That's the punch line to a classic joke; that's also a good description of our dilemma in trying to find a sensible policy on immigration. In my initial post on the May 1st demonstration in Seattle, I said that I was showing two atypical pictures. Below is a typical picture of the demonstrators in Seattle and, from everything I have read, the demonstrators in most other cities.
Notice the strollers in the picture? They were almost ubiquitous. And, if you wandered through the crowd, you could make eye contact with the kids in the strollers. Most were shy, as kids in strange places often are, but still smiled back, if you smiled at them. And their mothers, like mothers everywhere, were delighted if you admired their children.
Now picture those cute kids with their proud mothers, and then think about the problem of deporting illegal aliens — which is what many of those kids and their mothers are. We could deport them if there hundreds of them, perhaps even if there were thousands of them. But there are millions of them.
And now imagine how our "mainstream" media would cover that story, if the mass deportations were ordered by a Republican president. (Maybe even a Democratic president.) It isn't hard, is it? We'd be shown hard working families (but never criminals) being forced across the border by police, with kids crying and mothers weeping. Neighbors would be found to testify that those deported were fine, hard working people. And the political effects of such coverage are equally easy to imagine.
So a Republican president can't order mass deportations, and even a Democratic president would find it difficult. If we can't deport illegals in large numbers, then, broadly speaking, we have just two possible ways to deal with them. We can continue to tolerate the presence of millions who came here illegally, or we can find some way to regularize their presence. I think the latter is the better strategy, if it is combined with a much larger effort to control the borders and greater enforcement of laws against employing illegals.
In thinking about the right kind of strategy, we should think about the problem from the point of view of the person who is considering sneaking into the United States. We want to convince that person that his chances of staying in the United States are far better if he gets in line for some legal program than if he hires a "coyote" to get him across the border. That's difficult, but not impossible, especially if we make it far harder to cross the border illegally.
Many of us would prefer not to have a significant number of illegal aliens in this country. But if you look at those strollers and think about the politics of massive deportations, you will realize that we can't get there from here. Serious people will accept that and then look for the best, or perhaps I should say the least bad, policy from a set of unpleasant choices.
Cross posted at Jim Miller on Politics.
Posted by Jim Miller at May 08, 2006
04:58 PM | Email This
Everything must start with secure borders, or we just invite 12 million MORE into the country.
Posted by: Hoplophile on May 8, 2006 05:18 PMEnd the reason they come here.
End the social programs, the subsidies, and require all prospective employees to undergo a SSAN check... and if their number is bogus, call the INS and report them.
Employers ignoring such a law would forfeit their business.
ALL government agencies having reason to believe they're dealing with illegals would REPORT THEM TO INS.
Eliminate automatic citizenship for children born here of illegals. Actually hold governments, like those run by Queen Christine, responsible for wasting our tax dollars on illegals while we face a $75 million fine for illegal expenditures on their behalf.
We wouldn't have to deport ANYONE. If they COULD NOT WORK... they would leave of their own accord.
The President is wrong on this... and so are you.
Posted by: Hinton on May 8, 2006 05:37 PMBut, more to the point than just the strollers and the kids, is that these immigrants are doing jobs willingly for employers who are hiring them willingly. This is a good thing, this is capitalism and individual freedom. We've always been a nation of immigrants and there is no reason to stop that tradition. The immigrants would not come here if there were no jobs.
Thus the question is more about what we should do with the current immigrants. Since as you point out, mass deportation is not possible, we should instead register these immigrants and tax them and expect of them as we do our current citizens.
I understand the frustration with illegal immigration, particularly by those who have gone through the expensive and painstaking process of legal immigration. However the opportunity to turn back the 12 million immigrants who are already in the US passed long ago.
Posted by: Jeff B. on May 8, 2006 05:43 PMI also agree with the above, no more free government social services. They make citizens pay back welfare, why should illegals get it free?
No more drivers licenses without proof of citizenship. no more voter registrations without proof of citizenship.
These items would give incentive to actually getting in line and doing things the legal way. which of course we all welcome.
Posted by: dave on May 8, 2006 06:15 PMYour absolutely correct. Im not sure i can read anymore of this silly "oh well, theyre allready here, what can we do?" on this site.
Posted by: hookr23 on May 8, 2006 06:38 PMOutcry in Seattle - controlled by the Totalitarian Leftwing mafia - are you dreaming ? They love to harbor illegals and count their votes and keep getting their totalitarian socialist Democrats infesting as much local government as possible.
How can you stop it ? Try using a few stealth campaign tactics, like showing the photo of it over and over and expressing outrage to media outlets and then using the ballot box legally. Another way is to sign the initiative to split up King County and form Cascade County.
See http://www.cascadecounty.org.
Posted by: KS on May 8, 2006 08:37 PMAnd what did our ancestors do to immigrants? Do Mexican immigrants deserve less today than prieviously poorly treated Irish just because we now have a bunch of liberals that coddle to minorities? I agree, I don't want to see another new victim class demanding wage increases, etc. But, that's not the issue yet. They are not yet fully legal residents. I also agree with many who are frustrated with the oulandish displays of anti-American, pro-Mexican socialism, reconquista, etc. America is a place for those who want to come and adopt our, superior way of life. It's not a place for those who simply want to come for the money and then head home. After we do basic checks to weed out the socialists, the criminals, those with infectious diseases, terrorists, etc. the hard workers should be welcome.
All that said, we are still the beacon of freedom. Can you blame a legitimate would be immigrant for wanting to come here? What about the Mexicans who come here and have no intention of going home. They are here to make a better life. That's American, and that's individual freedom when they enter into an mutually agreeable and voluntary contract of work with an employer. Freedom doesn't come from your current citizenship, it's an inalienable right, remember? Do we punish the good immigrants for the sake of the bad? What makes a good immigrant? Is it just because a guy from say, England, paid a bunch of money to go through the system that he has any more or less desire or status to become an American than the poor migrant who crosses our southern border?
Domestic Isolation, or worse the blocking of legitimate work as a fair trade of value for value is far worse and far more un-American than any whining victim class that tries to exploit our country. And don't we have plenty of minorities who are already playing that game and are American? Shouldn't we worry about punishing those folks first before we assume that Mexicans will be the same? Do Asians typically come here for the handout or for hard work?
It's not such an easy dismissive issue because for every socialist reconquista protestor out marching over the past couple months, there were 50 hard working illegals who stayed at their jobs and who continued to perform valuable service, for our economy. Let's get 'em on the books.
I tell you what. I'll take 100 hard-working illegals any day over some of the existing US citizens who sit around on welfare and vote for Democrats.
Mexico has a system of feudalism, run by an oligarchy of families. Each major industry in the country is dominated by a monopoly, which is owned by one of these families. Government pretends to be socialist, but is in bed with these oligarchs. These monopolies stiffle the economy of Mexico, virtually eliminate innovation, reduce employment (and wages), and raise prices.
What Mexico needs is some good old anti-trust law with teeth in it. And the US government should start insisting on it.
That is the only way to stop illegal immigrants. The rest of the "choices" outlined here are just wishful thinking.
Posted by: BananaLand on May 8, 2006 09:36 PMOkay Jeff...what should our immigration policy be?
Posted by: South County on May 8, 2006 10:34 PMAnd I agree with Bannana, Mexico's government is a huge part of the problem. But the same is true for every bad government the world over, Mexico just happens to be immediately adjacent on a very permeable border. We do see people fleeing 2nd and 3rd world governments all the time. To the extent that any nation has not embraced capitalism and individual freedom protected by law, is to the extent that there is oppression, in many cases slaughter and the conditions set up for people to flee for a better world. Sometimes it's only to Europe, but if they can get to the US, they will come. Of course we have to encourage the rule of law, individual freedome and capitalism eleswhere to ease the influx to the US, but that's not going to happen overnight. And even still, we will always be a desireable place as the first nation to truly embrace individual freedom and capitalism.
And that's good news. We can't be afraid of immigration. Capitalism depends on growth. Immigration to fill new jobs that are the result of new wealth building is all a good sign that capitalism is working well. The influx of Mexicans is a huge sign that all is well.
Now I will couch that with my earlier statements above. Obviously, we want to try and limit the arrival of terrorists, criminals, reconquista socialists, those with disease, etc. We have to have some limits.
But, and to answer your question, beyond that, we should have an open immigration policy. It's got to have teeth. It's got to be well organized. There must some cost to come into the country, but it should not take years and years to get here if one is of good standing and one really wants to be an American. In essence, this is what our policy has always been. Only in recent decades have we limited the influx. And even with limitations, people still come here in droves. People year for freedom. It's a universal and unalienable right. And, it's the essence of the USA. We should be proud of that, and we should allow those who truly want to join us as good law abiding, hard working Americans, to do so.
A couple more things. There should still be a long wait period for naturalization, complete with all of the tests, the mastery of English, etc. If you really want it that bad, you have to earn the title of American Citizen. But, that should not limit the opportunity to come here and begin the journey provided one is of good stature as above.
Now, it's obviously all complicated by the current situtation. What about all the people who paid thousands to migrate legally under the current archaic rules? Rules that have become yet another messy government revenue source. That's why I think our best policy would be to secure the borders, then grant limited amnesty for a fee. The fee would be enough to put a decent hurdle of desire in place to weed out the opportunists who have no intention of staying in the US. Also, we would require mandatory documentation of all illegals, or as soon as they were discovered, they would be deported, regardless of how long they had managed to evade registration. I think that is the key. Strict enforcement of documentation and registration of all immigrants within a reasonable grace period. But we have to secure the border for this to even begin to work. And then we would still have a large immigration from all other countries looking to come to America as well.
Within reason, there is room for everyone here. If we make it a priority to phase people in sync with the wealth building, there will be plenty of future growth. Just look at the DOW over the last 100 years to get an idea of future growth.
All this said, it's an enormously complex issue. I really resent the socialist Democrats and Progressives exploiting this issue for short term political goals, etc. But we cannot continue on our current course or the problem will only get larger and all of the cries from the right to enforce the current laws are simply not going to happen. It's bad for business.
Most of all, we must understand that there should never be fear of Capitalism, Freedom and the American Spirit. The proof is everywhere around us. Our technology, longevity, tolerance, freedom, hapiness, free time, etc. By any metric, the US is the greatest country on earth. And we got this way by embracing indviduals and allowing them to come to this country and contribute to our ideas and traditions to make the wealth engine more efficient and better for us all.
It's not a fixed pie. Trust in the invisible hand!
Posted by: Jeff B. on May 8, 2006 11:17 PMThere is no need to deport so many. Read the policy proposals on attrition and you should gain a practical reasonable view on how millions will go back of their own accord.
I will outline the steps:
1. Secure the border so that any illegal alien that goes back across the border will have a near zero chance of ever returning in illegal fashion.
2. Prosecute employers that hire illegal aliens and harshen penalties for those convicted. Basically, make the legal risk of hiring illegals so great that nearly all employers will screen out any illegals. Also compel them to report illegals when found.
3. Restrict all taxpayer funded services, benefits and medical care to persons strictly able to verify legal status. Compel all agencies, courts and clinics to follow strict identification requirements. Illegals seeking help for whatever reason must be reported and must be denied all services other than basic emergency medical services.
4. Contract with domestic passenger services such as Trailways Bus, Greyhound Bus, Amtrak and so on, to transport free of charge to the border any person holding a "free passage slip" obtained from the government. Provide food, clothing, blankets to such persons as well as transfer vouchers for completing the trip to their home past the border. Also provide instructions, in the illegal's native language, on how to apply for legal entry into the United States.
5. Heavily tax all cash wire transfers both inbound and outbound, whether domestic or international, made by persons unable to verify legal status. Prosecute tax evasion by any legal person posing on behalf of an illegal for the purpose of wiring or receiving cash.
6. Clarify the 14th Amendment to exclude citizenship to babies born in the USA to parents unable to verify legal status. Clarification is based on the overlooked "and subject to the jurisdiction thereof" clause.
7. Require English as the official language for all government employee work and services such as law enforcement, courts, state hospital services, and public education while barring the awarding of points for any particular language ability other than English.
The above steps are being codified now in Congress to cause the illegal alien problem to contract through attrition. Congressman Hayworth of Arizona is a leader in this policy formation.
Heat should be brought to bear on Washington State elected officials to adopt a policy of attrition as soon as possible.
The best way to return illegals home is the same way they got here, by walking back across the border.
Posted by: Michael on May 9, 2006 12:05 AM1. Secure the borders. Stop more illegals from entering the country and increase security to help with interior enforcement at all ports of entry.
2. Get rid of the anchor baby provision. There are a few opinions on a way to do this without amending the U.S. Constitution.
3. Require citizenship for all social, legal, and welfare services. Emergency medical services should be available, but billed back to they home country of the illegal alien. No guaranteed mortgages should be available to non-citizens or non-legal immigrants.
4. Have civil and criminal penalties for ANY employer that has illegal aliens on their payroll. Any companies that accept phony documentation need to be penalized at least 10 fold of each illegally documented worker. Penalties need to be applied to employees processing legal documentation, managers, principals, and board of directors members (BoD insurance should not cover this). IRS audits of companies that show employees with more than reasonable number of withholding allowances need to be checked. Many illegals list 8 or more exemptions, this should red flag and help find employers and illegal aliens.
5. All people here illegally now have to make a choice, stay here and get in the back of the line to be made legal. Meaning that other applications from ALL countries will be processed first. Or go home and get in line in their home country. A date needs to be set for that.
6. All moneys sent back to people's home country need to be taxed, unless the person is here legally. This is to reduce the effective wage of illegals.
7. We need to increase the number of legal work permits for people that want to come here. We should have a temporary work permit for people that want to work and still go home. We should have a separate track for people that wish to become US Citizens.
There are lots of other ideas that I am still thinking about. But secure the borders, stop the free services, and over time deal with the people that are here. The illegal aliens here shouldn't be allowed to cheat others out of an opportunity to come here.
Posted by: Skeptic on May 9, 2006 12:20 AMhttp://www.creativeflashes.com/gallery/1416953 -- A Day Without Immigrants May 1st Rally in Seattle (143 Photos)
Seattle http://www.creativeflashes.com/gallery/1354395 -- Rally for Illegal Immigration on April 10, 2006 (122 Photos)
http://www.creativeflashes.com
Posted by: Janet on May 9, 2006 07:30 AMMichael, concerning your number 7: Foreign languages should still be a plus when hiring people for Immigration control, Intelligence, Foreign service, Diplomatic Corps, Military, etc. For any position whose purpose is to interface with American citizens and residents, however, I agree, that there should be no hiring preference. American citizens have to speak English. Residents who can't speak English yet can bring an interpretor, at their expense.
In addition to the provisions proposed by Michael and Skeptic, I propose another: performance requirements for the immigration process. My wife and I went through the process to get her residency application done properly and legally. Once we had provided all the information required for the application, and had it checked at the service center, we were scheduled for an interview 10 months later. When we arrived for the interview, it was patently obvious that no one had looked at the file, or even openned it in those 10 months. If information can happily be ignored for 10 months, why can't it be more efficiently ignored for 30 days, or less? Later, we applied to have the restrictions removed from her green card. (We'd been married 23 months at the time we applied for residency.) A few months later, they sent us a letter saying that a new green card would be sent. 11 months later, no new green card.
I'd force government compliance with a penalty payment scheme. One would put down 100% of the cost of processing the application to the stage of approval or denial. If the government blows deadlines, however, there would be a schedule for reducing how much post-approval fees would be, right down to the extent of them being free to the applicant.
If the immigration process had set time limits and controls to ensure government efficiency, I'm sure that the process would be more likely to be used. The cost of a coyote is well in excess of what normal travel plus the immigration fees should be, without adding in the risk of death.
Posted by: gmcraff on May 9, 2006 07:33 AMThe ownership of property/land should be restriced to US citizens. No foreigners should be landowners in this country.
Posted by: Susu on May 9, 2006 08:04 AMWhat I was saying is that you most definetly need to secure the border first. The reason for this is that if you dont then the jobs that are done by illegals now will end up being done by new illegals later. This is what I meant by saying that these newly founded legal workers would demand rights (as they should). The only downfall is that they would demand themselves right into welfare while the employers who employ illegals would just find new illegals to hire that have no rights.
I agree with michael on his immigration policy. We need to penalize companies that hire illegals more than we do now. One thing I would add to the immigration policy is to change the current policy on hiring workers outside the US to work here. Yes our country actually already has a guest worker program so to speak it is just so ridiculous they do not use it. The reason it is unused is that the employer must do the following:
1.they must provide housing at their cost
2.provide a reliable vehicle for recreation at least twice a week at their cost.
3.The pay must be around $10 an hour
This is why they do not hire legal workers it just isnt worth it. I heard this on a few different talk shows (Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity) so I unfortunetly do not have any links for you all.
Posted by: TrueSoldier on May 9, 2006 09:14 AMI have heard that when some employers hire illegal workers, they just make up social security numbers for them, do the withholding under those numbers, etc. Often, social security numbers have already been legally assigned to someone else. So ... you may have a work history you don't even know about! I heard this on the Clark Howard show; he recommends checking your social security records periodically, because this information may not show up on a credit check. I don't know how this aspect of identity theft can affect you - not sure of all of the repercussions (if there are any).
Posted by: Peggy U on May 9, 2006 09:15 AMBut, I don't think it's a good idea to punish US Employers for doing what is good for business. A much better way would be to simply require that illegals register and limit any benefits or employment until they do. Going after American business reminds me of what Maryland is doing to WalMart. It's wrong. It also reminds me of the latest witch hunt against the oil companies which is also wrong. American business is our greatest pride.
If we are going to penalize anyone, we should start with the Mexican government. The biggest problem of all is that Mexicans don't have any desire to stay or work in their own failed country.
Posted by: Jeff B. on May 9, 2006 09:25 AMFirst we need to do something about the Ninth Circus Court of Appeals though. You just know that it would rule that since illegal aliens are subject to arrest if they commit crimes that they are subject to the jurisdiction thereof.
Posted by: RBW on May 9, 2006 10:17 AMI think the 9th Circuit would fail in any such attempt.
A baby born of 'illegal' alien parents has committed no crime and is not subject to US law. Therefore the baby is not a US citizen.
Posted by: Michael on May 9, 2006 10:35 AMThe ownership of property/land should be restriced to US citizens and PERMANENT residents.
No need to penalize those that are here legally and permanently. Sometimes a permanent resident does not apply for US citizenship because they are collecting a pension from the country of their citizenship and an application for US citizenship would cut off that pension.
Posted by: Michael on May 9, 2006 10:38 AMGood points on language ability as a necessity of employment. But the positions you mention are not positions for the general public.
The requirement to make English official at first seems unnecessary but when you consider that millions of anchor babies have already been granted citizenship and are now attending school, then making English official in public education facilitates their assimilation.
The problem with alot of Mexican illegals is their inability and often unwillingness to assimilate. The language requirement strongly motivates them to assimilate.
The anchor babies already granted citizenship will be allowed to stay as their parents have in fact successfully gamed the 14th Amendment. But a review and clarification of the 14th Amendment is crucial to stopping future gaming via anchor baby scheming.
I'd hope you were right but stranger rulings have been upheld. They'd argue that being in the U.S. makes you subject to law and thus jurisdiction whether a crime has been committed or not.
Posted by: RBW on May 9, 2006 11:07 AMThe truth is that too many people in this country like to have their "near-slave" labor force. Perhaps we should create a mandatory minium wage for illegals of $20.00 per hour with full medical and dental benefits with no loopholes and strict enforcement. Then there would be no "jobs Americans won't do."
Pressure has to be put on the power/wealth structure in Mexico to reform. This is best done by, not only stopping the flow of illegals into the US, but by reversing the flow back to Mexico. Currently the US provides a pressure relief valve for discontent in Mexico. If the down-trodden people of Mexico are prevented from fleeing to the US, they will revolt and Mexico will be changed for the better.
Everyone in the USA is subject to US and local law whether here legally or illegally.
However, a distinction is made with regard to 'jurisdiction'. And the 14th Amendment uses jurisdiction as the distinguishing term.
So for example if a consulate official here legally commits a crime on US soil, they are processed according to US law up to a point where jurisdiction is determined, meaning what entity will carry through the prosecution. In the case of a foreign consulate official, there have been cases where they are returned to their country because their country claims jurisdiction. This causes anger among victims and their families and leads them to believe that embassy and consulate officials can get away with crime.
And so it goes with illegal aliens. They are deported or supposed to be deported because the US courts do not hold jurisdiction over them. Jails can detain them until a hearing is made but we hear that many are let go because of crowded jails and burdens on law enforcement. So they are subject to US law but not necessarily to its 'jurisdiction'.
You might be interested in reading what the writers of the 14th Amendment had in mind. You would see that they definitely were disallowing citizenship to children of foreigners that were born in the USA.
That raises the question as to why citizenship has been granted under the 14th Amendment to so many babies of illegal alien parents. The answer is that literally no one was watching until the problem was too big to ignore.
Many think erroneously that the authors of the 14th Amendment did not forsee the 'anchor baby' angle. The 14th Amendment authors most certainly forsaw that citizenship was not to be given to children born in the USA of persons that are not citizens. It is forgotten history that needs to be retrieved and discussed.
Posted by: Michael on May 9, 2006 05:02 PMI see whare I confused 'law' and 'jurisdiction'.
In my previous post I erred in saying:
A baby born of 'illegal' alien parents has committed no crime and is not subject to US ***law***. Therefore the baby is not a US citizen.
I should have written:
A baby born of 'illegal' alien parents ***on US soil*** has committed no crime and is not subject to US ***jurisdiction***. Therefore the baby is not a US citizen.
Posted by: Michael on May 9, 2006 05:06 PM