 | ||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||
|
« Words Fail, Nail, or Jail (Depending on the Editor) | Main | Back Home » November 27, 2005A Question of BalanceBy Donna Locke A people can be too generous. For a number of years we've taken in 1 million legal immigrants and 800,000 to several million illegal aliens annually, far exceeding our traditional immigration levels. Immigration is the determining factor in our population growth and poverty rate, and an ignored factor in the alarming degradation of our environment. Some experts say the United States has already exceeded its sustainable population level, yet the Census Bureau's midrange forecast says our current population of almost 292 million [in 2003; now nearly 298 million] will jump to almost a half billion people by 2050. Atlanta is already experiencing water shortages even as its population is expected to double during the next few decades. Water will become a nationwide concern. In addition, at current rates, the United States will lose 30 percent or more of its remaining 375 million acres of cropland by 2100. Some experts say our country will cease to be a food exporter by 2030 and will be unable to grow enough food for its people by 2050. That's quite a legacy we're leaving our children. An immigration policy that has resulted in a raid on our country by massive numbers of foreigners and in increasing inequity for American natives is wrong. A government that has breached its compact with the people and failed to protect them from subversion and attack is criminal. What should guide U.S. immigration policy? Logic and reality. We have a responsibility to future generations and to other planetary kingdoms, seen and unseen, that share this space with us. Above all, and especially now, immigration policy should serve our own survival. It is and will be a question of balance. Posted in Miscellaneous
Comments
I agree with this totally. In fact, it really appeals to the Green in my otherwise libertarian character. This issue just has so many implications, and it behooves us as a species to think about them without getting brainlock. Here's a link I just found on Drudge that is interesting: Posted by: Wintermute at November 28, 2005 2:41 AMAside from the sustainability situation, the large immigration numbers that have continued year after year for the past 20 years defeat the assimilation model of our nation's past. So our nation is being altered in ways not originally intended. Posted by: Donna Locke at November 28, 2005 1:58 PMI just read an article where the Miami police is going to start using a show of force to thwart terrorists. One of their tactics is to surround a bank and check everyone's ID as they enter. If it's OK for the Miami police to ask for your papers to carry on a perfectly legal business transaction at a bank, then why is it considered abominable to stand outside a tomato field and ask the workers to produce a legitimate ID? Posted by: Rick Forman at November 29, 2005 9:57 AMThis is funny, for years conservatives have tried to drum it into our heads that economic growth without government constraint is an unqualified virtue -- in the process belittling opponents as cynical "neo-Malthusians" who belive in limiting the potential for human capacity to sustain population growth. All of the sudden, the conservatives have turned into hysterical alarmists, trying to frighten people into supporting limitations on immigration, based upon the same nightmare scenarios that the "neo-Malthusians" have been predicting for years. Such inconsistency can only be due to a hidden agenda - a tacit form of cultural arrogance that assumes Mexicans are not good enough to become Americans and it is worth limiting the economic growth of the nation to achieve such exclusion. What is most offensive about this position is that it is dishonest and violates the core principles that conservatives claim to believe in so deeply. And it explains the electoral success of the Republican party in recent years - the appeal to the bigotry that to a regrettable degree still persists in this country. Posted by: TomJ at November 29, 2005 2:07 PMTomJ, you are confusing "immigration" with "illegal immigration." Perhaps that is because, well, because both have the word "immigration" in them, so let me assist you. The key word in "illegal immigration" is ILLEGAL. You won't find it in the one-word phrase "immigration." ILLEGAL immigration is what many of we conservatives are against - because ILLEGAL immigration is, by definition, a criminal action against our laws and is uncontrolled, thereby threatening our security and, yes, possibly overrunning our economy's ability to absorb it. LEGAL immigration has long been a numerically limited thing and no one I know of has ever argued that the economy would be able to handle the sudden influx of a few hundred million people. Posted by: Bill Hobbs at November 29, 2005 2:21 PMTomJ, you paint with a very broad and inaccurate brush. A cross section of Americans favors immigration reduction and tight borders. If you are insulting me personally: You clearly do not know me, and you have demonstrated that you cannot peg me politically or ethically. The stand I have taken on out-of-control immigration has been consistent since the 1970s and intensive since the 1990s -- regardless of sending country and including ALL sending countries. As for the bigot/race card, our opposition is always the player that throws intolerance onto the table. It's the only argument they had that they could scare Americans with and get any traction out of, but it stopped working for them several years ago, because the rest of the players always knew a lot of cheating was going on, and most of the observers of the game finally figured that out, too. The actual bigots are really a tiny minority in this entire debate. I've been around, and I know. Games of distraction don't work on this issue anymore, if they ever did. The majority of Americans know we have a serious problem. Among my closest associates in the immigration-reduction movement are many immigrants and American natives of color. You can try playing the bigot card here: Latino Americans for Immigration Reform. They'll flick it back to you in short order. Posted by: Donna Locke at November 30, 2005 2:00 AMNo one is saying Mexicans aren't good enough to become U.S. citizens if they apply and wait like other applicants. His legal process is held up continuously because illegal border crossers keep jumping ahead of him for false claims of persecution, asylum or amnesty. They both are dead set against amnesties or guest worker plans for illegals for the simple fact that it's not fair for some to follow the law and wait while others want to jump to the head of the line illegally. But for some reason the tolerant left doesn't believe in the priciple of law. The only bigots/racists in the immigration issue are La Raza and Mecha who call for ethnic cleansing of the Southwest all the while crying for more Federal support in entitlements. Two organizations who uphold the murder of innocent Anglo Texans by Mexicans in the early 1900s for nothing more than their skin color. Immigration has always been controlled up until 1965 when Teddy K. helped remove most restrictions. Up until then most immigrants had skills and education to offer that helped make this a great nation. Immigrant households are more likely to participate in practically every one of the major means-tested entitlement programs. Immigrant use of welfare programs (21 percent) is 43 percent higher than non-immigrants’ use (15 percent. It's simple, at the present rate of immigrant growth the nation can not afford the current immigration policies. Posted by: Rick Forman at December 1, 2005 1:11 AMPost a comment
Comments Policy: Your comment is subject to deletion if it is off-topic or includes foul language or personal attack. Readers, please email me if you find comments that include egregious violations of this policy. Comments may not post immediately - do not post twice!
|
|||||||||||
