Replies

Interior enforcement except in selected situations without going after illegal employment, and the active prosecution of employers, strikes me as a very bad policy doomed to fail, politically and practically. The incentives will still be there, but the clandestine will increase, and the disruptions will increase, and the bitterness will increase, and the abuse of children will increase (including the neglecting of their education, which cannot and should not stand). It is sort of like a heavy chemo program with not much efficacy in the end. John and Ken should have me on. I will tell them. Just making life more miserable for illegals who can still work, and whose employers have incentives to hire them, is at once cruel and unusual, and only works at incentives at the margins for so many of these relative desperate people.

Who disagrees?
How much worse is the Clinton/Bush policy of border enforcement with neither interior enforcement nor employer sanctions?

The incentives will still be there, but the clandestine will increase, and the disruptions will increase, and the bitterness will increase, and the abuse of children will increase (including the neglecting of their education, which cannot and should not stand). It is sort of like a heavy chemo program with not much efficacy in the end. John and Ken should have me on. I will tell them. Just making life more miserable for illegals who can still work, and whose employers have incentives to hire them, is at once cruel and unusual, and only works at incentives at the margins for so many of these relative desperate people.

Before they have you on, you should listen to them, or listen more closely.
Time and again today, Hutchison ducked when John put forth the point that there is zero enforcement against employers who hire Illegals in California.
And "cruel and unusual" is demagogic here.