Tuesday, December 20, 2005

Well, Heck

I'm trying to write the wrap-up to my first set of policies to deal with illegal immigration, and I'm beginning to really understand why politicians don't want to mess with this. It goes way beyond the Hispanic vote, too.

The additional problems I see with my own policy suggestions are:

1. The economic fallout in the US would be bad -- suddenly we'd have millions of unemployed illegal aliens with no way out. Deporting them, assuming we could catch all of them, would be extremely expensive. Polipundit suggested that, if they couldn't get work, the illegals would deport themselves, but I don't believe that. Some, maybe many, would be forced into crime, which is made more likely as increased pressure from the US government would allow Mexican organized crime groups in the US to have greater power over the illegals. Also, as our cheap labor pool dried up, prices would go up.

2. I recently read that remittances sent from people in the US constitute Mexico's second largest source of income. (I'll try to find the article and link it.) If even half of the money being sent there is from illegals, then carrying out these policies will actually make Mexico's economy worse, which will exacerbate the problem.

3. The Mexican government has lost control of segments of the nation. It is no longer in firm control over the police or military, both of which have been thoroughly infiltrated by drug lord agents and both of which have, in the past, acted to protect drug lord interests over the interests of Mexico. Any worsening of the situation in Mexico could further weaken the government and strengthen criminal organizations.

Thoughts? Ideas? Solutions?

Tuesday, December 13, 2005

Finals Week

It's that time of year, folks. I'll reformulate my Illegal Immigration 1 policy and post a new policy proposal in the near future.

In the meantime, here's some philosophy for you:

Definition: Kneehighlism - the belief that fruit-flavored softdrinks are better than Nothing.

And a holiday joke I stole:

Did you know that the three wise men were firemen? Yeah, it says they came from a far.

And finally, folks, remember: A solipsist has only imaginary friends.

Thursday, December 08, 2005

Dean Fisked Like a Snake in a Wagon Rut Wearing a Tophat

Howard Dean: "Bring the 80,000 National Guard and Reserve troops home immediately. They don't belong in a conflict like this anyway."

Jason Van Steenwyk replies:
...thanks to the Abrams Doctrine and former SecDef Melvin Laird, the active component cannot function without significant commitment from the reserve forces.

This is because, combat formations aside, much of the required medical, transportation, supply, administrative, communications, civil affairs, legal, and combat support needed to conduct a deployment comes from the reserve components.

If you pull reserve forces out, you will rip the heart out of our combat divisions. You may not even be able to fly them home.

Tell the Brigade commander "you know that truck company you rely on to move a battalion of soldiers to and from the fight? Send them home.You know that -30 level maintenance unit you rely on to get your crew-served weapons firing and to repair your damaged and broken vehicles? You don't get them anymore. You know those MPs already working 12 hour shifts guarding your detainees? Say bye-bye. And you really don't need those Arabic linguists do you? We're sending a whole battalion of linguists home...

In other news, Howard Dean to Bring Christmas Cheer to Troops.



PS, if you haven't advised me on my future presidential immigration policy yet, please do!

And remember, AGIP 2008!

Tuesday, December 06, 2005


Instapundit sends us to a roundup on the Wikipedia wars.

I like the idea of Wikipedia, an online encyclopedia anyone can add to or edit, a great deal. The execution, however, is sometimes lacking a great deal. Worse, sometimes it is making up a great deal, like adding treason to bios.

Sunday, December 04, 2005

Illegal Immigration 1

Here's your chance to affect presidential policy! This is the second in my series of policy discussions. These posts are rough drafts of my future presidential platform planks (AGIP 2008!), and I heartily welcome the comments of my presidential policy formation team (i.e., my blog readers). At the beginning of each week, I'll post a new policy discussion post, and at the end of each week, I will summarize and re-draft that week's policy proposal.

Illegal immigrants and immigration are complex issues, and so this post more than anything else discusses how to change immigration and employment policies to control illegal immigration. What this post does not address are border security, how to deal with the 7 million+ illegal aliens in the US this program will upheave, as well as how to handle the economic fallout of ending a large, cheap labor pool. Those three things will be the focus of next week's policy discussion (though, of course, feel free to comment on them here).

This post represents both domestic and diplomatic proposals to help end the problem of illegal immigration. I am greatly indebted for many of the ideas to various posts by Dr. Demarche on The Daily Demarche, a blog by two foreign service officers which has given the most informed ideas to address this issue I've seen. I have collected, organized and modified some of the ideas I found there and added my own as noted below.

Ten Answers to the Illegal Immigration Problem

In El Otro Lado, Dr. Demarche laid out five steps the US could take to resolve the problem of illegal immigration and explained them. I have quoted from his list (all direct quotes are from The Daily Demarche), added my own ideas, and posted these steps below. You can click the link to read his explanations. I have added three more steps from other posts at The Daily Demarche, including guest poster Criticalreactor. Finally, the last two proposals are my own.

1. "Punish American firms that hire illegal workers- this is the most important step." I would expand this to simply say 'Punish Americans who hire ...' It isn't just firms. Small businesses and individuals are also doing this. On the enforcement side, I would start with the big fish and work down, of course.
2. "Establish a more secure employment document- the Social Security card does not work." Issue new SS cards with photos and all the anti-counterfeiting features. Showing a valid new SS card would also be required to be able to vote in federal elections, and encourage states & cities to pass similar legislation for state elections. From Polipundit, I found out the Social Security Administration is already implementing an online database employers can check SSNs on, which is great -- I don't have to add this to my platform! I would make checking a requirement, however.
3. "Revise and expand the H2 [guest worker] visa category- not just for Mexicans, but for all, and require that issuance only occur in the country of origin of the alien."*
4. "Require legal workers to pay into Medicaid, and deny public benefits to illegal aliens found in America."
5. "Reduce the amount of foreign aid granted to any country by a set or variable amount based on the costs associated with each illegal immigrant detained/treated/deported."
6. Institute a waiting period for applications for visas after a denial. Currently, once denied a visa, an applicant can pretty much immediately re-apply, which is choking the system. This and steps 7 and 8 would greatly enhance our ability to control to whom we issue visas.
7. Professional visa adjudicators would take over the visa lines, currently manned by newby FSOs who do the job for a year or two and move on. They would be "...well versed in law and policy who speak the local language at a high level ..."
8. End all visa category restrictions on the use of section 214(b) to deny visas. 214(b) "... is the catch-all refusal used to turn down applicants (tourist, business, student, etc) that the officer feels are not being truthful, or has other suspicions about." Currently, religious visas (Islamist imams, anyone?) and some others are exempt from denial under this section. (Guest poster Criticalreactor suggested ending the exemption on religious visas, but I don't see any reason to stop there.)
9. Deny a visa to anyone who has publicly incited violence against the US or its interests within the last ten years, and deport any resident aliens who do or have done this.
10. From the date of passage of the legislation, any child born on US soil whose parents are in the US illegally will not be granted US citizenship. This decreases the incentive for pregnant women to cross illegally.

Well, team, what do you think?


Update: Dr. Demarche has a new post on this topic up at American Future which is worth the read.

*Dr. D., if you read this, could you please explain why you would require the issuance in the country of origin, instead of simply outside the US? For example, why is it a bad idea to allow a Chinese worker to apply from Japan?

Polipundit link mug tip to Michelle Malkin.

And remember, vote A Guy in Pajamas in 2008!

Saturday, December 03, 2005

Bush vs. ET Wrap-up

Well, Jean was the only one who gave a serious response to the discussion, so there's not much to wrap up. Thanks, Jean!

It was an impulse post, however, and most of my readers are folks coming in from Google searches for different kinds of pajamas, so maybe my expectations were a bit too high.

Tomorrow or Monday I'll post another question. Maybe I can make this one a bit more engaging.

Update: Just wanted to say, this was not meant as a 'poor me' post. If I can't generate reader interest, that's my problem, not my readers' problem for not commenting, etc. I hope I didn't sound like I was whining. I really do appreciate my readers, without whom I would have quit blogging long ago.