Friday, January 31, 2014

Immigration reform

The House released a statement of principles on immigration reform that was met with the very predictable derision from right wing bloggers. Chief among their complaints, was why now? I'm inclined to agree with those who believe that the coming mid-term elections have the real possibility of Republicans retaking control of the Senate. And that would very probably come with an increase of Tea Party candidates taking seats in both chambers. Hence the push for an immigration policy written by more moderate members while they have the chance.

I like to think of myself as a Libertarian/Conservative blend. But there are also some things that have to be realized in this particular situation. And one is that we can't simply just round up 12 million people and bus them out of the country! There has to be some mechanism to get these folks identified, and the criminals deported, without going all Gestapo on them.

And despite the hyperbole by even those with whom I usually agree, we cannot punish the children of these law breakers for the sins of their parents. In a recent post by the execrable Allahpundit, the afore mentioned Chamberlainesque RINO candy-ass brought up Mike Huckabee's favorables in pre-election polling. That brought out the usual moronic talk of not voting, yada, yada . . . as well as the usual lies about Huck's record on immigration while governor of Arkansas.

The point about his tuition assistance for illegals is always misrepresented. In fact, Huck's proposal was that children of illegals (the derisively termed DREAMers), if they had matriculated through the Arkansas primary school system, and if they qualified academically for tuition assistance, would be allowed to apply for such assistance. And if granted, those students would have to apply for and pass a citizenship test, thus becoming American citizens before getting tuition assistance.

I just don't see a problem with that. Isn't this what we want? Citizens, legal citizens? Taxpaying, law-abiding citizens? But this is one of the stumbling blocks with those on the right. While I have repeatedly said that I would rather Republicans run on principle and lose than win and be RINO's, I still recognize the reality that politics is about compromise. And this is a point I think we can compromise on without sacrificing principle.

The mission statement out of the House was naturally short on specifics, as all mission statements are, but it is a starting point. I don't see why we cannot reform immigration while still having proper teeth in the bill to prevent illegals from using their children as anchors, why we cannot punish those who willfully and knowingly hire illegals, and do something about border security that doesn't include building a huge fence around the entire country.

Simply hating on these guys for bringing it up is pointless. The House has been passing bills since the Republicans took control. I think it is a good thing to show the American people that only one party is actually trying to follow the Constitution and do their duty. And it isn't the Democrats.

And because she makes me ache (in a good way), here's my girl Slyyy -- all wet and wonderful:


Anonymous said...

Libertarian conservative blend is a decent representation of my thought and I have long felt much like you are describing above. Clearly it is not possible to 'round up' all the illegals and send 'em packin'. Decent reform starts with stemming the flow, and then works on legalizing those who are law abiding tax payers. Break a felony class law, no trial, get deported. They are not our citizens to try (Murder is a different animal). I agree with Huckabee. If you want a single penny from a Gov't program for ANYTHING, become a citizen, which includes learning American English. Poof, no more spanish signs needed. High voltage? You can't sue if the victim was an illegal.

postaldog said...

Yes. The situation simply isn't that unworkable. But the inside the beltway Republicans are so afraid to alienate (no pun, but could be) a group of voters who aren't going to vote Republican anyway, that they won't do any sort of straight forward reform.