The Significance of Illegal Immigration

America’s exceptional status as a “nation of immi­grants” is being challenged by globalization, which is making both migration and terrorism much easier. The biggest challenge for policymakers is distinguish­ing illusory immigration problems from real prob­lems. One thing is quite clear: The favored approach of recent years—a policy of benign neglect—is no longer tenable. Members of both the Senate and the House of Representatives recognize this and deserve credit for striving to craft a comprehensive law during this session of Congress.

Illegal immigration into the United States is mas­sive in scale. More than 10 million undocumented aliens currently reside in the U.S., and that popula­tion is growing by 700,000 per year. On one hand, the presence of so many aliens is a powerful testament to the attractiveness of America. On the other hand, it is a sign of how dangerously open its' borders are.

Typical illegal aliens come to America primarily for better jobs and in the process add value to the U.S. economy. However, they also take away value by weakening the legal and national security envi­ronment. When three out of every 100 people in America are undocumented (or, rather, docu­mented with forged and faked papers), there is a profound security problem. Even though they pose no direct security threat, the presence of millions of undocumented migrants distorts the law, distracts resources, and effectively creates a cover for terror­ists and criminals.

It's important to look at the pro's and con's of illegal immigration before accepting or rejecting it entirely:


Pro's

- The population today includes a far higher percentage (12 percent) of foreign-born Americans than in recent decades, yet the economy is strong, with higher total gross domestic product (GDP), higher GDP per person, higher productivity per worker, and more Americans working than ever before.

- The increase in the immigration flow has corresponded with steady and substantial reductions in unemployment from 7.3 percent to 5.1 percent over the past two decades. Unemployment rates have fallen by 6 percentage points for Blacks and 3.5 percentage points for Latinos.

- Whether low-skilled or high-skilled, immigrants boost national output, enhance specialization, and provide a net economic benefit. The 2005 Economic Report of the President (ERP) devotes an entire chap­ter to immigration and reports that “A comprehen­sive accounting of the benefits and costs of immigration shows the benefits of immigration exceed the costs."

- Immigrant unemployment rates are lower than the national average in the U.S.

- Most immigrant families have a positive net fis­cal impact on the U.S., adding $88,000 more in tax revenues than they consume in services.

- The increasing worry about outsourcing jobs to other nations is just one more reason to attract more jobs to Amer­ica by insourcing labor. If workers are allowed to work inside the U.S., they immediately add to the economy and pay taxes, which does not happen when a job is outsourced.

Con's

- Flouting the law has become the norm, which makes the job of terrorists and drug traffickers infinitely easier.

- The economic costs of terrorism can be very high and very real, quite apart from the otherwise positive economic impact of immigration (for example, one terrorist attack may directly/indirectly cost the U.S. billions of dollars).

- Efficient legal entry depends on a waiting period used to screen applicants, without which creates instability and safety concerns.

- Unregistered citizens take jobs that have been set by the American government to meet the number of employable U.S. citizens, throwing off the supply-demand balance.


To summarize, the real problem presented by illegal immigration is security, not the supposed threat to the economy. Indeed, efforts to curtail the economic influx of migrants actually worsen the security dilemma by driving many migrant workers underground, thereby encouraging the culture of illegality. These facts can serve to drive either support or opposition to American policy regarding the handling of immigration.


Any thoughts?


- Written by Tim Kane and Kirk Johnson, Adapted and contributed to by Josh Bower

The USA Must Have Guts To Terrorize The Terrorists

If we ever hope to rid the world of the political AIDS of our time, terrorism, the rule must be clear: One does not deal with terrorists; one does not bargain with terrorists; one kills terrorists.

And if that rule is too much for the United States to stomach, let it resign itself not only to the constant threat of kidnapping of Americans in the Third World, but worse, bombs in U.S. department stores, and other public places.

One of the great problems with Americans is that - being a decent people - they assume that everyone else is equally decent.

They assume that, all humans being equal, all cultures are therefore similar in concepts and values. But that is simply not so. And the Middle East is just not the Middle West.

The Middle East and the Moslem-Arab world possess their own unique cultures and values that in so many cases are at variance with those of the West. Human rights - especially those of non-Moslems or non- Arabs - simply do not have the same absolute value that they do in the West.

Above all, it is not decency or goodness of gentleness that impresses the Middle East, but strength. Because of this, the U.S. is looked on as a paper tiger - with all the accompanying contempt. President Reagan's constant flexing of muscle, with absolutely no reaction to the murder of U.S. Marines and the kidnapping of U.S. citizens, has created for him an image of one who speaks loudly and carries a small twig.

That is the heart of the problem. The answer? Never, ever deal with terrorists. Hunt them down and, more important, mercilessly punish those states and groups that fund, arm, support, or simply allow their territories to be used by the terrorists with impunity.

It is abundantly clear that if Syria wished to, terrorists would be deprived of huge areas of haven in Lebanon. But why should Syria want to? Or Iran? They're happily enjoying Western agony without suffering one bit. And that is the key: Make them suffer.

Terror in Syrian and Iranian cities will soon enough convince those two unworthy states that it is unhealthy to support terrorism. And if towns and villages that support terrorists in Lebanon are mercilessly dealt with, they, too, will soon enough turn on them.

The question is whether the United States has the stomach to defeat terror or whether Americans will sink into what the Rabbis of the Talmud call "the mercy of fools." When one refrains from terror against terrorists, he is not better than they. He will be deader, and there is nothing moral or ethical about that.

The choice is clear and once again, the Rabbis put it well: "If one comes to slay you, slay him first." (Brachot, 58 )


- By Rabbi Meir Kahane, published in the New York Times in 1987