Defending the Truth

I read this today and thought others might be interested in it too. JudeB
(So confusing.....Iraq is winnable, but the Illegal Immigration isn't.)(My head hurts.)




Excellent analysis of Pres. Bush's open borders efforts from the National Review


Defeatist at the Border
Should we surrender on immigration?

By Rich Lowry

Not all incremental progress is equal in the eyes of President Bush. When it occurs in Iraq, it is a sign that we need to forge ahead despite all difficulties. When it occurs on our southern border, it is deemed insufficient and a sign that — to use a favorite GOP phrase — we need to settle on a “surrender date” on immigration enforcement.

That date would be whenever Bush’s latest “comprehensive” reform proposal kicked in. He wants to legalize illegal immigrants already here and invite in “temporary” guest workers. When Congress finishes with it, this probably will be another proposal to solve the illegal-immigrant problem by making all immigrants past and future legal. This is the immigration-enforcement version of “declare victory and go home.”

And Bush wants to do it just as increased enforcement — like “the surge” in Baghdad — is showing tentative signs of progress. Apprehensions of illegals are down across the border, an indication that fewer of them are coming. Steven Camarota of the Center for Immigration Studies notes that the foreign-born population grew by only 500,000 last year, significantly off the annual pace of growth since 2000.

The administration contradicts itself on enforcement. On the one hand, it touts the success of increased border patrols and occasional workplace raids, because it realizes, politically, that it has to be seen as trying to enforce the laws. On the other hand, it argues that enforcement can’t possibly work, so we have to adopt an amnesty and guest-worker program.

The rational response to the promising signs from enforcement would be to do more of it, and to avoid undercutting its early success. But on immigration, the Bushies are — again, to use a term from the Iraq debate — defeatists.

The cost of this defeatism is borne disproportionately by low-skilled, native-born workers and the taxpayers. Flooding the job market with poorly educated immigrants does no favors for low-skilled native workers. It can only serve to depress their wages in what is already a difficult economic environment for them. Camarota believes a recent uptick in low-skill wages could be related to the slowdown in the flow of foreign workers.

The burden on taxpayers, meanwhile, is a function of the nature of government benefits. Robert Rector of the Heritage Foundation calculates that low-skill households receive $32,138 in direct government benefits and services, $10,000 more than the average household. These low-skill households pay less than $10,000 a year in taxes, meaning they get three dollars from the government for every dollar paid. Because almost all immigrants from Mexico are low-skilled, they can only add to this fiscal drain.

At least Bush wants to attempt to depress the wages of higher-skilled workers, too. He is proposing to expand the number of H-1B work visas for higher-skilled foreign workers, who tend to get paid less than their native-born counterparts. Alan Greenspan recently conducted a thought experiment. “Our skilled wages,” he said, “are higher than anywhere in the world. If we open a significant window for (foreign) skilled workers, that would suppress the skilled-wage level and end the concentration of income.”

Indeed, it would. It also would cause a political revolt. Such a revolt doesn’t occur at the lower end of the income scale, because the natural representative of the interests of native low-skilled workers — the Democratic Party — has bought into high levels of immigration in the hopes of getting new voters.

Bush’s failings at the border mirror his failings in Iraq. In both places, he underestimated the need for security and order and has undertaken a push for them only belatedly. In both places, he was motivated by a good-hearted belief in the essential fungibility of people. He thought that Iraqis naturally would have the same desires as Westerners; and on the border, he assumes that Mexicans are seamlessly interchangeable with Americans, since they seek employment here.

In Iraq, he has tried to compensate for his mistakes. On the border, he seems hopeless.

Let's just make Mexico part of the United States. Then the problem of illegal immigration goes away.

If you were President of the US what would YOU do about illegal immigration?

What an excellent question! If the United States wants to get rid of Illegal aliens, I think Attrition is the way to go. (you know, actually ENFORCE the laws we already have on the books.) I don't think it is possible to send everyone home enmasse, they are now 5% of our total population. However, slow and steady wins the race. Enforce our laws. Our biggest problem is that our administration picks and chooses which laws to respect and which ones to spit on. I am tired of getting the spit, as are a lot of American citizens.
In a nutshell, if there is nothing here for Illegal Aliens, they won't come. Like, don't rent to them if they can't prove legality. No jobs, no welfare, no healthcare, no nothing unless you can prove you are legally in this country. It is absolutely stupid to say we are winning in Iraq, using baby steps and don't give up! and then say we can't win on immigration because the problem is too big. Bull! There is already data that Illegal aliens are moving out of Colorado because of them actually enforcing their laws. Therefore, it isn't worth it to try to live there.(See above, no renting, no hiring, etc.) If they are leaving Colorado because it is no longer viable to stay there, apparently the entire US needs to follow suit and quit making it so attractive to break our laws. Just since the government has started enforcing the laws, there are fewer illegals coming here. Even some heading back to Mexico. Now, instead of taking that as a good sign, our gov. wants to throw their hands up and say, it is too big. we can't do it. What a crock.
I never paid a lot of attention, our main problem btw, until the immigration problem became crazy. But now, we are having a war over here. It is a strange war, to be sure, but it IS a war. Our Government is taking away our rights in the name of National Security because of Terrorists. At the same time, they are telling(by not enforcing our laws), that it is just fine if several MILLION people we know nothing about comes into our country, unknown to us. Bush grew up in Texas and I betcha his cook, his butler, his maid, etc. all came from Mexico. He seems to think EVERY Mexican person is the wonderful people he grew up with. When you get several million people, you are gonna get the crap too. Especially when ALL of those people are criminals for even coming here!
check this out and you might get a small idea of why we are so upset about this. It isn't about immigration at all. not Legal immigration. This is all about ILLEGAL immigration.
Immigrations Human Cost

p.s. Bad things would have happened whether Illegal Aliens were here or not. However, there are thousands of instances where deaths, rapes, kidnappings, molestations, even slave markets would not have happened had they not been here in the first place, illegally.

Thanks for letting me ramble my thoughts. Hope you have a great day!
JudeB
HeyJude.name

In theory, but then the mass population shift is legalized.

Just an addition to this subject. There is a petition, and LORDY I hate saying O'Reilly is right about ANYTHING, but he at least put some publicity on the problem. The petition is at O'Reilly Was Right on Sanctuary Cities! Sign Petition to President
People signing to send to Bush to try to stop these Sanctuary Cities and force him to enforce the law, including forcing these cities to quit openly disobeying our immigration laws. Hey, grass roots movements are the best we can do right now.(Being a Quaker, violence is out of the question for me.)
Hope this helps!
JudeB
HeyJude.name