Tag: Immigration to the United States

An immigration reform proposal I can get behind..

I finally saw an immigration reform proposal I could semi-get behind, and it was one from Roger L. Simon over at P.J Media titled A Modest Proposal for Immigration Reform. Here is his proposal:

So here’s my simple — call it simple-minded, if you want — solution, my modest proposal. Illegal immigrants, assuming they have lived here for a decent period of time and have not committed a felony, can have amnesty, but they can NEVER be allowed to vote. They can do anything else that is legal, but if they want to vote — or run for office or practice law in our country, as just happened in California — they must return home and go through the normal immigrant application process, however long that may take until they have citizenship.

This is a humane solution that does not make a complete mockery of the rule of law (only a partial one). You can live a satisfactory life without voting. Many who have the right to vote don’t bother anyway. (In 2012, only 57.5% of eligible voters voted in the presidential election. Many fewer voted in other contests.) It’s up to the individual illegal immigrant here: He or she can enjoy the privileges of U.S. citizenship without voting or go home and wait in line.

This solves the major problem I have with this attempt to give amnesty to millions by the democratic party. And please, let’s not pretend that it’s about anything else for the democrats. The left wants this amnesty because they see it as a means to jack up the number of people that vote for a living and cement their lock on elections. The right is pushing for it because corporate America somehow has convinced themselves this will allow them to lower labor costs despite the fact that the left is larding up the whole thing in order to buy these people’s votes.

However, I assure you that the left will kill this amnesty proposal if it contains language that makes it so these people never get to vote or run for office, unless they actually take the time to follow the immigration law, and that’s because the fundamental reason they want thise opf what they say, is the votes they believe they will get, and nothing else. They do not care of the burden/cost it will impose on the rest of us. It’s about power and holding on to that. All the other talk is smoke and mirrors.

So yeah, any proposal that has this language denying the vote will never pass muster with the left, or stand a chance to become law. And that in and of itself is just peachy by me. If you want to move here follow the law. Yeah, the immigration law sucks, so reform that to make it more responsive and less of a joke. But don’t let the left pass this amnesty plan of theirs simply so they can cement their already brutal stranglehold on the productive Americans and the abusive and coercive government, even more. And any republcian that goes along wiith the plan the left wants needs to be punished too.

The First Salvo on Immigration

The Gang of Eight (I guess) release the outline of immigration reform today. Let’s go through it.

1. Create a tough but fair path to citizenship for unauthorized immigrants currently living in the United States that is contingent upon securing our borders and tracking whether legal immigrants have left the country when required;

Putting aside the proclamation, they propose increases in the border patrol and tracking entry and exit for visa holders. It will also allow current illegals to come forward, pass a background check, pay back taxes and fines and acquire probationary legal status. If they continue to pass checks, they will move to the back of the line for eventual green card status. There will be special dispensations for people who came here as minors and agricultural workers (the latter put in place, no doubt, because of reports of food rotting all over the west when no one was around to pick it).

I suspect this provision will be the most contentious, but it is a fairly obvious tradeoff: enhanced border security in exchange for a path to citizenship. The striking thing is that they are trying to improve the number of people protecting the border rather than building a ridiculous and useless fence — although I suspect the fence will come when some campaign contributor needs a federal contract.

The effectiveness of this will depend on well they do on the other provisions. To wit:

2. Reform our legal immigration system to better recognize the importance of characteristics that will help build the American economy and strengthen American families;

We desperately need an overhaul of our nightmarish immigration system, which is complex, slow and expensive for legal immigrants. I have said it before and I’ll say it again: if you make it easier for people to come her legally, fewer will come here illegally. More illegals will go back and get in line.

The interesting provision is that they will give a green card to anyone in the sciences who gets a Ph.D. from an American University. While it has been fairly easy for STEMs people to get visas, getting a green card is notoriously difficult.

3. Create an effective employment verification system that will prevent identity theft and end the hiring of future unauthorized workers; and,

This is the second part that makes the “path to citizenship” work. If illegals can’t compete for jobs and have an easier way of becoming legal, the problem will eventually abate. I suspect, however, this will prove very difficult to implement. And it’s not going to do much about the guys standing around at Lowe’s who will work for cash.

4. Establish an improved process for admitting future workers to serve our nation’s workforce needs, while simultaneously protecting all workers.

This mainly is about allowing more flexibility with low wage and agricultural workers.

Overall, the outlines are about what I expected. Provisions 2-4 are fairly uncontroversial, depending on the detail. It’s the first provision that’s going to provoke a battle. I’m not fond of the path to citizenship myself. As someone who is married to a green card holder and has been through the stress and expense, I’m disinclined to allow an easier path for those who broke the law.

But I also recognize that we have a Democratic President, a Democratic Senate and a Republican Party that is hemorrhaging votes. If we get better border enforcement, cleaner immigration law and a employer verification system, I’ll take the tradeoff. It will be a massive improvement over the current mess.

Post Scriptum: I should not that illegal immigration has dropped substantially in the last five years. But that little to do with policy and everything to do with the crappy economy. When the economy improves, those numbers will spike again.

Work Americans Won’t Do

See, this is why I think you create a guest worker program before you kick people out of the country:

After enacting House Bill 87, a law designed to drive illegal immigrants out of Georgia, state officials appear shocked to discover that HB 87 is, well, driving a lot of illegal immigrants out of Georgia.

It might be funny if it wasn’t so sad.

Thanks to the resulting labor shortage, Georgia farmers have been forced to leave millions of dollars’ worth of blueberries, onions, melons and other crops unharvested and rotting in the fields. It has also put state officials into something of a panic at the damage they’ve done to Georgia’s largest industry.

Georgia needs about 11,000 low-skill low-wage workers to harvest its crops. They can now find only a fraction of the hands they need, thanks to illegals leaving the state. The governor — being a politician — is unable to admit that they fucked up and is suggesting that they hire convicted criminals (seriously). Georgia farmers could raise wages to hire Americans, but that would make their crops more expensive than neighboring states.

In short, they’re fucked.

First thought: this just shows how badly our system of unemployment and food stamps and other aide needs to be overhauled. Many people who are out of work won’t take these jobs because the pay would not make up for the loss of governments benefits. I’m in favor of keeping people from starving when they’re out of work but it should be child’s play to taper those benefits so that work, any work, always pays. And work is work. If someone is out of work, they should be willing to take any job they can find. I know picking onions isn’t on anyone’s career path. I would be miserable doing unskilled labor. But if I were hiring and heard someone had made ends meet by working a farm in the hot Georgia sun, I’d be more impressed.

(I’m under no delusion that this attitude is common. Our country has come to prize career path and “relevant experience” over fortitude, commitment, responsibility and a good work ethic.)

Second, it’s worth re-iterating what I’ve said before on the subject of immigration. Rather than just restate it, I’ll just quote myself:

When it comes to immigration, most people’s priority is to “seal the border”. Whether this is wise or not, I’m dubious that it’s even possible. Penn and Teller demonstrated that it takes minutes for illegals to tunnel under, cut through or climb over a border fence. We have a very very long border with Mexico and our attempts to seal the border are always and must be reactive—responding to new ways people find to get in after they’re already here.

No, the first step in fixing our immigration problem has to be the creation of a guest worker program—a way for people to easily, cheaply and legally come into this country for temporary or seasonal work. Such a system would work the problem, producing gigantic immediate benefits:

1) It would stem the flow of illegals across our border by shunting the otherwise law-abiding into the guest worker system. This would make it much easier to seal the borders. Think of it as diverting the river before you damn it.

2) It would shift millions of immigrants from violent coyotes to safe border guards and immigration officials, depriving drug gangs and other thugs of money, victims and smugglers.

3) It would make it easier for people to leave their families in Mexico, since they know they will be going back. This would alleviate the mythical “anchor baby” problem while giving Mexicans an incentive to improve their own country.

4) It could raise revenue. If people are willing to pay coyotes $1700 to smuggle them into this country, will they not be willing to pay $1000 to come in legally? Or $500? We could be talking about a few billion in revenue, enough to help fund the border patrol and pay for the necessary bureaucracy.

5) Call it the Law of iTunes: when you make it relatively easy to obey the law, people will obey it rather than break it. When businesses can hire immigrants above board, when immigrants can work without fear, that creates a massive incentive to obey the law. Illegal immigration will never completely vanish. But this would reduce it dramatically and allow us to concentrate our efforts on people we really really don’t want in this country—like violent psychotic criminals.

6) Part (5) will have the side effect of sending illegals currently in this country back to Mexico. Once there is an easy legal way to hire immigrants for temporary work, the labor market for illegals will dry up. Without work, many will head back to Mexico to get in line.

7) With workers properly documented, this will make it much harder for them to vote in our elections or collect social benefits.

Part (6) is appealing to me personally. As the husband of a legal immigrant, I don’t want illegals jumping the line.

Our current immigration law makes it almost impossible for our country to get the low-wage workers it needs and makes it almost impossible for people to come here legally for low-wage work. The line for visas in Mexico is over a million names long. That’s not because of Mexican bureaucracy; that’s because of our insanely complicated and arbitrary immigration laws.

Georgia has now clearly demonstrated why we need to fix the immigration law before we enforce anti-illegal statutes. They have crippled their agricultural industry and political stubbornness prevents them from going back on their bad decision. Let’s not follow their example. Let’s fix the law first.