November 10, 2006

An immigration challenge for Andrew Sullivan

In addition to various other things, Sully is wrong on immigration, saying this:

And we may get a sensible compromise on immigration.

That "compromise" - otherwise known as "comprehensive" "reform" - would vastly increase legal immigration and would lead to millions of new illegal aliens coming here in expectation of receiving the next amnesty. It would have many other negative consequences, but let's concentrate on just two:

1. Since the 1986 amnesty was never really enforced, and since the same types of forces (growers, the far-left, etc.) that pushed that through are now encouraging the new amnesty, what specific assurances can Sully offer that the new amnesty would be enforced?

2. Hopefully we can agree that Mexico has been able to obtain a good deal of political power inside the U.S. due to all of the legal and illegal immigrants that they've sent us. And, the new amnesty would increase that power. Does Sully have any plans that would counteract their political power, or is he not concerned about Mexico obtaining even more political power inside the U.S.?

Posted to Immigration at November 10, 2006 04:43 PM

Comments

and who was el.president at that time, its all a liers game.

Posted by: Fred Dawes at November 12, 2006 02:05 PM

Democrats and Republicans should agree to key legal issues about immigration in away that doesn't alienate law-respecting Hispanics: (1.) It is illegal and wrong to just come across our border without proper procedure; that shouldn't even be allowed as "debatable." (2.) Employment is controlled by the SSN number throught the W-2 process: there is no way to get a "real job" in American without either using a real SSN, or scamming the system in a way that is dangerous (identity theft, etc.) and not just a muddled argument about how much money people should or will get many years later from different employment arrangements. Take it from there.

Posted by: Neil' at November 13, 2006 07:23 AM