Posted on 09/24/2005 2:11:22 PM PDT by mwfsu84
Listening to a conservative radio talk show today, I heard the host bash Bush and the GOP on their lax immigration policies. He stated that this issue threatened to tear the GOP apart. And he isn't the first person to make that prediction.
I'm a staunch Republican who would hate to see such a dire prediction come true. I also admit in many ways I share Bush's views on the subject. Since he has done a poor job defending his views, I'd like to explain my own. Let's have a discussion and see if we can find some common ground. Or perhaps I am misinformed on the subject, in which case, I'd appreciate your input. I'd like to find some common ground...because I don't want this issue to destroy the conservative movement. Only civil responses, please. I didn't come here to fight.
I've always believed that America should be open to anyone who wants to work hard, live in peace. And the vast majority of immigrants who cross our southern border fit that description. I know several small business owners who hire them - both legally, by the way. They say they can't find Americans do the jobs they hire immigrants for. And these owners are extremely pleased with the immigrants' work ethic. They bust their tails and never complain.
Hispanic immigrants, for the most part, place a high value on their families. That's why many of them come here. A high percentage of them are practicing Catholics.
In my view, these are not the kind of people we should be turning away.
As I understand it, those who oppose illegal immigration do so for the following reasons:
1. It's in violation of the law.
2. Illegal immigrants use up services they don't pay for - schools, health care, etc.
3. Open borders leave us vulnerable to terrorists.
4. Many immigrants are violent criminals.
There is some validity to all of these arguments. Here are my responses.
1. Most of the immigrants here are in violation of the law. But like Prohibition in the 1920's, or the 55 mile an hour speed limit, it's a law that can't be effectively enforced.
We share an 1800 mile border with Mexico. What kind of barrier - physical or human - would possibly suffice to seal us off?
2. It's true that many Hispanics use services they didn't pay for. And I would hold their employers accountable for that. Employers should be the ones to report immigrants, taking out taxes from their payrolls. If not, the government should shut those businesses down, or fine them severely.
3. Open borders leave us vulnerable to terrorism. While I agree with this to an extent, I'd be more worried of terrorists crossing our border with Canada...a much longer border than the one with Mexico, by the way.
As I see it, there are two ways we can fight terrorists. We can seal off our borders, which is a defensive move. Or we can go on the offenisve, as we're doing in Afghanistan and Iraq right now. But we can't do both. Doing both would be cost prohibitive.
I would suggest the reason we haven't suffered a major terrorists attack in this country in over four years - despite our open borders - is because our strategy of going on the offensive is working.
4. Many illegal immigrants are violent criminals. I have no doubt this is true, but I'd like to know what the percentage is. As I said before, I believe the vast majority of individuals don't fit this description.
Hispanics are already the largest minority in America. Who they vote for in the future will determine which party stays in power.
Hate to pop your bubble. But it is all those anchor babies who are pushing up the birthrate in the USA.
Supply is a function of price. When illegals will do it for 10 bucks less, you have a huge economic incentive going on. Without illegals, the price for lower skilled labor would go up, and become more capital intensive. Income gaps would decline, along probably with the nominal growth rate.
1. Change disincentives for employment. I'm an IT consultant. I'm heavily recruited by companies desperate for IT workers. I freepmail these opportunities to underemployed/unemployed conservatives. I get back replies that the unemployed conservative paid into unemployment comp and he's going to get his money's worth out of it. Often it is a 2 income family. One spouse goes on unemployment comp while the other one works. When the eligibility runs out, they swap so each can be a stay-at-home-parent for part of their kids' childhood.
Solution. Create a "rainy day savings account" RDSA. The employer puts ALL benefits including health insurance, 401k/retirement, workers comp, unemployment comp, etc into the GROSS PAY. The employee designates an RDSA that is a direct withdrawl from his paycheck and direct deposit in the RDSA, no different than the direct deposit of his NET pay into his checking account. The owner of the RDSA would have full control of how his money is spent. He could buy HMO or catastropic coverage. He could pay himself unemployment comp or save the money for a true rainy day. It is his money.
This would eliminate the disincentive the current system has for unemployed people to work. Why is it that unemployed people are unable to find work for 26 weeks... or whatever they are eligible for. But within hours of no longer being eligible for unemployment comp they are suddenly employed. I can recite numerous stories of this among both the unskilled and the skilled as I have many friends in both groups.
2. Education. Our public schools and colleges produce people who have a smaller English vocabulary than the typical Indian IT worker. (The Indian with a heavy accent and "poor communication skills" is paid less despite having a larger vocabulary.)
Out public schools, colleges...our society produce people who cannot think logically about cause and effect. I notice it at church. When I was a kid, the hymns of Wesley, Simpson, etal were the outline of a sermond. Stanza 1, 2 and 3 are the points of the sermond. The chorus pulls the points together with a common refrain/conclusion. Now, the "praise songs" have no logic. "I praise God. God blesses me." Totally self-absorbed. Empty of any external meaning.
The IT worker shortage is becoming worse. Big business has found that VB and Java and client server programmers cannot handle the business logic of COBOL programmers. Furthermore, the VB and Java programmers turn up their nose at any technology that is proven, and not an unproven fad on the cutting edge. The result is that a large portion of the IT programming work done by Indians, both here as immigrants who overstayed their visa, and outsourced over there, is the core business logic that young US citizens are especially not qualified to code. This becomes more so every day as the older generation that can think logically retires or dies off.
Solution. Fix our education system. Teach the 3 Rs. Omit the Drivers Ed, Diversity (gay acceptance) Training, Environmental Awareness, and other soft subjects starting in kindergarten and going through every level.
3. Quality, not Quantity, should be the Immigration Criteria focus. Currently both sides of the immigration debate argue over numbers of immigrants. Over quotas. We should oppose quotas.
We should judge a person (immigrant wannabe) by the content of his character. Not by his number in some line. People who have undesireable records back home should not be allowed in. People who have not applied themselves in school to learn in either their own language or English should not be allowed in.
Currently, the attitude in some 3d world countries is that "I don't have to apply myself in school. I don't have to behave myself and obey the law as a teenager in my hometown. I can always leave and go the the USA." Changing the entrance criteria will dramatically change the culture for the better in the sending countries to the mutual benefit of both countries, and of the residents of both countries.
Specifically the policy of the Nixon administration should be reversed. John Mitchell and his INS director did a power grab to take power away from the local police and centralize it in the INS. Chicago's mayor Daley fought that policy in US court and lost. The US Court made the Nixon policy permanent. That policy effectively prevents any official except the INS from asking a person's immigration status. When the local police stop a person for trespassing or jaywalking, or murder, they cannot get involved in his immigration status. The only thing they can do is refer it to the INS (now ICE or whatever) bureaucracy.
Local US police used to get and implement extradition requests from local police in Mexico for a felon who was wanted back home. Nixon and the US Court order now prevent that cooperation.
We need to use some common sense here. We need to empower the local police to "take care" of the undesireables.
4. .....There are many points like this that are specific, pragmatic, recognize the reality of the situation and could be implemented in a win-win strategy for everyone. But this one post is way too long. More later.
"Fifty years ago, the public toilets of America were cleaner than they are today"
I was amazed at the ability of the night janitorial staff at the office building I work at to ignore the toilet clogged with crap for 4 days in a row. In a wonderful demonstration of their hard work ethic, they made no attempt to do anything about it.
I finally had to call facilities who sent the day janitor to clean it up.
I'm all for letting the law of supply and demand determine our actual need for foreign workers. But whatever the level of need we have for foreign workers, those foreign workers should be required to come to the United States through legal channels. Illegal aliens should be banned from working at any jobs here, and they should also be banned from applying for any guest worker program.
The same kind of barrier Israel's constructing along the border with the West Bank. It's been nothing short of fantastic in reducing unauthorized border crossings to a small fraction of what they were. And the price tag was only something like $1 million per mile. The fence in the San Diego sector was build for a similar cost. Extending it across the entire border could be done for less than one half of one percent of one year's federal budget. We could easily afford to do that and still fight the WOT abroad.
Although there would still be people finding various ways to slip through, it would reduce it drastically. As it goes down further, it could have a snowball effect, as the reduced odds of successful entry would dissuade many aliens from attempting it in the first place.
Do you personally know illegals like I do? Do you have conversations with them and know what they earn? What makes you think it is all price?
When insurance companies replaced siding and roofs on thousands houses due to hail, ads were in the paper, the unemployment office, the social service agencies ... no experience necessary, no discrimination against excons, just physically able to climb a ladder and work on a roof ... for $25/hr.
I talked to roofing company owners who wanted to practice affirmative action for citizens. No non-Hispanics applied. Only Hispanic citizens, legals and illegals applied (often same extended family with different status).
In a city hundreds of miles away, carpet needed to be replaced in a large office complex, a multi-year project. Costly attempts to implement affirmative action for citizens through the unemployment office, UrbanLeague and social service agencies as well as ads in the paper. No experience necessary, just willingness to work on one's knees. Only Hispanics applied. $25/hr.
I mentioned it to a young citizen (who owes me money). He said "I don't do Spic work." These stories abound.
Illegal IT workers, legal IT workers and citizens ... my co-workers have the same pay range as me, ofthen six figures. Immigrants who lack communication skills are often paid less. (I often have no idea what they are saying in a meeting. I say: "email me". Their email is perfect English and I understand.) At least they can think logically, which is more than many products of our public school system.
I'm not saying utopia is here. Problems exist. But the sky-is-falling-chicken-little approach is no way to win a debate. (Also my first hand experience is limited to the 3d largest Hispanic city in the US, Chicago, the Midwest, and a little bit of Texas.)
"When, exactly, do they become illegal?"
This intends to illustrate our inconsistency. We apply labels convenient to our agenda.
Actions like murder, robbery, rape are evil regardless of whether they are legal or illegal. Just ask us pro-lifers about "legal" abortion.
Laws such as speed-limit intend to preserve order and prevent negligent homicide.
So what is the difference if a person moves from Texas to Illinois or from Michoacan to Illinois? Does either move commit an evil act such as murder, robbery or rape? Does either act endanger order?
When an (illegal) immigrant finds a job in Illinois, is he "stealing" that job away from a citizen? If so, from which specific citizen is he stealing that job? Until the job is "filled" does not the employer "own" that job?
Should there be affirmative action and preferential hiring of citizens? In fact there is. I've known many employers who first offer preferential hiring to citizens and only resort to (illegal) immigrants when they cannot find citizens willing to work.
In fact, it could be argued that preventing an employer from hiring willing workers and forcing him to either relocate his plant overseas or go out of business is a theft of that employer's property.
You say you're not a speeder till they catch you.
So what is the difference if a person moves from Texas to Illinois or from Michoacan to Illinois? Does either move commit an evil act such as murder, robbery or rape? Does either act endanger order?
You're comparing the movement of citizens with that of illegal, undocumented aliens?
When an (illegal) immigrant finds a job in Illinois, is he "stealing" that job away from a citizen? If so, from which specific citizen is he stealing that job? Until the job is "filled" does not the employer "own" that job?
Should there be affirmative action and preferential hiring of citizens? In fact there is. I've known many employers who first offer preferential hiring to citizens and only resort to (illegal) immigrants when they cannot find citizens willing to work.
You're asking me if businesses should feel obligated to hire citizens of the country in which they operate?
I withdraw my argument on the grounds that your world view is looney.
Is it possible that the "bashing" you describe is nothing more than the free expression of political dissent?
There is a very good chance that the host was certainly correct in his/her opinion that by ignoring the issue our leadership is putting Americans at risk, and undermining the principles on which the nation was founded.
"He stated that this issue threatened to tear the GOP apart."
Indeed.
Those who choose party over country will ultimately become isolated.
You're wasting your time. I stopped even responding. I'd change my voter registration except I vote in gop primaries.
If they don't, I'll either vote 3rd party or for some sorry Democrat (hey, might as well get it over, right).
There's another option.
Indeed, I call it the: "Take election day off and go to the racetrack option"
That's right!
I propose that everyone who has had it with the gop and their "hard left" philosophies of big government, global socialism, and wearing the knee-pads for el presidents foxx, get involved!
We will have tens of thousands calling in sick and spending the day at the bar or racetrack, getting pissed, and refusing to vote for another "lesser of two evils".
Cheers!
75% of inmates in California jails are illegal aliens. The jails are busting out at the seams over here. The Sheriff Baca, is releasing them early because no place to put them.
Check out: www.americanpatrol.com then check www.aztlan.net. This guy is the one of the most racist people you will ever meet (and antisemite.) Him and his followers want anyone not of Mexican descent to leave immediately. This land is theirs by default.
They have a numerous stories about illegal aliens and family values. Something about family values doesn't stop at the Rio Grande?
If you still don't get why so many of us are against it. Come to Los Angeles. Find out about (La Raza, the race) Lulac, mecha etc. They hate everything not Mexican. This is spreading throughout our country. This is not multiculturalism.
Bob - where do you get your data?
I would strongly recommend against that. Voting for a third party like the Constitution Party sends a much stronger message to those in charge about what they're doing wrong. Simply sitting the election out puts you into the same undifferentiated mass with the malcontented socialists and nihilists. It doesn't give any kind of clear signal to the powers-that-be.
I would also add to your list the fact that many employers who USED to pay several types of payroll taxes when they employed Americans are now EVADING many of those same taxes by hiring illegals. The net effect is that the tax burden is even heavier on those business people (dumb enough?) to still keep trying to things the right way as well as the fact the employers hiring illegals can also pay sub-par wages knowing full well the taxpayers will get stuck with a large % of their employees living expenses.
"To argue the he is not a "speeder" until he is caught is the most childish thing I've ever seen posted on FR."
I think it was Bart Simpson (of the Simpsons TV show) who said (and there was a T-shirt with Bart Simpson on it that said this too):
"I didn't do it, nobody saw me do it, you can't prove a thing".
If you are in favor of Amnesty, consider that amnesty begets more immigration. And new waves of immigrants will always be willing to work for less money.
One problem leads to another...sigh.
sw
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.