The law of supply and demand also applies at the border: We can’t really stop all illegal immigration—in part because of the lure of a better life here, but also because of our own labor needs.
Like many of the bigger problems in the country, this one goes unsolved because voters are unable to accept that there are unavoidable trade-offs. They want cheap food, low construction costs, clean bathrooms, and affordable daycare, but at the same time they don’t want any perceived competition for jobs or housing, or just plain don’t want any other cultures or languages in their neighborhoods. Strong leaders would address these trade-offs honestly and directly, but voters clearly like to hear that they can have their cake and eat it, too, and populism thrives on stoking what’s an easy sell.
By the way, it’s not about illegal immigration. That’s just a fig leaf for plain old anti-immigrant sentiment. The Haitian pet-eating hoax is just one example of evidence of this.
Linda's take on EVerify was really annoying. Very unserious take on something that can be very useful in solving our issues. EVerify checks the for the validity of the social, if it is authorized to work as well as the identify of the person that is applying. They provide their state issued ID when applying and then you EVerify the name on the application with the SSN provided.
She would never say requiring ID to vote creates a cottage industry of identity theft and doesn't work because people will use fake IDs, therefore checking for voter ID is stupid. EVerify seems like a way more cost effective way of curbing illegal employment. This is 2024 we've got all manner of tech and tools to do verifications or flag suspicious activity. Should work with temporary work permits as well.
Kinda took a cheap shot at Obama for not focusing on immigration reform- why didn’t she do that, or even the Dreamers Act when she was serving with Bush? Unnecessary & beneath you, Linda.,
Gramps, respectfully, I disagree with your characterization of Linda's statements about Obama as a cheap shot. She dispassionately stated that Obama did not make the immigration issue a priority due to other priorities (health care). She speculated that perhaps it wasn't on his radar screen as he wasn't from a border state, unlike Reagan and W. And that was it. Her tone and words were not disrespectful in the least, in my opinion.
Good conversation. Always love listening to Linda on immigration.
In the broad sense I’m fully supportive where she wants to go on immigration. To be honest, I’m probably even more liberal about this issue than most.
I know for the most part Linda also sees the debate and ability to get anything through congress realistically. I honestly don’t even think if Harris wins, that Harris could pass lankfords bill. I just don’t think there are 10/11 votes in the Republican Party for it. I hope and pray I’m wrong.
The only thing I disagreed with vehemently was that Obama should have focused on this in his first term. Here, I couldn’t disagree more. What Linda always pretends is that somehow (1) immigration was a big issue between 2008-2010, it wasn’t and (2) that even here that the dem party was unified on it, it wasn’t. You can say it’s shortsighted and I would agree to an extent but in the aftermath of the Great Recession this wasn’t a concern (illegal immigration COLLAPSED) but healthcare was (because of unemployment skyrocketing).
What political pundits don’t realize is that no Democratic president will ever put much political capital into this issue. The largest reason is that they know republicans will do nothing to solve the problem. It’s a political capital black hole. This is true now and was then and was under Trump and was under bush and was under Clinton. It just isn’t worth there time.
The Trump administration cracked down sharply on legal immigration, partly by gutting the availability and resources of bureaucrats to process them, increasing process times by years - leading to a rise in the incentives for people to come in illegally. And I’m sure they’ll do exactly the same thing if they get in again.
"If Texas officials wanted to stop the arrival of undocumented immigrants, they could try to make it impossible for them to work here. But that would devastate the state’s economy. So instead politicians engage in border theater. "
Texan here. This is 100% true! My father’s family was all farmers & ranchers around Uvalde, a town that nobody knew until children were murdered. EVERY farmer & rancher would have gone broke without illegal labor. My dad grew cantaloupes. One year there was a cracked down on “wetbacks” (sorry, but true lingo), & 100 acres of cantaloupes rotted in the field. I was 18, selling them roadside- 10 for $1.00! He lost the farm to the bank the following year.
In AZ we once had a Republican senator named Jeff Flake. He wrote a nice op-ed in either WSJ or NYT explaining how the labor of undocumented migrants was essential to farming & ranching here. But he bailed from senate rather than do anything about it.
Not in AZ Republican Party. Didn’t think Nikki Haley could win 2024 presidential primary either but her staying in served some purpose and could’ve done even more if she hadn’t caved to Trump.
I never read Flake’s book. Do you know if it explained that the Conscience of a Conservative says not to make a stand to challenge those you think are failing a party you believe(d) in?
We are unserious about immigration. And the biggest lies come from the Red states - for example, perhaps half the dry wallers in Texas are illegal. And across agriculture, illegals manage the animals, pick the fruit, weed the crops. Also process the meat. Then the GOP governors pretend it is liberal cities that are at fault.
In any case the proposed compromise bill would have been a good start. But the GOP give in to their resident madman.
actually I don't harbor ill will to those who come here without papers. but in the context of a comment section, I don't see illegal as conveying anything other than the need to be concise. (so I don't see prisoners as a worse term than incarcerated persons etc). Wetback or jailbird would be intentionally negative. not meaning to offend but since you made the point, i thought it ok to respond.
Lets start by providing an alternative narrative. I'm a fifth generation immigrant. The management of undocumented immigrants is complicated but not the issue Trump would is spewing about. Simply increase the penalty for employing undocumented immigrants. Instead of building walls build schools to train and support undocumented immigrants and work together to include their hopes and dreams into society.
Like many of the bigger problems in the country, this one goes unsolved because voters are unable to accept that there are unavoidable trade-offs. They want cheap food, low construction costs, clean bathrooms, and affordable daycare, but at the same time they don’t want any perceived competition for jobs or housing, or just plain don’t want any other cultures or languages in their neighborhoods. Strong leaders would address these trade-offs honestly and directly, but voters clearly like to hear that they can have their cake and eat it, too, and populism thrives on stoking what’s an easy sell.
By the way, it’s not about illegal immigration. That’s just a fig leaf for plain old anti-immigrant sentiment. The Haitian pet-eating hoax is just one example of evidence of this.
Linda's take on EVerify was really annoying. Very unserious take on something that can be very useful in solving our issues. EVerify checks the for the validity of the social, if it is authorized to work as well as the identify of the person that is applying. They provide their state issued ID when applying and then you EVerify the name on the application with the SSN provided.
She would never say requiring ID to vote creates a cottage industry of identity theft and doesn't work because people will use fake IDs, therefore checking for voter ID is stupid. EVerify seems like a way more cost effective way of curbing illegal employment. This is 2024 we've got all manner of tech and tools to do verifications or flag suspicious activity. Should work with temporary work permits as well.
Kinda took a cheap shot at Obama for not focusing on immigration reform- why didn’t she do that, or even the Dreamers Act when she was serving with Bush? Unnecessary & beneath you, Linda.,
Gramps, respectfully, I disagree with your characterization of Linda's statements about Obama as a cheap shot. She dispassionately stated that Obama did not make the immigration issue a priority due to other priorities (health care). She speculated that perhaps it wasn't on his radar screen as he wasn't from a border state, unlike Reagan and W. And that was it. Her tone and words were not disrespectful in the least, in my opinion.
Sometime soon, please tackle how to solve our loneliness epidemic. Warn your guests to avoid platitudes.
Good conversation. Always love listening to Linda on immigration.
In the broad sense I’m fully supportive where she wants to go on immigration. To be honest, I’m probably even more liberal about this issue than most.
I know for the most part Linda also sees the debate and ability to get anything through congress realistically. I honestly don’t even think if Harris wins, that Harris could pass lankfords bill. I just don’t think there are 10/11 votes in the Republican Party for it. I hope and pray I’m wrong.
The only thing I disagreed with vehemently was that Obama should have focused on this in his first term. Here, I couldn’t disagree more. What Linda always pretends is that somehow (1) immigration was a big issue between 2008-2010, it wasn’t and (2) that even here that the dem party was unified on it, it wasn’t. You can say it’s shortsighted and I would agree to an extent but in the aftermath of the Great Recession this wasn’t a concern (illegal immigration COLLAPSED) but healthcare was (because of unemployment skyrocketing).
What political pundits don’t realize is that no Democratic president will ever put much political capital into this issue. The largest reason is that they know republicans will do nothing to solve the problem. It’s a political capital black hole. This is true now and was then and was under Trump and was under bush and was under Clinton. It just isn’t worth there time.
The Trump administration cracked down sharply on legal immigration, partly by gutting the availability and resources of bureaucrats to process them, increasing process times by years - leading to a rise in the incentives for people to come in illegally. And I’m sure they’ll do exactly the same thing if they get in again.
Good recent article on this in the Texas Monthly:
https://www.texasmonthly.com/news-politics/border-crisis-texas-solutions/
"If Texas officials wanted to stop the arrival of undocumented immigrants, they could try to make it impossible for them to work here. But that would devastate the state’s economy. So instead politicians engage in border theater. "
They would rather create a path to reelection than serve the needs of their constituents.
Texan here. This is 100% true! My father’s family was all farmers & ranchers around Uvalde, a town that nobody knew until children were murdered. EVERY farmer & rancher would have gone broke without illegal labor. My dad grew cantaloupes. One year there was a cracked down on “wetbacks” (sorry, but true lingo), & 100 acres of cantaloupes rotted in the field. I was 18, selling them roadside- 10 for $1.00! He lost the farm to the bank the following year.
In AZ we once had a Republican senator named Jeff Flake. He wrote a nice op-ed in either WSJ or NYT explaining how the labor of undocumented migrants was essential to farming & ranching here. But he bailed from senate rather than do anything about it.
Do you think it was even remotely possible that Flake could have won his primary?
Not in AZ Republican Party. Didn’t think Nikki Haley could win 2024 presidential primary either but her staying in served some purpose and could’ve done even more if she hadn’t caved to Trump.
I never read Flake’s book. Do you know if it explained that the Conscience of a Conservative says not to make a stand to challenge those you think are failing a party you believe(d) in?
I <3 the Uvalde and Del Rio area. (Not that that's relevant; just saying.)
I wonder what these businesses think about Trump’s plans. Do they think it won’t happen?
We are unserious about immigration. And the biggest lies come from the Red states - for example, perhaps half the dry wallers in Texas are illegal. And across agriculture, illegals manage the animals, pick the fruit, weed the crops. Also process the meat. Then the GOP governors pretend it is liberal cities that are at fault.
In any case the proposed compromise bill would have been a good start. But the GOP give in to their resident madman.
Terry - your observations are correct and apply to other areas of work and in most states, not only red.
Please consider whether calling people “illegals” is appropriate. Those without legal status are human, our brothers & sisters. Thank you
actually I don't harbor ill will to those who come here without papers. but in the context of a comment section, I don't see illegal as conveying anything other than the need to be concise. (so I don't see prisoners as a worse term than incarcerated persons etc). Wetback or jailbird would be intentionally negative. not meaning to offend but since you made the point, i thought it ok to respond.
Immigration is the ultimate Kabuki issue.
Lets start by providing an alternative narrative. I'm a fifth generation immigrant. The management of undocumented immigrants is complicated but not the issue Trump would is spewing about. Simply increase the penalty for employing undocumented immigrants. Instead of building walls build schools to train and support undocumented immigrants and work together to include their hopes and dreams into society.
All of what you say are the right things to do. Not politically feasible though. That’s the sad part about where we are.