Thomas Jefferson wrote in 1787 that "The basis of our governments being the opinion of the people, the very first object should be to keep that right; and were it left to me to decide whether we should have a government without newspapers or newspapers without a government, I should not hesitate a moment to prefer the latter. But I should mean that every man should receive those papers and be capable of reading them."
Tuesday, June 26, 2007
Immigration Reform
The Immigration Reform Bill, or "Amnesty" Bill is being discussed in the U.S. Senate this week. The speechs are red-hot. Should it be passed, or should it be defeated?
5 comments:
Anonymous
said...
What a complicated issue! It divides both parties. I have to admit I see merit and idiocy on both sides of the aisle on this one. Anti-immigration politicians are right when they say that illegal immigrants drive down wages. Pro-immigration politicians are also right when they say that they are valuable contributors to our society and that they give back more than they take. It is inhumane and unrealistic in any event to just try and deport them all. But these two correct positions are on opposite sides of the debate!
It is my understanding that in Switzerland if an immigrant gets a job in six months they can stay. If not, they must leave. Illegal immigration is addressed at the borders.
Of course our borders are much larger and require much more effort to stop illegal immigration.
We have gotten ourselves into a real mess by not being clear in dealing with things up to now.
I wish I knew of a reasonable way to deal with illegals already in the country.
If we just give up, that is not fair to those who follow the rules. Unfortunately, it is a bit like trying to move the ocean.
We have to make our minds up about what we want. If we enforce the law as it is, then the price of vegetables, taxis, gardeners, housekeepers etc etc will rise sharply. It will not kill our economy. In fact, it will have the effect of both redistributing income to lower income workers and reducing the demand for some of these services as well. If we are not willing to accept that outcome, then we must either continue to ignore the illegal situation or change the law.
I am an American living in Mexico now. Many families here have family members who have moved to the US to be able to work and send money back to their families. Most would prefer to stay in Mexico; it's a beautiful and friendly place to live.
The conservatives seriously oversimplify the problem. Not all laws are broken for the same reasons. The laws are not being enforced because business interests don't want them to be.
We need immigration reform, but this bill was not a good one. Requiring these poor workers to pay a $5000 fine, return home, and not be reunited with their families are all poison pills designed to scuttle the bill.
This is why elections matter. The US government is too conservative to produce a humane and responsible immigration bill. Once a new government is in place, perhaps they can try again. In the meantime, the lettuce will be picked as it always has been, and the conservatives will spew hateful words against hardworking immigrant families.
I posted an interesting National Review editorial. While I don't agree with all of their solutions, it has some intersting thoughts.
The "elephant in the room," is the unwillingness of a part of the Republican Party to confront one of their core constituencies: business interests. Any reform has to necessarily add more hassle to complying with law, in terms of checking documents, getting forms, etc.)
While both big business and small buisness would be effected, I suspect small businesses would have a more diffuclt time complying: large businesses tend to have the resources (i..e money) to comply with added (or enforced) governenmental regulation. If the Republicans are seen as the party that made the life of small business that emply illegal and inexpensive labor more problematic, they potentially lose voters.
Also, you just cannot ignore the racial and cultural aspects of the debate. The opposition to reform is widely perceived as anti-Mexican (fair, or unfairly), and this perception influences the US debate and electorate.
5 comments:
What a complicated issue! It divides both parties. I have to admit I see merit and idiocy on both sides of the aisle on this one. Anti-immigration politicians are right when they say that illegal immigrants drive down wages. Pro-immigration politicians are also right when they say that they are valuable contributors to our society and that they give back more than they take. It is inhumane and unrealistic in any event to just try and deport them all. But these two correct positions are on opposite sides of the debate!
It is my understanding that in Switzerland if an immigrant gets a job in six months they can stay. If not, they must leave. Illegal immigration is addressed at the borders.
Of course our borders are much larger and require much more effort to stop illegal immigration.
We have gotten ourselves into a real mess by not being clear in dealing with things up to now.
I wish I knew of a reasonable way to deal with illegals already in the country.
If we just give up, that is not fair to those who follow the rules. Unfortunately, it is a bit like trying to move the ocean.
Would love to read other ideas.
We have to make our minds up about what we want. If we enforce the law as it is, then the price of vegetables, taxis, gardeners, housekeepers etc etc will rise sharply. It will not kill our economy. In fact, it will have the effect of both redistributing income to lower income workers and reducing the demand for some of these services as well. If we are not willing to accept that outcome, then we must either continue to ignore the illegal situation or change the law.
I am an American living in Mexico now. Many families here have family members who have moved to the US to be able to work and send money back to their families. Most would prefer to stay in Mexico; it's a beautiful and friendly place to live.
The conservatives seriously oversimplify the problem. Not all laws are broken for the same reasons. The laws are not being enforced because business interests don't want them to be.
We need immigration reform, but this bill was not a good one. Requiring these poor workers to pay a $5000 fine, return home, and not be reunited with their families are all poison pills designed to scuttle the bill.
This is why elections matter. The US government is too conservative to produce a humane and responsible immigration bill. Once a new government is in place, perhaps they can try again. In the meantime, the lettuce will be picked as it always has been, and the conservatives will spew hateful words against hardworking immigrant families.
I posted an interesting National Review editorial. While I don't agree with all of their solutions, it has some intersting thoughts.
The "elephant in the room," is the unwillingness of a part of the Republican Party to confront one of their core constituencies: business interests. Any reform has to necessarily add more hassle to complying with law, in terms of checking documents, getting forms, etc.)
While both big business and small buisness would be effected, I suspect small businesses would have a more diffuclt time complying: large businesses tend to have the resources (i..e money) to comply with added (or enforced) governenmental regulation. If the Republicans are seen as the party that made the life of small business that emply illegal and inexpensive labor more problematic, they potentially lose voters.
Also, you just cannot ignore the racial and cultural aspects of the debate. The opposition to reform is widely perceived as anti-Mexican (fair, or unfairly), and this perception influences the US debate and electorate.
Post a Comment