Corey Stewart’s Xenophobic Games


Corey A. Stewart is playing “Whack -A-Mole.”

Now that Susan Bolton, a federal judge in Arizona, has struck down the more noxious parts of that state’s racist and xenophobic anti-immigrant law, the chairman of the Prince William County Board of Supervisors has freshened up his version of the Copper State law for all of the Old Dominion.

Stewart, a Republican, shepherded a similar law in his largely white, affluent bedroom county outside of Washington and had plans to infect all of Virginia with it as he takes credit for helping brainstorm Arizona’s ill-advised venture.

Judge Bolton blocked parts of the Arizona law that would make it a crime for immigrants not to carry their registration papers with them 24/7, make it illegal to seek employment in public areas, authorize police to make warrantless arrests of people they assume to be illegal aliens, and require police to check a person’s immigration status wherever possible.

In response, Stewart has done a quick sidestep shuffle and is proposing revisions for Virginia. They include not requiring immigrants to carry with them IDs showing they are legit (it was struck down in Arizona anyway), but he would make it illegal for undocumented aliens to buy property or register a car. If someone wants to make a wire transfer out of the country, they must pay fees ranging $5 for $500 or 1 percent of the sum above that. It isn’t clear if this would apply to all Virginians or just immigrants but Stewart says it would stem immigrants from sending home the money they earn in the state. You get it back as a tax credit when you file your taxes (I thought Republicans were against regulation and bureaucracy).

Just after Bolton issued her ruling hours before Arizona’s law took effect on July 28, Stewart said:

“I think the Obama administration has made a strategic blunder.” By filing suit against Arizona’s law, the administration “is just trying to intimidate Arizona.”

“Intimidate”? Now that’s a curious choice of words.

If you want to see examples of intimidation, check out the Web site for Virginia Rules of Law campaign, which Stewart launched in June. On it, a smiling Stewart (family photo on right rail) brags that thanks to his law, “illegal aliens fled the county, and the violent crime rate has plummeted.” (The former may be true, but the latter is seriously in doubt as statistics have shown little connection between the law and violent crime.

Granted, as a state bordering Mexico, Arizona has a lot more immigrant traffic than does Prince WIlliam. The Copper State, which didn’t join the union until 1912, has for centuries been a spillover region linking Latin America, Native America and European America. It really didn’t become Anglo-ized until white retirees started showing up in the 1960s, and only after that did immigration suddenly become a big problem.

As a rather sleepy and affluent suburb, Prince William has not been awash with immigrants in the same way. It is not the hotbed of serious crime that one sees in the District or in Virginia metropolitan areas such as Richmond or Portsmouth. The vast majority of immigrants, documented or otherwise, seem to be hard-working, law-abiding Latinos filling low-end jobs that whites don’t want.

As obnoxious as Stewart’s views are, he still has support in Virginia. Attorney General Kenneth Cuccinelli filed papers in Arizona supporting that state’s law.

It amazes that Stewart keeps coming up with such xenophobia when Virginia and the U.S. are more closely tied to the global economy than ever before. As a graduate of Georgetown University’s School of Foreign Service, he ought to know this.

Not only are his proposals hateful, some are just plain stupid. Take the fee on wire transactions overseas. Let’s see how this might affect my family personally. My wife was born in Russia and has been a naturalized U.S. citizen since 1993. She has since earned a B.S. and an M.A. degree in this country and has been teaching in school and paying taxes since 2000. I can vouch for this. I stood next to her when she was naturalized (and we had a hell of a party afterwards) and I know she pays taxes because I have filed them.

Her nephew still lives in Russia and is a middle schooler who is nuts about ice hockey. He needs equipment and money for training camp. Sometimes she sends it via wire transfer. So now we are going to have to pay some ridiculous extra fee designed to punish Virginians who happen to have been born in a different country. How American.

How Stewart’s wicked brew of discriminatory laws plays out in autumn congressional elections and the ones for Virginia General Assembly in 2011 depend on how higher courts handle Judge Bolton’s decision. It could very well be that the courts will strike down all of the Arizona law, not just parts of it. If so, Prince William’s immigration law would be in jeopardy. Efforts to pass one in Virginia will be moot. And Stewart will look like a fool.


Peter Galuszka



Share this article



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)


Comments

67 responses to “Corey Stewart’s Xenophobic Games”

  1. "It really didn't become Anglo-ized until white retirees started showing up in the 1960s, and only after that did immigration suddenly become a big problem."

    So, who are the immigrants, exactly?

    I'm sure the Hispanics in that area feel pretty much the way my wife's family did when new folks showed up and re-wrote the rules.

  2. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    Peter,

    The judge is a two-bit political hack. The U.S. Supreme Court stated in a 1982 case, apparently not addressed by the court, as follows.

    "Although the State has no direct interest in controlling entry into this country, that interest being one reserved by the Constitution to the Federal Government, unchecked unlawful migration might impair the State's economy generally, or the State's ability to provide some important service. Despite the exclusive federal control of this Nation's borders, we cannot conclude that the States are without any power to deter the influx of persons entering the United States against federal law, and whose numbers might have a discernible impact on traditional state concerns. See De Canas v. Bica, 424 U.S. at 354-356." Plyler v. Doe, 457 U.S. 202 (1982) (at footnote 23), Brennan, J.

    This is the case holding states could not exclude illegal aliens from public schools.

    So one more time, it looks as if a federal judge appointed by a Democratic president is ignoring the law in favor of her own views.

    TMT

  3. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    If the federal executive branch can decide what lawfully enacted legislation it wishes to follow, then it has the power to "nullify" law by fiat. If the exercise of that fiat can "preempt" a state's effort to enforce federal law or worse a state's own legislation, then the federal executive branch without imput from anyone else (see checks and balances) can rule. The Arizona decision is a slippery slope indeed.

  4. Gooze Views Avatar
    Gooze Views

    TMT,
    So, any judge appointed by a Democrat is a two-bit political hack? Thus, the ultra-conservative John Roberts Supreme Court is A-OK?

    Give me a break!

    Peter Galuszka

  5. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    Peter,
    There are quite a few judges, federal and state, appointed by Democrats who are fine judges. But here is a judge in a political case who is ignoring the Supreme Court. Moreover, the opinion was written by Justice Brennan, who was clearly one of the most liberal justices in history. Brennan writes states have power to address illegal immigration and Judge Bolton closes her eyes for Obama's administration.

    It would be one thing had she addressed the case and tried to distinguish it, but apparently that did not occur. If the Supreme Court says states have authority to deter "the influx of persons entering the United States against federal law, and whose numbers might have a discernible impact on traditional state concerns," how come Arizona did not in this instance?

    One would think that this question should have been answered. Maybe, we need to wait for Chief Justice Roberts to answer it.

    We need one set of rules that apply irrespective of which Party is in power.

    TMT

  6. Groveton Avatar
    Groveton

    "It really didn't become Anglo-ized until white retirees started showing up in the 1960s, and only after that did immigration suddenly become a big problem."

    Interesting theory.

    But is it true?

    See page 12 of …

    http://www.fs.fed.us/r3/coconino/projects/plan-revision/08_03_28_Socecon_Assessment.pdf

    The hispanic population of Arizona was 20% in 1940? And it's 25 – 30% today?

    Uh oh!

    Could we be seeing yet another example of the liberal lie machine?

    I am open to alternative explanations.

  7. Groveton Avatar
    Groveton

    More from the liberal lie machine?

    Prince william County. Largely white? I guess if 54% constitutes "largely".

    "By 2005 non-Hispanic whites were 54.2% of Prince William County's population. 19.4% of the population was African-American. 0.5% was Native American. 6.4% of the population was Asian American. The growth of the Asian population was, numerically and as a percentage of the total population in this subgroup, dwarfed by the growth of the Latino population, which made up 18.0% of the county's total population by 2005.".

  8. Groveton Avatar
    Groveton

    "I'm sure the Hispanics in that area feel pretty much the way my wife's family did when new folks showed up and re-wrote the rules.".

    My grandmother was Chippewa. She (and I) feel the same way about all of you.

    Please leave the land of the Chippewa Nation. especially you liberals. My grandmother (and I) never liked liberals.

    Potowmacks may stay if they certify themselves as conservative.

  9. Gooze Views Avatar
    Gooze Views

    Groveton,
    So nice to see you back from the other side of the big lake they call Gitchegoomie.

    PG

  10. In another 50 years this country is going to be more brown than white.

    It will be interesting to see what xenophobia looks like then.

  11. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    Peter your hate is dripping here. You are so full of hate for conservatives who are in favor of enforcing our immigration laws that you stop at nothing to smear them.

    There's absolutely nothing at all racist nor xenophobic about the Arizona law. In fact it largely mirrors the federal law. Some of the things you quote as the AZ law requiring and thus making illegal immigrants non-compliance "a crime" are already encoded in federal law and therefore already make them "a crime".

    Your continued reference to "immigrants" without the pertinent qualifier "illegal" continues to belie your (and most of the left's) intellectual dishonesty in this matter. No one is against legal immigration. What we are concerned with here is ILLEGAL imigration and it's continued negative affect on our country's sovereignty.

  12. Groveton Avatar

    Interims, it's said, never give up their dead when citizens' mindsets turn gloomy

  13. Gooze Views Avatar
    Gooze Views

    Anonymous 7:19,

    My "hate is dripping here?" Maybe, but I do not personally "hate" conservatives. In fact, I count a number as personal friends. On this blog, as painful as it is, I put up with the likes of Groveton and Bacon.
    Actually, what I hate is the roust and shakedown approach for an exclusive mind set. I think America is great BECAUSE of immigrants and not in spite of them. What is illegal in this area often is grey and not black or white. Imagine a father or mother whose papers are not in order having a child in this country making that child a U.S. citizen. Then you may have that parent rounded up and the family split apart.
    What I hate is someone like Corey Stewart slapping his photo of his smiling family on a politically-ambitious Website that will likely harm other families if we do what he wants.
    I do not see all that much difference between what he is proposing and Hitler having Euopean Jews forced to wear Star of Davids or Stalin forcing all Soviets to have "nationality" as line No. 5 on their internal passports that they must carry at all times. And the intekectual ancestors of the Americans who want to protect their sovereignty are the ones who opposed integration because "The Negroes have their own culture" and "In the South, it is the way we do things." I am old enough to remember that.
    Where U.S. conservatives come in here is that they fail to recognize is that the very economy they helped create has a huge need for immigrants, illegal or not.That is why they are here. They are performing a useful function.
    The sooner the U.S. realizes this and takes an inclusive tack by granting amnesty and citizenship the better off we all will be.
    Stewart's idea, furthermore, of having to pay an extra "illegal immgrant" tax on a foreign money transfer is simply stupid if not unconstitutional.
    No, I don't hate conservatives. I hate it when some them wrap themselves up in flag and family and bully others.

    Peter Galuszka

  14. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    Peter,

    I'm pretty conservative on fiscal issues (quite moderate on social issues), but I've never felt any hatred coming in my direction.

    I do, however, see evidence of a liberal tendency to see the ends justify the means. (Some conservatives exhibit this behavior also.)

    You don't like the idea of deportations of some people who have lived here (under the radar) for years. You don't like the idea that some employers exploit these workers. You don't like the idea that some families have members who are lawfully here and others who are not.

    I infer from your comments that, while you probably oppose a total repeal of the U.S. immigration laws, you would really like to see Obama (or Bush) have the ability to pick and choose which immigration laws are enforced, and where and when.

    Yet, you probably would strongly oppose Obama (or Bush) having the authority to pick and choose which automobile safety, income tax, etc., laws are enforced and where and when.

    There was a time when the U.S. has wide-open immigration laws. There was a time when the U.S. had more restrictive immigration laws than it does today.

    Shouldn't we enforce the laws we have on the books? Or get the votes to change the laws? (And answer the arguments that are raised against changed? E.g., grant of an amnesty would encourage more illegal immigration. Importing poverty further strains our social services network and drives down wages.)

    Shouldn't we follow the constitution as interpreted by Supreme Court unless and until reversed? If Justice Brennan wrote states have the "power to deter the influx of persons entering the United States against federal law, and whose numbers might have a discernible impact on traditional state concerns," doesn't that mean something? If you can sweep this under the rug, why can't someone else sweep away the right to counsel or the right to marry across racial lines?

    Peter, you want to take us down a slippery slope where you get to decide what laws apply and when.

    TMT

  15. Tobias Jodter Avatar
    Tobias Jodter

    So part of your irrational hostility is because this personally effects you? Yet you have no regard for the folks who are affected by uncontrolled illegal immigration. That's sort of lame.

  16. Gooze Views Avatar
    Gooze Views

    Tobias,
    How exactly are people affected by "illegal" immigration? Perhaps it's those non-union foeign-born contractors taking jobs away from Amerian-born union ones. Is that it?
    Or the Latino bus boy working at a restaurant at a basic job no American wants. Is that it?
    Or the foreign born illegal who kills several because he can't read English and drives his car the wrong way on a highway ramp. Is that it?
    Or perhaps the mad rapist killer who comes here to do his nefarious deeds?
    The last example is pretty lame since statistics do not show that illegal workers are not killers or violent criminals in most cases. In the first two examples, it is basically a case of workforce supply and demand.
    So, I'd say the only legitimate complaint might be theconfused driver which actually did happen on the Eastern Shore a few years ago.
    So please enlighten me on the plight of those "affected" by illegals.

    PG

  17. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    My husband is an immigrant (UK '62, citizen since '72) and we send money to the UK at Christmas to his sister and her family. I'd cheerfully pay a transfer fee for this small gift if it would enable the US to capture at least part of what gets transferred to Mexico and points south. I'd also cheerfully carry 'papers' and show them if need be just as I now show all sorts of papers when I cash a check, etc if it would help crack down on those illegally in the US. I'd settle for laws as strict as those in Canada and Mexico. I'm not asking for Japan's.

    As for the federal government picking and choosing what laws they'd like to enforce, I direct your attention to employment related identity theft, about which I had an op-ed in the Roanoke Times in early July.

    As strange as it may seem, the Social Security Administration (SSA) and the IRS will not alert a person to the possibility that he may be the victim of identity theft even if they have very compelling reasons to believe that he is. The IRS may, however, attempt to collect unpaid taxes that the identity thief incurred while using the victim’s SSN. The victim must prove that he does not owe this money on his time and at his expense.

    That's right. The federal government sees no reason to alert you to the fact that you – or your children – are victims of identity theft but may just turn to you for payment of taxes OR deny you umemployment or disability benefits if some illegal alien is using your SSN to work.

    Furthermore, identity theft from children is big, in part because children are not likely to seek jobs or credit and so their parents may not even know about the theft for years. In Utah, 1,626 companies were found to be paying wages to SSNs of minor children on public assistance. This fraud was likely discovered solely because the children were on or applied for public assistance.

    A lot of simple SSN fraud as opposed to full ID theft in which the thief assumes the entire identity of the victim (name, birthday, SSN, etc) is somebody simply pulling a number from the air and using it repeatedly. Regardless of your opinion on how best to deal with 12+ million illegal aliens in the US, your number could come up.

    And come on, Peter. Get off the racist kick. It's been exposed in the Journolist story as the Spencer Ackerman opening. Just start yelling RRRAAAAACCCIIISSSSSSTTT! That term has been used so loosely for so long that it has lost all meaning. It doesn't add a bit to your story.

    Deena Flinchum

  18. Gooze Views Avatar
    Gooze Views

    Deena,
    I appreciate your perspective but I am not going to back down on calling this racist because that is what it is exactly.
    I know this is anathema to many Bacon's Rebellion readers but editorial writers at the Wash Post and NY TImes think it is reacist, too.

    Peter Galuszka

  19. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    What is the standard for racism? When is a government policy racist?

    If the United States has a immigration policy that is less strict than many other countries, can it still be racist? Can a immigration policy be racist against Mexicans when Mexico's immigration policy is much stricter and harsher?

    If the the majority of people admitted to the U.S. lawfully and granted citizenship, can the U.S.'s immigration policy still be racist?

    What are the answers? And pointing out that Fred Hiatt and people of his ilk have called the policy racist is meaningless. Not a single member of those clowns could or would answer these questions.

    Yelling "racism" is a cover-up from avoiding a debate.

    TMT

  20. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    “ but editorial writers at the Wash Post and NY TImes think it is reacist (sic), too.”

    So what? The NYT and WaPo editorial writers want amnesty and would, all things considered, prefer that the folks not in their rarified environs just shut up and docilely accept the disruption of their children’s schools, the slumification of their neighborhoods, the depression of their wages, the absolute occupation collapse of good blue collar jobs in construction and meatpacking by an endless influx of cheap foreign labor, and so on and so on. As I said some years ago, "(The people affected by illegal immigration) are starting to fight back. Good for them.” And good for any politician whatever his party who helps them. I have probably voted Democratic/Green about 95% of my 40+ years of voting, but good for Corey Stewart. I wish him well.

    The NYT/WaPo editors don’t have to worry about these things. They tend to live in neighborhoods that are ‘gated’ by economics if not physical gates. Their children – if they have any – are in elite neighborhood schools or private school. Illegal aliens aren’t applying under the table for editorial jobs at NYT/WaPo. It’s easier to call people racist than it is to convince them that they should quietly accept their lives being upended. And that’s what’s happening. It’s time to start shoving the xenophobe-racist name calling back in their faces.

    This reminds me of an old joke about a psychiatrist who is interviewing a patient using Rorschach tests. He shows the patient one inkblot after another and the patient informs him that each is a naked woman performing some suggestive act. Most people saw butterflies, wolves’ heads, boxwoods, etc.

    At the end, the psychiatrist says, “You seem to have a fixation on naked women and sex.”

    The patient replies, “Me?! You’re the one with the dirty pictures!”

    Peter, I think you see racism where most people wouldn’t. You are better than that.

    Deena Flinchum

  21. Gooze Views Avatar
    Gooze Views

    Deena,
    Please calm down. I doubt where you live is as described.
    If so, please describe.
    Peter Galuszka

  22. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    "I do not personally "hate" conservatives. In fact, I count a number as personal friends."

    Hmm… Must have interesting conversations when every other sentence you accuse them of being xenophobes and racists. Not the kind of language I use toward friends.

    Just what about the AZ law or this whole question on illegal immigration makes this racist as you prefer to say and will not back down from? It's a simple debate about US immigration law. You seem to be of the opinion that anyone in favor of enforcing current US immigration law is automatically a racist.

    Let me lay one on you here Gooz. Many on the Left say that those who oppose illegal immigration are racist because for the most part the illegal immigrants most impacted tend to be of Latin descent and therefore this becomes a racist issue.

    Well, by the same logic I can state that anyone opposing enforcement of US immigration law equally are also racist since they would be in favor of an unequal playing field among immigrants. Most non-Latin immigrants can't easily get into the US because their countries don't share a border and are separated by thousands of miles of ocean from us. Should these immigrants be discriminated against? Why shouldn't we open our borders to them and allow amnesty for them as well? In fact, there should be equal opportunity for them to illegally come to our nation and achieve citizenship through amnesty programs. We as a humane country should just fly them in at taxpayer cost and say, "no problem, just hang around past your tourist visa expiration and become a citizen". After all, just because Latino's have "won life's lottery" and live next door to us in comparison shouldn't leave other illegal immigrants who want to come here out in the cold. Gooz anything less than this kind of "equal access" is obviously a "racist" sentiment.

    I'm sick and tired of you Libs with your vacuous arguments that whenever you can't come up with a reasonable, logical backing for your point of view, you cry "racist" or "xenophobe" to anyone who opposes you. I have grown up in the 70's and 80's. I attended a very integrated university with people from all over the world and am very comfortable interacting with and having friendships with people from cultures from across the globe. I am offended that anyone would consider me racist because I support the rule of law and a rational immigration policy. Sometimes I think you and those like you will not be satisfied until this country has completely open borders and no requirements to attain citizenship. In other words, no USA at all.

  23. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    I am calm, Peter. And I don't live in the situation I described nor do I think I claimed to. I live in Blacksburg, VA with a lovely park on one side, a wooded area to the back, and good neighbors on the other side. I am comfortably retired with no children. No children = no grandchildren so I have very little skin in the game, but that doesn't mean I'm oblivious.

    It would be the easiest thing in the world for me to sit down here and call Corey Stewart and the people who have finally had enough of the havoc that illegal aliens are causing in their lives racists. I don't because they aren't.

    I lived in Alexandria for over 35 years and know exactly what they are talking about. It doesn't have to be affecting me personally for me to understand and sympathize with their views.

    What irritates the heck out of me is people who can avoid the havoc calling those who can't racists or xenophobes when they are objecting to the conditions that have been forced on them and their neighbors, not the ethnicity of the people creating the conditions. Why should they quietly accept these conditions?

    Yelling 'racist' is easy and at one time tended to shut down debate, but it has been used so loosely for so long that is has lost its edge.

    Deena Flinchum

  24. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    Ms. Flinchum, thank you for your rational and insightful input.

    I hope Peter G. takes it to heart.

    Tossing rocks at empty pigeon holes will solve nothing.

    Observer

  25. Gooze Views Avatar
    Gooze Views

    Observer,
    If you have something to add to the discussion, fine. But please don't patronize with "tossing rocks at whatever" nonsense. Dealing with racism confronting this country at the moment is a lot more relevant than some impenetrable theories on land use and society at large.

    PG

  26. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    Peter,

    Can any immigration law that excludes more people than those who want to come to the U.S.; favors those with more substantial education and skills, versus low-skill labor; and provides for the, at least theoretical, exclusion of those people not authorized by the law to enter the United States be other than racist by the journalists' standard (P.G, WaPo, NYT)? Would we need open borders and complete amnesty to meet your standard?

    TMT

  27. Gooze Views Avatar
    Gooze Views

    TMT,
    All the points you raise are problematic.

    At the higher end, 9/11 brought all kinds of problems with H-IIb visas for researchers and others our economy needs. A disproportionate number of U.S. patents come from people from China and India. Fazlur Khan, a famous structural engineer who developed the exoskeleton for buildings like Chicago's John Hancock Center was a Pakistani.

    At the other end, there's obviously a need for lower end workers. So to Va.'s Shenandoah Valley and its poultry plants. Ditto Eastern N.C. That kind of agribusiness has grown enormously in the past three decades and there aren't enough indigenous workers.
    So, I think some kind of amnesty and guest worker program on a large scale would be the way to go. As much as I trash Bush, he actually tried to do something about this. And, believe it or not, Obama has been very big on immigration arrests (maybe he ought to spend more time working on a far-reaching law.
    Exclusive, punitive measures like Corey Stewart's are NOT the way to go.

    PG

  28. "No one is against legal immigration. "

    ===============================

    Why do we make it so difficult, then?

    Why does it take three years to get a response to an application to INS?

  29. "…you would really like to see Obama (or Bush) have the ability to pick and choose which immigration laws are enforced, and where and when."

    =================================

    Which makes immigration law different from other laws, exactly how?

    Don't we pick and xhoose enforcement of speeding laws, and white collar crime laws?

    Of course we do, and it is a matter of intelligently spending the resources we have.

    The idea that immigration lwas must be strictly enorced at any cost is just as stupid as the idea that zero pollution can be allowed, no matter the cost.

  30. "…grant of an amnesty would encourage more illegal immigration."

    Granting amnesty makes the illegal immigration legal. Therefore it cannot encourage MORE illegal immigration, the prior now having become legal.

    Amnesty isn't what cuase a desire to immigrate.

  31. "Most non-Latin immigrants can't easily get into the US because their countries don't share a border and are separated by thousands of miles of ocean from us. Should these immigrants be discriminated against? Why shouldn't we open our borders to them and allow amnesty for them as well? "

    ================================

    Most illegal immigrants arrived here legally, irrespective of where they came from.

    True illegal immigrants from Guatemala, for example, just get ona bus to cross mexico and then walk four or five days across the desert.

    To them it is no big deal.

    If amnesty is offered Ihave not heard anything that suggests it would berestricte to Mexicans, for example.

  32. I support rational immigration policy.

    To me, that means you don't spend more on the solution than the problem costs.

    And, don't spend more on THIS problem than some other bigger problem costs, either.

    Finally, you don't spend more than you have.

    What I don't see from those who favor strict enforcement isa budget as to how much they think we should spend or any idea where the money is going to come from, whether that means higher taxes or less priority for other programs.

    We are now spending more oney than ever on border enforcement, and we have a long way to go if we are going to be serious about it.

  33. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    Peter,

    I would never argue that the current immigration program is perfect and needs no changes. We should be generally be encouraging immigration of people with needed skills. My only caution in this area is that we not import people just to keep high-skill wages down. If want our children to study math and science, there needs to be sufficient jobs at good salaries in order to motivate the desired behavior.

    At the other end, we probably do need some unskilled workers, but how many? We could have a guest worker program that enables businesses to hire temporary workers at fair wages. But why do we want to import entire families that push up our education, medical and social services costs?

    Secure the borders; prosecute employers who know or have reason to know they've hired illegals to draconian levels; and then, as attrition begins to drive down the illegal population, let's talk about these various types of reform. Importing poverty is stupid and hurts most, but not all, Americans.

    TMT

  34. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    It is not clear how you can call yourself a ‘journalist’ and go on these rants about immigration laws.

    It is also not clear why you think that immigration, beyond those who are already here LEGALLY is a good idea.

    To be sustainable, the US economy – and the economy of every Region – must evolve to not depend on either cheap labor or those with technical skills trained in other countries.

    Observer

  35. Gooze Views Avatar
    Gooze Views

    Observer,
    I'm not advocating more or less use of cheap labor. I am merely pointing out that it is most definitely occurring (regardless of whatever sub, sub, sub, sub, transom, doormat, hatch you are referring to).
    I can call myself whatever I like and throw whatever rocks at whatever holes I choose!

    And have a nice day.
    PG

  36. Gooze Views Avatar
    Gooze Views

    TMT,
    You state:

    "My only caution in this area is that we not import people just to keep high-skill wages down. If want our children to study math and science, there needs to be sufficient jobs at good salaries .."

    Look, I agree with you. But if you take the "free market" globalism that many on this blog subscribe to, notably Jim Bacon, then it is totally OK to get cheaper foreign workers to bring down wages.

    That is the big contradiction of being a "free market" conservative and really sticking to your views and wanting the best for your children.

    And I'm not just dissing the GOP. Bill Clinton led the pack down this road.

    Peter Galuszka

  37. "We could have a guest worker program that enables businesses to hire temporary workers at fair wages."

    We could have but we don't. i tried to go that way once, but I gave up due to INS inaction. my guess is a lot of immigrants would go home, if they thought they could come back and work again later.

  38. "Importing poverty is stupid and hurts most, but not all, Americans."

    By all means, lets keep poor people on their side of the tracks.

    It doesn;t hurt us to keep them poor over there, and we don;t have to see them.

  39. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    You can call yourself what ever you want but if you want to be a respected journalist you have to stop rants about immigration, conservatives, and other random topics you believe you have reason to hate.

    Observer

  40. Gooze Views Avatar
    Gooze Views

    Observer/EMR,
    Stop being so patronizing. Maybe you should work on being a little more articulate.Your posts might go farther.

    Peter Galuszka

  41. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    Regarding solutions that don't break the bank:

    I've posted this before but here it is again. The solution is to dry up the jobs magnet. Border security is necessary but it is internal security that will make the difference. The technology for all of this exists now. It isn't some distant magic, and it's cheaper than doing nothing.

    · Initially for new hires, we should mandate the use of E-Verify, a highly accurate, free, simple, and fast verification system that more than 200,000 employers across the United States use to check the employment eligibility of their employees with more signing up each week. It will catch those who are using only forged SSNs and will likely completely end the theft of children’s identity as it will connect SSNs and birth dates. Those citizens who have errors in their information will have ample time to correct them. Those who are using these SSNs illegally will be denied employment.
    · At least quarterly, the SSA should send out “no match” letters which will alert employers that they have invalid information on one or more of their employees, such as a SSN that does not agree with name, birth date, etc or that does not even exist. Employers can then clear up any honest errors and terminate employees who are working illegally. Employers who fail to respond to these letters should face criminal sanctions plus liability for any harm that befalls any victims of this identity theft.
    · The IRS and SSA should cooperate to alert victims of identity theft as soon as they suspect that it is occuring. This is critical in cases of complete identity theft, which would not be caught by E-Verify. The victim should not have to wait until he is presented with a bill for unpaid taxes owed by an illegal worker. Nor should children, who would not be likely to use credit rating checks or to work, discover that they have a long history of bad debt, crime, and unsatisfactory employment when they are finally old enough to apply for jobs or college loans.

    Wouldn't every person reading this prefer to get a letter from the SSA or IRS noting that 15 people are using our SSN shortly after it happens rather than a bill for $15,000 for unpaid taxes years later? None of these systems are perfect but neither are the systems we use at IRS and SSA, and we still manage to collect taxes and pay benefits.

  42. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    8/3/10 12:43 AM is Deena Flinchum

  43. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    I sure would Deena.

    We need more solution ideas and less bile. Not just here but everywhere.

    "Maybe you should work on being a little more articulate."

    Maybe you should try to be more like a journalist and less like a TeaPotHead. The anger of does not become you.

    "Your posts might go farther."

    You are the poster, I am the Observer. When EMR posts fall to your level, I will be on his case too.

    Observer.

  44. "· At least quarterly, the SSA should send out “no match” letters which will alert employers that they have invalid information on one or more of their employees, such as a SSN that does not agree with name, birth date, etc or that does not even exist."

    =================================

    One argument is that illegal aliens are not paying taxes, and the other argument is that illegal aliens are paying taxes illegally with false numbers.

    As long as the taxes are being paid, who cares if they have a bogus number? All that means is that they will pay in but can't get paid when their time comes.

    Shoot, let's have a few hundred thousand more of those.

    Now, if the employers are also exploiting the workers through below normal pay, that's another issue, because that will cause poverty that will come back to bite us.

  45. Tobias Jodter Avatar
    Tobias Jodter

    PG – you are close-minded. It would be fruitless to present any argument showing how American citizen's are being negatively affected by illegal immigration. You have made it abundantly clear that you will disregard any point that might be made.

  46. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    Illegal aliens and taxes. A single male who has taxes withheld and remitted under a false SSN, who buys things and drives a car, but doesn't partake of significant services, probably is a net contributor. But there are probably very few illegal immigrants with children who come anywhere near close to paying their way. Most school districts spend about $10,000 per student on general education students. Toss in ESOL and other services, evening excluding those children who qualify for Special Education services, and we are talking big bucks. How much is spent on health care from the public fisc? While I suspect the bulk of illegal immigrants avoid other law-breaking activities beyond being here unlawfully and committing fraud by filing false documents. But there are sufficient numbers of what appear to be common criminals. How much do they cost taxpayers?

    The desire of some for extraordinarily low wages and others for potential voters just aren't worth it. Enforce the law, as permitted by the U.S. Supreme Court.

    TMT

  47. Very few illegal immigrants with children come close to paying their way.

    #############

    But,TMT, you say the same thing is true of most residential neighborhoods. They don't pay their way.

    Areas like Grovetons and farms may be the exception, and both of them support a lot of Latinos.

    If paying the way OS the problem the answer is higher taxes not fewer Latinos.

    Or fewer white or mixed race developments either

  48. Totally OK to have cheap foreign workers bring down wages

    ##################

    Precisely. It is going to happen anyway, we may as well have It happen here so we can get some benefit.

  49. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    Ray – re higher taxes. Are you supporting the imposition of higher taxes by employers of non-U.S. citizens or lawful aliens to recover all of the government costs associated with non-lawful aliens? This could presumably be done through a guest worker law.

    TMT

  50. I'm saying that you and others have argued that residential housing does not pay its own way.

    Now you are arguing that illegal alien residences don't pay their own way.

    So, I'm asking how the fact that they are illegal alien residences differentialte them from any other residence that does not pay its own way.

    In fact, the usual argument about residences that don't pay their own way is generally directed at new residences and new developments: in other words, homes that will be occupied by "aliens".

    What I'm suggesting is that this has nothing to do with money, but has to do with the fact that people do not like change. In order to prevent change, they want more control for themselves and less freedom for others.

    If it was really about money, all you have to do is raise the price.

  51. "This could presumably be done through a guest worker law."

    ================================

    I agree, it could be done.

    But it hasn't. In fact there are tempeorary agricultural worker visas, but just try to get one.

    So why hasn't it been done? Because the unreasonable rhetoric and angst over immigrant workers (legal and illegal, and even foreign workers who compete with us) prevents it.

    Many who want immigration control want just that: no foreigners and a white christian America.

    It is not about money, or else we could fix it, as you point out.

    Same goes for any other housing proposal. Since we refuse to fix the problem the only conclusion is that the problem is not with them, it is with us: we want more control for us and less freedom for them.

  52. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    'One argument is that illegal aliens are not paying taxes, and the other argument is that illegal aliens are paying taxes illegally with false numbers.

    As long as the taxes are being paid, who cares if they have a bogus number? All that means is that they will pay in but can't get paid when their time comes.'

    Actually no, Ray. Many of them get back what they pay in income taxes and more by applying for earned income tax credits, a program with a huge amount of fraud. The fact that it gets collected doesn't mean it gets kept.

    I suspect you might care if it turned out to be your SSN that an illegal alien used, especially if the IRS starts trying to collect from you.

    I suspect it might also bother you a bit if your wages had dropped by nearly 50% as has happened in the meatpacking industry.

    What we are seeing is the biz interests taking advantage of cheap foreign labor and passing the costs they aren't paying on to the community at large. Some of the costs are financial and some are social, like the overcrowded housing and school costs the TMT mentions.

    Deena Flinchum

  53. "Many of them get back what they pay in income taxes and more by applying for earned income tax credits, a program with a huge amount of fraud. "

    ==============================

    I won't pretend to understand how that works, but how does it make them any different from anyone else who applies for the credit? Isn't the point of the program to give back to some people more than they paid?

    You use this (more out than in) as an implied criticism of illegals using the program unfairly and illegally, but if it applies to everyone, legal and illegal, then it is a criticism of the program and not a crticism of immigration or immigrants.

    Absent the illegals, is the program still rampant with fraud?

    Don't get me wrong; I believe we have an immigration problem. One Part of that problem seems to be excess immigration on some quarters that we cannot easily assimilate.

    However, I'm not seeing arguments to solve the immigration problem: I'm seeing arguments against immigrants. I'm seeing arguments that seem disingenuous and incomplete.

    I suspect that I am seeing some racism. (Why does Arizona have an Immigration Problem that makes national headlines and New Mexico does not?)

    But mostly, I think people just do not like change, and they will be hyperdefensive in order to prevent it. That is why there are no real solutions being sought: any real solution will mean change, and that is the one thing that is unacceptable.

  54. "…especially if the IRS starts trying to collect from you."

    ================================

    The IRS has no right to collect money from me that I do not owe.

    If the IRS is trying to collect money from me that they know, suspect, or should know is actually owed by someone else (legally or illegally) then my problem is not with the immigrants but with unethical and probably illegal activites by the IRS.

    I'm more worried about them than I am the immigrants.

    I've never known anyone this happened to, and I can't imagine what incentive IRS would have to pursue a case that is obviously a result of fraud unknown to the actual taxpayer.

  55. What we are seeing is the biz interests taking advantage of cheap foreign labor and passing the costs they aren't paying on to the community at large. Some of the costs are financial and some are social,

    ================================

    How do the bus interests keep their ill gotten profits from low wages and pass the unpaid costs to us?

    Either they are competing with each other and we benefit from low wages through low chicken prices or else you believe in a giant business price fixing conspiracy.

    If that's the case, we have laws against price fixing and they should be just as vigorously inforced as the immigration laws. If that's the case it isn't the immigrants causing the problem, it is the price fixers.

    Overcowded ousing is caused by low wages AND by overpriced housing, which is caused by excess regulation limiting what can be constructed. That excess regulation is partly a backlash against overcrowded housing, which OVERTLY tries to cure that problem through snob zoning and overpriced housing.

    Even if we could force those colluding business interests to pay higher wages, we would pay the cost in higher chicken prices. Either way, this is not the immigrants fault, at least not he way your argument is constructed.

    We can kick the immigrants out, and then pay ourselves higher wages for what we build and grow and then pay higher prices to buy them from ourselves.

    Show me the cost savings in that argument or how it is that the immigrants are costing us money after they leave.

  56. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    'However, I'm not seeing arguments to solve the immigration problem: I'm seeing arguments against immigrants. '

    Then you either haven't read or understood my comments, especially the one about how to solve the problem.

    Also as you must have figured out, I am not arguing for the IRS to come to you or anybody else to collect taxes from illegal aliens. My point is that the same government entities that refuse to alert you to the fact that you are a victim of identity theft can try to collect taxes from you resulting from that theft, can deny you benefits that you are entitled to, etc. That you personally don't know anybody this happened to doesn't mean it's not happening. It is and actually you may. We don't read about this much in the MSM because it doesn't square with their amnesty program. What we get are boo-hooey stories about family separation of people who came to the US illegally knowing full well the possible consequences.

    As to how the biz interests pass costs onto us, I've mentioned on this blog before as has TMT. By paying low wages, they not only force the illegal aliens – who make the low wages possible – to depend on tax supported social services, if not for themselves for their children- as well as the people whose wages they depress. They don't have to pass any savings on to us at all. They can move it up the ladder to management etc. During the recent housing boom, construction wages actually fell. Did the cost of houses? Are we paying 45% less for chicken than we did in the 80's? I doubt it.

    You seem to be perfectly happy to ram wages lower whatever the effect on our less fortunate citizens. I'm not. And as for the racist change, please remember that the people who are disproportionately affected by this are often African Americans, because they as a group are more likely to have the low skills and less education.

    And for what it's worth, no I'm not willing to accept 'change' that makes life worse for most working & lower middle class people. Perhaps you are.

    As to EITC, why are we giving any benefits to people who don't have the right to work in the US at all? You are correct that people with low education/skills are more likely to benefit, whether they are citizens or illegal aliens. Why are we importing massive poverty into the US which we then need to subsidize?

    And FWIW, if you are calling me personally a racist, I couldn't care less. The word has long since lost its meaning. It rolls off me.

    Deena Flinchum

  57. If the same government entities that refuse to alert you to the fact that you are a victim of identity theft can try to collect taxes from you resulting from that theft, THEN THOSE GOVERNMENT ENTITIES ARE FUBAR.

    That is not an immigration problem it's a government problem.

    THEY DON"T HAVE ANY RIGHT TO COLLECT MONEY FROM ME THAT I DO NOT OWE.

    That statement is true irrespective of what the immigration situation is or isn't. Therefore such a hypothetical threat has nothing to do with immigration and it is a lousy anti-immigration argument.

    There is no connection, none, even if I thought IRS was stupid enough to try to collect taxes from a five year old for fifteen years of back taxes in the landscaping business.

    Now, give me a reason to fear immigrants more than the IRS.

  58. "That you personally don't know anybody this happened to doesn't mean it's not happening."

    ===============================

    Yeah, and Bosons occasionally collide with matter.

    Government finds all kinds of ways to screw up, but that does not mean it is happening because of the immigrants.

    If there are 350 millon social security numbers out there, and 3 million working illegals out of the 12 million living here, and if the government was 100% effective at tracking down every dollar the illegals earned, your odds of having the government TRY to collect from you is about a third of a percent.

    I don't think the government is that good, and I don't think every working illegal is using identity theft.

    Maybe some poor citizen eventually gets hit by a government Boson. How many billions in immigrant control are we willing to spend to prevent it? Wouldn't there be an easier, less expensive way to fix that problem, if it really is one?

  59. "You seem to be perfectly happy to ram wages lower whatever the effect on our less fortunate citizens. "

    Where do you get that idea? Not from anything I wrote.

    I just think that the price of clothespins and mousetraps will reach their lowest practical price regardless of what we do with immigration.

    You know how many mousetraps and clothespins are manufactured in the US?

    None. You could bring in a thousand illegals to manufacture mousetraps and it would make US jobs not destroy them.

    As far as I'm concerned every Cuban can swim back to Cuba with a Venezuelan under each arm. I don't care one way or another, but my observation is the anti immigrant folks don't have good arguments.

    They make silly claims that the IRS and big business is out to get you, and the claims make no sense.

    I believe big business is out to get my money, but immigrants or the lack of them won't change that.

  60. "And for what it's worth, no I'm not willing to accept 'change' that makes life worse …."

    ===============================

    Some people won't accept beach erosion in the Chesapeake either. They don't like change that makes thins worse for hardworking waterfront lot owners.

    Even if you explain to them that the land in the Bay area is sinking, they still don't want to accept change. They would be willing to spend any amount to stop it, even if it makes no sense.

    I don't want to accept that someday my tractor won't be worth fixing anymore, or me either, for that matter. Whether I accept it or not, I'm going to have to do something different.

    There are 350 million people in the US and roughly 3 trillion outside the US.

    You do the math.

  61. "By paying low wages, they not only force the illegal aliens – who make the low wages possible – to depend on tax supported social services, if not for themselves for their children- as well as the people whose wages they depress."

    ==================================

    How much mre would you be willing to pay for mousetraps and lettuce to keep all those people off the dole? What difference does it make if it comes out of your personal tax budget or your personal mousetrap budget?

    And what happens to the people you send home? Their wages get really depressed. So, it's not OK if a brown Catholic (American) gets his wages depressed, because he lives on your street, but it is OK if a white Hindu (Indian) gets kicked off the help desk over there and has no income.

    One life is worth more than another? How do you decide?

    What I'm hearing you say is that American lives are worth more and Americans should get paid more. They should not have to suffer the indignity of working for the same price that someone else is willing to do the same work for.

    That's fine with me, I'll be happy to get paid more. Just let me know when you get that perpetual motion machine working.

  62. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    "You seem to be perfectly happy to ram wages lower whatever the effect on our less fortunate citizens. "

    Where do you get that idea? Not from anything I wrote.

    Well from here, Ray:Totally OK to have cheap foreign workers bring down wages

    ##################

    Precisely. It is going to happen anyway, we may as well have It happen here so we can get some benefit.
    XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
    Ray there is no way that we can 'fix' the at least 4 billion people in the world that have living standards lower than Mexico's. We might – if we stop importing poverty from the third world – be able to alleviate though not completely end poverty in the US and, yes, I'm willing to pay more for products and services to do this. I opt for doing the possible. I plan to oppose what I see as an obstacle to this by opposing massive third world immigration, especially that which allows people to simply walk into the US on their own.

    Perhaps we have to agree to disagree on this.

    Deena Flinchum

  63. Again, I never said that.

    I was quoting from a previous post: It came from Gooze Views who was restating his idea of Jim Bacon's position:

    the full quote was

    "But if you take the "free market" globalism that many on this blog subscribe to, notably Jim Bacon, then it is totally OK to get cheaper foreign workers to bring down wages."

    The context of my response had to do with cheaper foreign workers working on foreign contries, not illegal immigrants working here.

    As I pointed out, there are 350 million of "us" and roughly 3trillion of "them". I don't think there is any doubt that Americans have benefited from being able to purchase goods cheaper than we can make them here.

    Most Americans seem to agree with me because 99+% of them have shooped at Wal-Mart in the last year. If that's the criteria, I'd be willing to bet that even you agree with me on this, by shopping at Wal-Mart and buying foreign goods at other places. Your hamburger at McDonalds comes from Argentina, probably.

    We are going to have to compete with those 3 trillion and there is nothing our immigration laws can do about it. All we can do is have protectionist tarrifs or voluntarily choose to buy only US goods, if you can find any.

    This isn't a question of whether I'm OK with it, and it is a long way from your statement that I'm OK with ramming lower wages down someones throat.

    I'm not about that at all. I'd like to have higher wages, in my day job AND my farm job, but I have to compete with foreigners in both areas. That is just the way it is, and the way it is going to stay with 3 trillion of them out there.

    For example:

    Last year, two laboratories managed to create an entire live mouse from a single skin cell which they induced to behave like a stem cell. The competition was so fierce that they published their results in scientific journals on the same day.

    Both of those Laboratories were in Beijing universities, not the United States. I hope American biologists make fantastic discoveries and make a lot of money, but the plain fact is that more people are working on those problems overseas.

    So, my exact quote about that kind of situation was

    "It is going to happen anyway, we may as well have It happen here so we can get some benefit."

    There is only one way to get from that to the idea that I want to ram lower wages down people's throats, and that is with a really, really bad argument and false argumentation on top of that.

    Which is precisely the kind of thing I was talking about when I say that it is my observation that the anti-immigrant people have the less persuasive arguments. It is a crappy and imprecise way of thinking, and it is no way to solve the actual problem.

  64. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    'As I pointed out, there are 350 million of "us" and roughly 3trillion of "them". '

    There are about 310 million of us in the US and about 6.86 billion in the world altogether. A far cry from 3 trillion.

    http://www.census.gov/main/www/popclock.html

    Research, Ray. Research. I came to this issue about 15 years ago as a left-wing environmentalist who was stunned to discover that the US was the 3rd largest country in the world and the only first world country growing like a third world county in spite of reaching ZPG in the 70's.

    That started me on a long trek of research and the more I found out, the more I am convinced that there are no problems facing the US that will be easier to solve in the next 40 years by adding over a 130 million people, largely from third world countries, many with few skills and little education, along with their descendants.

    'There is only one way to get from that to the idea that I want to ram lower wages down people's throats, and that is with a really, really bad argument and false argumentation on top of that.'

    I don't think so, Ray. You weren't arguing innovation. You were arguing low wages, based upon my reading of what you SAID. Go back and read your posting. If you MEANT something else, you should have been clearer.

    If you really have a problem with driving down US wages, especially for less educated US workers, I can't for the life of me understand why you think dumping millions of unskilled third world workers on the US is a good idea.

    I also understand the problems that you had bringing in your one H-2A farmer worker. I completely agree that the forms, etc should be easier for a person like yourself who doesn't do this a lot (as opposed to Ag-Biz that does it wholesale). I happen to like H-2A in principle: It stipulates length of work term, wages, travel expenses, some housing and health care, and tries to keep from impacting the local community adversely. It protects the workers AND the community. It allows a worker from, say Mexico, to work for 6 months or so and take his wages back and live WITH HIS FAMILY in Mexico. He can live OK in Mexico on 6-months of wages in the US. In the US? Not so much, which is why not too many US workers are big on Ag_work – it isn't a 12 months a year job.

    As for innovation, etc, look at California. It used to have public schools in the top 2 or 3 and the 7th best educated workforce in the US (1970). Now it competes with MS & AL in public education and where it is now after decades of dumping third world immigrants into it – legal and illegal – is dead last in educated work force in spite of Silicon Valley. According to CIS: "California’s income distribution in 2008 was more unequal than was Mississippi’s in 1970."*

    This isn't what I want for the US, Ray, and I doubt that it's what you want.

    You're a bright guy with strong feelings, but you don't seem to have done much research on this subject.

    Deena Flinchum

    *http://www.cis.org/california-education

  65. "There are about 310 million of us in the US and about 6.86 billion in the world altogether. A far cry from 3 trillion"

    Oops, I knew that, what was I thinking? You are correct of course. That changes the value of my argument by a couple orders of magnitude, but doesn't change the outcome, I don't think.

    Besides, things are not all that bad. despite losing lots of manufacturing jobs the value of waht we still manufature is higher than ever.

    Not much help if you are the one out of work, though.

    I started out as a left wing environmentalist, too. What I learned in 10 years in that business cured me of optimism and stupidity.

    I agree I wasn't clear, consider ing the following context that developed. At the time I thought it was clear considering that the previous context concerned itself with foreign labor in foreign places.

    I still maintain we are going to have to compete with them anyway, so the best way to get American benefits is to bring them here and have them work in America.

    That way we can control their environmental damage, for one thing, and they can contribute to our social security deficit for another.

    As you point out, we have an aging childless society. EMR points out, narrowly, that this does not bode well for the suburbs. id say that observation applies universally, so we need to have sustainable inputs to keep society running.

  66. As for innovation, etc, look at California. It used to have public schools in the top 2 or 3…

    ===============================

    Congratulatons, you found a way to use inovation and public schools in one idea.

    I wrote off public schools forty years ago when I was attending them and my fathe r teaching them. We have been throwing away money ever since.

    I doubt if metrics of the public schools in California are a fair measure of educaton in California.

    Even if I conede that public schools have ecome a dumping ground for poor children, we also know that California has refused to spend money on anything, a condition they were forced into by previous excesses (partially brought on by left wing,and liberal environmentalists). Schools aren't the only thing in CA that have gone downhill.

    I'm not conviced, however, that California isn't better off with a mllion half educated Latino kids than it would be with those same kids, uneducated, stuck in TiaJuana, peering across the border.

    Most of my high school friends had parents who would have been half educated Latinos – from Portugal. many of their parents arrived here illegally to escape conditions in Portugal. Now they complain about competition from new (uneducated) immigrants – from Brazil.

    Maybe you can explain to me what it is about being uneducated that makes people such fierce competitors.

    You are wrong about my feelings. I could care less, send them all back. I'm just not buying the arguments put forward yet.

    In fact, I'd wager that if we did send them all back the economic and social repercussions would be so bad that both parties would be beating the drum to get immigration fixed, pronto.

  67. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    On a lighter note, Ray, here's how I spent yesterday. I was the stage manager. GAWD am I tired!

    http://www.roanoke.com/news/nrv/wb/256048

Leave a Reply