A Different Take on the Immigration Debate

The New Case Against Immigration: Illegal and Legal by Mark Krikorian, Executive Director of the Center for Immigration Studies, argues:

"What's different about immigration today as opposed to a century ago is not the immigrants but us....(America is now a) mature society and that renders our past experience with immigration irrelevant. We have a post-industrial, knowledge-based economy, a welfare state, advanced communications and transportation technology that complicate the issues of security and sovereignty, etc. We have, in other words, outgrown mass immigration. It was an important phase of our national development, and played an important part in shaping who we are as a nation. But, like other phases we've passed through as a people -- pioneers settling the frontier, for instance -- it's something we need to put behind us."

From where I sit, the implication is that America should do what we've heretofore done:

1. Control immigration so that only non-criminals who've passed a health screening are allowed to become legal residents, with exceptions made for only people who truly are escaping persecution.

2. If a larger number of people apply for legal residence than can be accommodated without unduly taxing our education, health care, or other systems, then the decision as to who should be admitted should be based on their likelihood of contributing to society. For example, college educated people would be given preference.

3. Enforcement should NOT be done by rounding up illegals, but by strict punishment for employers who hire illegals.

4. All the work that employers say can't be done by legal Americans could be done--All that would be required is for employers to raise salaries and improve working conditions, which, in themselves are good things to do.