My Partner and I negate the resolution.

Resolved: Immigration reform should include a path to citizenship

for undocumented immigrants currently living in the United States.
Contention 1: Citizenship cannot be offered to criminals.
On March 27th, 2010, Arizona rancher, Robert N. Krentz Jr, was found shot to
death on his ranch in Southeast Arizona. Not long before he went missing,
he had radioed his brother to tell him that he was aiding someone whom he
suspected to be an illegal immigrant. This was confirmed in the following
police investigation. Research done by the Pew Research Center as well as
the Huffington Post shows that, with the increase of illegal immigration,
crime is also on the rise. Currently, our government is planning on
implementing a new immigration reform bill. The LA Times and the
Washington Post explain that this proposed law is very similar to Immigration
Reform and Control Act of 1986. At that time we had three million illegal
aliens residing in the United States; now we have eleven million. The path
to citizenship in the 1986 law called the illegal immigrants to pay a small
fine. We cannot offer citizenship to people who have already broken our
immigration laws, especially when doing so would involve turning a blind eye
to the matter of their character. Our current immigration process requires
that the applicant be a decent person. When we remove even this most
basic of requirements to people who are already criminals, we are asking for
a repeat of the disastrous 1986 reforms. People who are willing to harm our
citizens, as in the case of Robert Krentz, are among those immigrants who
would be included in this mass amnesty. It is clear then, that we must not
reward a criminal act with a great gift; the United States cannot include a
path to Citizenship `in immigration reform.
Contention 2: The Ratchet Effect
The ratchet effect is a unidirectional change in some legal variable that can
become entrenched over time, setting in motion a process that can then
repeat itself indefinitely. In 1986, Congress passed the Immigration Reform
and Control Act. This act allowed the three million illegals in residence at the
time to become American Citizens, along with many reforms to border
security, and immigration law. We hoped then to curb the problem of illegal
immigration. Today, there are eleven million illegal immigrants residing in the
United States. Clearly, the immigration reform in 1986 was ineffective.
Currently, our government is contemplating another immigration reform bill
that is intended to replicate the reforms of 1986, but on a larger scale.

Forbes explains that this is clearly an example of the ratchet effect. The
Atlantic gives us evidence of an increase in illegal immigration since the
1986 reforms. After an initial concession to illegal aliens, our government is
now planning to give in again. Immigration reform must not include a
pathway to immigration reform, lest we see a new wave of illegal
immigration.
Contention 3: Unaffordable results.
If our country were to include a path to citizenship, we would become
responsible for the eleven million illegal immigrants in our country. Those
illegal aliens would be eligible for welfare, which is something cripple the
United States. Research by prominent economist, Milton Friedman, shows
that the United States could not afford welfare for all these new citizens; the
Washington Post agrees with him. A study by the Heritage foundation shows
that fewer than 25% of illegal immigrant households have high school
degrees. These household, if placed on welfare have a deficit of $35,000, the
difference between taxes paid and welfare received. The same study shows
that the average illegal immigrant would take in about $590,000 over the
course of their life time. As of July, 2013, the United States has a deficit of
$16,138,158,460,360. If we were to give citizenship to these illegal aliens,
there would be fifty-two billion dollars added to our deficit each year due to
welfare for these immigrants. We can see from this that including a path to
citizenship in immigration reform is unaffordable.

We are proudly a nation of immigrants. People the world over are attracted
to the United States because we are a nation of laws. Granting amnesty to
those who broke the law and putting them on a path to citizenship would be
unfair, would encourage more bad behavior and would impose significant
costs on American families. For these reasons, we urge a neg. ballot.

CrossX info:
Forbes: Immigration reform: What about fairness to the other
96.5 %; the people who are here legally?
http://www.forbes.com/sites/louiswoodhill/2013/06/19/immigrationreform-how-about-fairness-for-the-other-96-5/
The U.S. is top of the country list:Susan Adams, Forbes Staff.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/susanadams/2013/05/30/the-worldsmost-competitive-countries/
The Atlantic: Immigration Reform is on the rise.
http://www.theatlantic.com/past/docs/issues/96nov/immigrat/borjas.
htm
The Washington post: We have tried amnesty before, and it failed.
The Government has changed nothing in the new proposed bill.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wpdyn/content/article/2006/09/14/AR2006091401179.html
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/01/30/in1986-congress-tried-to-solve-immigration-why-didnt-it-work/

The Huffington Post:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/30/mexican-drug-cartels-inunited-states_n_1837537.html
Pew Research Center:

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2013/10/15/crime-risesamong-second-generation-immigrants-as-they-assimilate/