Centerfield

The powers that be of both parties were out of touch and soundly overruled on this prop 200 issue, weren't they?

That leaves open a future opportunity for whichever party wants to take it.

Prop 200 doesn't do much ("Arizonans must show proof of citizenship when registering to vote and prove legal status when asking for certain types of non-federally mandated public benefits.") Medical emergencies are still covered so the hospital emergency rooms will be filled. Welfare covered by federal law will be provided. Education will be provided to children of illegals.

There is a guest worker program on the books. McCain wants to reform it to allow illegals to come forward, register for temporary labor cards or visas, and then risk losing them after three years. That will work ;)

Kennedy wants to add citizenship to the reform bill which Bush opposes.

Republicans need to address the issue head-on: stricter enforcement of employer regulations (higher penalties); stricter controls on the borders; work with Mexico and other Latin American countires to boost their economies so a liveable wage can be earn locally.

EG;
You're correct that Prop 200 doesn't do much especially since our AG determined (with the blessings of the courts, so far) that it wouldn't apply to hospital care, education and others. There's some indication the voters knew it wouldn't do much but that they "wanted to send a message" of frustration. In Arizona at least, there seems to be a broad-based frustration with the situation (except when it comes to who builds your house, who busses your table, who cuts your lawn, etc.)

I have been hearing horror stories about security on the southern boarder for years.

The fact that neither party is willing to champion this cause is puzzling. I think their reluctance is more than just sucking up to the Hispanic vote. One way to fund the baby boomer SS problem is to significantly increase the number of taxpayers through immigration. Europe is in a similar position. They dislike the immigrants but love they tax base immigration creates.

If either party actually came out and said "We are letting them in on purpose" they would get creamed in the next election.

Sorry forgot to finish the though: I think McCain and Bush see amnesty and visitor programs as a source of review.

Bob makes a good point about the tax base incentive. Another incentive is the labor pool of cheap labor that is willing to do the jobs that nobody else wants. I think both parties suck up to business interests in that respect too.

Bob, Huzzah! I've been saying that for quite a while, as you can see from this blog entry from a year ago.

I never really bought the "Jobs Americans don't want" argument.

The real justification seems to be that the totally destitute illegal works are great sweatshop labor. Abuse them, cheat them, violate labor laws and the illegals will just keep coming back.

Didn't construction jobs use to pay really well?

Bob and Tully;
A few f/u comments on the "cheap labor" and "new voter" themes. 1) Clearly cheap labor for us. In AZ it problably helps keep housing prices down, restaurant prices lower etc. ("What's the opposite of 'offshoring'?") In addition we get all that extra sales tax and unclaimed SS tax. (The unfortunate negative of a fake SS#). Now to be fair, if the jobs weren't paying better than Mexico and Central America the flow of immigrants would peter out. So those taking the jobs see them as an opportunity. Not to mention the large source of capital that goes back to Mexico.
2) Voters: Note, 44% of Hispanics voted for Prop 200. Nationwide, when Hispanics were surveyed about the issues they thought were important Immigration wasn't at the top, let alone near the top. So do liberal immigration laws help or hurt a party?

I would throw in one other consideration. Many undocumented workers (politically correct term) ultimately plan to return to Mexico. I hope they bring back a sense of how a government should serve its people and ultimately change Mexican society and government. (Cheaper than sending in troops for regime change. ;-) )

Bob,

If they are illegal, they don't pay taxes or contribute to SS. They add something to the economy but not to the tax coffers.

Also, there was some talk about allowing legal aliens claim SS benefits if they were eligible when they reach the SS age. But since a worker must contribute to SS for 10 years (40 quarters), the number of eligible aliens is probably very minimal.

EG;
I beleive some illegals contirbute to SS because of their falsified SS#.

Illegals do indeed pay SS when they work at legal jobs with fake papers. But "illegal" under our law is a single generation. If you're born here, you're a citizen. Mama and Papa may have snuck in under the radars, but Junior can be President.

My bigger point was echoing what Bob said about sheer population numbers. As I pointed out over a year ago, Hispanics have higher birth rates and a quicker upward social mobility curve right now than either whites or blacks. They are responsible for most of our population growth. By the numbers, more Hispanics means more tax revenue, and we're going to have more Hispanics even if we totally seal the borders.

The rest is left as an exercise for the interested.

EG: The point of amnesty and visitor programs is to make them legal, and of course the children born in this country are legal.

Chris:
1)If the high paying construction job I once worked, is now a minimum wage (or less) job occupied by an illegal, who is going to by that house or eat in that restaurant. Also your assuming a fake I.D. is needed to work in those jobs. Its my understanding thats not always how the system works. Workers gather on a corner and are hired for a day then get paid in cash.
2)Of course it helps the party, it also smacks of treason. I believe elected officials swear an oath to serve the current citizens of this country. Allowing a flow of illegal workers then sucking up to their descendant is equivalent to stuffing a ballot box.

According to NPR illegal immigrants sending money back home are now the second largest industry in Mexico. Larger than tourism but smaller than the oil industry.

Bob;

I don't know how construction jobs have changed in the past 20 years in terms of salary. No, I don't assume they ask for ID on many jobs. Some other jobs they do; my hunch would be those jobs would be higher paying. Therefore, there's a greater incentive to get that fake SS#.

Workers definitely gather in acorner. In fact that points to one of our "hot" local immigration issues. In several areas workers gather on the corner awaiting a pick up to come by and offer work. These are often chaotic and dangerous (i.e. traffic accidents). The city built a fairly rudimentary work center for workers to gather. The neighbors requested it. It seems to be working but has lead to significant displeasure within certain Republican circles because it "encourages illegal activity" (specifically the presence of and hiring of illegal immigrants)

Finally, I'm still not which party benefits by relaxed immigration enforcement.

Finally, I'm still not which party benefits by relaxed immigration enforcement.

Both, in different ways and at different times, and on different time scales. Relative advantage is different, harder question.

I think we do need to consider the Mexican issue in this. It might be in the US interest to have people working here and sending back money to Mexico. That might actually prevent even more illegal immigration and may help prevent Mexico from blowing up. So I think any immigration reform has to take account of how it affects Mexico.

Agree, Marc. If that money wasn't going south, how many more would be trying to come across the border, and what kind of shape would our neighbor be in?

We see the obvious drawbacks of illegal immigration. But the beneficial side effects are not nearly as obvious.