Extremists? Kevin Drum Mails One In

As an example of media criticism, Kevin Drum's attack on Charles Gibson and George Stepanpoulos falls short:

EXTREMISTS....I just heard Charles Gibson and George Stephanopoulos chatting on the ABC Evening News about the collapse of the immigration bill. Their conclusion? It was killed by extremists on both sides: liberal Democrats and conservative Republicans overwhelmed the centrists. It just goes to show that partisan polarization has made America ungovernable.

This is ridiculous. Look at the numbers. This was a bipartisan bill sponsored by Ted Kennedy and John McCain and supported by George Bush. Democrats voted 37-11 in favor of moving forward to a final vote.  Republicans voted 38-7 against it.  In the end, the Democratic leadership delivered nearly 80% of its votes.  Bush couldn't even get 20% of his party to go along.

All I can say is: if it was extremists that killed this bill, then 80% of the Republican Party is made up of extremists. For some reason, though, that wasn't quite the impression Charlie and George left us with tonight. Jeebus.

For heaven's sake.  Simply by reasoning backwards from the very defensible position that George Stepanpooulos has been a canny student of Congressional politics for decades I could deduce an explanation for his view.

Just suppose, hypothetically, that extremists in the Democratic Party persuaded their own caucus to "improve" the grand bipartisan compromise.  The net impact might be a bill that Dems generally prefer and Reps generally oppose, as in the voting cited above.  However, it would be perfectly reasonable to say that it was extremists in the two parties that shattered the compromise.

And the Dorgan amendment lets me make the leap from theory to fact.  From the WaPo (via Mickey):

Sen. Byron L. Dorgan (D-N.D.) does not like the immigration bill, either, but for entirely different reasons. Echoing the concerns of labor unions, he argues that the guest-worker program would depress wages and lead to foreigners taking good jobs that would otherwise go to U.S. citizens.

When the debate started late last month, Dorgan offered two amendments: one to kill the guest-worker program, and a second to water down the program to make it more acceptable to unions, by ending it after five years. The first failed by a large margin. But the second measure was defeated 49 to 48.

To close the gap, Dorgan and a GOP  ally, Sen. Bob Corker (Tenn.), looked to Republicans who had voted against the sunset amendment two weeks ago but who were known to have qualms about the bill itself. The target list included five senators from states with illegal-immigration problems, or where the issue had a particular potency with conservative voters.

And that is how the bill died - Dorgan "improved" the bill from the perspective of the left (maybe he would be viewed by Gibson/Stepanopoulos as a lefty extremist, since he did not support the bill) then enlisted righties opposed to the bill to support his killer amendment.

Democrats had an opportunity to show their solidarity with labor by voting for the "improved" bill; Reps can showed their solidarity with business by opposing it; and the bill died at the hands of "extremists" in both parties.

I hope that is not too confusing.

My life as a defender of Carlos Gibson and Jorge Stepanopoulos.  Merde!

Comments

[Other Tom]

Seconds before logging on here, I sent off an e-mail to Dianne Feinstein (no point in disturbing the eternal slumber of the brain-dead Boxer). This is something I do on an average of once every two years or so.

My point was, how dare you people try to legislate in this manner? How God damn stupid do you think we are?

When Teddy Kennedy and John McCain trot out a 400-page bill that no one has read, and exhort us to trust them, this was the "best we could do," I say get the hell out of my face.

I don't know how to assess the various reports I read about efforts to resuscitate this thing. I do feel strongly that this episode illustrates how far out of touch the World's Greatest Deliberative Body is with the people on whose behalf it is supposedly "deliberating." My fervent hope is that this whole business gets identified in the public mind as a Democrat initiative (thanks, Kevin Drum). It's about the only hope I see for a Republican comeback. And no thanks to the well-intentioned fool Bush.

[exmaple]

What killed the bill was everything about it.

Not just one thing some alienated policy wonks on the msm opine.

Bush and the business lobbies got greedy. Rich Liberal White Guilt about the economic ill-effects on American citizens has been displaced to foreigners, a two-fer, because it brings them cheaper labor. Rich Republicans just hanging steady. Media liberals fantasize this is "about" the color of skins, remark no irony how they are in complete agreement with Bush, no discussion that "comprehensivity" is a ruse to package something awful.

[Jeff Dobbs]

When Teddy Kennedy and John McCain trot out a 400-page bill that no one has read, and exhort us to trust them, this was the "best we could do," I say get the hell out of my face.

Oh, I would be a fool to try and improve on that.

[VIMH: so, you'll be trying to improve on it?]
Yes. I would end that quote with, "...you lickspittle weasels."

See, I am a fool.

[clarice]

Speaking of the WaPo, Kevin Drum nails them--Bush scored an impressive victory on missile defense with Putin to Iran's detriment but you'd never know it from the Post's description.
http://austinbay.net/blog/?p=1810

[clarice]

Except of course, it was AUSTIN BAY who nailed it..(God, this has been a couple of bad days on typepad for me.)

[Sue]

I sat there and watched them kill an amendment that made document fraud a crime, but only for those who have illegally entered our country to begin with. American citizens still sit in jail for something they were willing to allow illegals to get away with. And that was only one of my many objections to the bill.

[Sue]

And if someone else infers that I am an extremist (Gibson and his side kick, this time, though they are kind of dragging up the rear on this point) because I opposed this travesty of a bill, I'll...I'll...I don't know what I'll do but it will be dramatic, I assure you.

[RalphL]

Amnesty and wide open borders are the extremist positions!

I'm proud to claim Bill Otis as my second cousin. He's the only one in my generation to make much of a mark in the world, and the last lawyer in the family. His grandfather Shirley was the prime mover behind Virginia's Shirley Highway and the Colonial Parkway.

[Jeff Dobbs]

RalphL!!!!!

I missed your appearance here the other night, good to see you, my friend.

I almost had JM Hanes accept an invite to come to a neighborhood party last weekend ... if I thought you were around, I would have invited you too. (no such parties this weekend, however)

[clarice]

Jay Cost, that brilliant young political scientist says it best--This was not a failure; it was democracy as Madison envisioned it:
"I must admit that I find myself disappointed when journalists with years of experience covering Washington watch our system stultify efforts to alter the status quo, and then declare - in so many words - that a failure has occurred. There was no failure here. A sole senator from North Dakota effectively vetoed it. This was an archetypical Madisonian moment! This was a sign that our system is functioning well - regardless of whether the bill's policy prescription was an objectively prudent course of action to take. It was a divisive bill whose supporters constituted only a faction of the public. Even if the faction was the so-called "moderate," "sensible," "middle" - this bill's coalition was never anything more than a faction within the whole. Thus, their bill was effectively vetoed.

The proclamations of failure from journalists like Mr. Franken discourage me because they engender in the public a sense that our system is not working as it should when, in fact, it is working exactly as it should. Our governing system is extremely complicated, our education system gives short shrift to civics training, and so there is a wide divergence between what the average citizen thinks our system was intended to do, and what it was actually intended to do. Misguided criticisms from journalists who look fondly upon those halcyon days of programmatic efficiency that never existed only exacerbate this disconnection.

When there is a nationwide consensus of significant size on the issue of immigration, then there will be reform. In the meantime, let's stop implying that our system has failed us. It hasn't. This "failure" is actually all part and parcel of the Madisonian system. Learn it, love it, live it. Believe me, you have no other choice. It's not like you can change it."

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/horseraceblog/2007/06/mr_madison_votes_nay_1.html>Madison

[RalphL]

Typekey keeps dropping me, but telling me I'm signed in. Is everyone else having that problem? Signing out and signing back in worked this time.

Is anyone here calling the bill's failure a bad thing? Unfortunately, like Campaign Finance Reform, it will be pushed by the press and others til something ugly passes.

[RalphL]

Is Cost's blog called RaceHorseBlog because Mr. Madison votes Neigh?

[Other Tom]

The "journalist" by nature thinks that the passage of legislation means success, and the defeat of legislation means failure. Legislation is a good in its own right. If Henry Waxman offered a bill criminalizing good table manners, they would hail its passage as a success, and bemoan its defeat.

What is amazing is the inability of the congress and the press to see themselves as others see them.

[RalphL]

The press can never get beyond the horserace in election coverage, and the whole political class never gets beyond who's up and ho's down. It makes them feel good to have the inside skinny, to be part of the cogniscenti, and to hell with the consequences to the rest of the country.

[clarice]

Ralph, I'm about to round up a posse to mosey into typepad hq and make several arrests.
I think his blog was Horserace blog..it was the best analysis of the ongoing polls in the 2004 election. He's now a PhD candidate at the Univ of Chicago and looks to be the next Barone.

He writes a lot for RealClear Politics.

[JM Hanes]

Well TM, I'd say yes confusing -- mostly because it still took a majority of the whole to kill the thing, so the extremist small talk doesn't make much practical sense. Or maybe it makes technical sense, but just doesn't advance the ball in any particular direction. Or something.

As for labor Dems & business Pubs, Kaus notes "Gallup's own finding that those who are paying the most attention are the most lopsidedly (61% to 17%) opposed." Assuming that folks who aren't paying attention aren't phoning their Congressmen either, one could just as easily suggest that perhaps Republicans were listening more closely to their actual constituents than Democrats were. After all, the 17% extreme are the ones who wanted the bill to pass.

Of course, one could argue a lot of other things too, but this one strikes me as almost as much of a stretch as calling Sandra Day O'Connor an extremist Justice because she kept wrecking coalitions on the court by switching her vote from one side to the other. That's an observation, btw, not an analogy. In any case, you could call Liddy Dole an extremist too, but you'd have to seriously attenuate the technicalities to do it. Define extreme, and then we'll talk.

A compromise that took such massive maneuvering to build, and ultimately so little maneuvering to shatter, doesn't look all that grand to me. Considering the fact that Dodd and someone else switched their votes in the opposite direction from Dole & Co.. it seems almost more useful to say that the bi-partisan compromise died a bi-partisan death.

[Other Tom]

F**k the US Senate. I really, really hate 'em. This whole sorry thing convinces me that they think we're asleep at the switch, and that we believe they're going to do the right thing to take care of us.

At this point I don't think these shitbirds know what hit them. It'll be fun to watch the backpedaling and fingerpointing. "World's Greatest Deliberative Body," my ass. Yeah, we all really worship you.

Sorry for the purple parts. Martinis talking, don't you know.

[Rick Ballard]

"A compromise that took such massive maneuvering to build, and ultimately so little maneuvering to shatter, doesn't look all that grand to me."

I dunno. It serves the purpose, doesn't it? The hacks can claim to have voted for and against right through the election, can't they? The posturing fools on both sides can make claims and point to votes and maintain the pretense that they are in some manner worthy of drawing a paycheck.

It's a much better outcome than that which occured after McCain's last bout of Fenton driven compromise. Shoot, as far as I can tell from stats and news stories, apprehensions and enforcement actions are actually trending up.

Perhaps enforcing existing laws might become a fad with the Federal government?

[lurker9876]

Can any of you predict the outcome of the 2008 elections?

[richard mcenroe]

OT, sorry, but --

Open letter to any readers in the Los Angeles area...
I march with a small group that counterprotests a herd of ANSWERbots in Studio City every Friday and has since before the '04 election. This week (June 15) I must head back East for family. I need a designated hitter on the corner for me, as the 'bots tend to get 'brave' when there are only women on our side of the street.

The rallies more or less start at 6 p.m. but the full pack of 'bots shows up around 6:30, and the evening is usually over by 7:30, quarter to eight. Our group meets in front of the First Republic Bank on the corner of Ventura and Laurel Canyon.
If anyone wants to drop by, we can provide flags and signs, or you can of course bring your own.

Thanks.

[maryrose]

When Cornyn's amendment to kick out felons failed illegal ones that is,I knew the whole immigration bill was in danger. At one point they actually didn't want the police to do backgroung checks! Ludricous! Who elected these guys anyway? That's why the next president can't come from this bunch!

[Tom Maguire]

Typekey keeps dropping me, but telling me I'm signed in. Is everyone else having that problem? Signing out and signing back in worked this time.

It may help to set your browser to accept cookies.

Re Drum, the Times explains all:

As lawmakers began to contend with the collapse of the bill, the effort to distribute blame picked up where the debate left off.

The office of Mr. Reid, who had emphatically sought to hold Republicans accountable for sabotaging a presidential priority, distributed a document titled “Republicans Brought Down the Immigration Bill.”

It listed news reports and Republican statements that put the onus on the president’s party. “Last night, Republicans torpedoed comprehensive immigration reform,” the statement said.

OK, the Dems could have claimed credit before labor audiences, but they want to blame Reps before national (and Hispanic?) audiences. And we daringly presume that Drum is just following the talking points.

Elsewhere in the Times story:

“People on opposite sides of the political spectrum, in effect, banded together to defeat the middle,” said James G. Gimpel, a professor at the University of Maryland who has written a book on the politics of immigration. “Restrictionists on the right were always against the bill because they opposed any legalization for illegal immigrants.

“Business groups and their allies, including advocates for immigrant rights, lost much of their ardor for the bill because of changes made in the legislative process.”

...Although they rarely publicly voiced their opposition, the muscle of organized labor worked vigorously behind the scenes to defeat the measure. A key concern was the guest worker program.

Although dozens of amendments from senators were never called, Senator Byron L. Dorgan, Democrat of North Dakota, had three chances to offer amendments to eliminate or set an end date on guest workers, because the leadership wanted to balance the scales after the Republicans had won major changes.

The proposal to end the guest worker program after five years passed just after midnight on Thursday morning.

[JM Hanes]

Tom Maguire:

"It may help to set your browser to accept cookies.

No, it won't!

[RalphL]

“Last night, Republicans torpedoed comprehensive immigration reform,” the statement said.

Trumpet that throughout the land. It just might save the Republican party from disaster in 2008.

[RalphL]

"Seek professional help for all of us!"

Speak for yourself. I'm perfectly sane.

[JM Hanes]

Yeah, sure, Ralph, sez you! Just give it a couple of days.:)

[Sue]

Trumpet that throughout the land. It just might save the Republican party from disaster in 2008.

I don't know. When they label those opposed as racist and bigots 24/7, it tends to stick. Hell, my brother in law is a legal immigrant (now a citizen) and he spent more time writing and phoning Cornyn and Hutchison than I did. He is from Venezuela, btw. Don't even get him going on Chavez and those who rush to the camera to have their picture made with him.

[Other Tom]

I quote the great Mark Steyn:

"First of all, the only guys 'living in the shadows' are the aides of American senators beavering away out of the public eye to cook up this legislation and then present it as a fait accompli to the citizenry (if you'll forgive the expression). That is an affront to small-'r' republican government, and, if intemperate hectoring mediocrities like Trent Lott and Lindsay Graham don't understand that, then their electors should give them a well-deserved lesson."

That "intemperate hectoring mediocrities" bit really got my attention. I was very tempted to appropriate it without attribution, but of course that would be wrong.

Sue, what was your brother-in-law writing to them? Is he for the bill or against it?

[Other Tom]

Here's the Steyn piece:

http://www.ocregister.com/ocregister/opinion/nationalcolumns/article_1723669.php

[boris]

Steyn

[Sue]

OT,

Against it.

[Cecil Turner]

When Cornyn's amendment to kick out felons failed illegal ones that is,I knew the whole immigration bill was in danger.

I think that epitomizes the problem in a nutshell.

Perhaps a minority view 'round here, I support all the basic tenets of comprehensive reform:

1. legalize long-term illegal residents (I don't see any other feasible solution to avoid a permanent underclass a la Europe's muslims);
2. beef up border security;
3. visa reform--get a handle on those we don't intend to allow permanent residency;
4. provide a guest worker program, primarily to manage the process and remove the incentive for undocumented cross-border workers.

The goal is to make citizens of productive members of society, without encouraging a new influx of illegals. But the Devil's in the details, and this bill gets 'em all wrong.

The whole point of number 1 is to reduce crime and promote assimilation by working immigrants. We certainly don't want to invite a bunch of felons and gang-bangers to permanent residency (might as well ask Castro to clean out his jails again).

The point of numbers 3 and 4 is to manage those we don't want (at least in the main). That "Z visa" compromise they worked out looks like an invitation to a new perpetual class, and swallowed the rest of the reform. It's a deal breaker. Likewise, the guest worker program ought not to have a "path to citizenship" . . . the point is to be able to send them back easily.

The real problem with this reform appears to be partisan politics. In particular, the Democrats seem to want to admit as many of the least desirables as possible . . . presumably because they'd vote Democrat. Most of the proposals and negotiations revolve around that concept, and the Dems are on the wrong side of every one, AFAICT. And they kept pushing bad policies until it broke. The Times's "the [Dem] leadership wanted to balance the scales" quote nailed it. But the bottom line is that we don't need it so bad that we have to accept a bad bill. Good riddance.

[anduril]

Good morning! 3 public service links, with credit (blame?) to/for those who inspired me to do this:

Dumb Decisions: a review of Amity Shlaes' book on the Great Depression and why it didn't have to happen:

http://www.nypost.com/seven/06102007/postopinion/postopbooks/dumb_decisions_postopbooks_nicole_gelinas.htm?page=0

Abuse Talks, Women Walk - h/t TSK9 (self explanatory)

http://pajamasmedia.com/2007/06/abuse_talks_women_walk.php

From the KGB Playbook: Demoralization - h/t JM Hanes

http://pajamasmedia.com/2007/06/from_the_kgb_playbook_demorali.php

Sorry, no time to link properly, but cut and paste is easy.

[SMGalbraith]

Well, Drum is correct if one only looks at the cloture vote, a vote which was intended to prevent additional killer amendments.

But prior to that vote, "extremists" (if you will) on the Democrat side offered a number of changes to the (let us bow our heads) Grand Compromise that had the effect that TM was pointing out. I.e., making the bargain less palatable to the Republicans and thus, effectively killing the legislation. (Reid's "excellent" comment directed at Dorgan following the latter's introduction (for the second time) of his amendment should give Drum pause)

In a 50/50 Senate, grand bargains like this - especially on very complex and contentious issues - are prone to being undone by such legislative ledgermain. Even if done by extremists.

SMG

[SMGalbraith]

Well, Drum is correct if one only looks at the cloture vote, a vote which was intended to prevent additional killer amendments.

Great, I just re-read my post along with TM's.

Well, I just stated the same point that he did.

Only not as well.

I'll go now.

SMG

[PatrickR]

I'm with Cecil, except for; 'beef up border security'. I think that would be a huge waste of money. Better to pass legislation that requires state and local law enforcement to cooperate with the Feds.

Turn over the people who get arrested for felonies or even drunken driving, those we can permanently expel. Others who are here to work can stay, but not as citizens.

The market is sending strong messages to Mexico that there is demand here for unskilled labor. We can't repeal the laws of supply and demand. We learned that in the 20s with Prohibition and in the 70s with the 55 mph speed limit. People don't obey stupid laws.

It's pretty sad when it's Teddy Kennedy who gets the opportunity cost argument correct. It makes no economic sense to be chasing landscapers with manpower that ought to be looking for jihadists.

[Poppy]

It just shows we now live in an alternative universe. The whole point of the senate is to make amendments to legislation and have votes. The amendments that get over 50 votes by definition mean the legilsation
is more toward the center.

The Republicans did nothing different then their normal job, make amendments and have votes. The democrats were the ones who voted for the amendments and then claimed they wuld kill the whole bill. SAY WHAT!

Only one person defeated the bill and that was Reid, he could have continued the debate, he didn't, fearing his side would be forced to vote for popular amendments that the far left would object to in the final bill, and he certainly isn't controlled by Republican extremists.

[Poppy]

I still find it amazing that anyone can claim that hispanics have to come here or our economy will die. Whatever would we do if the Rio Grand was actuall an ocean and there was no meico, no latin America at all.??

Would someone have to invent Hsipanics? No, of course not, if the Hispanic semi-slave labor market all died tomorrow from a break out of the plague, I am sure companies would find ways to compensate for the loss of their slaves.

We did it before, we can do it again.

What makes my blood boil is the same people who claim us buying gasoline funds terrorism, dodn't see the fact that paying an illegal alien DIRECTLY funds the drug trade as the same smugglers bring in people and drugs.

[Cecil Turner]

I still find it amazing that anyone can claim that hispanics have to come here or our economy will die.

I think the better argument is the one PatrickR made: as long as there's a demand, they will come. You can regulate it, live with it, or spend an inordinate amount of time and effort in a [likely fruitless] attempt to stop it.

And heartily concur that it's a sad state of affairs when Ted Kennedy is the voice of reason.

[RichatUF]

Rick...

Perhaps enforcing existing laws might become a fad with the Federal government?

A novel concept. I remember back to the John Allen Mohammed shootings one of the stories that got buried is that he was also an alien smuggler and had been caught either in Miami or Purto Rico bringing people in with fake documents. Wasn't arrested, son't even think he was scolded.

Cecil...

The goal is to make citizens of productive members of society, without encouraging a new influx of illegals. But the Devil's in the details, and this bill gets 'em all wrong.

The whole point of number 1 is to reduce crime and promote assimilation by working immigrants. We certainly don't want to invite a bunch of felons and gang-bangers to permanent residency...

This has been a problem for a while also here

That is a data point for the Clinton normalizations in 1994 and 1996. Sowell wrote a pretty good book back in 1981 called "Ethnic America" that touched on these themes.

I've don't have any good answers: the best way would be to have illegal aliens leave on their own accord, but how would the country make the US so unatttractive that aliens don't want to come or want to leave. Another way would to make the counties people are coming from more attractive so people stay [Barone is a believer in this, and said that some reforms to Mexico would jumpstart their economy and within 10-15 years Mexico would have a standard of living about that of South Korea and we would have a dramatic drop in immigration].

And the status quo opens up avenues for alien sumgglers, organized crime in immigrant communities, and exploitation of people seeking a better life.

Maybe start using the 13th Amendment to target the smugglers and using anti-terrorism legislation and RICO to go after the gangs here. Start having a serious reform movement in Mexico-targeting the narco-traffickers and alien smugglers and the politicians that love them. Another point we could start pushing is that what Mexico is currently doing is nothing other than Lebensraum and that theory ended badly.

RichatUF

[RichatUF]

sorry I goofed up the formating on my previous comment

PatrickR says...
Better to pass legislation that requires state and local law enforcement to cooperate with the Feds.

One of drivers of this is that illegal immigration advocates are much better organized at the local level. Few point out the local->state->nation->internation flows that immigration (both legal and illegal) provides. One of the aspects of Amd. 187 (CA) was to correct this. It was opposed across the board-one reason is that congressional representation of the states wants to shift all the costs to the federal government, but not have any of the responsibility. Another aspect is just numbers-more people, more money [maybe thats the only reason the do-gooder mafia wants this so badly] and it helps that unrestricted immigration can skew the BLS stats to show how mean and uncaring we are.

RichatUF

[JM Hanes]

Poppy:

"Whatever would we do if the Rio Grand was actuall an ocean and there was no meico, no latin America at all.??"

Outsource.

[JM Hanes]

Cecil:

Count me in. I'd like to offer up a couple of amendments, natch.

To Item 1: Legalize long-term illegal residents as resident aliens.

To Item 2: Eliminate geographic & bureaucratic sanctuaries.

The bureaucratic front includes things like giving illegals driving licenses, or prohibiting inquiries as to status, etc.

To Item 3: Streamline the process for legal immigration.

To Item 4: Mandate penalties for employers of illegal aliens.

I'd base penalties either on repeated infractions, or on some minimum number of illegals employed (e.g. 5 or more). We need to be going after the pattern & practice folks, not cluttering the system with a bunch of average Joes who just hired a guy off the street to mow his lawn.

[RalphL]

Wasn't Perot's Giant Sucking supposed to be jobs going TO Mexico? Why didn't that happen? Is their govt that bad?

[boris]

JMH, item 4 has some problems. I think it would promote corruption at the local political level.

Small scale business and construction contractors cut corners a lot. Construction contractors especially get connected because development is so politically lucrative.

Creates a situation where the connected get rich and the ethical go out of business.

[Cecil Turner]

I'd like to offer up a couple of amendments, natch.

Heh. Seriously, the inability to agree on the basic goals is the main problem here . . . though I think a workable compromise might be possible. But we don't need another 20 million illegals, which is what I'm afraid a bad (amnesty) bill would encourage.

[RichatUF]

RalphL...

Wasn't Perot's Giant Sucking supposed to be jobs going TO Mexico? Why didn't that happen? Is their govt that bad?

Yes (was never a believe that the doom-and-gloom scenario painted by Perot. Part of his argument was also that NAFTA would cause a currency crisis in Mexico-and then 1994. This looks interesting

It didn't happen for a number of reasons The Mexican Oligopoly is a good place to start

Yes, why would some 7 million people come here over the last 20 years both legally and illegally from a single countrythis has some numbers but is dated and is from more restrictions and enforcement approach

RichatUF

[RalphL]

Rich, that first link is interesting but dated. They contracted while we were booming. Surprising that most of the emigration has occurred since the govt turned away from socialism.

Oil exports certainly are a mixed blessing; like gold and the Spanish Empire, unhealthy in the long run.

[JM Hanes]

Cecil:

I believe we need comprehensive reform myself, but I think the legislation and the apparatus that enacting it whole require are so huge that implementation alone will be a bureaucratic -- and a long one at that. If things don't work out as expected, I have no confidence we'll even be able to figure out why. Any one element that's underfunded, undermanned or mismanaged can send the rest of the dominoes flying.

Then there's the trust factor (See Border, Fence). The extremism which supposedly terminated this bill wouldn't suddenly evaporate on passage. The very compromises that made the current bill both possible and killable, will be revisited, refought, and undercut, under the radar, with varying degrees of success and failure, in every committee on the Hill.

I've come to prefer the idea of discrete, successive packages (benchmarks vs. triggers?), which taken cumulatively over time would, in fact, be comprehensive. That's one of the reasons I like my "legal alien" status over the "path to citizenship" approach. It allows the hottest button issue, and the one with the biggest long term (and potentially unanticipated) ramifications to be deferred indefinitely, without leaving millions in limbo, till we discover what works and what doesn't on the other fronts.

No need to respond, as I'm mostly mulling. I do like your no nonsense, no frills approach.

[Pofarmer]

Wasn't Perot's Giant Sucking supposed to be jobs going TO Mexico? Why didn't that happen? Is their govt that bad?

Yes.

I'm with Cecil, except for; 'beef up border security'. I think that would be a huge waste of money. Better to pass legislation that requires state and local law enforcement to cooperate with the Feds.

Turn over the people who get arrested for felonies or even drunken driving, those we can permanently expel. Others who are here to work can stay, but not as citizens.

How are you gonna keep the ones you expel out without better border security? I agree that State and Local Law enforcement need to work with the Feds. Right now, in most instances, they are actually barred from it. But, requiring them to arrest the same folks time after time is just stupid. It's basically what we are doing now.

It makes no economic sense to be chasing landscapers with manpower that ought to be looking for jihadists.

Fine, then keep them, and the jihadists, on the other side of the border. It's a twofer. If you landscaping suddenly can't get done, we can revisit the issue.