Saturday, May 8, 2010

Four Questions About Immigration

What most of us conservatives consider a no-brainer about the Arizona immigration bill, in that it is just an affirmation of the Federal law with State penalties, the MSM seems to distort in order to support a liberal cause. This distortion is fueling distrust of government and creating civil unrest. If there are riots, the Republicans will be blamed instead of the liberal media.

Now, in my opinion, workplace enforcement is a better way to deter illegal immigration, because it raises the price of illegal labor. Immigration is a supply and demand problem: the demand for cheap labor in the United States produces the supply of illegal immigrants. Cut the demand and the supply will dwindle. Nevertheless, after reading Mac Donald's piece, along with Christopher Caldwell's, David Frum's, and George Will's recent columns on the subject, SB 1070 looks like a desperate, slightly inflammatory, yet more or less reasonable attempt to address a pressing issue. The state is trying to make federal immigration laws work. Marco Rubio and Phil Jackson (!) agree. Here's Jackson:

First Jackson, who has showed lefty leanings in the past, indicated he had no problem with the controversial state Senate Bill 1070.

“Am I crazy, or am I the only one that heard [the legislature] say ‘we just took the United States immigration law and adapted it to our state,’” Jackson said.

Then he mildly scolded the Suns.

“I don’t think teams should get involved in the political stuff. And I think this one’s still kind of coming out to balance as to how it’s going to be favorably looked upon by our public. If I heard it right the American people are really for stronger immigration laws, if I’m not mistaken. Where we stand as basketball teams, we should let that kind of play out and let the political end of that go where it’s going to go.”

So here are four questions for opponents of SB 1070 who claim not to embrace the radical, open borders position that ruled until 1875:

1. Does the law have meaning? That is, if Congress has declared certain forms of migration illegal, isn't the state (broadly construed) required to enforce those laws?

2. Does illegal immigration suppress the wages of low-skilled workers?

3. Does America have the right to fence its borders?

4. Of which enforcement measures should we approve?

After due consideration, it's hard to answer Yes to questions one, two, and three, and not think SB 1070 is a basically sensible answer to question four.
Read Four Questions About Immigration here.

No comments:

Post a Comment