Immigration And The National Interest: Where Should Conservatives Stand?
Very soon the Republican Party and the nation as a whole will be debating exactly what to do about illegal immigration. Among others, the principles at stake will be the following:
- The rule of law
- National security
- National cohesion
- Preservation of traditional values
But what to do? How to apply these time-tested principles? Conservatives seem to be split. An apparent majority on the right want to get serious about existing immigration laws by effectively sealing the borders and sending illegals home. Others question whether such an approach is realistic, and whether it truly adheres to the four principles listed above.
I'm one of the questioners. I know that by taking my position I risk being lumped with GOP "prags" who value realism above all else, but sometimes we just have to ask ourselves: What will work? Ronald Reagan was one of the greatest hard-headed conservatives who ever lived; so was Abraham Lincoln. By insisting on basic principles and applying them in a relentlessly realistic way, both Lincoln and Reagan became great presidents.
In her Weekly Standard piece, "Law and Borders," Tamar Jacoby makes the best case I have seen for the Bush immigration plan. As Jacoby details, Bush's plan is true to every single principle listed above, and it is realistic. The plan would restore the rule of law, would enable us to concentrate resources on keeping terrorists out of the country, would require immigrants to commit to becoming assimilated Americans, and would rationalize the way we provide services to immigrants. It would remove us forever from the current situation in which everyone knows what is going on but allows it to continue with only winks and nods in place of a real policy.
Read the Jacoby piece, then consider my questions for those who, like one of my favorite radio talk show hosts, Laura Ingraham, zealously attack the Bush plan:
- What is your plan, and how will you get it enacted?
- Do you really think the American public has the stomach to see 10 million people deported, many of whom have been here all their lives?
- If the public is not ready to do that, are you prepared to see the Republican Party spend the political capital necessary to convince them?
- What if we fail to convince them? Where will the party be then?
It's one thing to bemoan the status quo the way the Tom Tancredos of the world do; it's another thing to have a workable plan that adheres to correct principles.
Bring on the Bush plan. Let's have a debate.
UPDATE: Thanks to Hugh Hewitt, my "blogfather," for the link to this post. I'm honored as all get-out. I have have never had 11 comments on a single post before. This is fun!
posted by Lowell Brown at 7:58 AM
|
22 Comments:
Lowell, (I got carried away on this one. Sorry. Cut to my last comment... that's where the real solution lays.)
You're right, cool heads need to prevail here.
*There is no physical, moral, or legal way to deport/resettle 7 to 10 million people.
*Any plan to legitimize and validate the presence of these illegals will be branded as amnesty.
*National ID cards are seen as a step towards statism wich steps toward totalitarianism which steps towards....
We can't go back in time to correct what presents itself today. However, we can correct today the variables that exist, (or are missing) to right the course we are currently on. There will be some tough bullets to bite and concessions to make on both sides of the political spectrum.
In my perfect world, would I be King, I would acknowledge a few cold hard realities. Namely;
*The boarders get much tighter for a few years until and while our internal measures get up and running.
*The 7 to 10 million illegals are here to stay.
*Those 7 to 10 million people, and the other 290 million people in this country, will be required to show federally recognized and validated ID or paper work.Not federally issued ID's. But ID's that pass federal standards. The feds would be able to issue permits for work and travel as is the current standard.
*Since immigration is a federal responsibility, the feds would have the right and responsibility to fine any employer with undocumented illegals in their service. So to individual states would be able to fine employers hiring undocumented workers. The fines and penalties monies would stay in the local community.
*Any and all public services beyond life threatening measures would not be available to undocumented illegals.
*Drivers liscenses. DL's would be issued the same way you and I get one. By demonstrating we know the rules of the road and we know how to drive. The DL would be marked non-resident and would be federally issued. The DL for a non-resident would cost, say, $500 dollars for a six month period to cover insurance. The DL would not be valid ID for anything other than operating a motor vehicle and could not be used to secure other forms of ID.
*Their stay in this country is over upon commission of a felony.
*Immediate measures and policies would go into place to assist Mexico and South American countries to create democratic institutions and rule of law accountability so as to foster healthy marketplace and commercial environments to keep their citizens from fleeing. The entire southern hemisphere of the Americas is a beautiful, diverse, rich and enormous chunk of this world. It's absurd that these countries can't stand on their own and thrive in the world community with the hard work and inventiveness of their own people. Set them free. Protect their rights. Get out of their way. They will stay to improve their lives, communities and countries. They'll stay home!
Posted by Wagonboy
Lowell-
I see another problem that I believe immigration is only symptomatic of. For years, we have measured our economic health on continued growth: on sustained, increased consumption and not on maintained value.
I see our willingness to tolerate lax immigration standards in order to flesh out the ranks of America's workers as part of chasing after the myth of economic growth.
200 years ago, Malthus should have been a wakeup call to the world.
We need change, but immigration control is only an aspirin not a cure.
Posted by Matthew Peek
Wagonboy: Your ideas are the kind that need to be part of the debate. (And I know you feel this one like I do, since you live mere blocks away frmo me!) Your italicized comments are really spot-on and I hope Congress and the White House pay some serious attention to those ideas.
Matthew: Your issue is more esoteric and I don't think Congress will do (or can do) much about it. It's one of those things we all know is true but we feel a little powerless about.
Posted by The Hedgehog
Actually, I think Wagonboy's are probably as unworkable as my own! After living in Panama and travelling throughout Central and South America for three years, I don't think that you can remove the corruption inherent in their governments, remodel their inadequate school or university systems or convince US companies to relocate to someplace that doesn't already have a trained and capable workforce or the infrastructure to support them. And while we lead the world in hi-tech, we develop other countries' production capabilities at our own peril. Even though we can reap a short term savings, in the long run it only damages us.
Even in a country with rich natural resources like Venezuela, you can never count on what's coming around the corner.
Posted by Matthew Peek
What did the former soviet satalites look like 20 years ago? Where there's law and order combined with property rights and a truly free press an entire constellation of problems begin to disapate. They have one more thing going for them throughout central and south america, if they can skillfully sew it into any reforms, a very strong and widespread religious community.-Wagonboy
Posted by Wagonboy
Stop making apologies for the cynical calculations of the current administration.
Eisenhower got over a million illegals to leave the country in Operation Wetback.
Anyone who says that it is not logistically possible to get a large fraction of illegals
out is lying. It has been done before, and on the scale necessary to do the job today.
What is lacking is the political will in Washington DC, that is, because it exists everywhere
else in the country and crosses party lines.
Securing our country is indeed a Federal responsibility. It is one which they have
failed to meet for years. State governments are now financing a foreign aid program
for Mexico, and it is certainly responsible for many of the current financial problems
in California. Get the troops, airplanes and tanks to the borders now. What will be
the administration position when Al Quaida successfully attacks us again if they fail
to control the borders? The party in power would be swept out of office at the next
election. That, at least, ought to get the attention of the RNC.
Posted by RKV
RKV, Way to think things through.
Tanks? Troops? Airplanes? Perhaps door to door and business to business raids throughout the country?
Most members of the House and Senate will certainly sign on to any bill containing this ingenious method of resolving the immigration problems we now face. And
there won't be a single court order from any circuit court ordering a halt to such an operation. As well, the general public will be universally in favor of spending tens of billions of dollars on such a practical exercise. All should go rather swimmingly! Why hasn't any sober person thought of this before?
First, we'll need to double the number of lawyers in this country. That should take a minimum of 5 years so we better get started. There's going to be much for them to do.
We'll have to impliment internment camps with tents and barbed wire to process and clarify the illegals from the legals before shipping/busing/marching them back where they came from. This could take months so don't forget to earmark a ton of cash to compensate for lost wages and collateral expenses those legally here who couldn't immediately prove their citizenship to the nice men who dragged them to the internment camp. Food, sanitation and medical services will also be provided of course.
Once processed and fingered as an illegal we'll just send them back to Mexico, Panama, Guatemala, El Salvador, Venezuela, Columbia, Peru, Bolivia, Honduras, and, don't forget the southeast Asian illegals. It shouldn't be too hard logistically or diplomaticaly. By the way, do we send newly arrived illegals without their children born on U.S. soil or with their children born on U.S. soil?
We'll have to process and redistribute much of their property, too. Things they can't carry on the long journey home. Houses, furniture, cars, tools, machinery, etc. These huge auction wharehouses could possibly fund a small fraction of a small percentage of the whole operation.
The world community won't be bothered by this operation, either. They'll gladly go along and won't take any punitive measures against us in the arenas of trade, finance, law, intelligence or hosting our military and defense bases and structures around the globe. They'll all understand and look the other way. And don't forget the cancer of socialism and communism creeping it's way into the governments of South America... sending all these illegals back to their home countries with a good working knowledge and foundation of our democratic principles should turn that commie tide right around.
We need a name for this operation. How about Operation Feverish Lunacy?
Posted by Wagonboy
Nice attempt to setup a strawman. Doesn't work. We have failed because we have not tried yet. Ask Mexico how they treat illegal immigrants that come from central America to Mexico - or do you even know? They kick them out and treat them brutally in the process. The rest of the world community acts the same way (see for instance Italy). I do agree with you that we should change our citizenship laws so that those born to persons here illegally should not be granted citizenship. Unfortunately those who do have children here now have an "anchor" baby. Futher I believe we should expect and plan for a revolution in Mexico. One is over due, given the corruption of the PRI. This should prove useful in destroying their socialist system.
Posted by RKV
I would further ask the readers here to consider what the economic effect of a significant reduction in low-wage immigrant labor in the US would do. 1) A mild increase in the price of the goods such labor supplied should be expected as a decrease in supply drives up prices. 2) A concurrent effect would be a reduction in the costs of uninsured healthcare in our emergency medical systems and a reduction in the need for english as a second language services in our schools. 3) We could reasonably further reduce the tax burden of welfare. BTW Americans WOULD do the work, as they did before an oversupply of low wage labor drove down wages artificially, and all of those wages would stay in the US, rather than the 40% which now goes to Mexico. 4) Futher incentives for our youth to work would be expected. Rather than sit at home in the summer, young Americans would be needed to work. This is in fact what used to happen - for example I personally had my first job as a summer agricultural laborer weeding a vineyard at age 14. 5) With greater border security the rationale for anti-civil libertarian measures like national identity cards would decrease or be eliminated. My best case scenario would include the elimination of the TSA.
Posted by RKV
Hedgehog,
I believe we should get all of the parts of the immigration issue on the table. I agree with you that President Bush's plan is the right way to go. I live in the Phoenix area and plan to run on this issue for a seat in the Arizona legislature in 2006.
Bob McPeek
Buckeye, AZ
Posted by Bob McPeek
Wagonboy.
I pretty much agree with the bulk of what you offer. I would emphasize different parts, and dispute that others are possible, given the direction of the court system, but the majority works for me with a bit of tweaking.
First, and absolutely crucial. Secure the borders.
There is nothing, from mass deportations to absolute bulk amnesties that have any chance if the open borders folk win. I believe that the critical parts of just about any of the proposed plans would have a chance properly "tweaked", but only if the flood is stopped. While I personally prefer some variant of the "deport 'em" plan, I could go along with secure borders, bulk amnesty, English fluency (written and spoken), Citizenship classes (and not the PC versions)US American History (again, nonPC) and some form of not-quite-punitive "community" service. (They were breaking the law, and want to be "forgiven", that takes some degree of reparation to society for the "damage" done to her by violating her laws) This would be something that would hopefully engender some recognition of what America has done, or what it takes to support her. Work in local free clinics would be good, as would be groundswork in public areas of national monuments (local possibly). Disaster aid relief, teaching ESL (English as a Second Language)or citizenship classes, but not just providing various government entities with free labor. Something that means something, to us as well as hopefully them. They are going to be our neighbors, so whatever done has to have the American people believe that the "durn illegals" have provided something back for the crimes committed ( none of them have only violated border laws)
Commitment to immigrage here and try for citizenship.
Loyalty oath. Deport violations of oath.
The medical issue is moot. They are already forbidden providing anything but "emergency" services. As expected, the definition of "emergency" doesn't resemble any other use of the word in the English speaking world. Judicial fiat. Breast augmentation surgery is usually out, but pretty much anything else is covered (my sister runs a pair of MRI and imaging clinics in Dallas, so don't try to dispute the point. You will lose.)
"Since immigration .... The fines and penalties monies would stay in the local community"
Whatever jurisdiction prosecutes and convicts, gets to keep the monies. Federal Prosecutor, federal grab; village attorney, village grab. If various jurisdictions want separate laws, they can each go after fines (much like feds and states can each have separate civil rights trials on the same charges)
Driver's Licenses I would tweak.
Every Illegal gets fingerprinted. Period. system tracks only a single print unless injury or loss of digit causes problem, but all digits are on file. Hey we have already established that they are criminals (there may be differing opinions on how serious of a criminal they are, but they are definately criminals of illegal border crossing at a minimum)Maybe data purged if they reach citizenship without being charged with a crime, and possibly after some longer interval even if charged with a (nonfelony) crime. Convicted Felons are deported upon completion of the jail time, no probation, time-off, or appeal.back to DL.
Federal registry, but local tests and liscence. There are different laws (rules of the road) in each state. Applicants would have to pass a driving test, separate states' written tests, and have separate endorsements for each state. car, truck, morotcycle, ect. Likewise, different states have different liability rates for insurance. Applicants would only have to pay the highest endorsement possessed. I like the idea of a "grace period" for moves, but recognize that the system *would* be abused to the point of making the system useless, so ... No Grace period, but any state could give another state's test (on file with Feds) if given at the same time as their own test or part of an official change of address. Also, English tests passed would require only insurance payment, fingerprint check, and eyetest for renewal, while foriegn language tests are given in full each time.Encourage English Fluency.
I could go on, but I suspect that that is pretty much a good start, (other than deporting people not willing to go along with this) and I suspect that you could live with this
P.S. you are not going to "fix" the other countries. The PTBs are happy as it is, and the serfs are unwilling to pay the price to change it. The best we can do is provide an example of a country where the law isn't written to benefit a minority, nor is the law for only some people to have to obey.
Posted by Jhn1
Nice original post, and some of the follow-up is interesting. Now, to briefly respond to some of it:
1. I hope none of you "We can't fix Latin America" types supported a similar project in Iraq. Or do you think LA is less vital to our national security than some place halfway around the world? Give Durbishire over at NRO some credit: he's consistent.
2. RKV, the PRI isn't in power, Vicente Fox's PAN is, and will probably lose to the castroid socialist PRD. Of course, a socialist cleptocracy on our southern border will change things: will you keep out those Mexicans fleeing from castroid socialism? I don't think we've really thought through just what raving PRD socialism on our southern doorstep will mean for the US, but if you think the PRI was bad, just wait man.
3. A lot of talk about assimilation, but it's time some tough questions were asked on that score. Just what exactly do we want them to assimilate to? Isn't much of the problem with multi-national gangs a result of assimilation of gang pathologies? Do we really want the next generation of deeply religious latino girls walking around like Britney Speares while the guys listen to Gangster Rap (or even angry whiteboy hard core for that matter)? The immigrants we're getting tend toward religiosity, and seem like natural allies in the culture war right now. I'm not saying that we shouldn't advocate assimilation, but perhaps we should be a little more careful with it than culturalists have indicated.
That's all for now, but it's something to chew on.
Posted by A. J. Nolte
AJ - Your item number 2 is in error. PAN controls the presidency (Fox) PRI controls the Mexican federal and most state legislatures. I speak Spanish and read Mexican newspapers so I do follow this in some detail.
All, Can we agree that we need to close the borders? For God's sake, do we have to wait for another terrorist attack to get this one right? How many have to die so you can have cheap lettuce and have your lawn mowed by somebody else?
Posted by RKV
I find all of the previous posts very interesting and I have a few questions/comments.
In my opinion the legal rights of illegal immigrants that are already in our country should be strictly reduced to some new category. Reasons for this new illegal status:
1) Illegal immigrants can "legally" file lawsuits and take someone to court for damages? They do it all the time in regards to traffic accidents, property damage, and bodily injury.
2) Illegal immigrants are walking into our hospitals in southern AZ, getting free medical care, and in the process using up the hospital's ability to provide these same services to the legal citizens. I've had people in southern AZ tell me that their hospitals are leaving because they can't afford to provide unlimited free medical care.
3) Other welfare systems are overloaded with Mexican people accessing our benevolence. I'll never forget the story I heard years ago about a small post office in San Luis, AZ which had something like 10,000 post office boxes for a town that was much smaller. I went down there one time and it's the truth. We're sending our money to people that don't even live in the US!
In conclusion, let's quit giving the illegals a free ride once they get here. Make them do some penance,
serve some period of probation, learn to speak English, and make sure they have a real job.
For the most part I agree with President Bush's plan to deal with illegal immigration because it has to be pragmatic. We need cheap labor and the immigrants need our jobs. I have worked in southern AZ for many years and it's always been an amazement to me how on our side the border you have nicely built homes and businesses, while on the other side you have what are basically shacks. We are blessed and it's OK to share
in our blessings.
Thanks for the opportunity to spout off.
Eric Ljunggren
Anthem, AZ
Posted by Eric Ljunggren
I don't see a trackback link, but my response is at http://donsingleton.blogspot.com/2005/02/immigration.html
Basically the answer, IMHO, is we need an ID card that cannot easily be forged, and THEN we need to crack down on employeers that are not checking ID cards. But to do that without a secure ID card is a waste of time.
Posted by Don Singleton
How do I set up a trackback link? That's one item missing from my blogger tool kit (or my blogger know-how).
Posted by The Hedgehog
I’ve posted a longer comment on polipundit and (above) on this blog.
Essentially, enforcement only becomes workable after scofflaw attitudes are discouraged, which is possible because 95 % of the population is law-abiding. Enforcement should be directed to the 2-3% of law-breakers who will persist, even when a realistic alternative is in place. So, with adequate warning to create a change in attitudes, a combined program of economic disincentives for illegals and a workable entry option for legal “guest workers,” enforcement can become feasible. We tend to give up too quickly on people, assuming from their current misbehavior that is actually a more or less sensible adaptation to the present, corrupt setup, that they won't respond to responsible reforms. They will.
Posted by RLG
Our organization represents 1 million Vietnamese immigrants. Tamar Jacoby conviently skirts around the biggest problem with President Bush's immigration plan. It is racist.
Under Bush's plan, about 30 million illegal aliens and their dependents would receive green cards after six years. 85% of them will be Hispanic. The percentage of legal/legalized immigrants from one country, Mexico, would rise from the current 30% to over 60%. While waiting for their green cards, adjusted illegal aliens and their dependents would be able to access US public benefits. Any children they have would be granted US citizenship.
On the other hand, only a few hundred Vietnamese would benefit from the Bush plan. Plus, it would indirectly increase the waiting time for Vietnamese extended family immigrants from the current 12 years to over 20 years. While these legal Vietnamese immigrants waited for a green card, they would not have access to US public benefits, nor would any children they have be granted US citizenship.
Yet somehow Bush thinks letting illegal aliens wait 6 years inside the US for a green card while at the same time making legal immigrants wait 20 years outside the US for a green card, is sending illegal aliens "to the back of the line".
President Bush also use the bogus claim that illegal aliens should be allowed to stay, because "their children are US citizens. Neither the Constitution nor Congress has granted them citizenship. Presidents since 1924, when the first US numerical quotas on immigration also created illegal aliens, have by executive decision decided to grant US citizenship to the US born children of illegal aliens. This executive decision could be easily overturned by Congress. This was already done by Presidents Carter and Reagan who decided to NOT grant US citizenship to children of legal Vietnamese immigrants born in US financed refugee camps.
President Bush says Mexicans just want to feed their families. Yet, the average Mexican income is 5 times the average Vietnamese income. Vietnamese want to feed their families also. Family values don't stop at the Rio Grande, and they also most certainly do not stop at the Pacific Coastline. But apparently President Bush thinks they do, that only Mexicans have family values.
This is a very racist and unjust attitude. The non-racist and just thing to do would be to first give the tools to employers to verify who is here legally. Then announce that over a five year period, the government will begin enforcing the CURRENT law against hiring illegal aliens, by industry. Start with the construction industry, then hotels, restaurants, janitorial, landscaping, meat packing, and finally agriculture. Since they will have the tools available, employers will no longer have the excuse they didn't know their workers are illegal. Of course, this means that President Bush will have to fund 2000 instead of 210 Border Patrol agents, and not tie their hands with ridiculous regulations.
At the same time, reduce the waiting time for legal family immigrants to less than five years. Most of these legal immigrants would be willing to perform the "jobs Americans won't do" which illegal aliens are now performing.
To provide another incentive for Mexican illegal aliens to return to Mexico, the US should provide matching funds to Mexico for education, law enforcement, and infrastructure development, so they can have "a better life" in Mexico.
This non-racist, fair plan would reward immigrants that obey the law, rather than those that break it. Businesses would have the labor they claim they need. Everyone would be happy, except for racist ethnic groups like the National Council of LaRaza that want more members.
For more info on this and to see that Americans were willing to deport Vietnamese illegal aliens at least, go to www.fairimmigration.com.
Tim Binh
Vietnamese for Fair Immigration
Posted by Tim Binh
Thanks, Tim. I posted your comment above and invited further comments.
Posted by The Hedgehog
I think that illegal immigration in the US is out of control and the government needs to tighten border patrol durastically. If Bush thinks that mexicans just want to feed their families, they can do it down in mexico like millions of others do. I understand that the US has much more to offer than Mexico, but that does not mean that they can come here and take jobs and use the government like it is their own. We need to work out a better and more efficient system of stoping illegal immigration and enforcing laws about current aliens that live in the US.
Posted by Anonymous
Subject: Putting your Life on the Line!
That is meant literally in every meaning of the Word!
Poor agent out of Arizona Lost his more than just his job that unfaitfull day during 2001. You can check it out yourself. Is it really worth while to put your life,family and career on the line to stop and illegal Entry no matter how you look at it.
Not the US Bored Patrol,Media,Public,Minutemen nor Media really care about the Young Honorable Men and Women who risk everything to keep us safe. Thank You Mr. Bush and FOX for pushing your problems upon us All.
Posted by fabianscarpetta
The
cheap web hosting should not only be reliable and fast. It should guarantee its uptime, which refers to the percentage of the time your website is accessible and can be seen in the Word Wide Web. The minimum uptime should be 99 %. In fact even 99 % seems to be too low. It really should be 99.5 % or higher. It helps to reach for an example your customers satisfaction, your needs and to enjoy financial freedom.
Post a Comment
<< Home