportunities, and by attempting to get them involved with their families and communities. We also support laws to prohibit torture under all circumstances.
Content by /u/MoralLesson
Substance Abuse
The United States has been waging a failed war on drugs since 1914 – imprisoning countless individuals for falling into awful and despairing addictions. We believe that it is time to end the criminalization of drugs and develop a policy of medical assistance – where we help people break their addictions and start new lives. Too many lives have been ruined by an unwillingness to seek help out of fear of decades in prison, and drug laws have often unfairly targeted minorities and the poor. Nonetheless, we recognize drugs have torn families and communities apart, and we seek to rehabilitate those who have fallen into addiction.
We support the repeal of substance abuse laws – decriminalizing marijuana, LSD, cocaine, and other drugs. We support allowing states to develop their own drug policies. However, we encourage them to make hard drug use – such as cocaine, heroin, and methamphetamines – mere civil infractions (or even something lesser) that mandate rehabilitation and potentially some community service in order to require people to seek the help they so often need to get their lives back on track. We support the repeal of the National Minimum Drinking Age Act of 1984, leaving it to the states to determine the legal age for purchasing and consuming alcohol without threats of losing important federal funding, and leaving it to the states and communities -- though with potential federal funding -- as to how to combat alcoholism.
We support the repeal of substance abuse laws – decriminalizing marijuana, LSD, cocaine, and other drugs. We support allowing states to develop their own drug policies. However, we encourage them to make hard drug use – such as cocaine, heroin, and methamphetamines – mere civil infractions (or even something lesser) that mandate rehabilitation and potentially some community service in order to require people to seek the help they so often need to get their lives back on track. We support the repeal of the National Minimum Drinking Age Act of 1984, leaving it to the states to determine the legal age for purchasing and consuming alcohol without threats of losing important federal funding, and leaving it to the states and communities -- though with potential federal funding -- as to how to combat alcoholism.
Content by /u/MoralLesson
Accused, Victims, and Jurors' Rights
The American justice system has been lacking for years with inadequate public defenders who are often pressured into making innocent people plead guilty. Numerous citizens have had to act in pro per during civil proceedings due to poverty – a circumstance tantamount to miscarriage of justice. Jurors have been placed with undue financial burdens for their precious though involuntary service. Crime victims have been without strong rights since time immemorial.
We support increased funding to the public defender offices around the country in order to lessen the caseload on each attorney and guarantee to every accused adequate legal representation. We support either a constitutional amendment or a combination of entrenched federal and state laws to ensure free legal counsel for defendants in civil trials and, with the existence of probable cause as determined by a preliminary hearing, free legal counsel for the plaintiff as well. These counsels would be similar to the office of public defender in terms of operation and financing. As always, the plaintiff and defendant would have the right to use their own counsel. We support the adoption of crime victim rights amendments to the constitution of every state and similar provisions in federal law. They would provide for the protection of the dignity and privacy of the victim, the timely disposition of the case, reasonable protection from the accused under certain circumstances and levels of evidence, the right of the victim to confer with the prosecution, the right of the victim to make a statement during sentencing, and adequate restitution when applicable. Such provisions would also provide to the victim information about the conviction, sentence, imprisonment, and release of the accused. We further support an increase in the remuneration of jurors who perform jury duty and support the provision of day care for the children of jurors for the duration of the service, furnished at public expense, to lessen the potential stress of parents called into service as jurors.
The American justice system has been lacking for years with inadequate public defenders who are often pressured into making innocent people plead guilty. Numerous citizens have had to act in pro per during civil proceedings due to poverty – a circumstance tantamount to miscarriage of justice. Jurors have been placed with undue financial burdens for their precious though involuntary service. Crime victims have been without strong rights since time immemorial.
We support increased funding to the public defender offices around the country in order to lessen the caseload on each attorney and guarantee to every accused adequate legal representation. We support either a constitutional amendment or a combination of entrenched federal and state laws to ensure free legal counsel for defendants in civil trials and, with the existence of probable cause as determined by a preliminary hearing, free legal counsel for the plaintiff as well. These counsels would be similar to the office of public defender in terms of operation and financing. As always, the plaintiff and defendant would have the right to use their own counsel. We support the adoption of crime victim rights amendments to the constitution of every state and similar provisions in federal law. They would provide for the protection of the dignity and privacy of the victim, the timely disposition of the case, reasonable protection from the accused under certain circumstances and levels of evidence, the right of the victim to confer with the prosecution, the right of the victim to make a statement during sentencing, and adequate restitution when applicable. Such provisions would also provide to the victim information about the conviction, sentence, imprisonment, and release of the accused. We further support an increase in the remuneration of jurors who perform jury duty and support the provision of day care for the children of jurors for the duration of the service, furnished at public expense, to lessen the potential stress of parents called into service as jurors.
Content by /u/MoralLesson
Reforming Judicial Appointment
As the American judiciary is becoming more activist than ever – enshrining unwritten rights to abortion into the Constitution, striking down reasonable measures to limit violence against women and prohibit same-sex marriage, and expanding government powers to include the near-limitless use of eminent domain and the ability to sterilize the mentally infirm – we seek reform. We believe this activism is rooted in the judiciary’s increasing partisanship – easily seen by the fact that the ruling of a judge can be accurately predicted by the President that appointed him or her to the bench. We believe that appointments in and to the federal judiciary should be based solely off merit, seniority, and impartiality – never politics.
We support updating and changing the federal methods for judicial appointment. We support the creation of one or more impartial nominating commissions where no party or ideology holds a majority of the seats, which will select three to five nominations for every open judicial seat by a supermajority vote. For seats on the Supreme Court, we support a joint session of Congress electing one of the nominees by an exhaustive ballot. For all other federal judicial positions, we support requiring the President and his or her cabinet to choose one of the nominees and the need for both houses of Congress to confirm the nominee. Congressional confirmation would become a period of time whereby either house could vote to reject a nominee rather than actually having to vote to approve them. Should the President and his or her cabinet fail to choose one of the nominees presented to them to fill a vacant judicial post within one-hundred twenty days, then another nominating commission (if several exist) or the Senate (if only one exists) would be allowed to choose one of the nominees in place of the President and his or her cabinet. Congressional confirmation would still work in the same manner as aforementioned in these instances. During the first regular election for members of the United States House of Representatives following the appointment of a federal judge, the federal judge would require majority confirmation by the voters in the jurisdiction (multi-state for appellate judges and nationally for Supreme Court justices) to remain in office. We support lowering federal judicial terms from life to fifteen or twenty years and instituting strict term limits on the federal judiciary. We support increasing the number of Supreme Court justices to twelve or fourteen.
We support updating and changing the federal methods for judicial appointment. We support the creation of one or more impartial nominating commissions where no party or ideology holds a majority of the seats, which will select three to five nominations for every open judicial seat by a supermajority vote. For seats on the Supreme Court, we support a joint session of Congress electing one of the nominees by an exhaustive ballot. For all other federal judicial positions, we support requiring the President and his or her cabinet to choose one of the nominees and the need for both houses of Congress to confirm the nominee. Congressional confirmation would become a period of time whereby either house could vote to reject a nominee rather than actually having to vote to approve them. Should the President and his or her cabinet fail to choose one of the nominees presented to them to fill a vacant judicial post within one-hundred twenty days, then another nominating commission (if several exist) or the Senate (if only one exists) would be allowed to choose one of the nominees in place of the President and his or her cabinet. Congressional confirmation would still work in the same manner as aforementioned in these instances. During the first regular election for members of the United States House of Representatives following the appointment of a federal judge, the federal judge would require majority confirmation by the voters in the jurisdiction (multi-state for appellate judges and nationally for Supreme Court justices) to remain in office. We support lowering federal judicial terms from life to fifteen or twenty years and instituting strict term limits on the federal judiciary. We support increasing the number of Supreme Court justices to twelve or fourteen.
Content by /u/MoralLesson
Defending Our Rights
Private Property
We believe that the right to private property is inviolable. However, we realize this right has its limits – sometimes private property must be taken, and its owners fairly compensated, for the public good. Unfortunately, modern governments have begun to abuse property rights through such means as the unfair use of eminent domain, the existence of liberal civil forfeiture laws, and rampant property taxes. Using property taxes as a primary revenue source for local governments also results in the musical suburbs problem, which segregates the wealthy and poor away from each other.
We support legislation limiting eminent domain by requiring proper negotiations, independent evaluators, and the use of the land for public uses only and not for economic development by other private citizens or increased tax revenue. We support overturning Kelo v. City of New London. We support legislation that mandates that whenever eminent domain is used on a person’s primary residence that they are given at least 125% the standard market compensation in addition to money for moving expenses, missed work, and inconvenience. We support the repeal of all state and federal civil forfeiture laws dealing with drugs and drug paraphernalia, believing them to be a grave threat to legitimate private property rights. We support states and local governments using more income, sales, and other taxes in place of property taxes, which unfairly harm the poor, have proven unreliable as revenue sources, and which discourage the ownership of land.
We believe that the right to private property is inviolable. However, we realize this right has its limits – sometimes private property must be taken, and its owners fairly compensated, for the public good. Unfortunately, modern governments have begun to abuse property rights through such means as the unfair use of eminent domain, the existence of liberal civil forfeiture laws, and rampant property taxes. Using property taxes as a primary revenue source for local governments also results in the musical suburbs problem, which segregates the wealthy and poor away from each other.
We support legislation limiting eminent domain by requiring proper negotiations, independent evaluators, and the use of the land for public uses only and not for economic development by other private citizens or increased tax revenue. We support overturning Kelo v. City of New London. We support legislation that mandates that whenever eminent domain is used on a person’s primary residence that they are given at least 125% the standard market compensation in addition to money for moving expenses, missed work, and inconvenience. We support the repeal of all state and federal civil forfeiture laws dealing with drugs and drug paraphernalia, believing them to be a grave threat to legitimate private property rights. We support states and local governments using more income, sales, and other taxes in place of property taxes, which unfairly harm the poor, have proven unreliable as revenue sources, and which discourage the ownership of land.
Reigning in Intelligence Agency Excesses
Americans have a fundamental right to privacy and a transparent government. It is inexcusable that our intelligence agencies have overthrown democratic governments, plotted attacks against everyday American citizens under proposals like Operation Northwoods, and abused secret courts to clandestinely spy on American citizens. We cannot abrogate constitutional rights under the pretense of terrorism, and we cannot allow organs of our government to operate in the shadows without any public knowledge.
We support the repeal of the USA PATRIOT Act, USA FREEDOM Act, FISA and its amendments, NDAA of 2012 (excluding appropriations), Executive Order 12333, and REAL ID Act, and we support restoring full due process and privacy rights to American citizens and nationals and those present in the United States. We oppose warrantless wiretaps, drone strikes on American citizens, and the secret and warrantless surveillance of American data, phones, and internet connections. We support legislation to end PRISM, ECHELON, and other Orwellian intelligence practices. We oppose any form of indefinite detention without trial, and we oppose any weakening of the writ of habeas corpus. We support the severe curving of powers given to the NSA and CIA, and we support sunshine laws to make their operations fully transparent to the American public. We believe racial profiling and the use of stop and frisk policies are unconstitutional per the Fifth and Fourth Amendments, respectively.
Americans have a fundamental right to privacy and a transparent government. It is inexcusable that our intelligence agencies have overthrown democratic governments, plotted attacks against everyday American citizens under proposals like Operation Northwoods, and abused secret courts to clandestinely spy on American citizens. We cannot abrogate constitutional rights under the pretense of terrorism, and we cannot allow organs of our government to operate in the shadows without any public knowledge.
We support the repeal of the USA PATRIOT Act, USA FREEDOM Act, FISA and its amendments, NDAA of 2012 (excluding appropriations), Executive Order 12333, and REAL ID Act, and we support restoring full due process and privacy rights to American citizens and nationals and those present in the United States. We oppose warrantless wiretaps, drone strikes on American citizens, and the secret and warrantless surveillance of American data, phones, and internet connections. We support legislation to end PRISM, ECHELON, and other Orwellian intelligence practices. We oppose any form of indefinite detention without trial, and we oppose any weakening of the writ of habeas corpus. We support the severe curving of powers given to the NSA and CIA, and we support sunshine laws to make their operations fully transparent to the American public. We believe racial profiling and the use of stop and frisk policies are unconstitutional per the Fifth and Fourth Amendments, respectively.
Transparency
We believe transparency in government is a necessary cornerstone of democracy. It is impossible to be a good citizen without knowing what the government does in your name and by your authority. Good governance requires that the governed be informed of all actions of the government in order to govern in turn. Thus, we support robust sunshine laws and shun attempts at government secrecy. A free people must insist that secret programs and actions are a threat to their liberty.
We support expanding freedom of information legislation and the creation of sunshine laws to open our government and its operations to more public scrutiny. We believe any government information or action not pertaining to the designs of dangerous weapons or the privacy of one or more individuals should be made public no later than 90 days after its creation. We support easier access to government and other public records by publishing local, state, and federal records on standardized state and federal websites. We support asset disclosure for many federal officials (which does not include those in the civil service) and a prohibition on insider trading for all public officials and employees. We support a more transparent and open budget process (including giving the public more influence and input on the national budget, potentially through participatory budgeting), procurement process, and contracting process. We support laws that create stronger whistle-blower protections. We support allowing state legislatures to subpoena federal officials and allowing local government bodies to subpoena state officials.
We believe transparency in government is a necessary cornerstone of democracy. It is impossible to be a good citizen without knowing what the government does in your name and by your authority. Good governance requires that the governed be informed of all actions of the government in order to govern in turn. Thus, we support robust sunshine laws and shun attempts at government secrecy. A free people must insist that secret programs and actions are a threat to their liberty.
We support expanding freedom of information legislation and the creation of sunshine laws to open our government and its operations to more public scrutiny. We believe any government information or action not pertaining to the designs of dangerous weapons or the privacy of one or more individuals should be made public no later than 90 days after its creation. We support easier access to government and other public records by publishing local, state, and federal records on standardized state and federal websites. We support asset disclosure for many federal officials (which does not include those in the civil service) and a prohibition on insider trading for all public officials and employees. We support a more transparent and open budget process (including giving the public more influence and input on the national budget, potentially through participatory budgeting), procurement process, and contracting process. We support laws that create stronger whistle-blower protections. We support allowing state legislatures to subpoena federal officials and allowing local government bodies to subpoena state officials.
Affirmative Action
We believe that all people should have access to equal opportunities when it comes to obtaining employment, education, contracting, and property ownership – the pursuit of happiness requires it. For too long has America been unfairly discriminating against people on the basis of race and religion – and yet many propose that the solution to such unfair discrimination is to discriminate in the opposite fashion. That is why we oppose affirmative action programs that take into consideration any non-merit factor besides socio-economic or employment status.
We support the reformation of America’s affirmative action programs, believing that the only non-merit based factor in any opportunity for employment, education, or contracting should be consideration of socio-economic status so that the poor and chronically unemployed could receive special priority when applicable and necessary to ensure equality of opportunity. We support the proper enforcement of laws that prohibit discrimination on the basis of race, religion, sex, gender, color, ethnicity, language, national origin, age, disability, health, genetic information, political affiliation, opinion, conscience, belief, culture, marital status, pregnancy, or birth.
We support the reformation of America’s affirmative action programs, believing that the only non-merit based factor in any opportunity for employment, education, or contracting should be consideration of socio-economic status so that the poor and chronically unemployed could receive special priority when applicable and necessary to ensure equality of opportunity. We support the proper enforcement of laws that prohibit discrimination on the basis of race, religion, sex, gender, color, ethnicity, language, national origin, age, disability, health, genetic information, political affiliation, opinion, conscience, belief, culture, marital status, pregnancy, or birth.
Second Amendment Rights
We support our Second Amendment rights and pledge to oppose any insensible forms of gun control. More attention needs to be paid to ensuring firearms are stored safely, that the mentally ill are recognized and treated, and that citizens are taught how to resolve conflicts rather than to attempting to abrogate the Second Amendment. Firearms are a part of the tradition of America and are widely owned – being used for hunting, recreation, self-defense, and collection and display.
We oppose attempts limiting the number of firearms or the amount of ammunition an individual can own. We oppose laws to lower the number of bullets in a cartridge, and we support the right of law-abiding citizens to purchase and own handguns. We oppose prohibiting the civilian ownership of semi-automatic weapons when no previous violent criminal activity or mental impairment exists. We support closing loopholes that allow people to avoid background checks when purchasing firearms, requiring special training and licensing before owning automated firearms, and making it easier for mental illnesses to be recognized and treated to reduce firearm-related tragedies. States and local governments would be left to make decisions regarding restrictions as to where firearms could be taken as well as the limits of open and concealed carry.
We support our Second Amendment rights and pledge to oppose any insensible forms of gun control. More attention needs to be paid to ensuring firearms are stored safely, that the mentally ill are recognized and treated, and that citizens are taught how to resolve conflicts rather than to attempting to abrogate the Second Amendment. Firearms are a part of the tradition of America and are widely owned – being used for hunting, recreation, self-defense, and collection and display.
We oppose attempts limiting the number of firearms or the amount of ammunition an individual can own. We oppose laws to lower the number of bullets in a cartridge, and we support the right of law-abiding citizens to purchase and own handguns. We oppose prohibiting the civilian ownership of semi-automatic weapons when no previous violent criminal activity or mental impairment exists. We support closing loopholes that allow people to avoid background checks when purchasing firearms, requiring special training and licensing before owning automated firearms, and making it easier for mental illnesses to be recognized and treated to reduce firearm-related tragedies. States and local governments would be left to make decisions regarding restrictions as to where firearms could be taken as well as the limits of open and concealed carry.
Welfare
Public Health Insurance
Healthcare costs pose a major threat to the American family. Unpaid healthcare bills were the largest cause of bankruptcy in 2013. We believe that every citizen deserves the right to quality health care and should not have to fear financial death because of healthcare costs. However, any health insurance system must honor the privacy of its users, be completely unbiased and be thoroughly efficient. In order to achieve these goals, and in accordance with Subsidiarity, healthcare should be run on the lowest level of government possible.
We support the creation of a universal, single-payer health insurance system implemented and funded by each individual state. The federal government would have little or no invlovment in this system, other than creating a general framework from which the states could draw their own systems and making sure that patients are receiving quality care. We do not support the pubic operation of hospitals and clinics, but a system whereby states contract their own healthcare providers, similar to Canada's health insurance system. However, in the case that a patient needs specialized out-of-state healthcare, citizens would be able to request special coverage from their state. In order to reduce the problem of moral hazard, patients would hold a copay of 30% until 3% of their annual net income has been spent on healthcare costs.
We support the creation of a universal, single-payer health insurance system implemented and funded by each individual state. The federal government would have little or no invlovment in this system, other than creating a general framework from which the states could draw their own systems and making sure that patients are receiving quality care. We do not support the pubic operation of hospitals and clinics, but a system whereby states contract their own healthcare providers, similar to Canada's health insurance system. However, in the case that a patient needs specialized out-of-state healthcare, citizens would be able to request special coverage from their state. In order to reduce the problem of moral hazard, patients would hold a copay of 30% until 3% of their annual net income has been spent on healthcare costs.
Basic Minimum Income
Everyone has a right to the means of basic subsistence, including proper nutrition, shelter, and recreation. This right is best realized through a basic minimum income, which is more flexible and economically efficient than indirect welfare, promotes personal responsibility, and ensures no one can fall through the cracks. In general, a basic minimum income is an excellent anti-poverty measure while costing less than traditional welfare due to the fact that it requires virtually no bureaucracy to implement.
Thus, we support legislation in every state to implement a basic minimum income for all citizens. The states, being closer to the people, will be able to better handle differences in the cost of living between different areas of the country. Moreover, state implementation will allow for them to act as laboratories of democracy for the purposes of the correct amount, the frequency, and other elements.
Everyone has a right to the means of basic subsistence, including proper nutrition, shelter, and recreation. This right is best realized through a basic minimum income, which is more flexible and economically efficient than indirect welfare, promotes personal responsibility, and ensures no one can fall through the cracks. In general, a basic minimum income is an excellent anti-poverty measure while costing less than traditional welfare due to the fact that it requires virtually no bureaucracy to implement.
Thus, we support legislation in every state to implement a basic minimum income for all citizens. The states, being closer to the people, will be able to better handle differences in the cost of living between different areas of the country. Moreover, state implementation will allow for them to act as laboratories of democracy for the purposes of the correct amount, the frequency, and other elements.
Immigration
We want to allow people who want to come to America to come here and fulfill their dreams. We hold solidarity with the people of the entire world, recognizing them as our brothers and sisters. We want to open our borders as much as possible to people from all nations, recognizing that they will become our friends and neighbors, contribute to our diversity by bringing with them their customs, and aid the economy by creating businesses and additional demand in the market. America's immigration policies must reaffirm our global reputation as a welcoming and business-friendly country. The way we treat immigrants will say more about us as a free society and less about our immigrant neighbors.
We support making legal immigration a quicker, easier, and less bureaucratic process. We believe our immigration policies should continue to focus on, though not solely exist for the ends of, reunifying families, admitting immigrants with skills or investments that are valuable to the economy, protecting refugees, and promoting diversity. We support automatic citizenship for those who have served in the military for at least one year and were given an honorable discharge, provided they know the English language, possess a basic understanding of U.S. government and history, and pledge an Oath of Allegiance to the U.S. Constitution. For those who have made the ultimate sacrifice during their tenure in our military, we support instant citizenship for the benefit of their families. We also support expanding the migrant workers program and using it as a path to legal residency and eventually citizenship. We support eliminating – or at least doubling –immigration quotas for those with advanced degrees, unique abilities and experiences, and those planning to invest significantly in our economy. We support increasing immigration quotas for all other methods of obtaining legal residency and citizenship by one-half, excluding the diversity immigration visa, which we support increasing by one-quarter.
We support allowing those immigrants who are here illegally to earn legal residency and a path to citizenship through a new method of naturalization, provided they have engaged in no other instances of law breaking besides minor civil infractions. Such a new method would include the necessity to pay all back taxes, possess a basic understanding of English and civics, and either work full time, go to school full time, or own and operate an American business (though those of retirement age, under school age, or possessing certain disabilities could be exempt from one of more of these requirements). At the same time, they would have a choice between performing 100 hours of community service over the course of two years or paying a fine of $1,000 as reparation for having illegally entered into or remained in the country. After this special pathway to citizenship has been open for three years, it will be closed, future illegal immigrants will be deported, and our immigration laws will be properly enforced.
We support allowing those immigrants who are here illegally to earn legal residency and a path to citizenship through a new method of naturalization, provided they have engaged in no other instances of law breaking besides minor civil infractions. Such a new method would include the necessity to pay all back taxes, possess a basic understanding of English and civics, and either work full time, go to school full time, or own and operate an American business (though those of retirement age, under school age, or possessing certain disabilities could be exempt from one of more of these requirements). At the same time, they would have a choice between performing 100 hours of community service over the course of two years or paying a fine of $1,000 as reparation for having illegally entered into or remained in the country. After this special pathway to citizenship has been open for three years, it will be closed, future illegal immigrants will be deported, and our immigration laws will be properly enforced.
Follow Us
The Hound of Distributism
Special thanks to everyone who helped to create this manifesto:
/u/MoralLesson
/u/lsma
/u/da_drifter0912
/u/GimmsterReloaded
/u/MoralLesson
/u/lsma
/u/da_drifter0912
/u/GimmsterReloaded
