Regarding The Associated Press news story “Immigration reform may hike cost of citizenship” : I really don't know how to express my opinion on this citizenship fray. My grandparents came to this great country from Europe (Austria and Slovenia) as immigrants, learned the language, customs and laws as best as they could, and studied and paid for their citizenship without any help from government.
They raised a family, obeyed laws, paid taxes and lived a fruitful life. It was their American dream.
Grandpap was a steelworker and Grandma did laundry, etc., to keep food on the table and a roof overhead. They were never rich, but the life they made here was better than what they would have had to endure in their native countries at the time.
I read with interest the news story about the proposed raised fines for illegal immigrants seeking citizenship until I came across the comments from Manuel Enrique Angel, who trained as a lawyer in El Salvador, is working as a cook in Houston, Texas, and wants to apply for citizenship.
It really tugged at my heartstrings that he has to pay $600 in rent. And in the next breath, he states he has car notes for $300 and $600! It will take him up to eight months to save up for the citizenship application fee.
I work 40-plus hours a week and don't make enough to have a combined $900 a month for vehicles alone! Change your priorities!
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.
- Gun questions for mayor II
- ObamaCare solution
- Gun questions for mayor I
- Shame on Wolf
- Wolf is the right choice
- Wrong on EPA water proposal
- Barbour sentence shameful
- Good ‘friends,’ good food
- Ebola: No worries, right?
- Embrace domestic energy production
- Making it special