A Common Sense Solution: Attrition Through Enforcement

Insider Advantage Georgia ^ | 12/11/07 | D.A. King

[Delacon]

On the illegal immigration crisis, it is likely time - again - for a respectful reminder about false choices and an as-yet untried and reasonable solution.

The transparent argument from those who will never relent on the amnesty-again agenda is that because we cannot round up and deport more than 20 million illegal aliens by sundown tomorrow (false choice “A”), the only other option is to legalize them as part of some contrived and disingenuous “Comprehensive Immigration Reform” program (false choice “B”)

I know what the reader must be thinking: Why is he bringing that up again?
The amnesty attempt of 2007 was defeated in the U.S. Senate in June!

Here is why: Just weeks after this year’s attempt at forcing the now-not-so trusting American people to accept the legalization option, another nationwide push began to prepare them for the next one – but not until the elections are over.

But, for the “legalization now, legalization tomorrow and legalization forever” crowd, there is a rather inconvenient truth emerging in news stories from around the country.

Whether headed for other areas in the U.S. or back to their home countries, nearly every week Americans paying attention can read news reports from places where the law is actually being enforced about illegal aliens giving up and leaving for more hospitable places to look for a better life.

Simply put - again: Enforcement works.

For many in the amnesty industry, the fervent hope is that either many Americans don’t realize that the legalization option was tied - and failed - more than twenty-one years ago, or they can be convinced that Albert Einstein was wrong when he remarked that one definition of insanity was “doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results”.

It is past time that pundits, editors and candidates for political office begin to recognize and discuss the third and seldom mentioned option: Attrition through enforcement.

It doesn’t take another Einstein to recognize that the idea of gradual attrition of the illegal population through the enforcement of existing laws while at the same time stopping illegal entries by securing our borders – at any cost - will work. It simply takes good old-fashioned common sense.

For decades, common sense seems to be in short supply when it comes to illegal employment and the illegal immigration it produces. Illegal immigration isn’t just wrong because it is illegal – it is illegal because it is wrong.

The national disaster created by the fact that Washington has failed to secure American borders or enforce our immigration and employment laws did not happen overnight. It has taken more than 30 years to get where we are today.

We should all stop looking for an overnight solution. There isn’t one. It may take as long to solve the problem as it did to create.

Not many can argue that border security is not a fundamental duty of their federal government. Neither can anyone reasonably argue against the equal application of American laws. Put the two logical concepts together and we can watch the illegal immigration problem begin to shrink instead of grow with each passing day.

The topic of illegal immigration has been labeled as the “third rail of politics” by many in the media in the now very active election campaigns. Not the case on the streets of America or at office water-cooler conversations. The American people rightly expect the issue to be addressed with something more than the empty rhetoric of the last two decades.

Candidates for office - on all levels - should heed the common sense of the American people and their ever increasing education on the topic and realize that a growing number of voters will not accept the false choices being offered on illegal immigration.

American voters should demand that we stop the insanity of repeating the mistakes of the past and expecting different results. Enthusiastic enforcement of the existing laws seems to be the only thing we haven’t tried. A slow but steady decrease in the illegal population is the obvious reasonable and workable solution.

This long time American will be listening closely for the concept of attrition through enforcement to be one of the first things mentioned in political candidate’s campaign speeches.

I suspect that I will be in a very large group of common sense voters.

---

King is president of the Dustin Inman Society, a Cobb-based non-profit coalition dedicated to educating the public on illegal immigration.

[Delacon]

Mr. King's organization Dustin Inman Society supports deportation of illegals. I am opposed to this with the obvious exception of illegals who break any laws other than their first one which is being here. I think advocating deportation hurts the ultimate goal of eliminating illegal immigration more than it helps because I think fewer people would support such a strong anti-illegal policy. Grabbing up whole families and putting them on southbound buses is heartless. Most come here for a better life. They've made a mistake in doing that by breaking our laws aided by our own government's decades long policy of saying "Its ok". We are at fault as well. I want them to know through our laws and actions that they are not welcome here. I want a policy that makes conditions such that illegals leave of their own accord. That said, I liked this article because it covers attrition through enforcement very well.

[beelzepug]

I can’t imagine you’re going to find too many in your corner here.

[rb22982]

Get them out anyway you can. Unless they become ineligible for ANY benefit (welfare, ‘free’ hospital visits, etc) permanently.

[StnCldTruth]

No you can’t deport them all, but that would be a start.
Fining employers won’t work, that’ll get passed on to the consumer, prison time however cannot be passed on !

[Farnham]

Something IS happening.

I work for a large corp. The building where I work has about 1000 employees, and the contract custodial staff (about 25 I would guess) has gone from being all Hispanic all the time for at least the last 5 years - to no Hispanics. In less that a month.

[Just A Nobody]

Grabbing up whole families and putting them on southbound buses is heartless.

BooHoo! It is no more "heartless" than putting a father in prison, leaving his young wife and 2 small children to fend for themselves, simply because he robbed a bank or a gas station. Gimme a break.

Many have been screaming "ENFORCE THE LAW" for years.
The only reason there is talk, and that is all it is, about attrition is because the powers that be were shot down so thoroughly on amnesty. As soon as we are preoccupied with the alleged attrition, the b-turds on the hill will sneak through an amnesty.

[Just A Nobody]

prison time however cannot be passed on !

If they are in prison they cost the taxpayers more than if we just let them roam around illegally.

1) Build the fence and STOP illegal entry by securing the border
2) Deport them swiftly when ever and where ever they are found
3) Cut off any and all social services
4) End the insane anchor baby policy
5) Fine employers who hire illegals
6) End of problem

It is as easy as 1-2-3 + 4-5-6

[StnCldTruth]

I’ll agree with 1-4...don’t think the fines will work. And I was refering to prison time for the employers, but still agree with 1-4...= )

[Travis McGee]

[Delacon]

“Fining employers won’t work, that’ll get passed on to the consumer”

I disagree. For one, if fines are leveled against all businesses and the fines are large enough then fines exceed the profit made by businesses that hire illegals over legal employees. It isn’t like some unavoidable tax that all businesses get hit with and can pass onto consumers. They get to choose to hire legal employees. Will an all legal workforce cost more than one composed of legal and illegal employees? The vote is not in. When you take in the welfare, crime, societal disruption, etc, the costs of having illegal workers may outweigh the so called benefits to consumers. Bottom line though, I don’t condone lawlessness. I am willing to pay for preventing it. How bout you?

[StnCldTruth]

As you say “if they are large enough and if they apply to all” then yeah it could work and would support it...
however...it is the “guvmit” we’re talking about

[Just A Nobody]

And I was refering to prison time for the employers

Ooooops! Sorry! ;*)

Let's just go with 1-5 and give it a try in that order. Can't hurt...may help. (But I do see your point)

[neverdem]

Fox News Just Claims Fred Thompson Hit Illegal Immigration Question Out of the Park!

Thompson to Announce Immigration Policy

A major part of the plan will be to reduce the number of illegal immigrants by increasing enforcement of existing law.

Attrition through Enforcement

Forget this stuff about being mean. One amnesty was enough. We just keep getting played for chumps. They have to know we are finally serious.

[Delacon]

“however...it is the “guvmit” we’re talking about”

Actually I don’t think this is so much the guvmit in the “we know whats best for the people” sense. Its the guvmit “we like big business money” sense. Our ole conservative ally is only conservative by convenience. If libs held to a pro-big-business position on most things, then businesses would vilify conservatism. Big-business is amoral and apolitical. Bite them in the ass on illegal immigration and they will fall in line. Its sorta like pollution at the turn of the last century. Big business didn’t like controls on pollution because it played hell with their profit margin. They had to be forced to bring their practices in line with what was acceptable to the people. I’d add that the people had to be convinced that business practices were unacceptable. Like now, the cost to consumers was involved. ILLEGAL immigration is the pollution, in a business sense, at the turn of this century.

[kabar]

I am opposed to this with the obvious exception of illegals who break any laws other than their first one which is being here.

You are still talking about deporting millions of people who have committed ID theft, phony SS numbers, failure to pay taxes, etc.

[NewRomeTacitus]

The illegals we force to go back to their countries are dis-inconvenienced by a setback while being sent back to the systems they were brought up in. When comparing that discomfort to our own citizens striving for a living wage to sustain a living - no contest. We should NEVER support allowing illegal aliens here for any reason. Illegals are here as criminals on the very basis of being here illegally (a concept I can’t understand Democrats not understanding). Watching liberal propagandists consistently bypassing that fact while painting the invaders as misunderstood victims convinces me that Democrats are not fit to lead.

[Delacon]

“You are still talking about deporting millions of people who have committed ID theft, phony SS numbers, failure to pay taxes, etc.”

You mean ID fraud which includes phony SS numbers and NO I am not talking about deporting anyone. Those broken laws are part and parcel with them being here because they were almost invited here by our welcoming government and businesses. Legally that is called entrapment. Legally if one is entrapped then they are let go and encouraged to not do whatever they did again. Don’t “round em up” but make em go.

[kabar]

You mean ID fraud which includes phony SS numbers and NO I am not talking about deporting anyone. Those broken laws are part and parcel with them being here because they were almost invited here by our welcoming government and businesses.

LOL. Now you are moving the goal posts from your initial statement that, "Mr. King's organization Dustin Inman Society supports deportation of illegals. I am opposed to this with the obvious exception of illegals who break any laws other than their first one which is being here." Most are committing more than ID fraud. Tax evasion is a separate crime. Working while in a illegal status is a crime.

Now you say you are not in favor of deporting anyone by stating, "NO I am not talking about deporting anyone." I guess that includes drug dealers, murderers, and common criminals. What is your position? No deportation at any time?

They were not "almost invited" here by our government. Just because the USG has done a poor job of enforcing the laws of this country doesn't mean that we are inviting people to break them. We are also doing a poor job of combatting the entry of illegal drugs into this country, but that does not mean that the drug smugglers should be excused for breaking the law. The very fact that you can suggest that we should excuse the illegal aliens for breaking into this country by not enforcing our deportation laws demonstrates the corrosive effect illegal immigration is having on the rule of law.

Legally that is called entrapment. Legally if one is entrapped then they are let go and encouraged to not do whatever they did again. Don’t “round em up” but make em go.

Your reasoning and logic leave a lot to be desired. I guess if I leave my back door unlocked and a thief enters my home and I apprehend him, the police and the courts should let him go because my leaving the back door unlocked should be considered "entrapment." What a bunch of horsesh*t.

[GOPJ]

It doesn’t take another Einstein to recognize that the idea of gradual attrition of the illegal population through the enforcement of existing laws while at the same time stopping illegal entries by securing our borders – at any cost - will work. It simply takes good old-fashioned common sense. For decades, common sense seems to be in short supply when it comes to illegal employment and the illegal immigration it produces. Illegal immigration isn’t just wrong because it is illegal – it is illegal because it is wrong.

BINGO

[gubamyster]

ping