Lawrence Lidsey, former chief economic adviser to President Bush and current president and CEO of the Lindsey Group, addresses some of the questions raised by immigration reform stalwarts, and notes that a short-term pragmatic approach, in this case, may just prove to be the best long-term move toward ideological consistency. From The Weekly Standard (May 22, 2006):
[…] [R]elevant to today’s immigration debate is that I am also the father of three immigrants to America who came here as infants or toddlers.
That naturally makes me a supporter of immigration. It also favorably disposes me to “comprehensive” immigration reform of the kind the president supports. The great majority of immigrants (legal and illegal) come here to work hard and make a better life for themselves. Moreover, the “send them home” alternative is highly impractical, even if most of its advocates are well meaning.
Which, of course, they are not. Instead, they are racist nativists who need a brown enemy—always—else they must face the uncomfortable fact that they live in a trailer and can only afford Busch beer in cans.
Sorry. Was that out loud…?
But my firsthand experience with the immigration process for my children suggests that the pro-reform camp inside the Beltway has focused exclusively on getting legislation passed, and forgotten about the practical realities of implementing reform.
Government has never been known as an efficient agent of change. Twenty years ago we had an immigration reform that provided amnesty and was supposed to solve our immigration problem. But that last reform failed, as vividly demonstrated by millions of people in the streets waving the flags of their nations of origin, and scores of Minutemen sitting in lawn chairs on the border armed with radios to report illegals. And the costs of the failure to the social fabric are real. They include increased polarization over the immigration issue that will only deepen if nothing is done. Frankly, we can’t afford another failure of government implementation. So, it is important to consider some practical realities that are now being ignored.
The front lines of immigration policy implementation are America’s consulates in large cities around the world. Long before sunrise, queues form at these offices to apply for entry into America. The “entry window” to the office for an interview is often quite short, maybe two or three hours. If you’re not in line early enough to get a number that allows you to have an interview that day, you’re out of luck. The interview may well be one of several, even if you only want to go to America for a “visit.”
[…]
The job of the consular officials is to make sure that those applying to visit don’t stay, and that those applying to stay meet all of the requirements that Congress has passed. One Bulgarian couple we know wanted to visit their son who was going to school in America. After several visits to the consulate, the U.S. official decided to let the mother visit, but the father had to stay behind, in large part to ensure the mother’s return to Bulgaria.
Those applying to come for good face a higher hurdle. At present, there are hundreds of thousands of people around the world who are waiting to immigrate legally to America. They have already waited in line to get their first appointment, then to submit the paperwork, then been called back to answer more questions. And still, they wait. In places like Hong Kong, the waiting time may be as long as 15 years. Most of these people have relatives–cousins or grandchildren, for example–who live and work and pay taxes in America and even have become American citizens.
[…]
Comprehensive immigration reform promises that people already in the United States illegally can apply for citizenship, but requires them to “go to the back of the line.” But a key question is, the back of which line? The reform bill before the Senate doesn’t require illegal immigrants to go back home–to, say, Hong Kong, to the end of the 10-to-15-year line there–to get a green card. Instead, it allows the current illegals to receive their green card immediately–having, in effect, jumped the line at the U.S. consulate abroad. Then, like other green card holders, they will be able to work here, collect government benefits like food stamps and Medicaid, and travel as freely as if they had a U.S. passport.
The line the current illegals will go to the back of is the citizenship line. Under the proposed law, current illegals, newly minted green card in hand, will have to wait six years, then get in line to apply for citizenship. But even after six years, they will be years ahead of many people who have gone through the legal process and are waiting overseas for a consular official to let them come here. Once those who have been playing by the rules all along get here, they too have to wait six years before getting in line for citizenship.
If we really mean “the back of the line,” that should be behind everyone who is already in the pipeline to come here legally. If you are granted your green card under the new “guest worker” system, you shouldn’t be able to apply for citizenship until after everyone already on queue has had their citizenship adjudicated. It’s a simple matter of not rewarding people for line-jumping.
This is more than an appeal for elementary fairness. There is a very practical reason to prevent queue jumping: It helps consular officials keep order on the front lines of immigration policy. How can anyone enforce the rules for entry to America if line-jumping becomes the law of the land? Once the world knows that we make citizenship easier for those who break the rules, enforcing the rules becomes a nonstarter.
We supporters of immigration reform correctly deride the “ship them home” crowd for gross impracticality. But any kind of queue-jumping allowed by a new reform will create a law-enforcement nightmare for every American consulate on the planet […]
[my emhases]
The rest is worth reading, as well.
In short, Lindsey argues that two previous attempts at immigration reform in the last 40 or so years have made the problem wore. And so he argues that “If Washington fails to provide a comprehensive system that actually engenders respect for the rules, the rule of law will be damaged to such an extent that it may not recover. The next time the issue comes to the fore, the politics will not be pretty.”
Not that they are very pretty today, mind you. But what is notable here is that Lindsey recognizes that any real reform must, first and foremost, prove workable.. Which is why he joins many others of us in criticizing not just portions of the Bush plan (which I think is largely correct—though it suffers from a failure to push enforcement first), but also those who believe it possible to engage in massive deportations.
As I’ve written on several occasions, such a plan not only suffers from gross overreach, but it also will, in my opinion, do long-term damage to immigration reform by creating a class of martyrs—they hybrid illegal/legal family forced to chose either to split or relocated—that will become the media’s go-to subject in an attempt to undermine the reform movement (which is already being painted by many as “racist”).
We should not underestimate the power of the emotional appeal. Setting up a stringent system of monitoring and cross-referencing, enforcing the laws on the books (and whatever new laws come out of this comprehensive reform compromise), and making sure that the process is fair to those who have gone about seeking entry into the U.S. in ways that respect our laws—all of these things are necessary for the long-term effectiveness of immigration reform.
Demanding mass deportations, or threatening the President with impeachment should he not move to round up families already living and working in the country, do more to hurt the cause of immigration reform than anything La Raza or other radical groups say or do.
But I expect many of you will disagree. In which case, let me just note that you are all RACISTS.
Please get that 3 million character link out of the above so that the site isn’t 3 screens wide. Thank you.
“faith”
HELP!!! Honey, I shrunk the computer screen!
Is this what Klonopin is like?
‘Cause I don’t like it.
TW: I never saw no html errors like this over at Thersites. Just sayin’.
Yeah, but what does this have to do with Hamscher’s vagina and my pie?
Once again, I agree. I’m beginning to worry that I’m a syncophant.
I hate line-jumpers too. I call them on it, unembarassedly. Shootin’s to dang good fer the bastids.
The line starts at the BACK, buddy.
Where I part company from many who favor the “green card” solution for illegal aliens (I insist on illegal – because that is what they are) is that the border has to be closed first. (enforcement)
Then the employers of illegal aliens need to abide by the laws (either as they exist or as they are amended). There should be substantial fines for employing illegal workers and those fines and prosecution of these employers should be publicized. Essentially we should make it “economic suicide” for any employer to employ illegal aliens.
Some (here and elsewhere) have stated that document fraud is so pervasive that employers do not know when they are hiring illegal workers. Simple, make all employees produce either a US birth certificate, a valid US passport or a green card and a valid passport from the country of origin. It is not impossible to forge such documents but it is somewhat difficult.
Require that same documentation for obtaining driver’s license, school enrollment or any type of public aid. (Missouri already does as of Jan 1 this year)
Would that type of enforcement eliminate illegal aliens? No. But it would significantly reduce the number of illegals. This would be basically a “self deport” mechanism. This type of enforcement would be ethnicity “neutral” as it would target every illegal regardless of nationality and motivate those that have been here for sometime to return to their country of origin and “get in line”.
This type of enforcement does not necessarily require a “fence” or “wall” on the southern border to be effective, BUT that wall, and interdiction, is needed to provide border secuirity against terrorism.
Hi ris,
I’d have to get those docs from US citizen (or those that claim they are…) applicants as well.
There are Americans who cannot provide those documents now.
Lots of people have no idea where their SS card is. The don’t know where the heck their birth certificate went and the never travel so they don’t have a passport.
I think anti discrimination laws would make employers demand all these docs across the board evenly.
I wouldn’t know a real Mexican passport from a fake one.
The I-9 process would be a fine model if you can get a national ID card… however, the ACLU and the isolationist conspriracy theory republicans will fight a national ID to the bitter end.
Once again anti discrimination laws don’t allow for special rules for people who claim they were born here
Remind me again why mass deportation is impossible? Because we’re out of practice, since it’s been 60 years since we rounded up 10 million people to send them overseas (into armed combat)? Because Americans are a simple people, capable of moon landings and genome sequencing but not up to the task of buying lots of bus tickets? Because illegal aliens live in the shadows, and don’t gather in public in large numbers advertising their immigration status?
Technically, I think mass deportation may be the least difficult project the government has ever undertaken.
Steve,
I’m not proposing special rules for people that “claim” to be citizens. I’m saying that those documents be required of all employees. I realize that some people are going to have to scramble to find (or get a certified copy) of their birth certificate – I had to write for a copy of mine some 20 yrs ago to get a passport.
These are already requirements in Missouri to obtain or renew a driver’s license. And yes there has been some public complaining about it as well as requiring birth certificates for school enrollment.
I also would have to have my employees obtain the documents. I’m sure (for existing employees) there would be a “grace” period to produce citizenship documents.
I don’t thin it is intrusive at all. Inconvenient, hell yes.
SteveG,
Is the government supposed to somehow magically sort this whole thing out without any effort on your part?
I think impossible is the wrong word. The process itself would be expensive, time consuming, a PR nightmare and have an immediate negative impact on the economy. And it is not necessary.
Just remove the incentive for being here (impossible to work) and the illegals will gradually self-deport. Economical. No PR downside (or little). Giving the economy time to adjust.
Undermine the entire reform movement (as in on principle they are against it) or undermining the reform movement that includes deportation?
just about every solution I’ve heard about costs money. Where will the money come from?
And we could do every freaking bit of that tommorow, simply by deciding to enforce existing law. Perp walk a few especially filthy slavers (which we know are out there, and probably know who they are), and the desire to employ people for significantly less than you’re supposed to be paying them will dissapate. Today, everyone knows there’s no enforcement. There’s no risk.
When you start thinking about the possibility of doing even 15 days in federal prison, let alone 8-10 years, the savings no longer outweigh the risks.
As for the ID, Social Security numbers can take care of that if they’re made to be verifiable. You can no longer take a deduction for a dependant without an SSN, so kids are getting them shortly after birth. We operate a credit card system with reasonable security and fraud prevention. We could do this with SSN’s the day after tomorrow. Because we’re busy tomorrow locking up scofflaws.
rls, I think that makes sense.
Of course, that does mean that deportation is a job Americans won’t do, so we have to rely on Mexicans to do it for us. But I can live with the irony.
It costs a minimal amount to enforce the existing laws against employers hiring illegal aliens. Raise the fines to $10,000 per employee plus double the wages paid to that employee. Earmark the $10,000 for border security, the wages fine for the state coffers where the violation occurred.
No mass deportations necessary. The illegals will self deport, buying their own bus tickets.
I’m telling you the birth certificate (certified copy) is extremely difficult to counterfiet and a US passport is impossible. I was shocked, shocked, I tell you, when I went to renew my driver’s license and was told I had to come back with one of those documents. I almost jumped with joy!
In this state you cannot register a car without proof of insurance and you cannot obtain insurance without a driver’s license and you NOW cannot obtain a driver’s license without one of those documents. How long do you think it will take until a large number of the illegal workers in this state will relocate to an “easier documentation” state?
Yeah but….
Great post, Jeff.
Pablo 6:13- I agree with your comment completely.
jg,
I went to your link. Apparantly you have some reading comprehension problems. I’m not proposing “local” law enforcement raid and round up illegals and arrange for their deportation.
My point is that if we enforce existing laws by targeting the employers of illegal aliens thus taking the motivation for illegal immigration away (NO JOB) that the illegal aliens will gradually self deport. After all, if they come here for the jobs and there are no jobs available for “illegals”, there will be no illegals.
Look, this is the most humane, easiest to enforce, least expensive and politically correct way to attack this problem.
I am open to any other ideas that can accomplish this.
Jeff, your criticism of mass deportation focuses on pragmatic concerns, in particular on the danger that they might be exploited by enemies in the media, etc. The subject, of course, also has a moral aspect. Question: do you think mass deportations would be morally wrong? How do you resolve the conflict between the democratic right to control membership in the political community and the liberal universalist principles at the basis of our civilization? If you regard these as difficult questions, how certain are you of yours answers?
Second, do you believe ethnocentrism plays no significant role in the current spike in restrictionist sentiment, merely that other factors also are significant, or something else?
Yes, I think forcing families comprised of illegals and their (citizen) children to decide between having to separate or else relocate to Mexico (in some cases, the kids might not even speak Spanish) creates quite a serious moral dilemma, which is what gives the pragmatic concerns I mention their force.
By “controlling membership in the political community,” I take it you mean how can I reconcile classical liberalism with immigration reform. Simple. Immigration laws were passed legally and democratically, and provide a measure for keeping track of who is inside the country—which is a necessary component of national defense, something that is clearly the responsibility of the federal government. And I don’t think it strains liberal universalist principles to place conditions upon citizenship, either; universalist principles do not, for instance, force me to accept Wahhabists or Taliban or any other persons who reject those principles as my neighbors.
And no, I don’t believe ethnocentrism plays a significant role in what you call the “current spike in restrictionist sentiment.” Anybody who has read conservative blogs will know that immigration reform has been a major issue on the right for years, and that the “spike” took place after 911. Word that Bush was not going to do anything significant to staunch the flow of illegals into the country while still pushing the guest worker program was enough, finally, to increase the din.
But this issue has been slowly reaching a boil.
Are there those whose reasons for wanting immigration reform have to do with ethnocentrism, nativism, or racism? Almost certainly. Do I think that number is significant? No. I believe this is about security and the growing displeasure many feel that politicians simply lack the will to enforce current immigration laws.
I would say yes, what else is
“La Raza todo. Fuera de La Raza nada”
“For The Race everything. Outside The Race, nothing.”
That sure sparks a reaction.
What’s the difference between that and a Klu Klux Klan or Aryan Nation rant?
Not a blipping thing.
rls sez:
Brother, I had the very same experience. In Ventura, California.
In 1986.
Don’t ask me why.
Not. Good. Enough.
tw: true
Jeff, WTF with that thing?
This whole thing is getting fargin’ ridiculous. I refuse to be called racist because I believe that there are certain individuals in this society who are bound to follow the law just like everyone else. Besides, I can’t be a racist – I hate everybody equally, without passion or prejudice. Kikes, Spics, Micks, N-Bombs, Gringos, Gooks, Chinks, Japs, it makes no difference to me – they’re all assholes in my book, and I hate them all equally with all the warmth in my heart and soul. I’m okay with Polynesian girls, tho – they have nice racks.
If I were to go down to Mexico and try to pull off some of the crap that our Friendly Brown Brothers are doing right now, the Federales and Judiciales would spend several years taking turns playing volleyball with my head.
Here’s the thing – most of the people we are discussing here are not true immigrants, assimilating into our culture and learning the ways of Uncle Sam. They are, by and large, expatriates instead, with their loyalties pledged to their home nation, but with their lips firmly attached to the teat of US and State Guvmintal Treasury.
Anyone who tries to use the Elian Gonzalez excuse to not be sent back to their country of origin is, in my mind, analagous to the kid who offs his parents and then pleads for mercy from the court because he is an orphan.
No bus ticket is necessary, as most of them have cars, so they can drive their sorry asses back home and get into the back of the line like most civilized people do.
Now, if you’ll excuse me, I have to go roast a pig. The Muslim mosque across the street is having a festival tonight, and I need slingshot fodder.
Consideration for your fellow man
Would not hurt anybody, it sure fits in with my plan
Over the border, there lies the promised land
Where everything comes easy, you just hold out your hand
— Genesis
I knew there were other reasons I was an atheist.
Some of us are born where US citizenship is automatic. Some where we can walk to the US. Some in such desperate straights that we do walk to the US. Some so far away that we can’t walk here. Some in such conditions that taking the risk to get here doesn’t make sense. Some have parents who bring us here before we know whats going on.
And then there is an appeal for elementary fairness. As opposed to the other kinds.
Before I retire for the evening, I would like to leave you all with this little tidbit of advice:
IGNORE ACTHOLE
Please don’t feed the acthole.
Down at the office had to fill out the forms;
A pink one, a red one, the colours you choose;
Up to the counter to see what they think –
They said “it doesn’t count man, it ain’t written in ink”.
I don’t trust anybody, least not around here, cos
It’s no fun being an illegal alien.
Hmmmm. Try as I might, I can’t find the words “fair” or “fairness” anywhere in the Constitution of the United States. Perhaps it’s that “living Constitution” thingie we keep hearing about.
Look, folks: I have no problem with anyone who would attempt to walk, run, drive, crawl, swim, sail, pogo-stick, or do the hokey-pokey to the US – provided that they do so in the legal manner, by the laws alredy outlined and on the books. Those that do so outside of those rules should be found and notified that their presence in this nation is no longer welcome or legal and invited to remove themselves from the premises within a specified time, else they will be subject to removal at a time and place not of their choosing.
And yes, there may be some Elian Gonzales type scenes, recorded for posterity by the MSM. And the cries of racismo y injusticia will ring out from Sea to Shining Sea, rebroadcast at 50,000 watts by your friendly ABC/CBS/NBC/Univision/Televisa affiliate.
I. Don’t. Care.
Quite simply, the mojados are not interested in being law-abiding members of this society; for if they were, then they would get in line and wait their turn like everyone else from their native country has to.
Ah, shit. There’s that fairness concept creeping up again. I hate it when that happens.
Hi Bostonian,
Do you own a business?
I already do the governments work for free… actually it is more like slavery, because if I screw up a form, or if I am late I get punished.
I pay people to collect taxes, social security, unemployment, disability, tax liens, child support from my employees and get it all to the proper authority.
I carry Workers Comp, Liability and follow all Cal-OSHA safety laws.
We don’t discriminate or sexually harrass.
I call that “effort”. Of course I pass it on to the consumer assuming there are any consumers wanting to buy at the 80% premium all that stuff adds to every dollar of labor.
Oh… and I get to be an immigration expert and forensic document examiner too because a bunch of fools that have never had millions of illegals living next door to them for nearly fifty years suddenly get all in a wad over signs at the drugstore in both Spanish and English. (hint: it’s called capitalism)
Have you ever read an I-9 form? Have you ever seen a fake green card? Did you know that all those holograms and embedded stuff can be mass produced?
I ask prospective employees to bring a Social Security card and one of any of the half a dozen various ID’s that allow a person to work in the US legally. I write the numbers and dates in the appropriate spots, I check to see if the photo on the green card is of the same guy. I check to see if the SS# is not 123-45-6789 or 678-90-1234 or whatever. I make copies of these. The employee fills out the part where he swears the abovve is true and correct and signs it.
I fill out my part saying I have personally reviewed the documents and to the best of my ability have determined them to be authentic.
I read the notice in bold type that comes along with it that says that in asking for documents that I may not discriminate or the basis of race, country of origin etc.
Oh, lemme see… unless a guy shows up with an absolute hack job of forged docs I have no way to know if what I am looking at is fake or real.
I can’t discriminate in any way… like “well, you sure look mexican to me and I heard about them there fakeries you people use….”.
Nope.
I did my part. Give me a photo ID and a Visa type card swiper tied into a database.
oh yeah, the SS Administration will send out a form asking about employee named xxxxxxxx and the SS number and declared wages.
They ask if the number I have and the amounts paid and withheld match the employee of this name.
So I fill it out. There at the bottom in bold print it says that it is illegal to terminate an employee based on the information in this letter.
I suppose that is because mistakes are made etc at the governments end now and then.
I have never had the SSA offer to send money back… they just keep it.
So don’t tell me to do more when I already follow the law… to the “T”. It costs me 80K a year to follow all the laws and a bunch of blowhards from states light years from the border want to tell me to “do more”.
There is an article today in the LA Times, some woman in public works landscape construction can’t find legal help at $34 per hoor. Predictably people hoot “I’ll take that..” but you don’t “take” a wage, you earn it. You earn $34 by producing about $70 worth of accomplishment. That means busting ass in hard, hot, dirty conditions at the pace your co- workers set. Picks, shovels, rock breaking, heavy lifting at a furious pace… or go home and find a job at the mall making lattes… oh wait Starbucks has no problem finding “baristas” wtf that is. Most if not all white/black kids in the 18-25 range in Southern Cal would rather earn $9 at Starbucks, or at the Gap than have to crank out the heavy labor 40hrs a week even at twice the pay.
Interesting note… the woman above went into her congresmans office and asked him to consider guest worker programs, he refused. She said she could not fill her labor needs legally even at $34hr. He scoffed and said “my son will take that job…” of course the kid no showed.
Or they would have had the common sense to have been born here. Cuz its about the elementary fairness, after all.
I have to ask who is proposing mass deportations? This is a straw man thrown out only by people who want a “comprehensive amnesty” for illegals.
I’ve heard plenty of arguments for internal enforcement against employers who hire illegal immigrants and other measures to make it impossible for illegals to get jobs, but I have yet to hear hardly anbody agitate for the cause of mass arrests and deportations.
OK. So who is arguing this position?
SteveG
Every time I read stories like that, my bullshit detector goes off the scale. I know some guys (the ones that speak some English) who do that work, here in SoCal, and they don’t get more than $15 an hour. Most get less. A friend of mine has been framing houses for 25 years and gets paid very well for his trouble. Outside of the resort town where he lives, contractors laugh at him when he expects to be paid at least what he was making a decade ago.
Jeff, thanks for the response. I’m not sure the tension between democratic & liberal (& within liberal) principles is as simply resolved as you suggest. The democratic legitimacy of immigration restrictions that “were passed legally & democratically†does not itself resolve these tensions, just as the democratic legitimacy of restrictions on liberal rights within polities doesn’t itself resolve the tension between democratic and liberal principles that the restrictions themselves instance. (Thus constitutional protections against majorities.) Your “simple†solution simply redescribes the problem. I grant that these aren’t simple nor trivial questions, but they’re at the root of our self-understanding until now as a liberal society.
I share your understanding that universalist principles don’t require acceptance of Talibanis, etc.; they do, however, have implications for the fate of people who don’t fall into that case. Governments obviously have legitimate security interests in this area, but I don’t think the current rise in anti-immigrant sentiment reflects a measured, rational appraisal of military-political priorities in the GWOT. More plausibly, a distraction from it.
I assume we’d agree that the weight of ethnocentrism in all this ultimately is an empirical question, but it seems to me you don’t register the answer that’s all around you.
Your insistence that restrictionist concerns have arisen continuously & gradually is puzzling. It’s trivially true that some groups have long cultivated the issue. Foundations spend, activists agitate. That history is all very interesting. (Others, e.g. the now-departed, little-honored Julian Simon, fought back hard. In the recent past they still were able to sustain a precarious balance.) But the more important thing is issue salience, & here you pass over striking discontinuity. Everyone knows the story: since last year, people, esp. self-identified conservatives, have abruptly pushed the issue to the top of their list of concerns. In some polls, higher than GWOT. There are other metrics: time devoted to the subject on talk radio & the internet. How much time did you devote to it a year ago?
It’s a legitimate question, why now? You suggest a steady bottom-up accumulation of discontent, along with the role of the conservative mass media. (I know, some people deny that Bill O’Reilly is a conservative. Welcome to actually existing conservatism.) That’s no doubt a big part, but neglects the initiating role of political elites in agenda setting. As was widely reported at the time, the congressional Republican leadership (already alarmed about their prospects) decided last fall that immigrants were their main chance to mobilize their base for 2006. This, & the accompanying legislative activity, lent focus to the media. A lot has since followed, much (so far) to the disadvantage of Bush, important parts of whose formerly compact base have come to despise him, as people will, as a weak horse. Political elites, like the sorcerer’s apprentice, are now confronted with an ethnically-charged eruption that they don’t control but must seek to manage, as the right breaks free from Bush & redefines itself for the future.
Clipped and saved for the next time Democrats try to make an issue of health care.
It has all the marks of a Catastrophe Theory State Change
“Nonlinearity, by definition, refers to the existence of relationships between variables that are not exclusively linear. This does not mean that relationships of interest are always nonlinear – indeed, the cusp catastrophe, a popular nonlinear model, describes relationships which are linear some of the time, but during particular zones, undergo nonlinear qualitative state changes. Coupled with the concept of dynamics, and of systems not at equilibrium, it is possible to explore complex relationships which exhibit spatiotemporal variability. For example, so-called “chaotic” systems generated from deterministic equations display predictable steady-states of activity for certain parameter ranges, after which there is apparently random divergence from states of equilibrium.”
Those on the Left ostensibly demanding comprehensive immigration reform are being disingenuous in my opinion. If efforts to control the borders are doomed to failure, then why are they so vehement in their opposition?
On the other hand, those that want a guest worker program seem to accept that “controlling the border” is feasible otherwise why is a guest worker program necessary?
Ultimately immigration control will depend on relegating illegal immigrants to the underground economy by identifying fake social security numbers in a timely fashion and warning employers that they face fines. If any entity but the Federal or State government faced such a task it would be solved in short order by effective use of the internet.
How about those agricultural interests that need workers? They could be issued permits to hire workers no questions asked,inreturn for paying social security taxes.
This sentence could be part of the confusion. I think that there is a very, very small minority of people on this issue that are “anti-immigration”. The vast majority are actually concerned with “illegal aliens” and the impact that they have on national security, public services such as hospitals, schools, etc. and the economy as a whole.
There are a wide spectrum of reasons why almost 80% of the population see “illegal aliens” as a national problem that needs a solution. For some it is as simple as “there are laws in place that need to be obeyed”. For others it could be the drain on public resources or the downgrading of working wages or any other reason that “hits home personally”.
This particular issue has been around for many years and trumpeted as a national security issue since at least 9/12/01. This is not a “newly embraced”, by conservatives, cause. This is a highly bi-partisan issue with many competing proposed solutions ranging from virtually open borders to isolationist “mass deportation” adherants.
Somewhere in between is a rational, moral solution that provides for the national security of this country, respect and enforcement for existing laws, and retains the concept that this is a country of immigrants – legal immigrants.
I might add that as a humanitarian society that there is a limit on the number of legal immigrants that we can absorb. Once here we have an obligation as to the welfare of the immigrant. That is why sponsorship of legal immigrants is of such importance. That is why so many in this debate are adamantly opposed to amnesty of any kind for those that have broken the laws.
Plus it is so obviosly unfair to all legal immigrants, those already here and those on the waiting lists. Current amnesty proposals simply say, “Break the laws of the host land, go undetected for a specific period of time, and you will be rewarded with legal status.” That is certainly no incentive to get in line or play by the rules.
Exactly I have myself on two occassions writeb letters of I guess you would call validation, affirming that to my personal knowledge marriages of citizens to a foreign national were real and true marriages, before their interview for Permanent Residency.
I have spent time and money of my own making overseas calls to Bashkortarstan and via the phone and computer IM intefacing between a young man and a College in Texas to get the all the required hoops jumped through so he could come here on a student visa,
So I reject any suggestion that I have an anti-immigrant bias I DO have a DEAD SET bias against ILLEGAL Aliens particularly since I am aware of the great difficulty close friends have had coming here.
The bottom line question for me:
Are we going to support the rule of law in this country, or not?
On this issue, currently, I don’t see how you can claim that we do. So, I see certain laws that are not being enforced, and that this is done (or not done) on purpose.
Doesn’t this weaken all laws, and diminish the power of the social contract that these laws are meant, at their best, to represent?
Are we going to continue to reward people who are causing this? If so, why?
What other laws should we let slide? Can I get a list?
Property rights, rule of law, education of the young – three pillars of civil society. But the termites gnaw at them all…
Spiny Norman…
Mine goes off too when I see that type of wage being turned down….
Not to be lecturing… but, people who don’t have the facts still have opinions.
I gave the clue…. Public works projects.
California Public works contracts demand verified payroll and union scale. The State Depqrtment of Industrial relations specifies the lead laborers on Public Works jobs earn $34.24hr and what are known as “tenders” earn $14.17hr.
The ratio of Lead Laborers to tenders is one to one. Tecnically you cannot run a three man crew.
Obviously for that sort of wage, you need to get top production because at $100hr. for a crew of four, if your job goes 5 days longer than anticipated you lose $4000.
Once again, plenty of people say they will “take that wage” but are they willing to truly earn it?
I think the woman in the article needs to expand her search…. but my experience with “working guys out” to see if they can handle it means babysitting guys for a day, and firing them after one. It costs $250 to see if a guy can skillfully handle the pace (a good sign is if he will work the first day as “tender” to show what he’s got)… plus the guy might be illegal.
Most landscape companies prefer to hire via referrals from existing employees. The current employees vouch for a guy and usually the work ethic is great, but those are the guys whose documents sometimes come up shaky.
That is a tough one for employers who have hard work to do…lots look the other way and take a crooked pictured ID or a SS card with number 654-32-1000 because the production is there (lets face it, most employers rightly place production first, safety right next to that and the rest is way down the list of things to do)
That is why I advocate a tamper proof card with a Visa type swipe machine that is tied into a database that’ll tell me right away the guy can work or not. Visa can do it, so can the Feds.
Guy shows up to apply, I run his card. Thumbs up? OK. Thumbs down? No thanks. Like I said, Visa does it… sure there are glitches there too and they will be exploited. (Some businesses will always have a faulty reader… sorta like the little liquor store where for some reason the guy always leaves the register open and uses a calculator… they always suffer a lot of “shoplifting” to account for all the off register cash sales)
Not to rub salt in any wounds, but this is a strawman. If Congress signs an amnesty bill and the president signs it, then the rule of law has been changed. Therefore, it’s no longer a matter of the law being broken.
TV (Harry)
tw: Ya takes the bad with the good.
There was a health care push a few weeks ago. Why then?
I do. Cheerfully. With a spring in my step and a song in my heart.
Because all I am asking for is actual enforcement of the laws currently on the books.
A taste:
‘nuff said.
Therefore, it’s no longer a matter of the law being broken.
No, rather it is a matter of those who break the law in the first place getting a pass for committing the crime…
…and, of course, others who will be coming thereafter expecting the same at some point in the future.
What an absurd statement! Not a matter of the law being broken!?! Not an issue of “rule of law.” Give me a break. What a retarded comment.
Harry,
I think you are missing the point. You have in your statement above an “if” and a “then”. What most of us are concerned about is the laws as they currently exist. Granted if the law is changed then it will be a matter of the law as it then exists.
If the Pols in DC want to go on record by voting for a change in the laws then so be it. That is the process we live by. However to just flat out refuse to enforce the law as it exists is a “de facto” change in the law – without the subsequent risks of going on record with their votes.
That is the problem that most of us see. The “lip service” that our Pols pay to enforcement while simultaneously “winking and nodding” at those that are breaking the law.
Someone (I wish I could find a link) estimated deporting 12 million illegals… of course assuming you can get catch them… would be like forming a line of cars from Tijuana to the Canadian border.
It isn’t a matter of the law. It is somewhat impractical to implement. Sounds good, but try picking up 12 million pennies scattered all over 100 acres one at a time as 6000 more per day pour in and hide under the furniture and in the barn. Heck, invite all of your friends to help. It would be like painting the Golden Gate bridge. You finish and start over at the other end.
Not saying deportation cannot be done. crack down on employers (Problem: most follow the law… even if they are found to have illegals, they have followed the law if they have filled out an I-9 properly and in good faith, withheld SS and taxes etc))
Ok so first give employers the right tools.
Give them a tamperproof card and a Visa swiper.
Give them a year to get rid of the illegals on their books (you have to let them replace key people… remember the government has failed the employer by not sealing the border, by not cracking down on document fraud, by making a byzantine mess over which card does what, by hamstring them with anti discrimination laws and the lawyers who prey on them)
So now after whatever amount of time it takes to get a swipeable ID past Congress, past the inevitable lawsuit by the ACLU cojoined with conservative groups and the one year grace period so businesses won’t go under (bad for the economy ya know) you finally will dry up the market for illegals and some will find their way home. You can’t turn employers into border cops, so the employer givs the exposed illegal a last check and they…. disappear.
I know people. Some of the most vocal anti immigrant voices out there are cheating on their taxes, committing fraud, doing telemarketing scams… the usual every day larceny. So my feeling is that rather than forming an orderly line at the border, people will go further underground. Work for cash. Oh wait… some already do… so lemme see. The illegals that are paying into the system get caught first and then join the underground multitudes. If they have babies that are citizens they(the kids) will qualify for public assistance, food stamps, housing etc.
That puts a few million more (legally) on welfare.
Bush gets the big picture.
SteveG,
I am also a small business man burdened by the innoccous “Paper God who Shits on My Desk Daily”. I don’t think any rational person is advocating rounding up 12 million illegal aliens and deporting them. That is simply a strawman argument for an amnesty program.
Until we get into place a tamper proof ID system, we can implement a better documentation program with the documents that currently exist. All citizens either have these documents or they are readily available with a minimal cost. All legal immigrants are required to have these documents.
Simply stated, put in place the documentation process and let those that cannot produce the documentation self-deport. Will all 12 million leave? No. But a significant portion of them will gradually return to their home if they are unable to obtain work, register an automobile, get a driver’s license, enroll their children into school, apply for public aid.
Sure, there will be some that will become part of the “underground” economy, working for cash under the table. But they will be the few. As a businessman you know how hard it is to take cash out of a business to distribute. Those that are “cash” employees will continue to shrink as employers realize that the risk is simply not worth it.
A gradual replacement of illegal worker with legal workers can be accomplished. But it has to start somewhere. Claiming that we can’t be 100% successful, so therefore we should not enforce our lawas, is creating the ultimate strawman.
Hi ris…
It is easy for me to understand where you are coming from. Strong opinions and a willingness to bend a bit make for progress.
I would be fine with gradual implementation of illegal relocaton… outsourcing back to Mexico or whatever.
The screeching fringe has no concept of the mess some of their plans would make of regional small businesses… and they don’t seem to care. Job one for the screechers is to send them home now.
Some of the “what part of illegal don’t you understand” crowd unashamedly advocate illegal methods to deport illegals which would be funny if they were lefties.
They blame businesses for being “magnets”. Geez.
Republicans are supposed to advocate less government intrusion, but people are on here advocating more and more intrusion into business. Governments role is to keep illegals out in the first place, and then to give an easy efficient way to check status of any that slip through. People here want to offload this responsibilty to me… *bleep* that and *bleep* the conflicting laws the feds and state make up
(see anti discrimination laws vs. workplace enforcement).
Michelle Malkin is encouraging her readers to dig into the employee files of a (Republican) woman who dares to be in favor of a guest worker program. To destroy her livelihood for disagreeing with the party line.
Isn’t that a bit over the top?
Statistical probability says there isn’t a nursery, farm, landscape firm, janitor firm etc in Southern cal that doesn’t or hasn’t had illegal workers. The magnet is the USA and our jobs… to blame the job creators seems lame. What are we supposed to do… not have jobs… suck so bad we are not a magnet?
I continue to disagree with you on whether in the end people will go home. You didn’t address my welfare concerns. A familiy composed of illegal parent and two citizen children should qualify for enough welfare, housing etc to subsist here indefinately… particulary if supplemented by day wage labor (I know of a guy who doesn’t have employees… he has the homeowner write checks directly to the men for wages) As long as the economy is good, certain businesses like landscaping will disappear underground in this fashion. The legitimate businesses will not be able to compete.
I saw a lot of this during the dot com bust followed by 9/11. Contracts dried up and I saw jobs I’d bid go to guys like I described above.
I had to live off my savings for a year.
I worked for a guy once who later it turns out was laundering drug profits… after doing a few little bid things I found out his scheme. He wanted me to do the rest of the job for 300K cash then he’d sell the place and make a “legit” profit… I said… “how the heck would you even do that…” in a sort of rhetorical way.
he starts to tell me how in Florida and New Jersey they set up with nurseries and suppliers blah blah blah… I said ummm Jimmy, I meant that I can’t do it I wasn’t asking how literally..
So the illegals with skills will find work. It is not as if homeowners are not larcenous and obviously anyone who treks up here in the trunk of a car with 7 others is resourceful and not easily deterred.
You are right, some will go back. I’ll be shocked if it amounts to more than 1/3.. and more will keep trying to get in as long as Mexico’s government sucks.
On a side note.
I travelled in the sticks of Burma, Thailand etc
I had special permission to trek through Kachin state north of Rapbaw. The Burmese would sneak across the border into China there and down south into Thailand to work because pay was better. I guess migration is almost a genetic thing
Steve G – it does no one any good if Bush sees “the big picture” if he is looking at it through Vaseline-covered glasses.
Nothing is practical to implement until it is A) invented, and then B) implemented.
It was said back in the early 1990s that Moore’s Law (stating the number of ICs that can be fit on a chip doubles approximately every 18 months) was no longer practical or reasonable. It would have been easy for the inventors back then to stop with Pentium or Pentium II. I have a suspicion the computer you are using has a main chip a bit more powerful than the P-II.
Why?
Because people at AMD and Intel and Motorola decided to test the limits of what could be implemented.
Using the attitude you portrayed in your post, the Manhattan Project would never have come to fruition. The Apollo project would never have gotten off the ground. The 747 would never have been built. On and on.
Nothing can’t be done if tried to its best extent.
But you (and others who are effectively pro-amnesty) suggest that we don’t even try to enforce the current law. And if that is the case, then I would appreciate any other laws that should not be enforced because it could get just “too impractical.”
This is not a strawman I’m setting up. I’m deadly serious – any illegals in this nation MUST GO BACK prior to applying for re-entry to the states. And as long as the GOP holds that position, they will not get my vote or my money or my effort on their behalf.
SteveG,
I purposely did not address the Welfare argument because I think it is irrelevant. Yes, a child born here is a US citizen, yet I cannot see a set of “illegal” parents applying for public aid and risking deportation (and consequently having to decide whether to break up the family) for aid for the child. Documentation.
I am firmly against “wholesale deportation” of illegal aliens. I think it would be extremely costly, be a PR nightmare and largely be…ineffective. I firmly believe that the best method is to take away the motivation for “illegal” immigration. A gradual decline in the illegal aliens replaced by “legal immigrants” would have a negligible impact on the economy.
There is no reason that immigration from Mexico, handled properly, could not be increased and “fast tracked”.
My position continues to be in favor of legal immigration, matched to the country’s needs, individuals properly vetted in lieu of “illegal immigrants” who do, whether intentionally or not, flaunt our immigration laws and prevent those that go through the immigration process a speedy entry.
We cannot, under any circumstances, reward bad behavior (violations of law) with amnesty for illegal aliens, no matter what reason they are here or from what country they come.
The border needs to be sealed for national security reasons. That it stops or reduces the influx of illegal looking simply for work is a bonus.
I don’t think you and I (and the majority) are very far apart. There is an obvious problem with illegal aliens that must be addressed. What we have to do is address it legally, humanely, with an eye to both our economic interests and those of our neighbor, Mexico.
I didn’t see this over at Michelle’s site. Are you talking about Cyndi Smallwood? If so, I didn’t see any call for “digging into the files”. I did see some e-mails that she posted from some of her readers.
I didn’t see anything wrong with any of that. It apparently benefited Ms. Smallwood as she has had an influx of resumes for that job.
</blockquote>It isn’t a matter of the law. It is somewhat impractical to implement. Sounds good, but try picking up 12 million pennies scattered all over 100 acres one at a time as 6000 more per day pour in and hide under the furniture and in the barn. Heck, invite all of your friends to help. It would be like painting the Golden Gate bridge. You finish and start over at the other end.<blockquote>
There were some 10 billion pennies made in 1998
they got moved some how.
Don’t tell something is possible, simply because you have preset your assumptions and premises to make failure certain.
They did not come in here in ONE mass group so who says they have to leave that way.
All that is needed is to get ahead, instead of behind the decision curve.
Have more going out than coming in, we did not get here overnight, so we don’t have to get out of here overnight
But throwing up our hands and doing nothing will only let the problem get worse, as we have already seen.
Zeno’s Paradox may SOUND logical but it is foolish to use it for a rationale for a complete absence of effort.
12 million elians. Break out the Sub machine guns.
For Aztllan La Raza Facist Revolutioanry Bigots?
You’re DAMN right, Haakaa päälle!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
(hack them down)
Those Bronze Continent Chicano Civilizer Maggots have come north before laying claim to the Land of others.
Everyone has their own “miami relatives.”
The Cal State University system and its Chicano studies (or whatever they call it now) provides about 99.9% of the US based Atzlan movement. Most working class illegals don’t have the slightest idea wtf the Reconquistas are yelling about and don’t have time to care about it either. This may seem weird, but most of the working class illegal guys that I run into (amazing how many guys will freely admit their status around the jobsite) they miss their home in a nostalgic way, but they love the US and are happier here than they have ever been. Very loyal to the USA but with (obviously) deep roots in Mexico.
You’d think from the news that they’d be all militant, but they just want to be respected for the hard work they do.
I forgot to say thanks for the discussion.
Thank you.
Obviously my bread is buttered in an industry and in a region that is heavily dependent on immigrant labor. I told the story of working with illegals at the age of 15 (I’m 48 now.) When I was working as laborer we were raided at least three times, and after a big brush fire in 1990 I saw a huge sweep of illegals that were cleaning up the burnt out home sites. Shoveling ash in the hot sun.
The agents were jerks… they were so testosterone fueled they roughed me up a bit… it was funny later. I was 15, they came running onto the avocado orchard and all my co-workers dropped their tools and ran. So I did too… I’m like hey.. wtf… I may look dumb, but if everyone else hauls ass, I’m running too and asking questions later. I’m 5’11” blond hair blue eyes and in high school so who the f is chasing me? But of course some guy does and is mad at me for running so he shoves me around… “hey if I hadn’t stopped you’d never have caught me”.
Funny thing: Two of the guys that I know were illegal adopted the strategy of ignoring the raid and continuing the digging as if there was nothing going on… the Border Patrol guys ran right by them Keystone Kops style to get to me. Obviously the training seminar forgot the profiling part even in the pre-politically correct era. I’m glad I can disagree vehemently with some of you without it turning into a personal battle.
Thanks
Doesn’t take ALL at no time in the Soviet Union were Party members more than 3 to 4% of the population,
I also know that the photos of the demonstrations in the Major Media were severely edited to keep from “inflaming” the public with the truth.
Like I said before anyone who wants to come here be an AMERICAN, build a better life and do it LEGALLY?
I consider them welcome.
The Cuban ones in Miami are grateful and were welcomed.
The Bronze Chicano Civilizer Scum can stuff it
and no
SteveG I don’t paint all Illegals with the same Revolutionary Brush, I don’t hide my head in the sand and pretend groups wanting Revolution are not out there, either.
Actually this has been interesting, studying Colonial American History.
Cortes went to Mexico with dogs, horses cannon and about 400 Conquistedores and conquered the Aztec Empire.
Pizzaro with about 180 conquered the Incan Empire
DeSoto invaded the Cherokee Homeland in the Georgia region with SIX HUNDRED Conquistodores and?
Got his ass KICKED
)))
Not that he did not do a lot of damage but we did manage to convince the Spanish Indian conquest in that region was not
Cost effective.
PPS The Navaho much latter threw their tails back over the Rio Grande in 1846 so it was not the Yanqis alone who took that region from them,
the Deneh did lose to the Yankees, later but the Chicano Civilizer NEVER had an original claim to it.
They can blow it.
You can add the Comanche.
The fact is that most of the state of Texas, at the time Texas became independent of Mexico, was still in the hands of the Comanche Indians. In fact, one of the reasons that the Mexican government invited in white settlers to Texas was to use them to fight off the Indians.
It was only after the formation of the Texas Rangers and the later invention of the Colt 45 that whites were able to make substantial progress against the Comanche.
The Hispanic population in Texas was tiny and the Mexicans neither held the land legally (they lost in a war fair and square, and later signed a treaty accepting the loss of Texas and the Southwest for all time, in return for millions of dollars) nor did they hold the land in practicality.
Mexican claims to any sort of inherent right to Texas or the Southwest are nonsense no matter how you look at it.
And our bloodthirsty nutcases were eager to kill 100%.
Marxism exterminated over 100 million human beings during its reign opposing them made sense. We were next.
Odd that I have not met a single person in the Former Soviet Union that has the animosity to the United States that you seem to have.
I guess that is the difference between those who lived under that oppression and folks like you.