Saturday, June 16, 2007

Immigration, Part I

I suppose that I started this blog to muse about various aspects of policy here in our country. Clearly, immigration is one of the most serious and divisive issues that we face as a country at this time. It is a very complex, multi-faceted problem, and does not lend itself to easy solutions. Our politicians are failing us again, for they are trying to pass "comprehensive" immigration law without really explaining it to the people. I guess they think we are too dumb.

Obviously, we have a problem, and it is a large one. There are millions of illegal immigrants already in our country, and more waves of them are coming in every day through porous borders. We don't even know how many of them are already here. Twelve million? Twenty million? Who knows?

That question presents the first problem to solve. How do we identify the illegals? We know kind of where they are: in the American Southwest, for the most part; but also in almost every other state. Is there a way to identify them without establishing a police state? Probably not, unless we can get them to come forward on their own. It just will not be practical to do it any other way.

How can we get them to do that? Well, of course we have to offer them something that they will accept. Deportation, jail or permanent exclusion from the United States are certainly not going to get them to come forward. Anybody have another idea? Please post it in the comments.

Assuming we can identify the illegals, what do we do with them? Deport them? Jail them, then deport them? What happens if we do those things?

We are talking about deporting 12 to 20 million people. What will this cost interms of additional manpower and jail space? What does this do to our economy? Most of these folks came to this country to follow the American Dream. Most work, and many even pay taxes and vote. Almost all are pretty good people. What kind of hole will this create if they are suddenly gone? What jobs will go undone in an economy with virtually full employment?

I don't hear any of our politicians talking about these questions. We do see a provision in the proposed law that would give these people a pathway to seek to become legal immigrants. All of the discussion seems to be over the code word of "amnesty." Of course, that is what it is. Why do not the proponents to this law defend it rather than deny that it is amnesty? My thought is that it is defensible under the circumstances, but only if a credible program to establish effective border security is accomplished first.

There is no real hurry to deal with those already here, other than potential terrorists. But there is a real necessity to establish security on our borders now.

My thought is that Peggy Noonan had a pretty good approach a week or two ago:

"...A little love would go a long way right now. We should stop putting newcomers in constant jeopardy by blithely importing ever-newer immigrants who'll work for ever lower wages. The ones here will never get a sure foot on the next rung that way.

We should close the border, pause, absorb what we have, and set ourselves to "patriating" the newcomers who are here. The young of AmeriCorps might help teach them English. Those reaching retirement age, who happen to be the last people in America who were taught and know American history, could help them learn the story of our country. We could, as a nation, set our minds to this...."

Close the borders now. Don't let anyone else into our house without our invitation. Then deal with those already here. Good idea.

Why do a comprehensive law now? Why not keep the promises made with the last comprehensive law in 1986...the last time we granted amnesty?

Secure the borders, then deal with the other issues.

UPDATE:

Mark Steyn weigh in this morning with another column that deals with immigration. "Immigration Bill is a Fraud" gives us a blunt view about the bill from an immigrant, and, as usual, does not mind getting right to the point (emphasis mine ):

"....Back in the real world far from those senators living in the non-shadows of their boundless self-admiration, the truth is that America's immigration bureaucracy cannot cope with its existing caseload, and thus will certainly be unable to cope with millions of additional teeming hordes tossed into its waiting room. Currently, the time in which an immigration adjudicator is expected to approve or reject an application is six minutes. That's not enough time to read the basic form, never mind any supporting documentation. It's certainly not enough time for any meaningful background check. Under political pressure to ''bring the 12 million undocumented Americans out of the shadows,'' the immigration bureaucracy will rubberstamp gazillions of applications for open-ended probationary legal status within 24 hours and with no more supporting documentation than a utility bill or an affidavit from a friend. There's never been a better time for Mullah Omar to apply for U.S. residency.

America has an illegal immigration problem in part because it has a legal immigration problem. Anyone who enters the system exposes himself to an arbitrary, capricious, whimsical bureaucracy: For example, one of the little-known features of this bill is that in order to ''bring the 12 million undocumented Americans out of the shadows,'' millions of legal applicants are being hurled back into outer darkness. Law-abiding foreign nationals who filed their paperwork in the last two years would be required to go back to their home countries and start all over again. Not only does this bill reward law-breaking, it punishes law-abiding......."

This is absolutely true, and is why Americans do not support the current bill. The politicians have never kept the promises made in the years before. How can we expect them to keep them now? They cannot or will not even enforce current law. They should do this, secure our borders, and then talk about a comprehensive bill.

UPDATE 2: June 18, 2007

US News says we are making progress. It sounds good, if true. Read the whole thing.

Looking for honesty and integrity

Michael Barone has an article in Friday's National Journal entitled Open Field Politics that pretty well describes what is going on in American politics today.


".....Now we seem to be entering a new period, a period of open-field politics. It seems to be a time when there are no permanent alliances, when new leaders arise with new strategies and tactics, when the voters, instead of forming themselves into two coherent and cohesive armies, wander about the field, attaching themselves to one band and then another, with no clear lines of battle and no landmarks to rally beside....."


It is an excellent article and I commend it to everyone.


I think it is clear that what we are seeing is that the voters are pretty sick of the "business as usual" in Washington, and are casting about for a solution. Neither party so far has come up with the right performance. Both Republican and Democratic promises to change are ignored after the elections, and the same corrupt practices in the Congress and the Executive continue, whomever is elected. I think we will continue to see this until one party or the other, or hopefully both, clean up the mess, and start doing the nation's business honestly and with integrity.



With so much money being collected to fund the various elections, it is going to be very difficult. The old saw that politicians try to sell the public that the money doesn't buy anything is disproved by the "earmark" process, if by nothing else. Until something is done to get absolute transparency in the process, the corrupt practices will continue.

Tuesday, June 12, 2007

Old folks and elderly care

Sorry about my absence, but I have been otherwise occupied, of which more later. (Editor: why are you apologizing? Nobody reads your blog.--I know, I know, but maybe someone eventually will.)

My old friend George has written a piece about the lack of geriatric physicians over at Blog of Ages today. He says there are too few young doctors going into geriatrics, which should be an up and coming specialty since there are so many Boomers reaching retirement age. He is right, of course, but one must consider that with Medicare setting the prices, it is more financially rewarding for the youngsters to specialize in things like anesthesia or heart surgery. He raises an excellent point, but he also got me thinking about another aspect of the problem.

Many of us, I am sure, have been faced with the duty of caring for elderly parents. My sweet wife and I cared for our elderly parents, stricken with everything from Alzheimer's and dementia to stroke, diabetes, and loss of limbs, for nine years. But that is not the end of the story. After having done that, we are now faced with caring for one another during our "Golden Years." This is a future that all of George's Geezers (all of us!) will face. Without enough geriatric physicians.

Many may not be prepared for a sudden end to a spouse's mobility, for whatever reasons, and it is something that every one should contemplate. Are you prepared to deal with it? One had best get ready.

This was brought home to my wife less than four years ago, when I had a quadruple coronary artery bypass and then an aortic dissection, all at the same time. My dear wife, though she had other interests, was my caretaker for several months, and did a fabulous job. People do not realize the stress put upon caretakers in that situation, particularly family. A special halo is due to my bride, and others like her, that give of their time and energy to help others in that condition.

Nearly two weeks ago, my bride got even with me. She fell and fractured a vertebra in her lumbar region. So now I get to repay her, and am doing so. And gladly. No halo expected. I have to get her well so I can get my knees replaced. LOL

So, all you geezers out there be prepared, because it is coming, whether you like it or not.

Having been so somber in this post, I will try to lighten up in subsequent ones. There are lots of good times to be had out there for us retirees, and I recommend that everyone take advantage of them.

More later.