S. 1348, the Immigration Bill, is dead on arrival.
Bush can’t get Republican support, not with the grassroots so angry, not with his lame duck status, not with Teddy Kennedy carrying the water for it. Democrats have no incentive to cooperate. My guess is it won’t even get the votes necessary for debate in the Senate.
So what happens next?
Can I offer a modest proposal? It’s time for a true national summit with Mexico, in which all issues are on the table. Since Bush won’t cooperate, it’s completely logical for Congress-critters to step forward.
This could start with a letter to, say, Univision or Telemundo, suggesting it be done as a TV series. And if it gets some ratings, get it on NBC’s fall schedule. Or, a Democratic challenger (hint hint) who wishes to distinguish themselves from the pack could go the Mexico City, meeting with government officials, with business leaders, and speaking Spanish on Mexican television.
There are enormous issues right now beyond immigration facing both countries:
- Drugs, which are destroying the Mexican state.
- Jobs, which Mexico doesn’t have enough of.
- The hollowing-out of Mexican cities and towns, which have become dependent on payments from workers in the U.S. for their survival.
- Energy, which Mexico is still exporting to the U.S.
- Trade, and whether NAFTA should be maintained.
- Border security, both for goods and for people.
We have a 14 year-old free trade agreement with Mexico guaranteeing
the free exchange of goods across the border. That agreement has no
provision for environmental standards, so we export our manufacturing
pollutants. It has no provision for labor standards, so we export
union jobs to non-union maquiladora
. It has no provision for the movement of labor, which is the victim of wicked capital flows that have caused a "giant sucking sound" south of the border.
On the other hand Americans treat many Mexican citizens like scum, even though the vast
majority are hard-working, far more like our grandparents than we are. And we’ve been buying up their best beach
front property for years, both for retirement and so we can act all
ugly at spring break. (You want to try to raise a family next to the video above?)
Point is there is enormous resentment on both sides of the border, and good
reason for all that resentment. Americans face what they consider grave
injustices from Mexico, and vice versa.
We need to have these out, in a civilized way. We need to look one
another in the eye on this, in a civilized way. We need to be honest,
both sides. Many on both sides no longer trust democracy or the
democratic process. Both sides have reason for this. Many on both sides
no longer trust their legal systems, because of problems which exist on
the other side of the border. Both sides have reason for this.
We can’t have both a free trade agreement and a de facto state of
war. The road we are going on leads to the destruction of both countries, the United States and Mexico.
Somewhere, in politics, in the media, somewhere, and on both sides of the
border, we have to come to this realization and start dealing with it
rationally. All of it. Not just piece-by-piece, as a problem of
immigration or drugs or pollution or health. All of it.
The time for demagogues is over. It’s time for real answers.
OK, here is the untold dirty little secret of this whole illegal immigration mess. There is a large enough constituency of Lou Dobbs worshipping economic idiotarians that there have to be laws and a great fence (that can be seen from space with spy satellites) and “enforcement” (occasional newsworthy raids against companies too stupid to play the game right). But there is also economic reality, which is that millions of people are needed to fill jobs that people raised here won’t do. Why won’t they do them? Because even the lousiest jobs that Americans will do (like WalMart greeter) are a heck of a lot better than picking fruit or washing dishes.
All the things that Pat Buchanan, Lou Dobbs, or Mark Krikorian fear about Mexicans and other Latinos (median IQ and family size come to mind), if true, are what make them perfectly situated to do these manual labor intensive jobs and actually find some satisfaction from doing them. Let’s be clear… There is nothing racist about the data itself, if that’s what the data indicates. The bigoted step is saying “therefore, we need to build a wall to prevent these people from driving down the great median IQ that we have”. Having cracked the crackers, I can move on to the dirty little secret…
That secret is that we actually have close to the perfect system now. It’s just a little ambiguous. People do not come here seeking citizenship or benefits. For the most part, the benefits really aren’t there. They come to work and they send the money home. So if you dislike amnesty, you should embrace the present, not lament that the compromise fix isn’t the one you hoped for. Employers have a good situation now too. Plausible deniability. They aren’t supposed to hire illegals, but their hands are tied over determining citizenship and investigating social security numbers. I’ve mentioned this here before, but I get a letter from a big firm that mostly represents employers in employment law. Their general newsletter advice for construction firms was literally to keep administration off-site so that ICE has to serve warrants off-site, giving subcontractors enough time to get their &^%$ together and move the non-English speaking undocumented off the site.
When opponents of the compromise say we should enforce our current laws first, including funding and building the fence that was previously authorized, they miss the point. There isn’t the political will to enforce it. We have the laws and keep them on the books to pay enough lip service to the anti-immigrant crowd to keep them in line, but then pretty much let the market work so long as people aren’t too stupid about it. The stupid ones get to be examples of how we’re “serious” about the law.
The compromise bill then becomes a way to disambiguate things. But I don’t think that’s really what anyone wants. In which case, the status quo is just fine. It’s a shame though, that Bush and his brain (Karl Rove) don’t get any real credit for this ingenious scheme.
OK, here is the untold dirty little secret of this whole illegal immigration mess. There is a large enough constituency of Lou Dobbs worshipping economic idiotarians that there have to be laws and a great fence (that can be seen from space with spy satellites) and “enforcement” (occasional newsworthy raids against companies too stupid to play the game right). But there is also economic reality, which is that millions of people are needed to fill jobs that people raised here won’t do. Why won’t they do them? Because even the lousiest jobs that Americans will do (like WalMart greeter) are a heck of a lot better than picking fruit or washing dishes.
All the things that Pat Buchanan, Lou Dobbs, or Mark Krikorian fear about Mexicans and other Latinos (median IQ and family size come to mind), if true, are what make them perfectly situated to do these manual labor intensive jobs and actually find some satisfaction from doing them. Let’s be clear… There is nothing racist about the data itself, if that’s what the data indicates. The bigoted step is saying “therefore, we need to build a wall to prevent these people from driving down the great median IQ that we have”. Having cracked the crackers, I can move on to the dirty little secret…
That secret is that we actually have close to the perfect system now. It’s just a little ambiguous. People do not come here seeking citizenship or benefits. For the most part, the benefits really aren’t there. They come to work and they send the money home. So if you dislike amnesty, you should embrace the present, not lament that the compromise fix isn’t the one you hoped for. Employers have a good situation now too. Plausible deniability. They aren’t supposed to hire illegals, but their hands are tied over determining citizenship and investigating social security numbers. I’ve mentioned this here before, but I get a letter from a big firm that mostly represents employers in employment law. Their general newsletter advice for construction firms was literally to keep administration off-site so that ICE has to serve warrants off-site, giving subcontractors enough time to get their &^%$ together and move the non-English speaking undocumented off the site.
When opponents of the compromise say we should enforce our current laws first, including funding and building the fence that was previously authorized, they miss the point. There isn’t the political will to enforce it. We have the laws and keep them on the books to pay enough lip service to the anti-immigrant crowd to keep them in line, but then pretty much let the market work so long as people aren’t too stupid about it. The stupid ones get to be examples of how we’re “serious” about the law.
The compromise bill then becomes a way to disambiguate things. But I don’t think that’s really what anyone wants. In which case, the status quo is just fine. It’s a shame though, that Bush and his brain (Karl Rove) don’t get any real credit for this ingenious scheme.
This is in line with Brad’s comment. It is not in the administration’s best interest to have real immigration reform. Underpaying illegal immigrants is the backbone of many GOP friendly industries and helps prop up our current state of wealthless prosperity that neo-cons love so much. Meanwhile, the bugaboo of the evil illegal alien (emphasis on alien) helps drive suburban support for financing the bloated an ineffectual Homeland Security department the administration has created.
This is in line with Brad’s comment. It is not in the administration’s best interest to have real immigration reform. Underpaying illegal immigrants is the backbone of many GOP friendly industries and helps prop up our current state of wealthless prosperity that neo-cons love so much. Meanwhile, the bugaboo of the evil illegal alien (emphasis on alien) helps drive suburban support for financing the bloated an ineffectual Homeland Security department the administration has created.
Jesse, there’s absolutely nothing in line about what you said with my comment. Every poll of the GOP base no matter how you cut it (grassroots, business donors, gun owners, etc.) is overwhelmingly against illegal immigration, as in “build a fence, prosecute employers, no amnesty”. There is a similar myopia among social justice progressives worried about immigrants being exploited. Look, when people are willing to crawl through the desert for hourly cash jobs (or perhaps tied to bogus SSNs), live in cramped apartments, and send the money home… When “El Norde” is a near mythical place one goes to enrich one’s family… Nobody is being exploited. Everyone in the game has something to gain in relation to their status quo. Win win win win… Few have anything to lose — about the only stakeholder that seems to have “lost” anything is unionism, but wouldn’t you think millions of illegal workers would figure out a way to unionize in some sense if it made economic sense? Comparatively, it makes none for them. The alternative to coming to work in the United States is to stay home and be poor.
As discussed in the mainstream press over the course of the immigration debate, Bush’s view is not formed of cynicism or politics. Anything but. It’s way too difficult of a position requiring too much energy to hold for political reasons. His view is principled small-l libertarian, formed mostly from his life experiences in rural Texas. Had 9/11 not interfered, I think Bush’s strongest legacy might very well have been eventual expansion of the United States to include British Columbia and much of Mexico. And not in any sort of imperialist way. When looking at their neighbor to the south (BC) and the north (Mexico), these people see wealth generation and a compounding of wealth differential that their current governments can’t hope to ever catch up with. They see contentious problems like energy, wars, trade deficits, and multicultural strife as things we kinda hash out and still move ahead. Bush will get credit for planting the seeds, but another centrist President (maybe a Guiliani or a Clinton) will have to do the concrete things to start to make it happen. At any rate, I give it 50 years max, and it will be the definitive legacy of libertarian influence on this country.
Jesse, there’s absolutely nothing in line about what you said with my comment. Every poll of the GOP base no matter how you cut it (grassroots, business donors, gun owners, etc.) is overwhelmingly against illegal immigration, as in “build a fence, prosecute employers, no amnesty”. There is a similar myopia among social justice progressives worried about immigrants being exploited. Look, when people are willing to crawl through the desert for hourly cash jobs (or perhaps tied to bogus SSNs), live in cramped apartments, and send the money home… When “El Norde” is a near mythical place one goes to enrich one’s family… Nobody is being exploited. Everyone in the game has something to gain in relation to their status quo. Win win win win… Few have anything to lose — about the only stakeholder that seems to have “lost” anything is unionism, but wouldn’t you think millions of illegal workers would figure out a way to unionize in some sense if it made economic sense? Comparatively, it makes none for them. The alternative to coming to work in the United States is to stay home and be poor.
As discussed in the mainstream press over the course of the immigration debate, Bush’s view is not formed of cynicism or politics. Anything but. It’s way too difficult of a position requiring too much energy to hold for political reasons. His view is principled small-l libertarian, formed mostly from his life experiences in rural Texas. Had 9/11 not interfered, I think Bush’s strongest legacy might very well have been eventual expansion of the United States to include British Columbia and much of Mexico. And not in any sort of imperialist way. When looking at their neighbor to the south (BC) and the north (Mexico), these people see wealth generation and a compounding of wealth differential that their current governments can’t hope to ever catch up with. They see contentious problems like energy, wars, trade deficits, and multicultural strife as things we kinda hash out and still move ahead. Bush will get credit for planting the seeds, but another centrist President (maybe a Guiliani or a Clinton) will have to do the concrete things to start to make it happen. At any rate, I give it 50 years max, and it will be the definitive legacy of libertarian influence on this country.
Brad, explain to me how our first posts are in disagreement. Point by point, I believe we are saying exactly the same thing. Our implications may differ, but not the arguments.
Brad, explain to me how our first posts are in disagreement. Point by point, I believe we are saying exactly the same thing. Our implications may differ, but not the arguments.