City Journal Autumn 2014

Current Issue:

Autumn 2014
Table of Contents
Subscribe
Tablet Editions
Click to visit City Journal California

Readers’ Comments

Heather Mac Donald
The Real Risks of Amnesty « Back to Story

View Comments (35)

Add New Comment:

To send your message, please enter the words you see in the distorted image below, in order and separated by a space, and click "Submit." If you cannot read the words below, please click here to receive a new challenge.

Comments will appear online. Please do not submit comments containing advertising or obscene language. Comments containing certain content, such as URLs, may not appear online until they have been reviewed by a moderator.


 
Showing 35 Comment(s) Subscribe by RSS
"The real consequence is to the unity of American culture..."

There are many reasons that American culture has been eroded. Immigration- legal or illegal- is hardly foremost among those reasons. American culture experienced a far more insidious erosion as a result of the 60s counterculture - before mass illegal immigration became a significant problem and amnesty a possibility. As several of the Manhattan Institute's best writings have pointed out, this counterculture was spearheaded by white liberals, not Hispanic illegals. Hispanics, like Italians and Irish before them will eventually assimilate, so long as conservatives are not caught up in irrational fears that Latinos (or other non-European immigrants) cannot assimilate. Conservatives would be much wiser to keep their focus on the core of the cultural erosion, a decadent social and political liberalism that has its roots in the transformational 1960s and permeates our media and culture to this day.
Join NUMBERSUSA.ORG....
Work to stop this Treasonous Amnesty
Call it what it is- TREASON.
Why did this author raise the subject of the Boston Marathon bombings only to quickly dismiss the brothers, Dumb and Dumber, as irrelevant to her primary argument? Was it because Tamerlan and Dzokhar are “sick” and we can’t base national immigration policy on two supposedly sick individuals? Perhaps she’s correct to do so but is there anything we Americans can agree on when it comes to immigration and amnesty? The fact that there are no principles we Americans can agree on completely undermines her remaining argument. For example, can we agree our government has the sole right to decide on who should be admitted to this country as either future citizens, visitors or H1-B workers? And thanks to cultural diversity the answer is a definite no, we can’t agree on that principle. Some Americans believe we stole our present lands from their mother country and that negates our right to decide. While others believe that they – or rather their ancestors – were here first suggesting it was originally never our decision by the universal right of first possession.

Can we agree to ignore what these two legal immigrants did based on the greater good of the superior many – can we morally hold millions of recent immigrants responsible for the acts of the few? Maybe not, but then how many Americans, theoretically, can be sacrificed under our current notions of fairness? Are 3 dead Americans too few to matter? Would 300 dead breach the materiality threshold or 3,000 dead? How many Americans recently missing arms or legs should we consider as nullifying this greater good argument?

Or, is it all simply a process of compartmentalizing the debate and agreeing to exclude the question of how many immigrants turned terrorists should matter? And once we start excluding potentially relevant factors then what justifies this author in criticizing other factors influencing the proposed legislation?

If we personally find another country’s government or political factions barbaric, can we apply our emotional distress to the question of granting political asylum? If our State Dept. warns Americans not to visit certain countries due to a violent lawlessness, should we then allow citizens of those countries to settle here? And if we value family cohesiveness, should immigrants be allowed to invite their uncles, aunts, grandfathers, sons and daughters to settle among us?

That one phrase - “In all fairness” - is woven into the answers to each of these questions every single time. But we will never find this mythical Book of Fairness in the Library of Congress or see it listed among the NY Times’ Top 10 non-fiction books. In fact, our Book of Fairness gives no answers and no comfort to the father of the 8 year old boy who was murdered. And that dance instructor who lost her foot courtesy of the bombing – what wisdom does the Book of Fairness offer her – get on with your life, the past is past?

At one time, Americans weren’t obsessed with ephemeral notions of fairness - selfish motivations, an impartial lack of sympathy and common sense ruled the immigration debate. But, today, a group equaling Australia’s entire population unilaterally decides to migrate here and our chaotic, ever changing sense of fair play is all that matters. When the population numbers of an entire continent decide to casually invite themselves into our homeland, the greater good of the enormous many becomes the only deciding factor for most Americans – they’re here now, we can’t do anything about it and therefore we must accept it – any remaining considerations then become unimportant political trivia.
RobertO: Ask a socialogist why the text used has over 100 references to Karl Marx. My prof. hemmed and hawed then said he didn't know. We've gone from Masters of Deceit anti-communism taught to backdoor Marxism ala Socialogy 101!
Aw contrary! Immigration knows very well that war-torn,cartel-infested countries have lousiest immigrants. These immigrants tend to be terroristic, cartel-type criminals or be dupes and stooges of terroristic, cartel-type criminals. Democrats LOVE these types because they feel sorry for criminal-infested countries. That's why these countries get to dump their refuse on US. BIG CLUE: If "refugee" goes back for 6 months...REFUSE HIM RE-ENTRY, ASSUME HE FOUND CRIMINALS TO BE INFLUENCED BY SO STAYED 6 MONTHS!
With respect to the dilution of teaching quality, I've read similar evaluations, particularly with respect to Los Angeles. A socialogist from UCLA (if I remember correctly) asked a sample of teachers their evaluation of other neighborhood schools. He provided a long list of issues for them to answer.

The results were dismal. Few schools evaluated above 50% competency. Only those schools in the neighborhoods of upper middle class came out with good evaluations. A common denominator problem involved the watering-down of class content because of english language deficiencies.

Many other people over the years have mentioned this issue as well.
Geo: nothing better illustrates the divide between the Republican leadership - and there IS a leadership - than this issue. Health care, taxes, abortion, gay marriage, all very small change compared to immigration. The GOP leadership's failure to understand this is practically inexplicable.

I still maintain that the GOP leadership has a very small constituency - these people could not win an election without the GOP rank and file and the independents who have basically walked away from the Party due to the leadership's continued bungling and missteps. That is another story - how the GOP leadership has caused so many people in the Party to leave in disgust. Although that started with Bush's out of control spending, it really got rolling with Bush's amnesty plan.

These people simply never learn - it is maddening.

In fact, Bush basically lost any ability to run the country after pushing amnesty. He literally tore apart the party. Many people forget that the country was on a path to a permanent conservative majority in 2000. Bush more or less singlehandedly changed the direction of the nation with bone headed move after bone headed move - starting with his inexplicable failure to rein in spending. I mean, wasn't the guy a Republican? Aren't we for limited government?

You can read Rove's book in order to gain a good understanding of the foregoing- Karl "deficits don't count" Rove blames Republicans in Congress, but that is a very thin excuse indeed since Bush did nothing about it and enthusiastically joined in the spending spree. In fact, when reading Rove's book you get a good idea of how completely disconnected both Rove and Bush were from any notion of conservative values. Bush was given a great trust by the American people, and he blew it in the worst way. His ineptitude in going into Iraq, his spending all pale in comparison to his destruction of the conservative majority by pressing ahead with amnesty.

But, it was also Bush's insistance on not responding to Democratic media critics, leaving it to those of us who knew the Democrats were more than able to use their powerful control of the media, as well as Democrat's ability then and now to set the nations agenda. It destroyed Bush's Presidency and his party.

I've never forgiven Bush, and never will forgive him, for the foregoing - I could care less that he is supposedly a decent man. After all the guy more or less set us on a path to what we have today. The election of Obama is more than anything else the result of Bush and Rove's arrigance, blindness, and - call it what it is - stupidity.

You get the feeling in Rove's book that he was so rattled by the Plame scandal that he ran from Washington with his tail between his legs. The fact that he came back into the spotlight says a whole lot about the man's lack of character. And Rove is still - still - hard at work destroying the Republican party - by going after the Tea Party Rove shows that he is incapable of learning from his mistakes. And Bush's silence since the Obama election is an indication that he has no problem with the direction of the country. To think I voted for the man - we would have been better off had Gore or Kerry won, and maintained control of Congress.

But, back to immigration. The GOP leadership has time and again shown that it is incapable of running the party - it is frightening inded that the nation's last hope is with these people. This is not the place to recite the litany of horribles commmitted by the leadership (I could start with the Boehner's absolutely disasterous record as House leader), but if they pass an immigration bill that even remotely resembles this one, we can say goodbye to the GOP.

And with the GOP gone, the Democrats will have free rein, and will destroy us. As I've written before the Democrats are quite comfortable with poverty, since it means all the votes - there is no bottom for the Democrats since they don't care - prosperity is not even remotely on the agenda (look what they have done in places like Detroit, California et als).

It is too depressing to think about - but I'll say this again - if the GOP passes this bill, they will lose the rank and file completely. Not only will the GOP never win another national election they will lose control of Congress - permanently until the country is torn apart.

I could go on, but what's the point? The Senate will do what it will do, and it doesn't appear that the fact that the people in the party and those independents supporting the (supposed) goals of the party makes not one whit of difference to the blind, arrogant despicable people at the top. And no amount of spending will put the party back together again.
Frank Youell,

Let me address one of your points first. The fall in wages of low-skilled workers since the 70s is a much broader phenomenon than one that can simply be explained by low-skilled immigration. Replacement of labor with capital is the much more likely culprit (and is better supported by economic theory as well).

But even assuming that immigration did play a role (and immigrants are complementary with low skilled natives), it would also create an incentive for low-skilled natives to adopt better skills. If they can't, they have to accept lower wages -- this is good for the economy and consumers overall -- greater productivity and lower prices for domestically produced goods.

And sorry Frank, looks like you've gotta do your homework. A 2008 response by Borjas doesn't invalidate P-O's study.

2010 study by Ottaviano, Perri, and Wright shows that immigration pushed natives into higher paying jobs: http://papers.nber.org/papers/w16439#fromrss

Broader AEI analysis supports this conclusion: http://www.aei.org/files/2011/12/14/-immigration-and-american-jobs_144002688962.pdf

Borjas' results are in fact those that contradict economic reality. Even if (and this is a major if) immigrants are perfect substitutes for natives, the resulting productivity gains are a net economic benefit -- cheaper goods because of cheaper labor as well as demand-incentives for better skills for natives.
B. Davis, you have nailed the issue.

The entrenched repubic, party elitist just don't get it and seemingly never will. I for one am DONE holding my nose and pulling a lever for a dem lite. Those days are gone, I won't do it again. I refuse to take part in the destruction of the Country.

The gop issues a autopsy report and recommends and suggests to become another version of the opposing party. Is there anybody in the gop that really believes that Schmucky really has the best interest of the gop in mind? I expect this coming from McCain, Schmucky, Lindsey Lohan Graham, I never expected it from Rubio or Jeff Flake. They have been played like a two dollar fiddle.

The Boston bombing is as germane to this immigration issue as the assault rife and high capacity magazines were to Sandyhook. If you don't think so, just listen to the dems warned against using it as part of the discussion. The marched every sympathetic victim out and used them for their purpose, yet the gop isn't suppose to use the bombing in any immigration debate. The normal/usual gop vs dem debate that takes place.

The autopsy report may be available for review, but if they continue down this road, you can expect the "Death Certificate" to be issued in short order, embossed with the gop seal.

God Help us!
Rubio ran on and promised that border security would be in place before any thing else. Now the NY senator (Schumer) has hoodwinked him along with the other gentlemen. Rubio will never recover. Now with all the mumbo jumbo He is advocating, the border will never be secure and our Country will never recover, should this bill pass. Our Nation will be destroyed financially and otherwise. This bill is almost as bad as the Obama Care catastrophe. Maybe he should get some more advise from Jeb Bush or Chris Christie. Now I notice Graham is chiming in to help destroy our country. What a lovely bunch of Republicans we have representing our cause. Saving our Nation. Now Jeff Flake has joined in the destruction. Real Conservatives do not have a prayer in this country. These gentlemen run for election on one thing and then are not in Washington but for a few days until the big boys have completely snowed them. They forget everything they said back home but the big boys really like them now. McCain is one of the big boys I am talking about along with all the Democrats. Seems to me He would some day try to help save our Nation. Like all the rest of the good old big boys some day after He has helped destroy our country he will go back home to one of his mansions and live happily ever after watching the freedoms we have left, along with our free enterprise system taken apart piece by piece on a big screen TV. You know what? I'll bet he will never miss a meal.
Lake Worth,

"What pragmatic assessment leads to thinking that Reagan's amnesty program did anything bad? Anything at all?"

Let's see how many bad things came from Reagan's Amnesty. California is America's number one immigration state and the state most impacted by the IRCA (the 1986 Reagan Amnesty).

1. California once had the best public schools in America. Now they compete with Mississippi for the bottom. Sometimes they win.

2. California once had the most affordable and best middle-class housing in America. Now it ranks at the bottom.

3. California once paid the highest real wages to workers of any state in the union. Now wages (adjusted for the local cost of living) are rock bottom.

4. California once had income inequality somewhat below the national average. Now it's far above the national average.

5. California once offered mobility to its people. Gridlock is now the norm.

6. California was once a place where Americans from every state could go looking for a better life. Now its a chamber of horrors that even illegal aliens flee.

The LA Times published a great story about how Amnesty / mass immigration was wrecked the (once) great state of California. See "6 + 4 = 1 Tenuous Existence: An illegal immigrant couple with six children were already living in poverty. Then the quadruplets arrived. They're still in a daze" (http://articles.latimes.com/2006/jul/28/local/me-quadruplets28). Here a few choice quotes

"U.S. immigrants' stories often are about reinvention and newfound prosperity, about leaving behind poverty and limitations.

But that is not Magdaleno's story.

Both Magdaleno and Anzaldo are illegal immigrants, settled for years in an immigrant enclave. Magdaleno has the same number of children as her parents, who were peasant farmers in Mexico. Like her parents, she is living in poverty and struggling to provide for her family.

"It's not sweet," said her 36-year-old sister, Alejandra. "It's very sad. The life for girls back there in Mexico is the same as the one Angela has now. They marry and have children, and that's their lives."

Neither Magdaleno nor her husband speaks English, though she has been in the United States 22 years and he 28. Even her teenage daughters speak mostly Spanish; their English vocabulary is limited."

"As Angela was having children, her siblings were undergoing a transformation of a different kind. They were slowly leaving Los Angeles.

Her sister Alejandra was the first to leave. In Los Angeles, she and her husband were barely able to make ends meet. As in Mexico, "there was little work and it's poorly paid," she said.

Eight years ago, she and her family moved to Kentucky, where a friend said there was more work and were fewer Mexican immigrants bidding down the wages for unskilled jobs.

In Kentucky, Alejandra picked tobacco. The work was hard and she didn't know the language. But soon, life improved. Over the years, she invited her siblings to join her. One sister married a man who managed a Golden Corral, a chain of all-you-can-eat buffets. Soon several Magdaleno siblings were working in Golden Corrals. Their husbands found work installing windows and as farm-labor contractors. They went to night school to learn English because few people in Lexington speak Spanish.

Today, the Magdalenos in Lexington earn more than they did in Los Angeles, in a city where the cost of living is lower. Kentucky is now their promised land, and they talk about California the way they used to talk about Mexico.

"What we weren't able to do in many years in California," Alejandra said, "we've done quickly here.

"We're in a state where there's nothing but Americans. The police control the streets. It's clean, no gangs. California now resembles Mexico -- everyone thinks like in Mexico. California's broken.""

If illegal aliens can recognize that mass immigration has "broken" California, it should be possible for you to make the same intellectual leap.
YF,

"For low-skilled immigrants to depress wages, labor substitution elasticity between natives and immigrants has to be fairly high -- yet evidence indicates that current immigrants are more similar to previous immigrants (not natives) therefore they would substitute other immigrants rather than natives."

In a word, No. Time to do your homework. The notion that low skill immigration is "complementary" comes from Perri-Ottaviano. The P-O work was overturned by subsequent research. Let me quote from Mark Thoma (an Open Borders liberal).

"George Borjas, Jeffrey Grogger, and Gordon Hanson have a new paper, and it's not good news for the Ottaviano and Peri result that immigration can cause native wages to increase due to strong complementarities between native and immigrant labor". Read it all over at http://economistsview.typepad.com/economistsview/2008/03/borjas-grogger.html.

There is a basic point that everyone should be able to understand. Low skill immigrants complete with a huge fraction of the U.S. labor force. The overall U.S. high school graduation rate is in the low 70s (Heckman). At least a third of the graduates (see the NAEP data) have very minimal skills. That makes the U.S. population at least 50% low skill / unskilled. So much for "complementary" immigration.

To get some idea of how absurd the P-O "results" are, consider this. P-O consider unaffordable housing to be a "benifit" of mass immigration. You can't make this stuff up.

Of course, P-O also assume full employment and no immigrant displacement of natives from the labor force. There is vast evidence that neither assumption is even minimally correct. For a typical study, see "The Impact of New Immigrants on Young Native-Born Workers, 2000-2005". Quote

"Over the 2000-2005 period, immigration levels remained very high and roughly half of new immigrant workers were illegal. This report finds that the arrival of new immigrants (legal and illegal) in a state results in a decline in employment among young native-born workers in that state. Our findings indicate that young native-born workers are being displaced in the labor market by the arrival of new immigrants.

Multivariate statistical analyses show that the probability of teens and young adults (20-24) being employed was negatively affected by the number of new immigrant workers (legal and illegal) in their state.

The negative impacts tended to be larger for younger workers, for in-school youth compared to out-of-school youth, and for native-born black and Hispanic males compared to their white counterparts."

Claiming the low-income workers aren't hurt by mass immigration has no basis in fact (or theory). Of course, the ultimate test is the marketplace. Have wages for low-skill workers soared or crashed since mass immigration (re)started around 1970.


Hint, hint, they have crashed.
@ David: "The best outcome of this bill passing would be the ultimate end to our current union as states."

I agree. Democrats have repeatedly demonstrated that they'll pander to their constituents vilest demands in return for votes. 40 million new voters from Banana Republics will give Democrats the power to turn the federal government into a Banana Republic in return for handouts. Once that happens, citizens in states with functioning economies and polities will want out of the union once it becomes clear that withdrawing is only way to preserve their way of life.
Remember, anybody can become an American citizen, but only some are actually Americans. Excluding third-world aliens, with or without education.
I wonder why I served in the Navy. With this Amnesty plan, it means nothing to be an American citizen.
This bill sells US citizenship for a grand total of $2,000. The price of a 1998 Honda Accord. The estimated value of US citizenship is in the 100's of thousands.

This bill also increases legal immigration from 1 million a year to 1.5 million a year.

I believe it increases H1B visas to about 180,000 a year and creates a guest worker program that schemes to import about 350,000 people a year (who will more than likely never leave).

This bill alone will give about 40,000,000 people US citizenship by 2023. The best outcome of this bill passing would be the ultimate end to our current union as states.
B.Davis I agree totally, but the Democrat's object is to bring in so many that to say no more is to be out voted in a democratic election.

It s perfectly possible Bush had two choices 1. loose the elction and let the Democratics make the country even worse, or 2. appease to a degree and win, then at least try to do something good.

YF is right the next wave of immigrates tends to displace the last, but there are two further issues. The children of immigrants used to higher standards of living, if unable to rise up the ladder are then disproportionally unemployed and a ready pool of discontentment. As are the older parents who may be displace in their 40's and 50's, after 20 or 30 years of hard work and little to show for it.

Go to London (where I grew up and taught College) the next wave replaces the last. BUT the young are not getting educated and just play the racism card, they are disproportionally unemployed second and even third generation and they blame the whites. Many Muslim terrorists are really bored unemployed youth.

I fear that with unpayable debts, incurred health care and pension obligations, fractionising and fast ageing populations the next 10- 15 years will be a dangerous time.

I just see the government raising taxes and cutting benefits. This will just be adding fuel to the tricky situation, the old are mainly white and the young brown; I doubt they will want to pay ever higher taxes for us to age in luxury.
Make sure to call your Congressional representative about this. It looks like it will pass the Senate, but this can still be stopped in the House. These people need to know that they will go if such an awful bill is passed. I hope they also take the time for long deliberations so the American people can more fully understand the particulars. If this was done with Obamacare, we would not have it now.
Yes, Heather, but the jihadist terrorist threat comes from young Muslim men. Nations which do not have Muslims do not have Muslim terrorists.

At the very least, let's stop bringing in potential threats. Even if the Rubios and Flakes are dumb enough to believe Mexican migrant workers are itching to pull the lever for the GOP, they should be smart enough to introduce "reform" which seeks to limit the terrorism threat on our shores.
More on this at www.insideins.com
MacDonald writes: The risks in the proposed amnesty law relate rather to America’s core immigration problem: the mass illegal entry of uneducated, unskilled aliens who pose no terror threat but who have a concrete effect on our educational and economic competitiveness.

Only partially correct: what about the millions of H-1B visa workers?
Even liberal NPR get it.


http://www.npr.org/2013/02/21/172566332/follow-report-on-h-1b-visa-story


http://www.npr.org/blogs/alltechconsidered/2013/04/03/176134694/Whos-Hiring-H1-B-Visa-Workers-Its-Not-Who-You-Might-Think

She writes that it is “unrealistic to think that immigration officials should have divined the young Tsarnaev brothers’ future homicidal plans when the family’s asylum application was accepted in 2002.” In fact, it was well known that ethnic Chechen muslims were joining militant Islam in significant numbers. What is unrealistic is to think that the U.S. bureaucracy would be able to do a sufficient investigation on each such refugee to assure the American public that there was no reasonable danger of these types of refugees becoming militant Islamists.

When we already have well over 300 million people in the country, why must we take in any populations from muslim regions? How about a “time out” for taking in such populations during this period of time when radical Islam is waging war on the U.S. and the West? Our immigration policy ought to be designed to benefit the U.S., not foreign nationals. It would appear that since the 1960s our immigration policies have been designed by the progressives as yet another tool to dilute and weaken American culture with its strong roots in Judeo-Christianity and capitalism in order to open the way for their vision of egalitarian materialistic statism.
On immigration
No issue makes a conservative's blood boil like this one - the unfairness of what has been done to the country is seemingly so eivdent that only someone with a vested interest in profiting from what can only be deemed a crime would go along with it.

Accordingly, Bush's approval rating went to 13% when he got behind amnesty. Rank and file Republicans, who are so much more conservative than the leadership, see this issue as a matter of right and wrong, and they clearly viewed Bush as wrong. And, as a direct result of this issue more than anything else, they stayed home in 2006, and again in 2008.

But, the Republican leadership is seeming blind - as well as deaf, dumb and stupid. They do not understand that Republican voters are not like Democrats - Republicans are by and large informed about the issues and they see this for what it is - craven pandering by the Republican leadership. It's Bush's second term all over again.

If the Republicans pass this they will destroy the party, and the country as well. They will certainly lose my family's five votes - we will simply give up - after all if your voice, and those of your constituency are ignored over and over again why bother?

In fact, as a result of the Republican leadership's inane polcies we stopped giving money to the party - not that we ever were able to afford much, but we were doing what we could. I suspect others have done the same.

What this issue says is that the Republican leadership has again shown it has no ability to think strategically - it remains bound to the old rules of politics, and acts like the past couple of decades have never happened. It has no real adherence to a consistent policy, no passion for the issues, and it doesn't understand its own constituency.

More than that, the Republican leadership doesn't have a constutuency - there is no large group of rank and file Republicans out there supporting the leadership's policies. The leadership may have access to money but informed voters can't be bought as easily as uninformed voters - as both Romney and Karl Rove learned in the last election. But Rove should have known better - he had seen the same thing in 2006. How blind can you be?

In fact, the rank and file is far more conservative than the leadership, which for some reason doesn't understand its own - it is living in the past when Republcans were comfortable as a minority party where it was expected to make some noise and then give in to the Democrats.

Here's a prediction: if the Republicans pass this the party is finished nationally - the next major election will be a disaster of unmitigated proportions as Republicans (like us) simply stay home. It will be far worse than 2006, since the amount of frustrations will be so much greater, since the law passed - the Democratic media will no doubt catch on to this and rub the Republicans face in it at every opportunity.

The rank and file will not take any delight in not voting, but..well, there is something just so despicable about how the leadership just can't understand those it claims to represent. The Leadership will be taught a hard less on - AGAIN - about how sometimes, money isn't everything in politics, and after awhile even your most ardent supporters get tired of having their noses rubbed in **&^%(crap, to be nice) all the time.
We already have a plan to legalize illegal immigrants. It's called the 14th Amendment. It holds that, if you’re born in this country, you’re a citizen, even if your parents are not legally present in it. For most parents, who want nothing more than that their children have better lives than their own, this is a great and unusual concession – one that hundreds of millions of parents throughout the world would be delirious to utilize. And in fact, millions of the current illegal population voluntarily entered the country on such terms. Destitute in their own nations of origin, with no prospects for improvement, it was a great step upward. But now, apparently, it’s no longer good enough. Why not?
In places this article's intent for seriousness leads to belly laughs. For example:

-- "Hispanics will not shift their vote to Republicans in the next presidential election unless Republicans promote the same big-government programs, such as Obamacare, that attract Hispanics to the Democratic Party in the first place."

Heather is not aware that class warfare in America has excluded our bottom 40% of the population from preventive medical care with stagnation of life expectancy for the last 60 years. "Hispanics" is scratching the surface of what the insurance industry and social reforms of Obamacare will mean to our poor and working poor.

-- "We can expect fraud to be an enormous problem in the proposed amnesty process, as it was in the 1986 amnesty...."

The term "enormous problem," as used here, is a howler. Big joke. What damage was wrought on the United States from the 1986 amnesty? What pragmatic assessment leads to thinking that Reagan's amnesty program did anything bad? Anything at all?

Whining is a disease for anti-minority "conservatives." The cure? Lord only knows.

A good article all around, but it's disappointing that the myth of low-skilled immigrants depressing wages is still alive.

For low-skilled immigrants to depress wages, labor substitution elasticity between natives and immigrants has to be fairly high -- yet evidence indicates that current immigrants are more similar to previous immigrants (not natives) therefore they would substitute other immigrants rather than natives.

See http://www.cato.org/blog/how-does-immigration-impact-wages and http://www.epi.org/publication/bp255/.

More technical: http://www.nber.org/papers/w14683.pdf
This immigration bill within maybe 20 years will turn the US into a country demographically dominated by Hispanics, Indians and Blacks.

This presents a huge risk that the constitution (written by dead white slave owners) will be discarded or just ignored. Will a desire by our Mexican descendants to recover the southwest states, a desire by the Cherokees etal to revenge reservations and the desire by blacks for compensation for slavery present any particular risk to White European descendants.
I am a teacher and I too lament the lack of what my parents called "patriotic assimilation." We have known about this long before John Fonte. We can investigate the decline of patriotic assimilation. Part of the reason is due to the growth of a foolish and ideologically driven multiculturalism. I say foolish because any education which does not prepare young people for citizenship and a worklife among Americans is harmful. I could give many examples but what employer would want an employee with White Supremacist tattoos or gang tattoos. What employer would want an anti-Semitic employee who denied the Holoaust? What employer would feel comfortable with an employee who thought "property was theft" or that the USA was the "most violent and oppressive country in the history of the world?" One of the primary virtues is gratitude and if immigrant students do not have any gratitude (despite frustrations) for their personal freedoms and economic and educational opportunities they should be ashamed of themselves. In fact, many American youth should be ashamed of themselves. It is ironic that the most patriotic students I have met in my long years of teaching were immigrants or the children of immigrants. (hundreds of my students have voluteered for military service over the year, particularly the Marines). So I too am very concerned about our national unity. I have been a strong supporter of English medium education and a strong critic of the weaknesses and folly of what I call "phoney" bilingual education. What is the answer? One answer is to freeze government benefits for recent immigrants and suspend many benefits for periods as long as 10 or 15 years. Another is to insist on a high standard of integrity for new immigrants. Breaking the law and occurring two misdemnors should be a red flag. And it should go without saying that felons should ont be allowed to vote or naturalize. In my opinion, students who show educational promise and who pass English and math basic proficiencies should be allowed to serve in the military. Residents who serve honorably in the military on active duty and in the reservse should be given preferences for citizenship. I don't know Boston as well as San Francisco but I think it is a fair bet that per capita there are far fewer JROTC and JNROTC programs in the schools than in the American heartland. I think it should be a REQUIREMENT of Title I money that JROTC programs are available for all students in a district and if not at every school at least avaiable for students who wish to transfer to a local JROTC program. I too am very concerned about immigrants giving up and "assimilating" to a permanent, slothful, dependent parasitic proletariat. But once agains I have seen that new immigrants -if they learn English and do well in school- are more successful than many native born Americans (those of the disfunctionl underclass). I suppose it all comes down to feelings of courage and hope. I face our educational challenges with courage and hope. And something I do no see in Ms. Mac Donald: sympathy and love. Just before writing this I edited an essay for which I was not paid and for which I had no professional responsiblity. It is the essay of a former ELD student who grauated from High School five years ago. This so-called "mediocre" student (the student garnered some D's and C's)passed all the basic proficiencies. Now this person in in Junior College studying business while working part time. Now this person is getting A's and B's. This person does not want to be a burden on our society and wants to succeed. This person's role models are Matthew Boulton, Andrew Carnegie, Bill Gates and Ronald Reagan not Hugo Chavez, Fidel Castro or Mao Zedong. This person admires Marco Rubio. And I am helping this person out of friendship, in the spirit of being a good neighbor and out of strong belief in the importance of civic virtue and good will and charity for all. I don't expenct any personal benefit or advantage. My only reward is a good conscience and the friendship and respect of many fine immigrant youth. I am not a pessimist. I believe in the idea of America. And I know this. Immigrants bring youth to America and that means hope. I would rather be teacher and citizen in America than Russia, Japan or even France or Britain. There are problems and challenges with immigration reform but we make a mistake if we dwell only on the negative and possible negatives of immigration. This is not about supporting one party or faction or another. If the Republicans are so incompetent that they cannot win future elections they deserve that fate. Likewise, the Democrats WERE incompetent 1968-1992 and came close to losing every presidential election. They have done better recently no merely via public "bribery" or as "Santa Claus" but also because most Republican candidates were, old , weak and uninspired. I don't care about "Republican" America or "Democratic" America. I only care about AMERICA -the USA. And I believe in the power of the America idea to transform lives through work and through education. If we don't have work or youth or families or education we won't have a future as a united, free and strong nation. We can face firmly towards the future with hope or pessimistically fail to respond to the challenge before us.
The global population will continue to grow to around 2040, but much of this growth is due to the longvity of those aready born, birth rates are falling globally. (Google Dowell Myers for California)
We need to put our emphasise in a couple of areas:
1. Lower impact living, less consumption.
2. Stability of population, an average of 2.13 children per woman. Less unskilled immigration.
3. Higher value added jobs and the education to achieve this.
4. Compulsory pension savings, maximising savings returns and security of investment.

I have three children, we live on 3.5 acres and grow most of our own food with raised beds and water tanks. We have smaller engined cars, recycle and buy second hand where ever we can, toys, clothes and building materials. We have solar cells on the roof, water tanks and have planted many native trees. I would compare our CO2 output with most urban Yuppie, childless couples. The childless couples will be liberals, so they will be replaced with at least double the number of illegal imigrants, so longer term CO2 will be just as high or higher.
If they are not replaced, who will pay their pensions or buy their condos when they want to retire and live outside the city.
Population is the part A, but life-style is the part B. Medium sized houses with the 1/4 to 1/2 acre gardens, with vegetable beds and fruit tress, walking to schools, work or leisure activities; could have us in a large low carbon world. Has Japan's ageing population and economic stagnation cut their CO2 output much?
Call them what they are: Scab Labor.

Tell your lib. friends that they're just scab labor for big business, and see what they say (they're immune to appeals to patriotism or common sense, but this blow may land).
Frosty Wooldridge1 April 22, 2013 at 5:05 PM
Not mentioned in this commentary: this immigration bill will bestow upon American taxpayers an added 100 million immigrants within the next 37 years. (Source: PEW Research Center) It will create a whopper of an overpopulation predicament as to water, energy and resources along with environmental climate change and loss of quality of life for all Americans.
If we don’t halt population growth with justice and compassion, it will be done for us by nature, brutally and without pity – and will leave a ravaged world. ~Nobel Laureate Dr. Henry W. Kendall

"The raging monster upon the land is population growth. In its presence, sustainability is but a fragile theoretical construct. To say, as many do, that the difficulties of nations are not due to people, but to poor ideology and land-use management is sophistic.” Harvard scholar and biologist E.O. Wilson

"Unlimited population growth cannot be sustained; you cannot sustain growth in the rates of consumption of resources. No species can overrun the carrying capacity of a finite land mass. This Law cannot be repealed and is not negotiable.” Dr. Albert Bartlett, www.albartlett.org , University of Colorado, USA.

“Most Western elites continue urging the wealthy West not to stem the migrant tide [that adds 80 million net gain annually to the planet], but to absorb our global brothers and sisters until their horrid ordeal has been endured and shared by all—ten billion humans packed onto an ecologically devastated planet.” Dr. Otis Graham, Unguarded Gates

If we don’t halt population growth with justice and compassion, it will be done for us by nature, brutally and without pity – and will leave a ravaged world. ~Nobel Laureate Dr. Henry W. Kendall

"The raging monster upon the land is population growth. In its presence, sustainability is but a fragile theoretical construct. To say, as many do, that the difficulties of nations are not due to people, but to poor ideology and land-use management is sophistic.” Harvard scholar and biologist E.O. Wilson

"Unlimited population growth cannot be sustained; you cannot sustain growth in the rates of consumption of resources. No species can overrun the carrying capacity of a finite land mass. This Law cannot be repealed and is not negotiable.” Dr. Albert Bartlett, www.albartlett.org , University of Colorado, USA.

“Most Western elites continue urging the wealthy West not to stem the migrant tide [that adds 80 million net gain annually to the planet], but to absorb our global brothers and sisters until their horrid ordeal has been endured and shared by all—ten billion humans packed onto an ecologically devastated planet.” Dr. Otis Graham, Unguarded Gates


" ... the real consequence is to the unity of American culture, and the proposed amnesty bill will only erode it further."

Amen, Sister