Tuesday, December 13, 2005

Kyl's immigration ideas not terrible

m2powered had a post criticizing Senator Jon Kyl's interview w/ the Arizona Daily Star.

My trouble with Kyl's immigration bill? This idea of circularity. I sincerely doubt that the majority of illegals want to go back home. I believe they come here to work.

I have no trouble with individuals migrating here and working. In fact, I LOVE the fact that they work under the table. I LOVE to see the minimum wage and labor laws ignored. In fact, I have no trouble with those workers having drivers' licenses or their children born on US soil being citizens.

What I DO have trouble with is not knowing WHO is coming into our country. I'd like to know if each individual is a security risk or they have a criminal background. The U.S. has an OBLIGATION to protect itself from security risks. Additionally, I DO have a problem with illegals using government services paid for by OUR tax dollars. In Arizona, thanks to lame federal MTALA laws, the costs illegals impose on our hospitals are shutting them down. We simply can't afford to keep them open.

The one thing that Kyl's bill seems to do that is an AWESOME thing is that the feds are FINALLY releasing plenary controll of immigration law. Kyl's bill will allow local law enforcement officers to DEPORT illegals. That's not Kyl making an ass of himself, it's showing wisdom. The feds have done an ATROCIOUS job at enforcement. Allowing locals to shoulder some of the burden is GOOD.

So, as long as we can force those coming to the U.S. to submit to background checks, and they are denied public services, I say allow them to flow into the country as they desire. If you read the Pew Hispanic Foundation's report on immigration, the flow of immigrants is directly tied to the strength of our economy. In good times, we'll have more immigrants. In bad times we'll have fewer. We shouldn't worry much about the flow of immigrats...the economy will take care of that. What we need to worry about is if they pose a security threat, and we need to eliminate their costs in terms of public services.

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home