WINNING THE BORDER BATTLE (Immigration Reform)

New York Post ^ | December 9, 2004 | Tamar Jacoby

[beckaz]

December 9, 2004 -- THE immigration wars have started again in Washington, with this round, like the last, pitting mainly Republicans against Republicans: conservative Republicans in the House vs. President George W. Bush. The charge from the right: that when it comes to immigration, the president is soft on enforcement.

The only trouble is it isn't true. The president's plan for a guest-worker program — first proposed in January and, according to the White House, one of its priorities for the coming year — is in no way antithetical to enhanced enforcement. On the contrary, better enforcement is the heart and soul of Bush's package, and his principles are the only path to the tighter, more secure borders we need.

Powerful House Judiciary Committee Chairman James Sensenbrenner, leading the charge in Congress, used the fight over the 9/11 intelligence bill to send a shot across the White House's bow. Though he lost this round — his provisions were stripped out of the bill — he has vowed to continue the fight in the new Congress. Many of the immigration provisions he is championing — including denying drivers' licenses to illegal immigrants — sound reasonable enough and might make sense if our border policy were functional. But they won't work and will only make things worse unless we fix the system with reforms of the kind the president proposes

[Reaganwuzthebest]

The economic arguments for mass migration has about been used up and now conservatives are down to hate speech, how pathetic.

Haven't you heard the latest talking points from some in the open borders crowd? We need mass immigration in order to compete with China economically. Apparently if we don't have a billion people like them they will overtake us and rule the world.

[junta]

I said "Jorge's" amnesty plan calls for a world wide job auction.

[junta]

No I haven't, but thanks for telling me. Well so much for that high tech information era crap we're now down to a sweatshop era immigration policy. And to think Japan has half the people we have, how do they cope?

[Reaganwuzthebest]

And to think Japan has half the people we have, how do they cope?

Japan does just fine without mass immigration because they've learned to mechanize a little more, something American companies would do if they were forced to.

[beckaz]

By 'radical approach' might you mean 'enforcing the law'?

I might indeed, as a beginning. Isn't it insane that applying the law is now a radical idea?

Police and Sheriff Depts., prosecutors refuse to do anything for fear of bad press and/or being slapped down by higher courts or politicos. In other cases they won't do anything cuz they're thinking or running for higher office themselves.

Instead of applying the law for starters, the politicos are tripping over themselves (including Bush perhaps) to extend benefits to illegals (driving licenses, in-state tuition...)

I am struggling really hard to think of a way we can get a response from our reps on this huge issue. There must be votes to gain in he darn issue, they must all be more afraid of the ACLU and the open-borders (activists, not biz)lobby.