Sunday, September 10, 2006

Why 'securing the border first' is backwards

From Dan Kowalski, Austin immigration attorney and editor of Benders Immigration Bulletin:
Here’s a helpful analogy. Think of a two-lane country road with a 20 MPH speed limit. Over time it grows to an eight-lane divided highway, with multiple cloverleaves, on-ramps, side roads, and even HOV lanes. But the speed limit is still 20 MPH. Naturally, everyone breaks the law and speeds. To enforce the 20 MPH limit, you’d need a traffic cop every 50 feet. You could do it, if you had an unlimited budget for traffic cops. But why? The rational answer is to raise the speed limit to match the road and traffic conditions. Then you’d need a traffic cop only every few miles, if that.

Our immigration laws are like that country road-turned-superhighway. The “speed limits” - meaning the visa quotas and categories - were designed a long time ago and have not kept up with the way people live, work, study, travel and love.
Immigration enforcement will be "most effective - and least expensive," he argues, "when our immigration laws look like they were written in the 21st century, rather than the 19th."

4 comments:

StopKinky said...

Kinky has ideologically positioned himself on the far right to get the votes of disaffected radical Republicans.

As reported by the Quorum Report, Kinky has pledged on Dan Patrick's right-wing talk radio program that he would not veto Patrick's "trigger bill" to make abortion illegal in Texas immediately upon any reversal of Roe v. Wade by the US Supreme Court.

This puts Kinky to the right of Perry and Strayhorn, who both have refused to commit to signing Patrick's extremist bill.

Chris Bell is the only candidate who would veto Patrick's extremist bill:

“I would veto that,” Bell told The Associated Press on Friday. “I think the majority of Texans are still pro-choice. I don’t think they’re pro-abortion, but they understand that there are instances where that very painful choice is going to have to be made.”... Abortion rights advocates should help “find ways to make it as rare as possible,” Bell said. “But to make it illegal, that’s not the road to go down.”

Kinky also positioned himself well to pick up far right-wing votes when he "stirred up controversy Wednesday when he referred to hurricane evacuees living in Houston as 'crackheads and thugs' who should be escorted out of Texas."

When asked about these comments, Kinky helpfuly explained that "Racism was here before I came around," he said. "I am just trying to bring up these issues within the (expletive) society....As it happens, the crackheads and thugs who remain in Houston after Katrina happen to be black; that's fact."

A few days earlier, Kinky positioned himself to capture right-wing votes on the issue of immigration reform:

He said he supports groups such as the Minutemen Civil Defense Corps because they draw attention to problems on the border.

Asked about his own strategy for securing the border, Friedman said, "I'm not sure. I don't have a plan."

He said he would appoint people who care about the state to develop a plan based on his motto: "Remember the Alamo."

Border safety has deteriorated, Friedman said, because politicians are too afraid to offend Hispanics and get tough on the Mexican government.


On issues ranging from a woman’s sovereignty over her own womb to race to immigration reform, Kinky has flip flopped himself into positions far to the right of all other candidates, including our shamelessly right-wing failed governor.

Mucho Mephisto said...

Is there any politician or group seriously interested in rewriting quota law? Every opinion I've heard expressed has missed that we're battling over a law that's unrealistic.

Rusty said...

COME ON KINKY!!!

Instead of getting this fear and " SELECTIVE " and tainted PERCEPTION and ASSUMPTION of what Kinky believe, why not go to his site and see for yourself? www.knikyfriedman.com

As we see the political adds come out, and see how ALL OF A SUDDEN the wrongs and corruption in Austin BECOMES AN ELECTION ISSUE. Ask yourself and THOSE OTHER THREE CAREER POLITICIANS who have been DIRECTLY ENVOLVED in our problems FOR YEARS! Why they didn't stand up before this election??? How is it they being a career politician and some PART OF THE TEAM IN AUSTIN " FOR YEARS ", how is they carry no blame???

The bottom line is there is “”” 1 “” NON POLITICIAN and “” 3 “” " LONG TIME " POLITICIANS running for Governor, FACT! Everybody in this state knows the LT. Governor has the real power. None of these career politicians wants to see a non politician elected, that would mess up their PRIVATE PLAYGROUNG YOU AND I PAY FOR!!!

As you watch these career politicians and their supporters attack Kinky, ask yourself why??? Could it be THEY CAN'T STAND ON THEIR OWN RECORD? Could it be that their ploy to play Kinky off as a joke and not a real possibility, HAS BACKFIRED???

Is Kinky going to make mistakes, you bet, JUST LIKE EVERYBODY HAS! The difference is he isn't going to lie about it! No Governor makes decisions without researching and asking for advice, NOT PERRY OR ANY BEFORE HIM, why is it suggested Kinky will not, or should not have this same ability???

As you watch these career politicians attack to preserve their dreams of self proclaimed superiority and elites and dynasties, " KNOW " there is ONLY ONE NON POLITICIANS RUNNING FOR GOVERNOR, KINKY FRIEDMAN!!! Watching as " OTHERS SUPPORTERS " try to use fear and even the stretch of being FAR RIGHT, is at best amusing and at worst disgusting and dishonest! I Wonder about all those who are on the RIGHT and even FAR RIGHT, feel about their beliefs being manipulated to elect President Bush, but now being used to taint a NON POLITICIAN??? When will ALL OF """ US """ regardless of beliefs refuse to be manipulated BY BOTH THESE CAREER POLITICAL PARTIES AND THEIR PARASITE SUPPORTERS????
IMPO!

Rusty White
Speaker www.leap.cc

scott in dallas said...

Sadly Kinky, who I didn't come on here to write about has embraced the same stupid narrative that we've been offered on this and too many other topics, that said, he can't do worse than what we've been getting.

I am a landscaper and employ illegals. I pay them $11 and $9 per hour. I have tried to find other workers but haven't had much luck. I would rather be law abiding than save the entitlement contribution, though that is a lot of paperwork for a gardener to screw with at the end of a fatiguing summer week. This leads to the first point, it should be as easy to hire an American as it is an illegal. BTW they will jump out of the truck if you're paying less than $8 for real work.

Anyhow, I've called into several right leaning talk shows and asked them why they need big gov't to fix this problem. Why not call on your listeners to check to see who they are hiring. In 6 yrs I've been asked once, by a DoJ employee who has political aspirations. That strikes me as ironic considering all the venom I hear on the radio.

The system we have seems fair. Homeowners ARE concerned about price. Believe you me I am not getting rich off my workers. If I had to pay for reliable help, I'd have to pay $12-15 per hour plus the extra 7%. I would be forced to charge more.

Homeowners are the ones who must pay for their hospitalization here. They get cheaper lawn service, for this I'd have to go up $5 per yard. Cheaper fences, roofs, homes themselves, food all come to the homeowner thanks to the inexpensive laborers, (and they live here too, paying those property taxes too.)

If the American people can't be persuaded to make documented workers a marketable commodity we shouldn't bother changing these laws. We're not having an honest debate, but one of political opportunism that appeals to the lowest viceral aspects of people.

I've ignored a couple aspects I want to further explore, the first is the large companies that hire illegals. This is appropriately an enforcement issue, and gov't seems to look the other way. We really don't want a gov't that is going to insert itself into even the simplest transactions among men.

The other issue is what do we do with these poor folk here? Well, it is simply more cost effective to give these people full health services rather than to withhold them. A festering wound untreated, a communicable disease undiagnosed and treated are bad. A cliche reinforces my point, an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.

Ultimately for me, if the people don't mind hiring them, it is unreasonable to penalize me. The alternative is I'd be cut out for fear of penalties and the illegals would get all the work.