Mr. Kinsley, I Am Not Kidding Myself About Immigration

BY MICHAEL LINN JONES

In a TIME.COM piece, Kidding Ourselves About Immigration, Michael Kinsley addresses something that belittles genuine concerns about the unregulated flow of people into the U.S. His main thrust is that those who point out that the law should be supreme are actually hiding their true concerns: immigrants themselves.

What you are supposed to say about immigration--what most of the presidential candidates say, what the radio talk jocks say--is that you are not against immigration. Not at all. You salute the hard work and noble aspirations of those who are lining up at American consulates around the world. But that is legal immigration. What you oppose is illegal immigration.

This formula is not very helpful. We all oppose breaking the law, or we ought to. Saying that you oppose illegal immigration is like saying you oppose illegal drug use or illegal speeding. Of course you do, or should. The question is whether you think the law draws the line in the right place. Should using marijuana be illegal? Should the speed limit be raised--or lowered? The fact that you believe in obeying the law reveals nothing about what you think the law ought to be, or why.

Another question: Why are you so upset about this particular form of lawbreaking? After all, there are lots of laws, not all of them enforced with vigor. The suspicion naturally arises that the illegality is not what bothers you. What bothers you is the immigration. There is an easy way to test this. Reducing illegal immigration is hard, but increasing legal immigration would be easy. If your view is that legal immigration is good and illegal immigration is bad, how about increasing legal immigration? How about doubling it? Any takers? So in the end, this is not really a debate about illegal immigration. This is a debate about immigration.

First off, I'm a taker on that last question. Yes, indeed INCREASE legal immigration. Streamline it. The three main criterion upon which someone should be allowed to permanently reside (and eventually gain citizenship) are 1, criminal behavior, 2, known contagious diseases, and 3, the ability to support oneself in the U.S. without resorting to social welfare programs.

Having people live in the shadows is not conducive to a strong and vibrant nation, nor a strong and productive population. As long as people DO live in the dark they are not really part of the society. To be fair, one of my main concerns about the influx of Hispanic only immigrants is their propensity to not only stay within their own ethnic group (normal for all new immigrants) but their lack of interest in assimilation. It could be fairly said that the shadows DO inhibit assimilation.

But...the law is very important as it is supposed to establish the premise that we are all here....no matter our circumstances....equal before the law. One might recall in years past the quiet outrage when a diplomat in New York or Washington got drunk and killed someone but faced no penalty because of their diplomatic plates.

Such is the case now, for the shadowy world of illegal aliens places them in a similar status. If I may be so bold as to claim that a habitual drunk driver is a criminal, then we have a lot of them on our roads. However, like a diplomat there really isn't any penalty short of a manslaughter conviction. And even then, after serving their time and being deported, they are quite free to come back with a new name, etc., and resume their criminal lifestyle.

And such a situation is NOT like smoking marijuana, because the number of traffic murders can be traced almost entirely to alcohol. It is estimated that as many Americans (and legal residents...AND illegal residents) are killed each year by illegal alien criminals as there were killed on 9/11. Note I did not say illegal aliens, painting all with a broad brush, but illegal alien CRIMINALS.

Expanded legal immigration would go a long way in alleviating this problem. But then the question can get a bit sticky.

Who do we let in?

Let's assume that the U.S. has absorbed 20 to 25 million illegal aliens at the moment. Most are from south of the U.S. border. And let's say we issue another blanket amnesty.

Fine. But then wall off that border and control who comes in. Increase the number of legal immigrants from Asia, Africa, Europe, and so on. Make America a melting pot again.

Certainly, it's true that we can't let in everyone who wants to come. There is some number of immigrants that is too many. I don't believe we're past that point, but maybe we are. In any event, a democracy has the right to decide that it has reached such a point. There is no obligation to be fair to foreigners.

Michael Kinsley is thoughtful if nothing else. And his last quote is accurate enough...there is no obligation to be fair to foreigners (vis a vis immigration law). But, once here we DO have to be fair, and fair to ourselves as well.

And once here, immigrants must be fair to us, too. Adopting another country and its culture is a time-consuming and onerous chore. But most 1st generation immigrants grasp what America can be with fervor, as well as giving us a cultural shot in the arm.

So bring in more....legally. Just be fair and not reserve the word immigration to one particular ethnic group.

These days that is too much for ask for, however.
************************
Cross-posted at Michaellinnjones.com

Our Immigration Laws are Busted, Small Business Owners Must Fix IT?

Picture courtesy of U.S. Customs and Border Protection

When in doubt our brightest of the lawmakers in Washington have pushed even more off of the Federal Govern-Mint onto the States and now the small business owners of America. With their failure to fix the immigration laws that they are supposed to enact, they figured that passing the buck was a far easier pill to swallow.

Judge Breyer from San Fransisco was right to rule as he did. It is time to face the problem and make it right. The Congress and the President need to put in place an immigration policy that works. Over at the Los Angeles Times they have this about the Judges ruling…

Illegal hiring crackdown is blocked

A federal judge stops a controversial program to punish companies based on discrepancies between their workers' names and Social Security numbers.

By Anna Gorman, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer
12:56 PM PDT, October 10, 2007

In a major defeat for the Bush administration, a federal judge ruled today that the government could not use mismatched Social Security data to ferret out illegal immigrants from the workplace.

U.S. District Judge Charles Breyer issued a preliminary injunction that blocks the Department of Homeland Security from starting a controversial program to punish companies based on discrepancies between their workers' names and Social Security numbers.

"Altering the status quo would subject employers to greater compliance costs and employees to an increased risk of termination," Breyer wrote in his 22-page ruling.

The injunction will remain in place until Breyer holds further hearings and decides whether to strike down the proposed Homeland Security rule permanently.

The Social Security Administration had planned to begin sending out "no-match" letters in September, and the Department of Homeland Security had warned companies that they could face criminal or civil sanctions if they did not clear up the discrepancies within 90 days. The administration planned to send about 140,000 letters, affecting more than 8 million workers.

Labor and immigrant rights groups, who sued the government to stop the crackdown, called the decision a major victory. They had argued that the new policy was unlawful and that U.S. citizens and documented workers would be fired as a result of the proposed rule.

"This is a particularly important day for the labor movement because the Social Security no-match letters have long been used to defeat worker organizing," said Ana Avendano of the AFL-CIO. - LA Times

Thank you Judge Charles Breyer for laying the smack down on another policy concerning immigration by the Bush administration, not my problem, kind of busy in Iraq, but I will return your call later philosophy. America has an illegal immigration problem and the President wants to put the ownership on business owners? Let me make myself clear, if you as a business owner hire and illegal immigrant then you are breaking the law. If the government hands you questionable Social Security numbers and then tells you that you have ninety days to fire the person or prove that they are in fact a legal immigrant, is that not the govern-mint’s job to begin with? Heavy fines will follow if your employee can not prove citizenship.

Ask yourself this question? You’ve lived in America all your life, how can you prove that you are a citizen if your employer asked you to do so? Other than a birth certificate or your Social Security card you can not. If one or two of those documents is questionable by your government then both are questionable. Parading your Mom or Dad into the human resource office does not count either. For all intents and purposes, I could not find my birth certificate if you asked me for it right now. Same goes for my original Social Security card. I know they are here somewhere but I have not needed them in decades. Your job, your families livelihood is on the line and the decision to fire you or keep you on is on the line. Prove that you are an American citizen!

Everyone over at INS should get a pink slip next payday! For that matter we should fire all of the border patrol guards too because they failed to check for proper paperwork as the immigrants ILLEGALLY walked into America. Lock up all the Mom and Pop business owners and throw away the key. Mom and Pop are the ones to blame for illegal immigration is what the administration is really saying to the American people. Fine their sorry butt’s out of business. And yet they are a pro business administration?

Bush and Homeland Security on immigration is a joke. Mom and Pop don’t have the resources or the tools to handle who is legal and who is not. For some odd reason the war on terror and everyone we are supposed to be afraid of is not a high priority for this President when it comes to immigration policy. Putting illegal immigration at the feet and ownership of small businesses or big business is dead wrong. That is the job of our government PERIOD!

I’m not a basher of Legal Immigrants but I do have concerns when people come to our shores illegally. Granted, our nation and our way of life offers many opportunities to all and if you follow our laws then you are more than welcome to begin your travels and experience on becoming an American citizen. This policy deserved to be struck down because the Federal Government policy sucks and does not work, it is busted. Rather than fixing it they passed the blame down and now it is Mom and Pop’s fault.

Thought for the post here from the political mind. All you illegal immigrants that might vote Democrat raise your hands? All you illegal immigrants that might vote Republican raise your hands? All of you Democrats get the hell out! Republicans, you can stay but we are going to be watching you.

That my friends is the mine field that is Washington politics. If you were a national politician would you want to touch this topic? That is the dilemma we face here with our nations immigration policy. Nobody has the guts to call it like it is for fear of losing large new immigrant blocks of voters.

Our nations immigration policy is busted and the only way to fix it is in the White House and in the Congress. Ownership of this issue belongs there. Stop passing the damn buck. Somebody FedX from the Smithsonian Harry Truman’s desk top statement to the White House!

Papamoka

Cross posted at Bring IT ON!

Link to this post and we will respond in kind...

Technorati Tags:
Bush, Cheney, McCain, Kennedy, Border States, California, Mexico, South American, LA Times, Anna Gorman, Illegal Immigration, Legal Immigration, Judge Breyer, San Fransisco Court, Court Over Turn Immigration, Congress on Immigration, Bush on Immigration, Immigration News, Immigration Amnesty, Amnesty, Business Owners Immigration, American Citizenship, Immigration Laws, Irish Immigrants, Italian Immigrants, Mexican Immigrants, Puerto Rico Immigrants, Columbia Immigrants, Ecuador Immigrants, Panama Immigrants, Brazil Immigrants, American Politics, Immigration to America, INS, Homeland Security, War on Terror, Fear of Immigrants, Polish Immigrants, Russian Immigrants, Armenian Immigrants, Syrian Immigrants, Lebanese Immigrants, Canadian Immigrants, Australian Immigrants, Statue of Liberty, French Immigrants, Columbian Immigrants, Venezuala Immigrants, World Immigration to USA