–Are you for immigration reform? What does that mean?

The debt hawks are to economics as the creationists are to biology. Those, who do not understand monetary sovereignty, do not understand economics. Cutting the federal deficit is the most ignorant and damaging step the federal government could take. It ranks ahead of the Hawley-Smoot Tariff.
==========================================================================================================================================================

Congress has been debating immigration reform, and like all political “reforms,” the word means different things to different people. Health insurance “reform” means federally provided, affordable insurance to everyone, or to no one, or somewhere in between. Budget “reform” means cut spending, increase taxes, both or neither. Tax reform means make taxes simpler or fairer or lower or higher.

But what does immigration reform mean? Does it mean fewer or more immigrants? Does it mean an easier or more difficult procedure? And more importantly, what is the goal? Is it to:
–Protect our nation from terrorists and other enemies?
–Protect American workers from competition?
–Protect America from crime?
–Save our limited resources?
–Keep American white? Or Christian? Or English speaking?
–To relieve an overcrowded America?
–Just keep Mexicans out?

For example, consider Rep. Steve King, an Iowa Republican who wants to end automatic or “birthright” citizenship for all children born in the United States. What is the benefit to America? He says it’s to prevent non-citizens from coming here on a visa, and intentionally having a child, thereby circumventing immigration laws. Aside from the probability the number of such people is small, what is the problem? What if some women do that? Who has been harmed? How has that diminished America?

Or consider those Republican lawmakers from southern states and lawmakers who wish to copy Arizona’s harsh law. They would give police the massive job of screening all suspects for immigration status. Why? They claim the undocumented immigrants are too costly, using medical and educational facilities without paying taxes. But how true is this really? What percentage of undocumented immigrants do not pay taxes? And what would be the police costs and the court costs and attorney costs and the logistic costs of pursuing all these people, trying them and deporting them, only to have them return again and again? And what would be the cost in human suffering, or do we now consider undocumented immigrants to be something less than human?

These lawmakers claim their goal also is to protect their states from crime, but do undocumented immigrants cause more or less crime than citizens?

Rather than allowing the xenophobes, who wish to create a “fortress America,” to coopt the word “reform,” perhaps those, who still belief the words on the Statue of Liberty, might wish to define reform in our own terms. How about if “immigration reform” means make immigration much faster and easier? How about recognizing that going through danger, cost and effort is prima facie evidence of people who truly want to be Americans, and such desire might make them more loyal and more devoted to our nation than those lucky enough to be born here?

Surely, we can protect America without building a North Koreanesque barrier. Is Mexico our enemy? Are the great open plains so crowded? Is the American worker too weak to compete? Are resources truly limited to a Monetarily Sovereign nation that at the snap of an finger, can spend trillions on the world’s greatest war machine? And don’t immigrants actually contribute to our resources? My immigrant parents did.

Yes, let’s have immigration reform. Let’s open the welcoming arms of a great, confident, powerful America, rather than hiding behind the barbed wire curtain of a crouching, fearful, mean spirited bunch of petty losers.

Rodger Malcolm Mitchell
http://www.rodgermitchell.com

No nation can tax itself into prosperity. Those who say the stimulus “didn’t work” remind me of the guy whose house is on fire. A neighbor runs with a garden hose and starts spraying, but the fire continues. The neighbor wants to call the fire department, which would bring the big hoses, but the guy says, “Don’t call. As you can see, water doesn’t put out fires.”

–Return the Statue of Liberty

The debt hawks are to economics as the creationists are to biology.

Arizona patriots have spent, and apparently will continue to spend, enormous amounts of money, to track, arrest, try, jail and deport illegal immigrants. In addition, the ongoing legal costs to create and defend in court, the various anti-immigration laws, are substantial.

All this money is spent because of the perceived economic drain on legal taxpayers, for schools, medical facilities and other welfare and human services support programs, the belief illegal immigrants take jobs from American citizens and the belief illegal immigrants are responsible for illegal drugs in Arizona.

An Arizona law (mostly overturned) would have allowed police to demand proof of legal residence from those stopped or arrested, when there was “reasonable suspicion” that they are in the country illegally.

What constitutes “reasonable suspicion”? What factors, for instance in a traffic stop, would give a police officer “reasonable suspicion” that a person was an illegal alien? Skin color? Accent? Are white people exempt? And if the officers “reasonable suspicion” were wrong, would an innocent person be detained? Will every person in Arizona now be required to carry official citizenship papers or a birth certificate, (ala Nazi Germany) in case a police officer has a “reasonable suspicion about him/her?

Pro-immigrant groups say Arizona’s expensive efforts merely are a manifestation of bigotry, and are not supported by economic considerations. For instance, the words and actions of Sheriff Joe Arpaio from Maricopa County, Arizona do bear a strong resemblance to the words and actions of “Bull” Connor, the notorious bigot from Birmingham, Alabama, who claimed he merely enforced Alabama’s segregation laws.

With all the emotional shouting, facts are not being heard. Perhaps it all begins with a simple question: What is the real difference between an illegal immigrant and a legal immigrant? While much has changed recently, a REPORT completed for the year 2004 is instructive. Summarized, it indicates that on balance, illegal immigrants provide an overall economic benefit for Arizona.

While we’ve heard no outcry against legal immigrants, it’s may be possible illegal immigrants are even more beneficial. They are more likely to be of working age, more likely to work (they came here to earn money) and possibly less likely to commit crimes (for fear of deportation).

A chart on p. 58 of the above report says: “Fiscal costs of immigrants in 2004 were an estimated $1.4 billion. Tax revenues attributable to immigrants as workers were approximately $2.4 billion, resulting in a net fiscal gain of approximately $940 million.

It is quite common, when a nation experiences difficult economic times, for the citizens of that nation to look for scapegoats and especially to develop xenophobia. I suspect that is what has happened in Arizona and in the several other states considering tough, anti-alien laws. It’s become so crazy, some Republicans want to deny citizenship to U.S.-born children of illegal immigrants!

Sadly, during times of stress, some “patriots” forget our heritage: “Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, the wretched refuse of your teeming shore; send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me. I lift my lamp beside the golden door.“ Shall we return the Statue of Liberty?

Or better yet, perhaps we simply should stop making the path to citizenship so darn difficult.

Rodger Malcolm Mitchell
http://www.rodgermitchell.com

No nation can tax itself into prosperity