Brooks gets blurry in the article, for example
The number of illegal immigrants flowing into this country is dropping, not rising. The flow of total immigrants peaked in 2005 and has been dropping since. The share of immigrants coming from Latin America is falling sharply. Since 2008, more immigrants have come from Asia than Latin America, and the disparity is growing.
The first sentence specifies illegal immigrants, the second says total immigrants... is that legal plus illegal? The last sentence says simply immigrants... who are we talking about here?
Also, since 2008 more immigrants have come from Asia than Latin America. Also, since 2009 more Mexicans have left America than entered. Yes, and? That doesn't mean we have fixed a problem with our southern border, it means that it has been very difficult to get a good job in this country since the economy tanked. Before we declare victory lets wait for labor to be in demand again.
I think the comparison to Reagan and Bush is a bit specious as well. If I recall about a million illegal immigrants became legal in Reagan's immigration reform. We have more than 10x that many here illegally now. Would the solution be the same?
I am NOT saying build a wall... It's more a comment on the article and reading too much into it than anything. The one thing I would not do is sign off on citizenship for anybody that came here legally. I could sign off on a political compromise that granted permanent residency if that deal included a mandatory eVerify type system for all employers of all sizes and importantly not just fined companies but sent corporate officers and directors to jail if they habitually violated the process. (not for hiring illegals that were approved by the system, but either skipped the system or hired people that were not approved by it)
|
(
In response to this post by NJHoo)
Posted: 02/20/2016 at 09:10AM