- Image via Wikipedia
CNN recently posted a story about a college student named Colotl who was arrested and almost deported. The gist of the situation was that she was stopped for a traffic violation and could not provide a valid license. Instead, she provided an out of date Mexican passport. In short, she seems to have been in the country illegally. While she is being presented as a victim, she did violate the law. In addition to being here illegally, she was also operating a motor vehicle without a license, which is also a crime.
I am, however, sympathetic to her plight. After all, she is in the United States trying to better herself and her prospects through higher education. Historically, we can trace back many of Mexico’s problems to the United States. This is a laudable goal. However, there are procedures for foreign students to become legitimate, legal students here in the United States. I know-I went to college and grad school with many people from outside the United States. I also have had many foreign students in my classes-students who were here legally.
However, I do see her and even the police as victims of the current system. As pundits and politicians point out, our current system of handling illegal immigrants is in serious need of reform-both in terms of the laws and the implementation. Those who are here illegally would often much prefer to be here legally and legitimately. The police would probably prefer to avoid being caught up in a political and social mess. Unfortunately, our elected officials seem to lack the courage or ability to engage this problem in a rational and effective manner. This has led certain states, such as Arizona, to pass its own laws. However, this sort of hodge-podge approach is not effective and serves mainly to create political divisiveness and hot tempers. That is, they are not helping the situation-except, perhaps to draw attention to the lack of effective action at a national level.
Setting out the goals is a relatively easy matter. One objective is to deter people from coming here illegally and to deal justly and effectively with people who elect to do so. Currently, we do not do as well as we should. A second objective is to ensure that in the pursuit of the first objective we do not violate people’s rights or encourage racism. Another objective is to redesign the system and its operation so as to make it more efficient and effective for people to go through the legal process of residing, working and going to school here. Such people contribute a great deal to the United States and many end up deciding to stay and become citizens. A look at the history of our country shows that we have benefited greatly from this influx of people from other places and this is something that gives us great strength. To use one extreme example, we benefited immensely from scientists and intellectuals fleeing from Nazi Germany and the former Soviet Bloc. As such, we should be glad that people really want to come here and we should encourage this. But, it is also important to acknowledge that there are people we should keep out. After all, we have no shortage of our own real criminals, terrorists, and other miscreants and there is no good reason to allow more into our country. Thus, the ultimate goal is to build a system that encourages and allows people who will contribute to be here legally, while ensuring that those who would bring harm remain outside.
Of course, setting such goals is easy. To use an analogy, it is like a marathon: it is easy to know that you need to cross the finish line. The hard part is making that a reality. Doing this will be like training for a marathon-it will take will and a capability to endure some pain.
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](https://i2.wp.com/img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png)
Some comments:
1) People who come here illegally deserve compassion, but they should not be rewarded for breaking the law at the expense of people waiting to come to the U.S. legally.
2) It should be acknowledged that unskilled illegal immigrants hold down wages for unskilled U.S. citizens, preventing those at the bottom from making better wages. It is often said that Americans won’t do certain jobs, but the more accurate statement is that Americans won’t do certain jobs at minimum wage.
3) The people who benefit from illegal immigration are mainly the immigrants themselves and the people who employ them. In general, unskilled workers take more from the system than they contribute, and this is even more true as we become more of a welfare state.
4) Skilled, highly educated immigrants are a great boon to the U.S. and we should encourage as many of these people as possible to come here.
Agree #1. Regarding #2, if “Americans won’t do certain jobs at minimum wage” who will? Could you provide details to adequately support the claim in the second sentence of #3? Agree with #4, though it should really have no bearing on decisions about “illegal” immigrants. I don’t think “highly educated” illegal immigrants should get special treatment.
freediek:
The way to help lower income people is to make labor scarce, so that wages go up. The law of supply and demand applies to labor as well as goods. Flooding the market with cheap labor only hurts lower income families.
Excellent points. Also, there is the legitimate concern about the crimes that are associated with illegal immigration. In some cases, the illegals are the victims of these crimes (such as being exploited by the folks who bring them across the border). Sorting out the situation a bit better would help with this concern as well.
Why do we demonize law abiding US Citizens who want illegals out of the country? Would I not expect to get into trouble if I remained in Germany after my career in the Army, without going through the proper procedures?
I take this stance: We can understand why it happens but we cannot allow it to happen. California has suffered greatly because of this. Of the 30 million uninsured people in the US before the health care bill passed, nearly half of them were illegal aliens.
Europe is having the same issues. Wait and see. The backlash from Europeans will be worse than America’s. The Europeans are xenophobic and racist. America on the other hand, is the least racist nation in the world, though you wouldn’t know it by listening to the left. And it’s Europeans who, despite their high-browed “pacifism” honed senseless blood letting to a fine art.
Europe is worse of than the United States. While we have immigration problems, we tend to integrate much better than other countries. However, this does not mean that we do not have problems that need to be addressed.
As Magus points out, illegals do put a strain on the social systems. One way to address this is to take steps to convert the illegals to legals who pay taxes (although, interestingly enough, some illegals do apparently pay taxes).
The real problem is that unskilled workers are a net drain on the system. Here is one study:
http://www.cis.org/articles/2004/fiscalexec.html
This study is one of the first to estimate the total impact of illegal immigration on the federal budget. Most previous studies have focused on the state and local level and have examined only costs or tax payments, but not both. Based on Census Bureau data, this study finds that, when all taxes paid (direct and indirect) and all costs are considered, illegal households created a net fiscal deficit at the federal level of more than $10 billion in 2002. We also estimate that, if there was an amnesty for illegal aliens, the net fiscal deficit would grow to nearly $29 billion.
Among the findings:
Households headed by illegal aliens imposed more than $26.3 billion in costs on the federal government in 2002 and paid only $16 billion in taxes, creating a net fiscal deficit of almost $10.4 billion, or $2,700 per illegal household.
Among the largest costs are Medicaid ($2.5 billion); treatment for the uninsured ($2.2 billion); food assistance programs such as food stamps, WIC, and free school lunches ($1.9 billion); the federal prison and court systems ($1.6 billion); and federal aid to schools ($1.4 billion).
With nearly two-thirds of illegal aliens lacking a high school degree, the primary reason they create a fiscal deficit is their low education levels and resulting low incomes and tax payments, not their legal status or heavy use of most social services.
On average, the costs that illegal households impose on federal coffers are less than half that of other households, but their tax payments are only one-fourth that of other households.
Many of the costs associated with illegals are due to their American-born children, who are awarded U.S. citizenship at birth. Thus, greater efforts at barring illegals from federal programs will not reduce costs because their citizen children can continue to access them.
If illegal aliens were given amnesty and began to pay taxes and use services like households headed by legal immigrants with the same education levels, the estimated annual net fiscal deficit would increase from $2,700 per household to nearly $7,700, for a total net cost of $29 billion.
Costs increase dramatically because unskilled immigrants with legal status — what most illegal aliens would become — can access government programs, but still tend to make very modest tax payments.
Although legalization would increase average tax payments by 77 percent, average costs would rise by 118 percent.
The fact that legal immigrants with few years of schooling are a large fiscal drain does not mean that legal immigrants overall are a net drain — many legal immigrants are highly skilled.
The vast majority of illegals hold jobs. Thus the fiscal deficit they create for the federal government is not the result of an unwillingness to work.
The results of this study are consistent with a 1997 study by the National Research Council, which also found that immigrants’ education level is a key determinant of their fiscal impact.
“With nearly two-thirds of illegal aliens lacking a high school degree, the primary reason they create a fiscal deficit is their low education levels and resulting low incomes and tax payments, not their legal status or heavy use of most social services.”
Good response to my “Agree with #4, though it should really have no bearing on decisions about “illegal” immigrants. I don’t think “highly educated” illegal immigrants should get special treatment.”
It comes down to a “bottom line approach” doesn’t it where if the “illegal” would be educated we’d likely give a shit about his illegal status. “Give us your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to be free, but screw your uneducated. . .”
freddiek:
I don’t think there is a problem with illegal immigration of highly skilled people, but if there were I would not advocate applying a double standard to them. I do think highly skilled people should be given preference in legal immigration, however.
http://www.frumforum.com/law-students-arrest-creates-test-of-arizona-immigration-law
ahem…it should be acknowledged that the land belonged to the ‘illegals’ before white conquistodores took it. In this scenario, US citizens are the illegals. Isn’t this the excuse of Israel to obliterate Palestine?
fiddleferme:
Think carefully. Do you not think the approach of Ghandi would have been effective against Israel? Sadly, Islam has no tradition of non-violent resistance.
TJ,
Ghandi’s methods only work with Western governments. Everywhere else, Ghandi dies…
Read ‘The Last Article”, by Harry Turtledove. It is a sci-fi piece that speculates about what would have happened to Gandhi if Nazi Germany had won the war.
fiddleferme,
Which warring tribe would you give the land back to?
It doesn’t seem Israel has obliterated Palestine.
Again, it’s so easy if we break it down. Treat your country as you would your own house. Then the rules are clear: You can’t come in unless i invite you, you can’t steal my stuff.
The reason people don’t think like thi is that most of the time the problems caused are caused to someone else, mostly the people of Arizona, Texas and California.
Oh, and by the way. Most legal immigrants are very much against those who enter the US illegally. It’s a dishonor to those who did it right to pine over those who do it wrong.
That is a legitimate point. As Ulysses Grant said: “Generally, the officers of the army were indifferent whether the annexation was consummated or not; but not so all of them. For myself, I was bitterly opposed to the measure, and to this day regard the war, which resulted, as one of the most unjust ever waged by a stronger against a weaker nation. It was an instance of a republic following the bad example of European monarchies, in not considering justice in their desire to acquire additional territory.”
What people often forget is that, not that long ago, Americans were crossing the border seeking opportunities in Mexico.
The two wrongs make a right argument. It’s the same argument I heard when I arrested some criminals for drug possession:
“Cops do drugs too!”
Cops who do drugs go to jail, too.