On Mike Pence

The New York Times front page profile on my friend, Rep. Mike Pence (R-IN), "Star of the Right Loses His Base at the Border," is really all about the anti-immigration, far-right group led by Tom Tancredo of Colorado to oppose any broad-based immigration reform whatsoever--and to label any proposals for temporary workers, or even Pence's 17 year citizenship path, as "amnesty."

This word "amnesty" is being used to attack absolutely any conceivable immigration compromise. I could go on forever on this subject. I have written several columns on it. But at the end of the day, the Tancredo crowd, which includes Pat Buchanan, just wants border security to keep out immigrants.

They also want to deport all illegal or undocumented immigrants. "Border security" and "deportation" are their watchwords. They manage to completely ignore the economics of the problem, whereby Mexicans seeking higher paying jobs in the U.S. rather than the faltering Mexican economy can produce are coming here to work. After all, living conditions in the U.S. are a lot better for all but the richest people than they are in Mexico.

If we ever deported the 10-15 million undocumented workers, then the U.S. economy would be severely damaged. New studies show the Mexicans actually help the U.S. economy and wages actually rise overall, (though there are small losses in border town wages). Even unskilled American workers benefit from lower priced goods and services generated by these new Mexican worker-immigrants.

Pat Buchanan attacks me as "worshipping at the church of GDP." But in a CNBC Kudlow and Company interview, I reminded him that I also worship at the church of Catholic Mass, as do the vast majority of the Mexican immigrants. These faith-based folks would create a new blue-collar middle class that is sorely needed in this country if we let them.

They would also finance Social Security over the next fifty years. Though it should be noted that academic research shows that 2/3rds of them pay Social Security with phony ID cards and will never receive the benefit as matters now stand. And, of course, they pay the sales tax on whatever purchases they make in stores.

The problem will never be solved unless we legally permit roughly 400,000 per year to fill the demand for U.S. jobs that are currently available. This resembles the Bracero Program and it must be part of any solution. It's just plain common sense that at any given productivity rate, a larger labor force generates more GDP growth to the benefit of the U.S. economy. During the high tide of immigration, over the past twenty years, the U.S. has enjoyed unrivaled prosperity at low unemployment. So, again, I ask, if immigration is so bad, then why are things so good?

Yes, there should be tough border security. Yes, there should be foolproof ID cards, with biometrics, for Social Security and employment purposes. Former Sen. Alan Simpson of Wyoming, the co-author of the 1986 Simpson-Mazzoli immigration reform bill, has said the failure of that bill was a function of the lack of an ID card system.

But the intransigence of the Tancredo-Buchanan crowd is a remarkable political event which is all out of kilter with poll after poll that shows a substantial majority of respondents favor broad based immigration reform.

If these guys win, the Republican Party loses, and the nation loses. Unlike the big countries of Western Europe and Japan, the U.S. benefits from immigration that keeps our population rising. (In fact, harking back to the Catholic Mass, roughly 45 million unborn children have been killed since the abortion wave was launched by Roe v. Wade in the early 1970's. We have an opportunity to replace this extraordinary loss of human life with hard headed but compassionate and economically sound immigration reform).

Incidentally, I wrote the article for Human Events when that newspaper awarded Congressman Pence its "2005 Man of the Year" award. I know Mike. The man is a wonderful, Reagan-thinking conservative. His life is governed by religious values, a belief in a strong national defense, and a pro-growth approach to low taxes and less government spending.

This Tancredo-Buchanan backstabbing does this rising GOP star a great disservice. If allowed to go unanswered, it would represent another devastating blow to the Republican Party.

While the Pence-Hutchinson immigration reform idea is not perfect, it does represent a useful discussion point for future action. As diplomatically and kindly as possible, with all the greatest respect for differing points of view, let me just say that the Tancredo-Buchanan attack on Mike Pence is nuttier than a fruitcake.

"the Tancredo crowd, which includes Pat Buchanan, just wants border security to keep out immigrants.

NOT TRUE: They want to keep "ILLEGAL" immigrants OUT.

"They also want to deport all illegal or undocumented immigrants"

Really? While I agree with this concept, have NEVER heard or read either Tancredo or Buchanan advance such a position.

They manage to completely ignore the economics of the problem, whereby Mexicans seeking higher paying jobs in the U.S. rather than the faltering Mexican economy can produce are coming here to work."

Of course, they are only coming here to do the "work American don't want to, or CANNOT do."

After all, living conditions in the U.S. are a lot better for all but the richest people than they are in Mexico.

Absolutely. And even more so, in Bangladesh, Somalia, Darfur, and dozens of other countries.

Why not "invite" these millions of poor, downtrodden, illiterate, uneducated and unsilled workers here as well? I'm certain they would probably help "improve" our economy by working for even LESS than bidd business wants to get away with paying the poor hapless Mexicans they now exploit.

"Even unskilled American workers benefit from lower priced goods and services generated by these new Mexican worker-immigrants.

Of course they do. We ALL benefit from paying only $2.00/lb for tomatoes as opposed to $2.25 and maybe new homes are a few thousand dollars cheaper, however, I wonder how many "unskilled" American workers are thrilled with the prospect of having these "undocumented immigrants" come here and take jobs from them by working for much less an hour?

More-so, how can it benefit the lower class, by facilitating so many employers in paying lower wages than they would normally be required to, in order to attract and keep the help they need?

"I reminded him that I also worship at the church of Catholic Mass, as do the vast majority of the Mexican immigrants. These faith-based folks would create a new blue-collar middle class that is sorely needed in this country if we let them.

I'm a Catholic as well, and sadly, among my relatives, friends and other Catholics I know, MOST tend to be "liberal" and vote (OVERWHELMINGLY) for Dummies.

Is increasing the D's voting base by 12-20 million a good thing Mr. K?

Former Sen. Alan Simpson of Wyoming, the co-author of the 1986 Simpson-Mazzoli immigration reform bill, has said the failure of that bill was a function of the lack of an ID card system.

I see. The "failure" of the Bill was NOT in the failure to apply the "enforcement" provision of the Bill, but something as benign as a "lack of an ID card system."

So simplistic and so utter balderdash, which only a moron (or illegal alien/pro amnesty apologist) would embrace.

If these guys win, the Republican Party loses, and the nation loses"

Au contraire Mr. K. If "these guys" win, we and the Country wins and the Republican Party regains some of its core beliefs and values

Unlike the big countries of Western Europe and Japan, the U.S. benefits from immigration that keeps our population rising

Naturally, we should emulate countries like France, where at the present time, 10% of the population is Muslim and it has been predicted that within 20 years, France WILL BE, a "Muslim Country."

So, why not just bend over, accept the "inevitable," and consider the U.S.A. as being a "Hispanic Country" in 30 - 40 years?

While the Pence-Hutchinson immigration reform idea is not perfect, it does represent a useful discussion point for future action.

Ah, the "operative" word, here is "discussion." Nothing wrong with that. However, to rush into an "All or Nothing" (Comprehensive Bill--a.k.a/Shamnesty) is an absolute absurdity.

Why does it have to be an and/or?

Will Congress NOT be in session in a year, two or ten?

Why can we NOT address border security NOW and in a year or two or five, go back and address the illegal aliens who are living here now/then?

The reason being that by then, instead of having 12-20 million illegals, there will probably be 25-40 million and it will be "game over"--no hits, no runs, and plenty of errors.

As diplomatically and kindly as possible, with all the greatest respect for differing points of view, let me just say that the Tancredo-Buchanan attack on Mike Pence is nuttier than a fruitcake.

And you, Mr. Kudlow, are naive, misguided, misinformed, or worse yet, a pro-illegal alien, pro-amnesty, dupe, and apologist and that's putting it mildly.

Tripe. The "economy" does not supersede the rule of law. Neither does it overrule right and wrong. If a person has broken the law, violated our sovereign borders, stolen public services, committed fraud and any other number of illegal acts to come, live, and work here ILLEGALLY they should not ever be rewarded with ANYTHING other than quick deportation, fines, penalties, and possibly a jail cell.

The widespread malfeasance in enforcing our laws from the President all the way down to local law enforcement has lead to MILLIONS of illegal aliens within our borders. Those illegal aliens not only march in our streets in events organized by anti-American marxist groups the are also responsible for a vastly disproportionate amount of crime. And that includes violent crime. Rep. Steve King (R-IA) estimates that crimes committed by illegal aliens are responsible for more than 9,000 American deaths annually and also the sexual abuse of almost 3,000 American children.

No economic or any other argument will convince me that rewarding these criminal invaders with anything except the penalties they have earned is the right thing to do. We've already experienced the negative consequences of ignoring their criminal activity for decades. What result can be expected if we actually start openly rewarding that criminal activity? It won't be beneficial to the "economy", I can tell you that.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.