Illegal immigrants: a welfare nation

Given the credibility concerns with the Center for Immigration Studies and their reputation for cooking data, it appears someone on your news desk made a wide news decision that other papers didn't.

Yeah, Daniel, what evidence can you offer to back up your slam against CIS?

"What are our own citizens who lack health insurance, and who need public care, supposed to do? Stand in line behind citizens of other countries who are here illegally? It's not right."

It's not right that people have to stand in line for health care to begin with because they lack insurance. Where's your moral outrage about that? If health care for poor people in Texas is overwhelmed, maybe you should be worrying more about a fix and less about building walls to keep out undocumented workers. It's all about priorities.

"Similarly on the public schooling situation, I'm aware of a Texas public elementary school where a senior administrator admitted to native parents from the neighborhood that their kids were going to be kept behind because the school has so many Hispanic kids whose English skills are poor to non-existent that it affects the quality of the education for all kids. Is that right?"

I don't believe this. I'm not calling you a liar, I am saying that these parents have heard what they wanted to hear. Since Texas was the model for NCLB, I can't fathom a situation where such a thing would happen where kids who were performing well would be kept behind or that kids who performed poorly on NCLB tests can blame that poor performance on kids who don't speak English.

"The uncomfortable truth is that Latino immigrants are not assimilating."

I personally know lots of Latino immigrants as well as their second-generation (US-citizen) children and third-generation grandchildren. My son is on a soccer team where the coach hardly speaks english and his older son interprets for him. He is their token blonde and everybody, including him, think it's a kick. I attend church with lots of immigrants. Combine that with the fact that in my working life I'm surrounded by Asian immigrants, and on any given day, most (like 80%)of the people I interact with are non born in the US.

I also have the benefit of having grown up in the shadow of an earlier-wave immigration boom with Italian and Polish grandparents.

The assimilation experience is almost identical to that of my parents and grandparents. The 3rd gen like me are almost exactly like my peer group. The immigrants bring all sorts of things from their experience which includes some good and some bad but on the whole I am grateful for what they have taught me. I have been crowned by my co-workers with the title "honorary Asian parent" but that only tells half of the story. The respect for family and hard physical labor (although not loose attention to time) and the true heart-driven piety that I have learned from my poor latino friends has enriched me beyond words.

Coming to America is a roll of the dice. Some things american are challenged and some renewed. The immigrants risk the alienation and coldness of america. Unlike Japan or Europe, we are dynamic with a foot in every door in the world. One of the things I most love about my home where a majority are foreign-born, is this knowledge that the nativists consumed with their imaginary wall-building just can't appreciate. Its sad. I have always fared better living with hope instead of fear so I can't help but encourage others to do likewise.

Daniel: For instance, how are they defining "welfare program"? How are they determining who is an "illegal immigrant"? What variables did they use come up with this-"Overall, nearly one in three immigrants is an illegal alien. Half of Mexican and Central American immigrants and one-third of South American immigrants are illegal."

Did you read the actual report? It's all there. It took you three separate posts on this thread to admit that you don't like Mark Krikorian, and that's why you don't accept these findings? Please.

You are free to disbelieve the thing about the public elementary school, but it's not made up, and it's not a case of selective hearing. I've not seen demographic information on that school, but I recently saw demographic information about the neighborhood it serves, which would seem to back up what the administrator said. The administrator wasn't putting the students down, just relating a major problem the public schools here in Dallas have because of the immigration wave.

Daniel,

If every illegal immigrant in the U.S. repatriated and legal immigrants without the ability to care for themselves could not obtain welfare, that would save billions of dollar that could be used for healthcare for native Americans. You can't import poverty into America and then turn around and say America doesn't do enough to fight poverty.

As for schools, if teachers are spending half the class explaining things to Spanish speaking kids or they're teaching half the class in Spanish, then the native students and the immigrant students are each receiving half a lesson.

If people expect the country to massively import Mexicans without becoming more like Mexico; if they expect that culture is infinitely amenable to law, then they “expect what never was and what never will be”, to borrow a phrase.

Query: What constitutes an "objective, neutral" measure of assimilation? In my mind, assimilation means that a man views this country as his homeland - that his loyalty is to the United States, not the country whence he came. But how does one measure this? I ask seriously.

I personally know lots of Latino immigrants as well as their second-generation (US-citizen) children and third-generation grandchildren.

Hey, so do I. I am one (third-generation Mexican-American), my husband is one (second-generation), and my mother-in-law is one (born in South America). Lots of relatives on my husband's side were also born in South America. I've had lots of Hispanic acquaintances and co-workers over time (we are the largest minority group in the country now), as well as close friends directly from China, Vietnam, the Philippines, and other countries. All my relatives, and my husband's relatives (and my friends' families), though, came here legally, and my experience is that their assimilation process was NOT the same as the current illegal Hispanic immigrants (and I'm quite well acquainted with many of these as well). All the legal immigrants (and their families) I know have assimilated the same way as in previous generations - still speaking native languages but fully assimilating into the culture, working hard, proudly becoming American citizens and living within the law. But illegal immigrants are simply not assimilating in the same way. Many are very nice people, but they aren't acquiring English the same way, aren't assimilating into American culture. And it's not just a "perception" in Texas (where I'm moving soon), but in Washington, in Ohio, in Indiana, in Chicago, in Atlanta, etc. I've got no brief for nativists, but there is a huge divide between the legal and illegal population in this country in terms of cultural assimilation and I don't think it's wrong to be upset with the out-of-control nature of illegal immigration here. My in-laws are all ticked off about it too -- they did things the right way, why should others get benefits by breaking the law?

"If these people were sent home tomorrow, the drain they place on government services would evaporate."

No they wouldn't, because the capital they create far outstrips any drain on government services and we would be left with government services that would now operate with even less tax dollars and income because of the drain on the economy. The lines Rod is so worried about at the public hospital would be even longer and the schools would be even more overburdened because of the loss to the economy (and tax base) created by the workers who pay taxes and buy goods.

I so completely don't buy the we need cheap labor argument. In many industries with high levels of illegal workers, like food production, labor makes up a small portion of costs to begin with.
I live in a part of the county where there are fairly low numbers of illegal immigrants. People mow their own lawns (often with expensive, American made riding mowers), clean their own houses, watch their own kids, the nursing homes are staffed, homes are built. About the only places where you see a lot of illegal immigrants are in hotels and restaraunts. Yet if you go a bit outside the metropolitan area, the restaraunts are staffed by Americans and as are hotels.
I know I'm just a mom in "fly-over" country, but it's hard to express how utterly ridiculous the cries of "who will you get to mow the lawn and clean your house and watch your kids" are to people in this part of the world. Do it your friggin' selves you lazy sobs! Yeesh! I mean if you have to pay more for labor, maybe it will just expose the fact that you can do just fine with a more moderately sized house and meals at joints that charge $7 for a burger instead of gormet $15 burgers you can get at a lot of the places that hire illegal immigrants. It's hardly the end of the world.

Kimberly,

Do you really think the children of current undocumented workers aren't assimilating? I just don't see it. The kids on my sons soccer team all imagine a life in the US. They visit Mexico and retain some Mexican identity but they are working for and planning for a future in the US. Heck lots of them were born here and thus are citizens. They identify with the US in terms of tastes, and affiliations. For better or worse, they're all Oakland Raiders fans. They are so much like my parents were in their somewhat divided identities that I see a great deal of commonality.

In terms of English/Spanish, the uniting thread of many of the kids on my son's team is that they go to a very high-quality, bi-lingual magnet school (the devil to the nativists). If you watch PBS newshour enough, you've seen the school. They are fluent in both languages. These kids come from ambitious families with hopes and dreams for their children just like I have.

As one of the few grownups running for president John McCain said in a forum yesterday, there are 12 million people here illegally but there aren't 12 million handcuffs. Many of the children are citizens. Are we going to throw out the parents and care for the kids? What about the grannies who are caring for the kids when the parents go to work?

Where is the Christian compassion?

Economic is not a zero-sum game.

But costs are costs. What I never understand about the economic arguments for maintaining an uneducated, marginalized and exploitable population of bed pan emptiers is their view that the increased costs of emptying bed pans is a real cost, but the drain on social services and increased costs resulting from illegals in other areas are not real costs. I suspect it is because the cost of illegal immigration is in part hidden and in part borne by persons other than Silicon Valley Steve.

If we really want the market to work properly, the cost should be attached to the service in question. If the labor savings on homes in America are being passed on to buyers, but medical care costs are increasing because of the uninsured illegals building cheaper homes, the market will not function properly. Conservatives frequently note that economics is not a zero-sum gain. But there was a time when they also recognized that there is no free lunch.

There is no free lunch, but there are many lunches worth paying for.

All I'm saying it that the simple idea that some pot of money would be available if the nursing home workers were shipped out is too limiting. We already have massive inflation in health care. Much of it is based on the fact that we have an increasing population of elderly folks who require lots of personal care. Without a ready low-wage workforce, those costs would increase greatly. It is a more complex calculation to figure out just how much more we would pay in medical inflation and how that would affect general inflation. You also have to add the lost opportunity costs from the displacement of employees from other occupations and inflation in wages as there is competition for workers. How about the cost of the 12 million hand-cuffs and the massive incarceration. I could go on-and-on creating citing other potential reprecussions.

I don't even believe that comnplex modeling could capture the result but the naive belief that there would be more medical care available as an end result is unsupportable.

Jeff wrote: "I agree with visas and guest worker progrmas"

The problem with guest worker programs is that they don't work. Yes, you get the workers to come and do the work, but you know what? Conditions here, even poor conditions, are so much better than what is back home, they don't want to leave again. Canada used a variety of the guest worker program to build the Canadian Railway back in the 1800s, and ended up passing legislation in 1926 (I think it was) to bar Oriental workers (specifically Chinese) for over 50 years, after discovering that raising the head tax from $50 CDN to over $500 CDN wasn't working at keeping them out either. It simply kept the immigrants in debt for longer as they worked it off. Nor were the immigrants allowed citizenship, and their children and grandchildren, born and raised in Canada, were not granted many of the rights and privileges of citizenship, even though they were exemplary members of society. Guest worker programs cause more problems down the line than they solve in the short term. Illegal immigrant problems won't be solved by guest workers. You'll be trading one set of problems for another.

With regard to Daniel's disbelieving the anecdote from a senior public school administrator who told non-Latino parents that their children would likely face problems from the fact that the school has to struggle to educate children who show up with little or no English-language skills, here's a passage from that D story (written, by the way, by a writer who has since left the mag to go work for the Southern Poverty Law Center, so he's no right-winger) that backs up the anecdote:

The Mexican-parented baby born in the United States enters the DISD [Dallas Independent School District, i.e., Dallas public schools -- RD] or a suburban school district. Because the first-generation immigrant child likely comes from a home where the English skills of the parents are weak, those of the kid will be, too, at least at first. Studies indicate that low English skills plague about 33 percent of DISD students—and that a language other than English is spoken in 43.9 percent of homes in Dallas, compared to 19.4 nationally. It is not surprising that Hispanics in general—and the foreign-born most acutely—do poorly on tests. The city’s graduation rate, according to a study sponsored by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, is an abysmal 46 percent. (It says the state’s claim of 81 percent is flat wrong.) For Hispanics in general, the graduation rate is an almost criminal 32 percent—one in three. Undocumented rates are worse.

Because more than two-thirds of all DISD students are Hispanic, things that weren’t a problem previously become so dramatically. ... DISD was nearly 1,000 classrooms deficient in meeting state requirements for bilingual teachers in elementary classes with Spanish-speaking pupils last year. It is actively recruiting bilingual teachers, some directly from Mexico. It may not be enough. The bilingual teachers DISD does have are so weak linguistically that MALDEF has filed a lawsuit on behalf of Spanish-speaking school children, saying they are not getting an adequate education. Councilmember Garcia says, “Education has to be the No. 1 priority of the Latino community.” But it is clearly an achievement that DISD finds elusive.

MALDEF is suing because the government is not providing an education in the language of immigrants, half of whom (in Dallas) are in this country illegally. What a country: violate the law by sneaking in, put your kids in the public schools, then have your advocates file suit for not teaching your children in the language of the country you just left.

Some thoughts:

1. The "immigration debate", IMHO, boils down to three separate (but quasi-interrelated) questions. First, who should we let in? Second, how do we keep out those we don't want coming in? Third, what do we do with people who are already here illegally?

2. I really don't see why Mexico should be given any special treatment when answering the first question. "All men are created equal" implies (to me) divvying up by shares of world population. As for humanitarian grounds, there's lots poorer countries than Mexico. And merit would suggest importing mainly the skilled & educated.

3. Regarding the second & third questions: Some in the "enforcement only" crowd probably are nativists, racists, whatever; see Niven's Laws. Others, however, simply don't trust the government to be serious about enforcement this time. In their minds, we've already been down this road, in 1986: amnesty plus enforcement, only there was (effectively) no enforcement, and instead we got 10-20 million more "undocumented migrants". I confess to being in this category.

4. Personally, I'd be willing to accept an "enforcement plus amnesty" package, but only if the "enforcement" aspect was guaranteed to prevent future illegal immigration. Failing that, I'd suggest a wall (*) & other border-security measures (e.g., at airports & ports), and deporting only those illegals who run afoul of the law (traffic tickets included). Once illegal immigration has been halted (or at least reduced by 95-99%), we can think about amnesty for the remainder.

5. Re. Guest workers: Immigrants who know, coming in, that they're not here for the long haul have less incentive to assimilate, since they plan on going back home after X months/years anyway. My (possibly overblown) concern with guest workers is that they may morph into a population doomed to remain perpetually alienated from mainstream American society. I'm not sure this would be in our interest.

6. Regarding immigrants & welfare: "Public charge" doctrine?

(*) IMHO, this is the optimal solution to stopping illegal immigration via land crossing. I'm willing to be convinced otherwise, however.

Steve,

"Where is the Christian compassion?"

This is where the failure of many people to distinguish the mirco form the macro is so apparent. Micro in this case being individual illegals and the macro being illegal immigaration as a whole. The flaw of the left is its focus on the micro. I think as a Christian I am commanded to have compassion for and the desire to help individual people, while at the same time holding the view on a macro level that illegal immigration is undesirable and should be prevented.

On a lighter note, what's the deal with the Oakland Raiders and people from Mexico? Even in the heart of Bronco country, the hispanic population is overwhelmingly pro-Raider.

Remembering the Netherlands, though, I would remind everyone here that America's ability to assimilate immigrants from all over the world is the envy of Europe, where they really do not have a clue. We change them; they change us. That's always been our strength.

There are thousands of young people living in the suburbs of Paris whose families have been in France for three or four generations who do not consider themselves French, and the French agree, but.....what now?

Many of the children are citizens. Are we going to throw out the parents and care for the kids?

This is something that those who say "deport 'em all" ought to consider. Retroactive expatriation and exiling US citizens (even minors whose parents are here illegally) are lines I'd rather not see our government cross. OTOH, if fathering or birthing a kid on US soil grants de facto immunity to deportation - the implications are obvious. And if we tear apart families via deportation, who's going to take care of the kids?

Do those who favor deporting all "illegals" (either immediately, or on installment plan via attriton) have any thoughts on this?

If you aren't fluent in English learn it. This has nothing to do with language imperialism and everything to do with whether you expect to be an economic success in this country.

My parents made a deliberate decision to make English my first language. I thank God every day for that.

I am especially baffled when a child who comes here in early childhood manages to grow up without learning English.

Is there any evidence this is actually happening?

You know, Daniel, that's a very good question. There are a number of statements to that effect on this thread, but they're all second and third hand if that. ("This or that teacher is said to have said something to this or that parent.") The rantings and ravings of the SF Chronicle about all these poor high school seniors who are straight-A students but who can't pass a simple test because they don't read English are not evidence of anything but a slow day at the Chron.

The typical pattern is that the original immigrants may or may not learn English. If they bring their parents over, those older people probably won't. (Chinatown is full of elderly people who speak only Cantonese.) The children of immigrants are typically bilingual, though better in English than in the old language; their children speak only English.

Does anyone have anything but anecdotes to suggest that this normal process is not taking place in the Hispanic immigrant population?

Daniel,

You must not have children in a public school that has been overwhelmed by an influx of illegal aliens and their children, whether native-born or not. Native born, English-speaking children spend half the day with their heads on their desks while teachers attend to students with lagging English skills. Native-born children with learning deficits do not get the attention that they would normally receive because resources are shifted away from them and into ESL programs and tutoring programs in Spanish. This is exactly what has happened at my local school. I'm sorry if you don't "buy it" but it is the truth. Native-born children lose valuable instruction time and support services when a school district experiences a LARGE influx of non or limited English speaking students. Their needs simply can't be met without siphoning resources away from the local children. The question for me is if we really owe more to the children of those who have broken our laws than we do to our own children and those of our fellow citizens? Shouldn't Americans be able to put their family's interests first without being called names? Aren't we being asked to forgive illegal immigrants their trespass because they are just looking out for their families? You are right about some of these schools already having serious problems. In schools that were already low-performing this situation is disastrous, but it also affects children in higher performing schools.

Jeff,

The micro and macro can and often do intersect. I personally seek out those experiences to clarify my own positions. Consequently, policies that I support or reject directly effect individuals that I know and who are a part of my life. As a Christian, I don't think I can so easily seperate these as you suggest. At the extreme (and arguments are often made from extreme cases) one could have been friendly with Jews in Germany but supported the Nazi party for a variety of reasons. I'm sure many did. The result was horrendous.

On the lighter note regarding the Raiders. My theory is that they have become the ultimate underdogs team. The team didn't create the phenomemon but because the ability to connect with the mainstream is thwarted by the dominance of the 49ers, they have embraced it. It's based on the underdog gritty Oakland heritage vs the affluent, city by the Bay, San Francisco. It's really funny to go to a game and the ads on the jumbotron are for fork-lifts. This in the SF Bay area.

The weirdest part of this phenomemon has to be the Navajo language radio broadcasts of games to the reservations. We live right in the split between the wine-and-cheese 49er fans and the blue-collar, tacos-and-budweiser Raider nation. Given that choice, we're with the Raider nation.

Well, there is one solution to the illegal problem. Make it unpalatable for them to come here. Take our prison population (the non-violent offenders anyway), and make them earn the restitution that we are paying out. Send the prison population out into the fields, with monitoring bracelets or a dog collar type of device (same as I would use to train my dog - even a low voltage will stop them in their tracks). If the government would offer up this labor to private contractors for say, 2.50 per hour, we would be able to take nearly all the jobs away from the illegals, at least partially fund the restitution of prisoners, and gain other benefits. This is coming from a former classmate who was in college because we have a program to use education to rehabilitate felons. As a felon himself, he seemed adamant that the prison poulation could think of nothing better than getting out of the cell to do work (of any kind).

I'll get back to you as soon as I go through the research for my principle of bilingual/bicultural ed. class. I know that we discussed it, and that there is a strong generational connection between language learned/spoken at home and the use of a second language outside of home. Something like less than half of immigrants (including those who immigrate as children) end up learning the second language (English, here). THe second generation is still orally fluent in both, but most cannot read or write in both (almost always learning the "new" language). And by the third generation, most of the original language is frorgotten.

As for our schools, there is no such thing as a mandate for inclusion. Convince your school board to go to an ELL pullout, or a SIOP model (preferred by the majority of ELL educators), and the problem is solved. However, it's not just the students who are causing education quality to go down. First off, it's NCLB's absolute reliance on (useless) performance based tests which force teachers to stop teacing, and become nothing short of "memorization babysitters". We are losing out to the world because we have this irrational and bogus belief that we need to measure ourselves against each other due to our need to feel special.

I have never understood why we think we need to parade around idiots who can memorize a math problem and its answer but cannot figure out how or why it works. We need to stop all standardized tests (state level, local level, SAT/ACT, etc.), and let teachers actually teach. That and parents have two extremes: one set who are helicopter parents (and are killing their children's education by trying to force them into a box that some moron in a consulting firm says will guarantee their child will go to Harvard), and the second set who aren't involved enough in their children's education - that includes ALL parents, not just illegals.

Yes, work is important, but once you realize that reading to your child boosts their IQ (which really only correlates to/measures your abiliity to read), and helping make sure they get all their homework done helps ensure they will go to college, then that should be something of a priority. Not working like mad to make sure they have the latest useless material possessions and gadgets. Working like mad to make sure the rent is paid? Well, there's no helping that.

Does anyone have anything but anecdotes to suggest that this normal process is not taking place in the Hispanic immigrant population?

Presione dos para español

If they were learning the language, we wouldn't need to see virtually everything in English and Spanish. Why did the NFL decide that for Hispanic Heritage Month, it's ads mainly had to be in Spanish? Really, most people see the problem right before their eyes. Actually, if we were committed to them learning English, why are we providing everything in Spanish as well?

Assimilation requires discrimination.

Take our prison population (the non-violent offenders anyway), and make them earn the restitution that we are paying out. [...] If the government would offer up this labor to private contractors for say, 2.50 per hour, we would be able to take nearly all the jobs away from the illegals

Approximate # of "illegals": 11 million (*) to 20 million (**)

From the Bureau of Justice Statistics (***):

# of persons in jail (2006): 766,010

# of persons in prison (2006): 2,245,189

# of persons on parole (2005): 784,400

# of persons on probation (2005): 4,162,500

OTOH, it is interesting to note that the Thirteenth Amendment does contain an explicit exception.

(*) J. Passel, "The Size & Characteristics of the Unauthorized Migrant Population in the US", Pew Hispanic Center, 2006.

(**) Justich & Ng, "The Underground Labor Force is Rising to the Surface", Bear Sterns, 2005.

(***) http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/correct.htm

These are recent immigrants. In previous waves of immigration the situation was exactly the same.

No, it's not exactly the same. First we didn't have modern communications then that could allow someone to continue operating in their own language. That is what we are seeing happening here. Large areas are building up that can sustain a non-English environment. Talk to people from Miami where it's already pretty much a Spanish only area.

Also, we cut off immigration a some point. That forced the people who came and stayed to learn English.

Susan, you omit some important details in your anecdotal experience. Please take the following as contrast rather than critique.

Much depends on the age of the child, but much also depends on the child's native academic skills (i.e. the training they've had so far from their homeland). One is not learning in a language unless one is either very good at mental translation, or one has learned to think in the language. I heard a story (local, my wife is a pub ed teacher and I have met many teachers through her) recently about a boy who was brilliant in math, but was unable to demonstrate that until a few months of ESL gave him the means to do so. Until that point, the math teacher had no objective way to measure the boy's progress in the math curriculum.

ESL in the US seems much like what you describe: based on immersion rather than formal pattern teaching and repetition by rote. Also, it is not accurate to describe the Dutch results -- which you strongly imply -- as fluency in one year. They have a firm grounding in pronunciation and grammar in that time, I have no doubt, but vocabulary acquisition will take several more years yet, during which time they will likely clear the third obstacle: learning to think in Dutch. It would be reasonable to expect that the local schools would continue 2nd language support after that first year.

One technique with which I happen to have personal experience is having the student teach me their language as I teach them English. I was a tutor, under the direction of a teacher, but the principal seems clear: learning by example (the gist of immersion) can be facilitated if the instructor is being a role model for the method.

"Large areas are building up that can sustain a non-English environment. Talk to people from Miami where it's already pretty much a Spanish only area."

Just like every other immigrant wave before, these people will learn English because it improves their economic opportunities. Yes, you can live in Miami or Dallas or LA or DC and see entire communities where you can live without speaking English. They are also economically cut-off from the rest of the city, like the Irish and Russian ghettos in New York or even the Chinatowns.

Even though the lingua franca of the fast food industry in these cities, of the hotel and office cleaning industries in these cities, and maybe the construction industries, they cannot move beyond mere laborers without speaking English, even in Miami. While financial business gets transacted in Miami, every one of those people speaks fluent English. They transact in Spanish because they are dealing with Latin American countries.

Again, the main difference is that for the first time there is such a large number of Spanish-speaking people in this country that corporations and the media have exploited that. But just because someone watches telenovelas on Univision and reads Al Dia, doesn't meant they don't speak fluent English, read fluent English, and write in fluent English. It doesn't mean they aren't watching Desperate Housewives on ABC and reading the Dallas Morning News.

We are in the midst of a major cultural shift where Latinos--most who are bilingual and will speak Spanish on occasion--are now the largest minority group with their own media and corporate market. But we shouldn't confuse that with isolation.

You know, for all the complaints about Plyler v. Doe and its outcome, can you imagine how much more dysfunctional the alternate outcome would have been -- millions of children forced to be truant and uneducated, hanging out at home, guaranteed targets for recruitment to MS-13 and the Latin Kings within a few years?

Rod, if you don't support closing emergency rooms to illegal immigrants, why would you support (as you seem to) repealing Plyler v. Doe?

I'm one liberal who acknowledges the dysfunction (though conservatives should also acknowledge cities like New Brunswick, New Jersey -- a city with an illegal immigrant population of at least 25% that has also been revitalized by the new Mexican population) caused by illegal immigration -- Rod's story IS real (would that board conservatives would believe my personal anecdotes ...) and so are the anecdotes about junkers piled up in the front yard, people stacked like cordwood into small houses or even apartments, etc. (Mind you, that's more dangerous for them than it is for us.)

Why should it surprise us, though, that a dysfunctional immigration system would produce dysfunctional outcomes? The solution is to fix the system, with reasonable immigration limits (i.e., not zero as the talk radio callers want) and perhaps a trade-off of no path to citizenship for current illegal immigrants (hardly "amnesty") except for children, which would answer Republican charges that Democrats only want votes.

BTW, building a Berlin Wall on our southern border is not fixing the system ...

"BTW, building a Berlin Wall on our southern border is not fixing the system..."

(shaking head in disbelief) Wasn't the Berlin Wall put up to keep people IN? Where's the relevance?

why would you support (as you seem to) repealing Plyler v. Doe?

Not sure if that's what Rod's proposing, but I'll run with it.

Prior to Plyler, was public schooling of "illegals" constitutionally prohibited nationwide? If not, "repealing" that decision wouldn't necessarily prohibit such schooling; all that would disappear is the judicial fiat _requiring_ that _all_ jurisdictions provide such schooling.

IMHO, if some "bigoted, racist, nativist" state or locality wants to deny welfare, housing, jobs, emergency rooms, schools to "illegals", I say let them. The "illegals" will move to more welcoming, enlightened jurisdictions. The former get the "illegals" out of their backyard; the latter get revitalized; and both also suffer the respective costs associated with their respective policies. A win-win.

fix the system, with reasonable immigration limits (i.e., not zero as the talk radio callers want)

Not all "restrictionists" want zero immigration; some "merely" want it dramatically reduced, e.g., 100k/yr. I'm not sure if that level is prudent or necessary.

building a Berlin Wall on our southern border is not fixing the system

1. Unless those "reasonable limits" are to be merely "ink on a page", we'll need some way to keep out those who exceed the limit in any given year. Whether this requires a wall is arguable; I think it does, but I'm willing to be proven wrong.

2. A wall (or the like), is not necessarily incompatible with letting in, say, 2/3/5 million immigrants a year; just build more entry points. But at least this way, you'll be better able (than currently) to monitor who comes across our borders, and keep out those you think ought to be kept out (criminals, terrorists, etc.).

Susan, one minor quibble: the child's native language is immaterial to the further support in learning the new language. Immersion is generic. The primary learning in those local schools, given the intensive preparation during that first year, is vocabulary.

You make an excellent point about immigrants who are functionally illiterate in their native languages.

The only way to do anything about the people here illegally is very harsh penalties on people who hire them. [...] But, instead, the right constantly sits and yammers about how evil immigrants are

Employer sanctions aren't exactly unknown on the right. See here:

www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1053318/posts

Also here, which quotes Krikorian:

www.stateline.org/live/details/story?contentId=89870

Michelle Makin:

michellemalkin.com/2007/08/10/the-new-bush-immigration-enforcement-plan-color-me-underwhelmed/

John Derbyshire:

article.nationalreview.com/?q=MDhjNTJmMTkzOGEwMTJiZTBmMzc5ZDZhYjc5NTI3YWQ=

David Frum:

frum.nationalreview.com/post/?q=MjgzM2U4ZDk0YmY2NzViNTdmYWZjZDBkNmE1ZjFiYjk=

Steve Sailer only dislikes them 'cuz he thinks the government isn't serious:

isteve.blogspot.com/2006/04/compromise-on-immigration-is-surrender.html

I'm not sure I'd call myself "right-wing", but here's my take on employer sanctions:

gravitron5.blogspot.com/2007/07/immigration-law-enforcement-part-ii.html

BTW, on the question of federalism in the case of a repeal of Plyler v. Doe:

That is the very argument that strict constructionists use to reassure those who are pro-choice in case of a repeal of Roe v. Wade -- that abortion will still be allowed in many states, just not all; just as public education for illegal immigrants would still be allowed in many states, just not all.

The problem, of course, is that there are tens of millions, if not 100+ million people, in America who believe both abortion and any public support for illegal immigrants (throw in emergency rooms, why not) are so wrong, so immoral, so heinous, that they must be banned altogether nationwide for the very preservation of our country. And so it is always possible that the current conservative Supreme Court, sympathetic to those cries, could impose a (yes) judicially activist solution to appease them.

Two of the many reasons Hispanic immigration is different and impossible to stop is a) demographics, and b) border location.

Look at California: Hispanic TFR peaked at 4.4 by 1990, dropped to 3.2 in 1999, but is now back up to 3.7 in 2005 (all others white/black/asian have TFR = 1.6 and have all been declining since the 1980s. Do the math youself (hint: even if Hispanics started dropping birth rates now, it's pretty much a done deal because of the lower birth rates of the old locals).

Note also that Hispanics have shorter generation cycles (they have kids younger). In other words, in addition to having impressive birth rates, they value family and children and thus aren't so afraid of teen pregnancy. In this way, they have three generations in the time others have two.

What makes this different from the old immigrants is that Americans used to be big breeders themselves, so fresh newcomers could never "own" any area demographically via births alone. The Irish came the closest to doing this, but they usually spoke English and spread out quickly all over the country, being overwhelmed by other immigrants themselves. No way this is happening to the Hispanics anytime soon.

So you have big two factors: millions with a different language pouring over and living near a nearby border, plus birth rates three times that of natives living there and showing no sign of dropping...at the same time the native's families are sinking like a stone. We will have a different language and racial group overnight; you ain't seen nothing yet. They are already holding some local public meetings in Spanish in certain locals. Just wait till 2050. It's kind of funny; you can see all the posters on Crunchy Cons who have Hispanic connections already. Soon, going after Hispanic immigration will become politically impossible.

I'm always curious: exactly why should Hispanics learn English? They own the Southwest demographically and thus politically. If you want to live in the SW, you had better get bilingual and absorb Latina culture. It's a demographic done deal.

Larry - Thanks for the kind words. If I come across as a tightrope dancer, it's probably because my position on this issue hasn't yet congealed.

WRT probation/parole - my 5:23 (11/29/07) comment, and the stats therein, were specifically addressing Christopher Mohr's 4:55 proposal to underbid "illegal" labor with virtual chain gangs. I suspect there may be "illegals" on probation and parole - Googling "undocumented" or "illegal alien" and "probation" or "parole" turns up lots of hits - but I don't have time to look up stats on them.

WRT federalism & Plyler - I understand your concern, and I wish I could confidently predict today's Supreme Court, when presented with a case demanding a nationwide ban on public schooling of "illegals", dismissing for want of jurisdiction ("not a federal question,", etc.). Alas I cannot.

Such a ban may fall within Congressional authority to regulate immigration & resident aliens; but I still think it bad policy. In the case of both "amnesty" and mass roundups, such a ban is irrelevant, since, in either case, there would no longer be an "illegal" population. In the case of an "attrition strategy", there's enough sympathy for "illegals" - e.g., "sanctuary cities" and the like - that I think a national ban would be counterproductive. For the reason you mentioned - "school or MS-13" - a national ban on public schooling of "illegals" (ironically) makes sense only when there are (virtually) no illegals actually here.

Learning languages isn't that hard.

Honestly, to hear this blog talk about it, it's like nuclear physics or something! I speak three languages and am learning, at 62, a fourth (Dutch), and believe me, it's no big deal!!! Most people in Europe speak at least two languages fluently, with smatterings of three or four others. If you stay inside the European language group (English, German, Dutch, French, Spanish, Italian and so forth) it's a relative snap. If there's a reason for it, sit down and learn it, OK? If you live where the new language is spoken, no problem, just go to the store and talk, right? It's not that hard.

All these languages are closely related. I have a good friend who is fluent in English, Spanish, Swahili and Mandarin, with pieces of a half a dozen others, and he's not that unusual in the grand scheme of things.

Is it you guys in the middle of the continent? If I have to use my Spanish to read the signs at Home Depot, does the world end? If you have to learn Spanish to live effectively in the Southwest, why is this such a big deal? Contrarywise, if kids moving here have to learn English, why is this such a big production?? Gosh, you'd think we were asking for brain surgery or something!

MI
Employer sanctions aren't exactly unknown on the right. See here:

Well, yes, there are plenty of intelligent people on the right who have realized the obvious. I wasn't trying to imply there weren't, I was actually trying to state the opposite!

Namely, that a lot of people on the right have realized that that is the sole method that makes any sense at all, and are having to jump through all sorts of mental hoops as to why Republican leaders do not do that very very obvious thing.

When the real answer is 'They like the status quo.'. A non-voting, non-unionized, dirt-poor segregated worker class. It's a 'pro-business' dream.

And, yes, I know about the SSA no-match thing, but I also know how stupid it is. Notice the AFL-CIO is against it...and then ask yourself how many people here illegally are in unions. It's basically none. (I'm sure it's some liberal conspiracy where the union is working against its own interest by encouraging undocumented people to compete with it, though.)

Of course, the SSA checks could have been the basis for some useful program. A few quick sanity checks first, like is the name simply misspelled? Is it a women with the same first name and different last name, she probably just got married. Does one SSN appear to have two places of employment more than 100 miles apart?

A very useful sieve of some sort could have been set up, where 80% of the results got weeded out, and, with the remaining 20%, we simply see what corporations have large numbers of these suspicious workers, and then we look into them manually. (Because, duh, it's the businesses we're after, not the workers.)

But instead it was set up in the same self-defeating manner that no child left behind was, and half of all Republican government programs are set up...it was set up to instantly and totally fail in every possible way. Luckily it was blocked in the courts before an entire tenth of the working population got mistakenly thrown out of work.

Well, yes, there are plenty of intelligent people on the right who have realized the obvious. I wasn't trying to imply there weren't, I was actually trying to state the opposite!

Apologies, I missed the tongue in cheek.

yes, I know about the SSA no-match thing, but I also know how stupid it is.

Regarding "no match", well, I skimmed NILC's press release, and thought, "Not sure I agree with their ultimate goals, but they do have a point on this one." There's gotta be a better way to do work-status verification.

Regarding "no match", well, I skimmed NILC's press release, and thought, "Not sure I agree with their ultimate goals, but they do have a point on this one." There's gotta be a better way to do work-status verification.

Bah, they don't even really have to do that. Something like 75% (I'm guessing there.) of all undocumented workers work at known places, like construction companies, or agriculture, or, around here, chicken plants. (Gainesville, chicken capital of the south.) It's not like it's some sort of mystery, or places are 'accidentally' hiring them not knowing.

A few trivial laws would let them single out 'problem' businesses and make those businesses immediately forward each new employee's records. It could be combined with the SSA stuff I was talking about above, although, frankly, simply asking local law enforcement would work just as well. Once it's made clear this is serious and actually costs more money than it saves, businesses will stop.

And, I repeat, I'm not actually a fan of this, or, at least, only as the second step, where the first step is to create a guest worker program. I'm just pointing out that it would be almost absurdly easy to start targeting business and, thus, reduce the demand, and, thus, reduce illegal immigration.

Eventually some sort of actual real law enforcement might be needed to track down the very sneaky businesses, but right now? Nope. And at that point, businesses would actually have to start actually violating the law, instead of just 'being tricked', and that is a line most businesses do not want to cross.

"They take the jobs that no one wants". Yeah, I am pretty sure somewhere in America, there is a man or woman (whose family has lived here all their lives and are LEGAL Americans), who wants nothing more than to find that job that pays minimum wage just to buy her/his son or daughter a footbal or a doll from the dollar store yet can't. Why? Because some illegal alien came and took the job that "no one wanted". Well, Merry Christmas to that family. Thanks to an illegal immigrant, the legal American can't get the job that "no one wanted". Thank you very much for the liberals and those who support the de-americanization (I don't know if thats a word) of the United States. You care more about some illegal than you do about your neighbor. Thank you so much. Merry Christmas to you too.

Sorry, Christian. I have a strong, default respect for military service, but your horizons are a bit narrow for my taste.

Item: the vast majority of poor in this country are in large urban centers, where "illegals" are at a minimum, and where they have ample opportunity to find jobs.

Item: meaning to be a bit self-contradictory, those same urban poor are that way in significant part because of the actions of rich, white business owners.

Item: most illegals work in geographic areas rather far removed from those aforementioned urban centers.

I know a bit about command training, both from that default respect and because I listen when vets talk, and your citation of poor English skills amongst your "comrades", and your implication that they are given front-line communication responsibilities, sounds very much like a crock of s**t. Most sgts I know would report that to their superiors, and wouldn't hesitate to go through channels and skip their immediates if the situation was not remedied.

Oh, and where I live, people with non-Caucasian features and any sort of accented English get little to no respect just for that. I am willing to take you at your word about not being a racist, but you sure do sound like one.

Dear Franlin. I had many of these SGTs who couldn't speak english. Many. They couldn't even say the Pledge of Allegiance. And when we would teach them how to say something in English (in a kind AND respectful manner), they would simply look down on us and tell us that spanish was their language. Yet, when speaking to a superior, they would smile and tell them that they couldn't speak English that well. Yet, when we would suggest to them not to speak spanish to one another, to practice their english, they looked down on us again and stated that spanish was their language and it was who they were. Nevermind that we new this, we didn't have any prejudice against the language, just their attitudes not to learn. I have no problem with other languages. Infact, I am of Asian decent. Manyof my relatives speak another tongue but have had the good enough respect for this country to learn ENGLISH. Did they accuse others of trying to take their heritage away when trying to teach them? The answer is NO! Speak english, pledge your allegiance to America, or get out. Oh, and come here LEGALLY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Christian, please back up your claims with the base and base commander's names. If (and I'm stretching to respect it) your allegations are true, local and national news would be all over the situation in no time.

The problem is that the mayority of those women that come here illegaly
the first thing they do as soon they are here is get pregnant and go on Well Fare and the ones who pay for them are the ones who pay taxes. They get medicare, rent free, food stamps, this is really becoming an abuse made by this women.

Amen Kimberly.
"It's not right that people have to stand in line for health care to begin with because they lack insurance. Where's your moral outrage about that? If health care for poor people in Texas is overwhelmed, maybe you should be worrying more about a fix and less about building walls to keep out undocumented workers. It's all about priorities."
Daniel --
One problem with health care does lie with illegals. They clog up ERs like they're a nurses office at an elemantary school during flu season. They are well aware that they will not be turned away for anything. So they come. Not just for emergencies, but everything. The common cold, a runny nose, a bloody lip, a foreign object in the eye - whatever. Not because the hospital is closest, but because they don't have to pay. They're then instructed to follow up with a local doctor. But they don't. They return to the ER, for follow up and prescription refills. There would be no line if ERs were used for what they're intended for and by people who intend to pay their bills. Ask any ER nurse, they'll tell you the same.

Jason - please point out, in the Bible, where good Christians are supposed to give free heatlhcare, housing, food, and Heaven kows what else..........the illegals are essentially THIEVES. They KNOW what they are doing. It's not random. I working IN a hospital - they know how to work the system. They are THIEVES.

Generosity and charity goes both ways. The POOR have obligations - OBLIGATIONS and DUTIES - as well. Yo, and your Socialist buddies, seem to think Christianity, and the USA, are akin to life on Pleasure Island - as a perpetual first night - in Disney's "Pinocchio". Your vision is WRONG, Jason.

Now - post what Leviticus says about dealing with thieves.

In Matthew 25:31-46, Jesus proclaims that how you treat the hungry, the thirsty, the sick and the “other least of these,” is how you treat Jesus himself. And if you fail to help the least of these, Jesus promises that you will be sent to hell. Notice He refers to "nations" not individuals.

31"When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, he will sit on his throne in heavenly glory. 32All the nations will be gathered before him, and he will separate the people one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats. 33He will put the sheep on his right and the goats on his left.

34"Then the King will say to those on his right, 'Come, you who are blessed by my Father; take your inheritance, the kingdom prepared for you since the creation of the world. 35For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, 36I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me.'

37"Then the righteous will answer him, 'Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink? 38When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you? 39When did we see you sick or in prison and go to visit you?'

40"The King will reply, 'I tell you the truth, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers of mine, you did for me.'

41"Then he will say to those on his left, 'Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. 42For I was hungry and you gave me nothing to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink, 43I was a stranger and you did not invite me in, I needed clothes and you did not clothe me, I was sick and in prison and you did not look after me.'

44"They also will answer, 'Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or needing clothes or sick or in prison, and did not help you?'

45"He will reply, 'I tell you the truth, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.'

46"Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life."