Enforcement Only Immigration Reform is Idiotic

So, Obama is sending 1200 troops to the border in an effort to stem illegal immigration.  Additionally, no one, and I mean no one, has deported more people than the Obama Administration.   Go ahead, look it up on Google, I'll wait.  You done yet?  Okay, good, because the point of this article isn't to praise Obama's immigration enforcement efforts, its to pan them completely (though, the deportation increase is probably the result of the enforcement efforts at the end of the Bush Administration which are now finally being litigated).

So, let's ask the key question - why do people hire illegal/undocumented immigrants?  Simple, they hire undocumented immigrants because the immigrants will be willing to be paid less than other workers and because they won't complain about abuse (out of fear of deportation).  But these factors don't change when you change the supply of illegal immigrants by enforcement - they exacerbate them.  Immigrants become less and less willing to speak up for themselves if deportation becomes a very real threat. For instance, when I worked for the Fair Housing Council, a landlord had two fake immigration officials threaten her tenants, and these tenants almost dropped their complaint (and they would have, but for the fact that the immigration officials were so obviously fake).

Now, if the enforcement was equally applied to both employers and immigrants, this would be different.  The monetary value of hiring an undocumented person would drop, and employers would think that hiring an undocumented person wasn't worth the risk.  But that's never going to happen.  For one, its easier to find undocumented immigrants than employers, and its easier to prosecute them.  Employers have "rights" and "lawyers" which make prosecutions expensive and risky.  So, the Feds go for the easy target.

And that's been the state of immigration in the country for the past twenty years.  Every Administration since Reagan has beefed up immigration enforcement, and the situation has only gotten worse.  So, instead of trying to prevent immigrants from coming, let's reduce the economic benefit of hiring undocumented immigrants - give them documentation, full rights under the law, and let them compete with Americans on an even playing field.

Immigration Reform (Part 2)

Let's face it, the current state of affairs when it comes to immigration in the United States sucks.  Undocumented immigrants live in fear of deportation and as such, are willing to take abuse from employers, landlords, etc, just to avoid confrontation.  Low wage workers get the shaft because they're competing for jobs with undocumented immigrants who are afraid to confront their employers.  Worst of all, apparently, my roommate had to learn Spanish in high school. (Actually, it was the efforts of Thomas Jefferson and Carlo Bellini in the late 18th Century that created Modern Languages studies in American schools.)

Anyway, no one is happy except for people who hire undocumented immigrants, and people who've developed a taste for authentic Mexican tacos.  Mmm. . .tacos.  As you can guess, I fall in the latter category.  And as much as I love tacos, surely there has to be a better way to get my taco fix.

I've stated this before in a few other blogs, but it bears repeating - the way to fix the immigration problem is to remove all benefits of hiring illegal immigrants for employers.  The only way to do that is to "legalize" everyone.  If foreign workers want to come work in the U.S., they can so long as they pass a background check.  In so doing, these foreign workers are protected by the same employment laws that protect everyone else, and as a result, they compete directly with American workers on a level playing field.  And if, in the resulting competition, foreign workers can't find work, they're going to go home.

Additionally, we should have a separate path of citizenship for those who want to become American citizens, complete with the full restrictions and requirements as exist today. 

Hippie Punching, ctd,

Not too long ago, I wrote that while the Democratic Party establishment has no problem attacking the grassroots, the Republican Party Establishment is beholden to their base.  The recent immigration debate, brought on by the Arizona Legislature, and drafted by a hate group, brings this issue to the fore.  I have been pleasantly surprised by the number of Republican leaders willing to speak out against this law, despite its popularity. 

Of all the slings and arrows I could throw at the Bush Administration, racism is not one of them.  Bush didn't care about the color of your skin, he cared about how much money you had in your bank account.  His immigration bill was less than perfect, but its a lot better than nothing.  Not surprisingly, its the Bushies that are attacking the law.  Oh, and John McCain (who says he never claimed to be a maverick) looks worse and worse by comparison every single day.


But all this leads me to the oddities of the American political system, as noticed by Bush and Rove - African Americans and Latinos tend to vote for candidates who don't share their political views on social issues.  Significant portions of African American voters are anti-choice, anti-gay, anti-immigrant, and as anti-tax as anyone.  Similar portions of Latino voters are equally anti-choice, anti-gay and anti-tax.  And yet, these voters either stay at home or vote Democratic in every election.  I think the reason for this discrepancy is that minority voters view Republicans as racists - a view that is exacerbated by issuing proclamations in support of the Confederacy (without mentioning slavery), opposing civil rights legislation, supporting oppressive anti-immigration legislation, etc.  Until that changes, the GOP will never make significant inroads with these key constituencies.

Other notes: its pretty clear now that the economy of much of the Bush Administration was based upon the housing market, which everyone knew was precarious.  This article makes clear that while the Fed had some reservations, and knew how to slow down the bubble (by rising interest rates), it chose not to. . .I'm not sure I like the Chargers' draft this year. . .I like the Padres' start. . .

And lastly, the Obama Administration, or more specifically, Obama, needs to make clear that he won't allow the U.S. to devolve into cowardice and fear because some loser tried to set off a bomb.  That's what the terrorists want - they want us to strip away the rights of American citizens, they want cower in fear.  We win when we refuse to do so.  With that said, big props to the street vendors who helped the police nail that loser in New York.