Wednesday, June 20, 2007

Skippy versus Krauthammer

Two very different conservative views on illegal immigrants and the building of a Great Wall can be found at Enjoy Every Sandwich (Skippy) and Real Clear Politics (Charles Krauthammer). Both essays deserve your attention.



Anonymous said...

Skippy has a good essay and covered many of the problems with immigration reform, but still manages to paint all conservatives with the same overly wide brush while missing one of the major arguments of that side; illegal immigrants are breaking the law, there is extreme distaste for rewarding them with amnesty for doing so (stepping in front of others waiting to do so legally, which adds unfairness to the already distasteful equation), and conservatives understand that such blatant disregard for the law undermines our society in sum. Yes, many Americans are the economically illiterate rednecks he describes, but then again, many are not. Because of this, I don’t think he fundamentally understands where many (most?) conservatives are actually coming from on this issue.

Krauthammer does have a point, and a fence likely would keep some illegals out, but ultimately I think he grossly oversimplifies just how difficult such a fence really would be to build and maintain.

In answer to what I think might be effective – and Skippy did touch on some of these – this is a comment from my blog:

“I have not done a lot of research into how to remove illegals, but a few ideas come to mind.

Aside from the normal methods of deportation, and to begin enforcing the immigration laws already on the books, I suggest that the best way to achieve the desired effect is to create an atmosphere and the appropriate carrots/sticks to prompt illegal aliens to leave on their own accord:

• First would be to go after their incentive and ability to be here illegally; jobs. That is, stop turning a blind eye on those who employ illegal aliens. This could be extended to housing, if needed.

• Second would be to set a date at some point in the future (months rather than years, but enough time for those that need to, to save enough for transpiration out of the U.S.) by which illegals must leave the country if they wish to apply to come back w/o penalty or other legal delays. Those found in the U.S. after that date would be deported and would have to wait longer before being eligible to return legally. Multiple offenders could face fines, longer delays, or permanent ineligibility.

• Third – and in conjunction with number two above – create some sort of pilot guest worker program more suited to the type of labor most of the illegals are engaged in.

I think such a combination – making it difficult to stay illegally, having penalties for staying but none for leaving, and offering a way back in – might help alleviate the problem.

I also think that those born in the U.S. of non-citizens or non-permanent residents should not be awarded U.S. citizenship, but that’s a different issue.”

Anonymous said...

That'd be "transportation" rather than, "transpiration."