Posted on 03/25/2013 7:28:46 PM PDT by neverdem
Over the weekend, Michael Barone posited that, contra claims by Steve Sailer and Mickey Kaus, he doesn’t think massive Mexican immigration will resume once the economy rebounds and if we pass an amnesty. James Pethokoukis from AEI made the same point, without really any elucidation, during the podcast we did (with Kaus and Treviño) at Ricochet a while back.
Barone points to a recent Gallup survey that finds 5 million Mexicans saying they want to move here, compared to 22 million telling Pew in 2005 they’d come here as guest workers if they could. He further points to Puerto Rico, where he claims emigration to the U.S. abruptly ended decades ago.
Sailer responds that robust immigration from Puerto Rico is actually ongoing. And I addressed the “Mexican immigration is over” narrative in some detail over at The National Interest last year. But I think the most important point is this, from Sailer’s response:
Why don’t we wait five years and see what happens with immigration before passing some massive immigration “reform” law based on suppositions about how Fortunately, It Can’t Happen Again?
Simple prudence suggests that we simply can’t know whether Mexico has permanently left its mass emigration phase until we see what happens during an economic expansion in the U.S. Deferring any consideration of a huge amnesty is also necessary to see if the administration’s claims that the border is secure are true., since there are lots of other places illegals come from, too; compared to Honduras, for instance, Mexico looks like Beverly Hills.
This is sort of what Rand Paul was getting at in saying that Congress would have to “certify” that the borders are secure annually for five years. But if I understood that part of his proposal correctly, the illegal aliens would get legal status after the first such vote, rendering subsequent votes irrelevant, since there’s no chance whatsoever that the work cards, Social Security accounts, driver’s licenses, etc., given to “provisionally” amnestied illegals would ever be taken away.
Soothing predictions about the moderate and limited effect of proposed immigration changes have a poor track record, to say the least, as do predictions about large government-policy changes generally. Maybe the most spectacular misjudgment was Ted Kennedy’s assurances about the effects of the 1965 immigration law:
First, our cities will not be flooded with a million immigrants annually. Under the proposed bill, the present level of immigration remains substantially the same . . . Secondly, the ethnic mix of this country will not be upset . . . Contrary to the charges in some quarters, [the bill] will not inundate America with immigrants from any one country or area, or the most populated and deprived nations of Africa and Asia . . . In the final analysis, the ethnic pattern of immigration under the proposed measure is not expected to change as sharply as the critics seem to think. . . .
The bill will not flood our cities with immigrants. It will not upset the ethnic mix of our society. It will not relax the standards of admission. It will not cause American workers to lose their jobs.
Can’t get much wronger than that. Unless you look at predictions about the cost of another disastrous 1965 consequence of Goldwater’s defeat, the establishment of Medicare. As Cato reports:
When Medicare was launched in 1965, Part A was projected to cost $9 billion by 1990, but ended up costing $67 billion. When Medicaid’s special hospitals subsidy was added in 1987, it was supposed to cost $100 million annually, but it already cost $11 billion by 1992. When Medicare’s home care benefit was added in 1988, it was projected to cost $4 billion in 1993, but ended up costing $10 billion. Or consider that when Massachusetts Commonwealth Care was put into place in 2006, it was expected to cost about $725 million annually, but the expected cost for 2009 is now almost $1 billion.
And don’t forget Dick Cheney’s infamous Iraq prediction:
MR. RUSSERT: If your analysis is not correct, and we’re not treated as liberators, but as conquerors, and the Iraqis begin to resist, particularly in Baghdad, do you think the American people are prepared for a long, costly, and bloody battle with significant American casualties?
VICE PRES. CHENEY: Well, I don’t think it’s likely to unfold that way, Tim, because I really do believe that we will be greeted as liberators.
I’m not trying to say that my predictions are always right and everyone else’s are wrong. It could be that Barone is right that mass immigration from Mexico is over. But he himself acknowledges “the nontrivial possibility that I could be wrong.” Given that very real possibility, it would be irresponsible to go along with the president’s demand that Congress pass an immigration bill “as soon as possible.”
I’m sorry, I didn’t understand your point. Press one to speak spanish
The 57 states must collectively fight the federal gummint.
It’s that simple.
They have been floating that 11 million crap for the last 15 years when there is at least another million coming here every year.
There are at least 2 million of the bastards in Los Angeles alone.
Our ‘leaders’ sell citizenship for votes ... Jerks. Then they call us ‘racists’ if we object.
Here’s the solution - if we’re going to whore our country let’s use the money to pay down the debt. Rather than ‘giving it away cheap’ let’s charge people to be citizens. Highest bidders win.
Meo vamanoso for Switzerlando.
The solution to illegal aliens is simple.
Audit eveery business for their compliance of I-9 rules and fine the hell out of any employer hiring illegals including homeowners, cut off all welfare and medical care andfood stamps and they will self deport real quick.
They can either self deport or die in the street of starvation and I don’t care which!
Of course, someone will have to do the work they will no longer have to do.
Given the history of the last several amnestys, I would predict we will get 18-20 million after this amnesty.
“Will We Get Another 11 Million Illegals After An Amnesty?”
Gee, I dunno. But what usually happens when bad behavior is rewarded?
This issue alone proves the GOP elite are not on our side, the conservative side.
They could stop this. They will not. They know almost ALL of these people will vote Democrat and they are fine with it. They are in it with the Democrat leadership. Boner and Cantor doing their conservative black list and purge this year, continuing to approve spending, not saying anything about the idiocy of sequester cuts that Obama has made that could have cut other things less visible (ie like White House tours and regional FAA airport staff, instead could cut studies about why 3/4 of lesbians are obese and endless monkey studies)
Our leadership is Vichy Republicans. They are in freaking cahoots with the Democrats. Just biding their time, enjoying what little power they have, trying to gain media points appearing to cave and compromise, they are the proverbial fat girl desperately wanting the handsome guy to ask her to dance. The handsome guy (media) always dances with the cheerleader (libtards) and the RINOS cry why nobody likes them, they caved off their original position.
It’s pathetic. And they tell us WE’RE the problem. This year they can all go to hell.
“Over the weekend, Michael Barone posited that, contra claims by Steve Sailer and Mickey Kaus, he doesn’t think massive Mexican immigration will resume once the economy rebounds and if we pass an amnesty.”
Proof again that Michael Barone is a privileged class idiot. Although some of us have known that for a long time.
Of course.
Next silly question.
Reagan taught us that Democrats cannot be trusted to honor their word.
"This amnesty will give citizenship to only 1.1-1.3 million illegal aliens. We will secure the borders henceforth. We will never again bring forward another Amnesty Bill like this." Ted Kennedy, 1986
It is simply the base unit for illegal immigration and was calculated by estimating the number of illegal aliens living in LA County and then going to lunch.
The actual number of illegal aliens is somewhere between 11 million and 11 billion, give or take a chamaco or two.
Q "Hey Fred, how many illegal Mexicans in Cudahy?"
A" 'Bout 11 million."
Nothing will stop the influx of criminal trespassers until the benefit magnet is shut off.
Notice how some self deported themselves when the economy tanked and the benefits of being in the USA were not enough to keep them here.
When we continue to offer health care, food, education, jobs why on earth would they ever stop coming here?
If only their cesspool of country of origin clean up their act. Also makes me wonder why they want to stick to their culture. It seems to suck.
Misjudgment??!! Are you kidding me?!
That was one of the biggest, hugest, most humongous witting lies told in all of American history.
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.