The Happy Carpenter

Bush Estrangement Syndrome

A letter to David Frum sums it up well:

I voted twice for this man and his abdication of the most fundamental executive responsibility, to protect our country from foreign invasion, is cause for regret.

Talk is cheap.  The most responsible course of action that this president can take on immigration is to do nothing.  Leave it for the next president.  Focus on Iraq and then go home.

Signing this bill would render what little good he has done meaningless by comparison.

I wish he were already gone.

The bottom line for the many, many conservatives who've become estranged is this:  They just plain don't trust the government to do any enforcement of any immigration restrictions.  End of story.  The Feds have had 6-1/2 years to seal the border but haven't.  The White House has no chance to regain their trust -- it's just too late for that.  They can't build fences or hire border agents in the time President Bush has left.  But the Republican senators and Representatives can salvage their connection to the conservatives by simply breaking the immigration bill down into a logical progression.

1. Close the border.  AFTER that's done and only after that's done,
2. Comprehensive immigration reform that does not include amnesty.

Overwhelming majorities of Americans don't want amnesty for illegal aliens.  We want them to go home and get to the back of the line.  (Personally, I'd put a moratorium on Mexicans -- Mexico has been a bad neighbor.)  We do NOT want them to stay here and wait at the back of an imaginary line while they renew their shiny new Z-visas for life.  The obvious way to get those folks to self-deport is through proper identification and strict work place enforcement. 

I strongly doubt the Senate will get the garbage out of the bill, and if they don't I expect it will die in the house.  And that's a shame because the status quo stinks.

Everyone concentrates on the problems we're having in this country lately. Illegal immigration, hurricane recovery, wild animals attacking humans in Florida. Not me. I concentrate on solutions to problems. The result is a win-win-win situation:

Trish the Dish contribues this:

+ Dig a moat the length of the Mexican border.

+ Use the dirt to raise the levies in New Orleans.

+ Put the Florida alligators in the moat.

Any other problems you would like for me to solve today?

Immigration - the good, the bad, and the ugly

Last night driving home I listened to Hugh Hewit interview senator John Kyle (R - Arizona) for about an hour.  Senator Kyle was very impressive and very persuasive.  It's a good bill.

Then this morning I listened to Laura Ingraham for about two hours, including an interview of a really smart guy from the Heritage Foundation whose name I don't recall.  Very informative.  There is quite a bit of really bad crap in the bill as it stands right now, such as in-state tuition for semi-legal aliens, welfare benefits, the list goes on.

Ingraham convinced me that the bill needs a lot of work.  But her position is that the bill should be fought to the last drop of blood.  No.  We should roll up our sleeves and get the crap out of the bill, subparagraph by subparagraph.  Too many conservatives loose sight of the fact that we're comparing this bill to the current actual real life status quo, which is terrible.  It's a mistake to compare the bill to what you'd like a comprehensive immigration reform bill to be in heaven.  Remember, not so long ago the Republicans controlled the House, the Senate, and the White House and did squat.

In the end, Senator Kyle was the most persuasive.  Get to work, get the best bill you can get, but don't throw the baby out with the bath water.

Can't do it

Regular readers know I'm very interested in immigration issues.  I had intended to spend a chunk of this Sunday reading the text of the immigration bill and then putting in my $0.02's worth.  This morning, I found the text to the 400 page bill.

I also read that these 400 pages are not the final bill.  The final is expected to be 1,000 pages.  So there isn't much point in spending this beautiful Sunday reading what's only a draft.  And the 1,000 pager is not expected to be fully written until after the Senate votes on it.

Huh?

If voting on a bill that's not written yet just so you can crow about how you got it done before Memorial Day isn't the hight of irresponsibility, what the hell is?

A few days ago I was hopeful about this, but now, not.  The talk radio crowd, with the exception of Michael Medved, hates the draft and is profoundly suspicious about the process and the final product.  I like the draft OK but am equally suspicious. 

Where's the fire?  What is so urgent in this bill that there isn't time to write the friggin' thing before voting on it?  Is every single person in Washington, DC retarded?

Actually, the Senate's immigration bill looks pretty good to me

I plan to look into this more on Sunday, but the summary I read in this morning's paper looks pretty good to me.  Not exactly what I'd have done, but much better than I expected.

I did have one idea, which might be in the bill but I seriously doubt it.  There is a provision for the illegal aliens to pay a $5000 fine per person.  If there are 12,000,000 illegals, then that's a maximum of $60 BILLION!  If the bill were to send that money to the counties from which the aliens lived, we'd see a quick end to that Sanctuary City nonsense!

There might be a good idea about immigration working its way through Congress

Good ideas are rare in Washington (especially lately) but I read about one today:

One possible compromise: Allow foreign workers to enter on temporary visas, then use a point system to determine who can stay.

In fact, the Republicans in the backroom in Washington are considering a point system, but they want to apply it primarily to people waiting abroad for permanent visas. The problem with that idea? What can we determine about people waiting abroad beyond their skill and education level? Of course we need more doctors and computer scientists. But we also need farmhands and drywallers. And there's no real way to judge from afar how well either group will do here.

Far better to admit an array of temporary workers, skilled and unskilled, and then after a few years use a point system to screen them for permanent visas: a system that rewards not just skill and education but hard work, job advancement, abiding by the law, learning English, putting down roots and investing in your community -- the things we want to see in U.S. citizens.

"Temporary is temporary" makes a good sound bite, but as a one-size-fits-all policy, it's not a workable answer. A system like that would deprive us of our most able, enterprising newcomers. Even worse, many of them probably would not go home when their work stints were done, but instead would burrow underground, creating another generation of illegal immigrants.

That makes a lot of sense to me.  It would, obviously, be subject to endless tinkering much like our tax code.  Maybe that's a feature, not a bug.  You could do a lot of cool things with a point system.  For instance, part of the points for staying might be based inversely on how many others from a particular country are already here.  I've said it before on these pages -- I think the biggest problem with immigration today is that too many are from a very small area (Central America) and therefore have enough numbers to generate their own communities and therefore are not integrating; they're melting us, we're not melting them.  So, yeah, a point system that allowed really outstanding Mexicans to stay but sent home an average Mexican in favor of an average Thai would be a good thing. 

I hope the Republicans are crafty enough to keep the State Department and the Courts out of this.  To state explicitly that the purpose of the point system, and of immigration in general, is to benefit the national interests of the United States, NOT to be "fair" to various foreign interest groups.  That's a lot to ask.  I'm not being naive, here, and sure I still think the government will largely screw this up as it does most everything it touches.  However, Libertarians and Conservatives should keep in mind that controlling our borders is a fundamental government function -- dig in and do the best deal you can, then campaign on the differences of how you would change it compared to how they would change it and let the (legal) voters sort it out.

Victor Davis Hansen's personal experiences with illegal immigration in California

He's a well respected scholor and historian, a clear thinker and cogent writer.  But in his latest article on immigration, his most compelling writing is his own personal anectdotal experience.

Less than a mile from my home is a former farmhouse whose new owner moved in several stationary Winnebagos, propane tanks, and outdoor cooking facilities—and apparently four or five entire families rent such facilities right outside his back door. Dozens live where a single family used to—a common sight in rural California that reifies illegal immigration in a way that books and essays do not...

... The government’s attitude at all levels is to punish the dutiful citizen’s misdemeanors while ignoring the alien’s felony, on the logic that the former will at least comply while the latter either cannot or will not.

... Ever since the influx of illegals into our quiet valley became a flood, I have had five drivers leave the road, plow into my vineyard, and abandon their cars, without evidence of either registration or insurance. On each occasion, I have seen them simply walk or run away from the scene of thousands of dollars in damage. Similarly, an intoxicated driver who ran a stop sign hit my car broadside and then fled the scene. Our farmhouse in the Central Valley has been broken into three times. We used to have an open yard; now it is walled, with steel gates on the driveway. Such anecdotes have become common currency in the American Southwest. Ridiculed by elites as evidence of prejudice, these stories, statistical studies now show, reflect hard fact.

Another area in which I and many conservatives part with the President.

Police should have discretion, but in California they've gone too far

Police need to have descretion.  Every time you sail past a police officer doing 4 mph over the limit, you're glad they do.  However, ignoring federal and state law for political pandering is going too far.  Now some one is trying to stop them from ignoring the immigration status of drug offenders by taking them to court:

LOS ANGELES (AP) - Illegal immigration opponents have sued the Los Angeles Police Department, taking aim at its long-standing policy of ignoring most suspects' immigration status.

The lawsuit filed Wednesday in Superior Court seeks to force officers to inform federal immigration officials when illegal immigrants are arrested on drug charges.

The department prohibits officers from inquiring about the immigration status of suspects, a policy strongly supported by Police Chief William Bratton and Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa...

Sooner or later, conservatives were bound to discover the power of the courts.  Not that this is in any way contrary to our dearly loved doctrine of original intent.

I have a similar question about divorce and the homestead act in Florida

Think about it.

            The Honorable Tom Harkin
            731 Hart Senate Office Building
            Phone (202) 224 3254
            Washington DC, 20510

Dear Senator Harkin,

    As a native Iowan and excellent customer of the Internal  Revenue Service, I am writing to ask for your assistance. I have contacted the Department of Homeland Security in an effort to determine the process for becoming an illegal alien and they referred me to you.

    My primary reason for wishing to change my status from U.S. Citizen to illegal alien stems from the bill which was recently passed by the Senate and for which you voted. If my understanding of this bill's provisions is accurate, as an illegal alien who has been in the United States for five years, all I need to do to become a citizen is to pay a $2,000 fine and income taxes for three of the last five years. I know a good deal when I see one and I am anxious to get the process started before everyone figures it out.

    Simply put, those of us who have been here legally have had to pay taxes every year so I'm excited about the prospect of avoiding two years of taxes in return for paying a $2,000 fine. Is there any way that I can apply to be illegal retroactively? This would yield an excellent result for me and my family because we paid heavy taxes in 2004 and 2005.

    Additionally, as an illegal alien I could begin using the local emergency room as my primary health care provider.  Once I have stopped paying premiums for medical insurance, my accountant figures I could save almost $10,000 a year.

    Another benefit in gaining illegal status would be that my daughter would receive preferential treatment relative to her law school applications, as well as "in-state" tuition rates for many colleges throughout the United States for my son.

    Lastly, I understand that illegal status would relieve me of the burden of renewing my driver's license and making those burdensome car insurance premiums. This is very important to me given that I still have college age children driving my car.

    If you would provide me with an outline of the process to become illegal (retroactively if possible) and copies of the necessary forms, I would be most appreciative.

Thank you for your assistance.

            Your Loyal Constituent,
            Donald Ruppert
            Burlington, IA

Hmmmmmm.

The Bank of America illigal immigrant credit card bruhaha

Yesterday I heard a local radio talk show host going off the deep end about Bank of America's new plan to issue credit cards to customers without social security numbers.  Much of the Right side of the blogosphere is going equally nuts about BOA's plan.

I say, "So what?"

Enforcing immigration is not the job of Bank of America or any other business, individual, or state government.  It is the duty of the Federal Government, a duty they are shirking.

I say if the Fed's are going to let illegals waltz in here by the millions and make no serious effort to send them home, then why the heck should Bank of America pass up a lucrative market niche?  I mean, really?  It would be different if we were "all in this together", working systematically to develop good immigration law backed by thorough enforcement.  Then we'd all owe each other the duty to enforce the law. 

But we're not.  The Fed's don't want to do squat about the Latin American immigration invasion because they're afraid to lose the Latino vote.  That makes those who rigorously try to enforce immigration rules in a Federal nudge nudge wink wink vacuum chumps, not patriots.  I would love it if Bank of America were to come out and say exactly that.  Something like,

"You build that fence and send the thousands of our customers who are here illegally home, and then we will be happy to require those SS#'s for credit cards, but until then, SOD OFF!"