Solving the Immigration Problem - Dropping Both Entitlements and Xenophobia

For some reason, the mainstream media has beenstronger and our foreign relations stronger. I'd mention
pushing "immigration" as a problem in search of athe additional tax revenues that could be received but I
solution. Why this "smoke and mirrors" issue is beingseek to repeal the 16th amendment and abolish the
pushed so hard, in light of MORE sweeping legislationIRS.
being passed by the 111th Congress like theI would also vote to increase the number of temporary
Dodd-Frank Bill, is a bit disconcerting to me. Thevisas granted to highly skilled workers.
solution to immigration seems to be a self-evident one;I would vote to allow some immigrants to remain in the
simply allow any foreigner, without a criminalcountry while pursuing legal residency.
background, that is actively seeking work to stay here.I would support legislation that would require hospitals
Now please note, I am advocating freedom of entryto report illegal aliens if said hospital seeks state
and residency, and not "amnesty" or the granting ofreimbursement for treating them. In addition, I wouldn't
U.S. citizenship. Anyone working here, that is producingmake it necessary for hospitals to provide care to
or otherwise contributing to the overall economyundocumented aliens IF they can be safely sent back
should be able to freely.home country without a significant chance of their
If we had no welfare state, there would be few validcondition worsening.
arguments against opening our borders, assuming theOn these matters, I tend to agree with Ron Paul and
foreign citizens weren't allowed to vote and they didn'twould vote them same way he did. Where I differ on
have a violent or fraudulent criminal history. However, ifRon Paul is on the "anchor baby" issue and birthright
foreign citizens are allowed to vote, take food stamps,citizenship. I favor the American tradition of jus soli (law
Social Security, "free" medical care, and "free"of ground) tradition over jus sanguinis (right of blood)
education, then there are some very serious conflictssince I am a staunch individualist and I don't believe that
of interest.one's bloodlines, race, or language should be used for
Immigration is really a secondary issue. End welfare,OR against anyone and that people are by their
Social Security, Medicare, the progressive income tax,nature, born good.
the minimum wage, public education and the War onI would not support legislation to end our current "jus
Drugs and you will end the enmity towards immigrantssolis' or birthright citizenship in favor of "jus sanguinis"
(assuming they aren't violent criminals). Keep thoselaws applied nearly everywhere else. The United
institutions and you create bad incentives.States is almost unique in our "jus solis" heritage and in
We are subsidizing illegal immigration with our policies,my mind it is a robust expression of individualism. It is a
and as Ron Paul says, "when you subsidize something,chance to break free of the chains of bloodlines, race,
you get more of it." Now practically speaking,language. I do see the problems presented by the
enforcement of laws dictating the deportation of the 8"anchor baby" (such an ugly term) issue but feel that
to 12 million or so illegals is impossible anyway, but let'sthe answer lies in ending welfare, not pursuing jus
looks at some of the commonly raised argumentssanguinis.
against immigrants:There are obscure arguments to be debated whether
1) "Immigrants take advantage of welfare and socialor not America adopted the 'jus solis' from the English
services."common law tradition or not. I've heard many of these
SIMPLE SOLUTION: Make them ineligible for benefits,arguments and personally find them unsatisfactory or
and then continue to phase out these unsustainableconvincing, especially with counter-factuals like Calvin
benefits for natives as well.More's Case, 77 Eng. Rep. 377 (1608) which held that:
2) "An influx of immigrants can influences entire"the earliest, most influential theoretical articulation by an
elections."English court of what came to be the common-law
SIMPLE SOLUTION: Don't allow immigrants vote until'rule' that a person's status was vested at birth, and
they have been naturalized. Sure, allow non-criminalbased upon place of birth".
immigrants in as guest workers who can participate inAccordingly, in 1866, in the United States v. Rhodes,
the economy but do note allow them to vote.Supreme Court Justice Swayne said:
3) "Immigrants take our jobs.""All persons born in the allegiance of the King are
SIMPLE SOLUTION: Understand whose jobs theynatural-born subjects, and all persons born in the
really are; the employer's. The jobs belong to theallegiance of the United States are natural-born
person doing the hiring. If the employer can findcitizens. Birth and allegiance go together. Such is the
someone willing to do the same or better quality ofrule of the common law, and it is the common law of
work for less, can you blame them for hiring them?this country, as well as of England.... We find no
You wouldn't want someone tell you to pay a higherwarrant for the opinion that this great principle of the
price for something you could find cheaper (or evencommon law has ever been changed in the United
for free), would you?States. It has always obtained here with the same
4) "Immigrants comprise the majority of the populationvigor, and subject only to the same exceptions, since
growth in the U.S., and this conflicts with the Americanas before the Revolution."
dream of 'affordable housing' (i.e., creates scarcity)."Either way, the Supreme Court of the United States
SIMPLE SOLUTION: Well, hire inexpensive laborfollows precedent good luck changing over 110 years
(possible those legal foreign workers) to build moreof jus solis without an amendment (now, if you're going
houses. Heck, you will also be able to sell them theto go through all the work to create a constitutional
very homes that they've helped to build, creatingamendment, wouldn't our time be MUCH better spent
additional demand and jobs. By the way, the dream oftrying to repeal the 16th?).
affordable housing has really only proven to be aBorder security is a GREAT idea but some sort of
nightmare when quasi-government bureaucracies likeAmerican version of the Berlin Wall certainly is not.
HUD, Fannie, Freddie, or the Federal Reserve try toEliminate all of our wastefully entanglements in military
solve the problem of "affordable housing".foreign affairs and work for a strong military solution
5) "Terrorists may pose as immigrants to attack usthat protects our borders from terrorism, criminal
from within" or "With immigrants come higher crime"immigrants, all enemies foreign and domestic, etc.,
SIMPLE SOLUTION: Look to secure borders as anwithout comprising our liberties. If those who are here
alternative to expensive, wasteful military basesillegally refuse to file for residency or a work visas, or
overseas that only serve to create "blow-back". Inhave a criminal background that includes violence or
addition to saving incredible sums of money by closingfraudulent behavior, then yes they should be deported.
foreign military bases, a truly secure border wouldIf they aren't criminals and have filed for residency or a
make enforcement of immigration laws easier. Withvisa and aren't taking welfare, then no deportation. If
regards to immigrants causing an increase in crime,fact, I'd even favor allowing illegals to stay while their
that is a myth. If you want to end the violence andresidency or visa applications were being processed (if
crimes at the borders, end the illegal War on Drugsthey passed a criminal background check, they weren't
(remember Prohibition? It required a Constitutionalable to participate in welfare, and they carried private
amendment, which was repealed because it simplyinsurance so that hospitals didn't have to treat them for
didn't work and only created more crime).free). Failing a criminal background check or having
I am against Arizona style legislation since any movetheir application for residency or visa turned down (for
to require less evidence from law enforcement is areasonable circumstances) would be grounds for
move in the wrong direction in the fight against tyranny.deportation.
The Arizona law reduces the burden of probableShouldn't we eliminate all discriminatory policies based
cause to mere reasonable suspicion. This goes againstupon race or any other arbitrary grouping and let
my goal to eliminate all discriminatory policies basedpeople stand on their own individual merits? Shouldn't
upon race or any other arbitrary grouping (i.e., racialwe encourage the free movement of labor and capital
profiling) since the only "suspicious" people will look likeacross borders, especially in a financial crisis such as
they are from Mexico, whether they are an Americanwe find ourselves in?
citizen or not. This is not fair the the American citizensShouldn't we begin the elimination of the welfare state
that may or may not look like they may be an illegaland entitlements programs, eliminating any bad
based upon some whim of a very human, and henceincentives someone may have to immigrate and
fallible, police officer.siphon off the system, and to put charity back where it
Incumbent Rep. Jason Chaffetz's Bipartisan Reformbelongs; into the hands of churches, fraternal
Of Immigration through Defining Good Enforcementorganizations, and mutual aid societies?
Resolution (H.R. 1026), or BRIDGE resolution makesHave we forgotten that the Founding Fathers of The
mandatory the use of E-Verify by business owners,United States of America were immigrants? Shouldn't
placing the burden of immigration enforcement notwe always welcome refugees and those seeking
where it belongs, but upon entrepreneurs. This ispolitical asylum from totalitarian regimes? Have we
anti-business and pushing off the responsibility of theforgotten that some of the greatest Americans of all
Federal government onto erstwhile business owners.time were immigrants (e.g., Albert Einstein and Nicola
I much preferred H.R. 4321's idea to legalizeTesla come immediately to mind)?
undocumented immigrants if they learn English, pay aLet's drop our unfounded fears of those people who
$500 fine, pass background checks and register withonly want to enjoy the same freedoms that we do.
the federal government. However, since there are noLet's support the free movement of labor and capital
provisions to keep immigrants off the dole or mandateacross borders!
that new immigrants complete the same naturalizationPlease help me make a difference in Utah's 3rd
process as those immigrants before them I wouldn'tCongressional District, please donate to my campaign
vote for it (besides, I am sure there are other problemstoday!
with the legislation that I didn't see).Kind regards,
Greencards are granted to only 140,000 skilledJake Shannon
workers per year, why? Why not allow all skilledLibertarian for U.S.
workers in? It would only serve to make out economy