The Illegal Immigration Question I’d Like To Hear

 

shutterstock_36533647True to form, Jeb Bush went full throttle into to the “we can’t possibly deport 11 million illegal immigrants” zone, and quoted a rate of 500,000 per month. To be honest, he makes a reasonable point. The logistics of it are near impossible.

An Airbus A380 variant flown by Emirates Air can seat 615 people, the largest passenger capacity of any airline. It would require 813 flights of these behemoths every month (i.e, 27 a day) to move that many people. There are only 173 A380’s in service. Jeb may have been exercising hyperbole to support his position, but he isn’t off the mark.

Additionally, identifying and locating that many illegal aliens each month is near impossible and we have no method of doing so now.

Stepping away from the hyperbole, let’s give the candidates some operating room and say they have one term to deport the illegal aliens, which would mean about 200,000 a month. If a half million deportations per month is impossible, 200,000 is only barely achievable.

Relatedly, we need to be realistic about what “securing the border” means. One of my friends is a Texas State Trooper and was one of the first volunteers for the boat squadron that patrols the Rio Grande. His team works closely with US Border Patrol. I visited with him about the situation; suffice to say, border security isn’t as tough-minded as we often think. These days, being detained by Border Patrol doesn’t carry a threat of immediate deportation and is a big reason we continue to see thousands per week streaming into the country.

All that said, I have a scenario I want to pose to Ricochet that I wish was posed to the candidates.

Scenario

Leaving dinner on a Wednesday night, I make a legal left turn with a green arrow when a well-used Mercedes runs the light and hits me head on. No one is injured, but my SUV has to be towed away and — when all is said and done — I’m going to be out $7,000.

The Mercedes was driven by a young man with a young woman in the passenger seat. Neither of them speak English, and neither has a drivers license or any other form of identification. The car’s inspection and registration are both expired and there is no insurance. The girl in the passenger seat is pregnant, about four or five months along. They have little money.

A Spanish speaking officer is dispatched to the scene and one of the of the EMS technicians speaks Spanish. The driver and passenger are not married and admit to being here illegally. They are evasive about how they got here and whether they have relatives in the country or not.

The Question

Sir/Madam, in your administration, what will happen to these two?

If it is verified they are illegal aliens will they be allowed to stay or deported? If they are allowed to stay, will the woman receive publicly-funded healthcare for her pregnancy and child? If their child is born here, will he or she be granted American citizenship?

What I’d Like to Hear

In a Brent Administration, the young couple are taken into custody, their immigration status is determined, and they are turned over to ICE and held until deported. A process measured in days, not years.

They are allowed phone calls and — if family came to visit and found to be here illegally — they will be detained and deported also.

Once detained, they would not be temporarily released or allowed to gather their belongings, money, etc. This may seem rough treatment, but at least we aren’t going house to house doing no-knock raids as happened with Elian Gonzalez.

The Way Forward

This uncomfortable process garners immediate attention, makes people feel “unwelcome,” and challenges those here illegally. If they wish to return home on their own, they can take their possessions, money, family, etc. If they are stopped for so much as jaywalking they are interned in the criminal justice and ICE system until they are released outside our borders.

Not an easy choice and not intended to be. Breaking our laws should not be comfortable or without consequence.

If they elect to stay, live in the shadows, and seek employment for cash, they may do so, but there will be no legal acknowledgement or path to citizenship. Increased use of E-verify and raids on suspect businesses decrease the opportunities to better themselves. As soon as they step out of the shadows, into the purview of law enforcement, or try to get a birth certificate for a child, deportation begins as soon as they are identified without an opportunity to gather their family or possessions.

Summary

Jeb Bush is mostly correct: deporting that many illegal aliens isn’t practical. The steps to solve this crisis include, but not limited to:

  1. Real border enforcement (no more notices to appear or other hand receipts).
  2. No incentive to come illegally in the first place. No contorted 14th Amendment interpretation that extends citizenship to the children of these criminals.
  3. End forcing public education for illegal aliens.
  4. Conduct government business in English only.
  5. Increase E-verify and employer penalties
  6. Restrict repatriation of dollars by non-citizens.

Please note I did not include a wall funded by a third party. Rick Perry made a good point awhile back: build a 14′ wall and they make 15′ ladders. Of course he also supported in-state tuition for those who’d broken our immigration laws, so there was motivation for ladder manufacturing courtesy Rick Perry.

Giving illegal immigrants the opportunity and motivation to self-deport is possible. Raiding homes of people we can’t identify and locate to ship them out on 800 flights per month is not.

Published in General, Immigration, Politics
Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 164 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. BrentB67 Inactive
    BrentB67
    @BrentB67

    Mountain Mike:

    Carol:BrentB67 2016! Who is your VP choice?

    And please lay out your tax plan in detail -remembering that the President only proposes, Congress disposes!

    Mike, thanks for your interest. I have thought of writing a post of my dream tax plan.

    The only tax plan I’ve seen this cycle that excites me is Governor Jindal’s proposal. Congress would have an aneurysm (not a bad thing) even bringing up his plan for debate.

    • #31
  2. Bob Thompson Member
    Bob Thompson
    @BobThompson

    BrentB67:

    Mountain Mike:

    Carol:BrentB67 2016! Who is your VP choice?

    And please lay out your tax plan in detail -remembering that the President only proposes, Congress disposes!

    Mike, thanks for your interest. I have thought of writing a post of my dream tax plan.

    The only tax plan I’ve seen this cycle that excites me is Governor Jindal’s proposal. Congress would have an aneurysm (not a bad thing) even bringing up his plan for debate.

    Does he take the IRS out of the picture? That’s what I like about Cruz.

    • #32
  3. BrentB67 Inactive
    BrentB67
    @BrentB67

    Bob Thompson:

    BrentB67:

    Mountain Mike:

    Carol:BrentB67 2016! Who is your VP choice?

    And please lay out your tax plan in detail -remembering that the President only proposes, Congress disposes!

    Mike, thanks for your interest. I have thought of writing a post of my dream tax plan.

    The only tax plan I’ve seen this cycle that excites me is Governor Jindal’s proposal. Congress would have an aneurysm (not a bad thing) even bringing up his plan for debate.

    Does he take the IRS out of the picture? That’s what I like about Cruz.

    Jindal doesn’t and that is a weakness and Cruz is dreaming if he thinks that convoluted mess he proposed runs without the IRS or a similar bureaucracy.

    I’ve met him personally on several occasions during the Senate campaign and honestly do not know who is pulling the strings and where he is coming up with some stuff. Ever since the Mercer donation I have had to scratch my head.

    • #33
  4. Scott Wilmot Member
    Scott Wilmot
    @ScottWilmot

    Great post Brent – I like your 6 steps. You’ve won my vote.

    • #34
  5. Mountain Mike Inactive
    Mountain Mike
    @MichaelFarrow

    BrentB67:

    Bob Thompson:

    BrentB67:

    Mountain Mike:

    Carol:BrentB67 2016! Who is your VP choice?

    Jindal doesn’t and that is a weakness and Cruz is dreaming if he thinks that convoluted mess he proposed runs without the IRS or a similar bureaucracy.

    I’ve met him personally on several occasions during the Senate campaign and honestly do not know who is pulling the strings and where he is coming up with some stuff. Ever since the Mercer donation I have had to scratch my head.

    I see no real prospect for eliminating the IRS either, but I would like the tax code to be shredded down to a few hundred pages in plain English.  I cannot do my taxes anymore – S corp and personal just take too much effort and resulting fear of error.

    • #35
  6. Lucy Pevensie Inactive
    Lucy Pevensie
    @LucyPevensie

    BrentB67:

    Mike H:

    BrentB67: No incentive to come illegally in the first place. No contorted 14th Amendment interpretation that extends citizenship to the children of these criminals.

    You’re kidding right? You don’t really think the largest incentive to come here is to have your child be a citizen?

    It isn’t the largest reason, but it is high up on the list.

    I can’t speak for the illegal immigrants, but I’ve known foreigners who managed to get a visa for a year or so, timed so that their kids would be born here. I’m thinking in particular of two relatively westernized, educated Turkish women. The phrase “anchor baby” did not come into the discussion, but these friends of mine said that if things went really bad (ie, Islamist) in Turkey, having a child with US citizenship would provide a way out for the whole family.

    I would imagine that this might be extremely common among illegal aliens.

    • #36
  7. jetstream Inactive
    jetstream
    @jetstream

    You know Brent, America is too far on the back side of the power curve and too close to the ground to really recover. So how about we get Instugator and the boys, a couple of DC-3, find a safe haven in the Caribbean or Perth Australia, putz around with grape fruit and coffee and cavort with the native girls. I’ve got some old DC-3 time and tail dragger time to check you guys out. I’ll probably have to begin to ease into copilot and cavorter in charge. You guys can fly and cavort as required.

    • #37
  8. Fake John Galt Coolidge
    Fake John Galt
    @FakeJohnJaneGalt

    11 million people managed to get into this country illegally with little or no problem.  I can’t seem to understand the logic that they can not leave this country just as easily.  All it takes is a will to do so.

    • #38
  9. The King Prawn Inactive
    The King Prawn
    @TheKingPrawn

    Fake John Galt:11 million people managed to get into this country illegally with little or no problem. I can’t seem to understand the logic that they can not leave this country just as easily. All it takes is a will to do so.

    Given the same time frame, sure.

    • #39
  10. BrentB67 Inactive
    BrentB67
    @BrentB67

    Mike H:Here are my attempts at a compromise:

    1.) Instead of border enforcement, a broad guest worker program, with no statutory limits on length of stay, that (really) ensures the incentives to move illegally disappear. If you have a willing employer, you can keep renewing.

    2.) Don’t let them or their children become citizens or collect welfare until a sufficient amount of tax is paid, or ever if you insist. So I’m essentially giving you this one.

    3.) Wouldn’t public education be one of the best assimilation programs for their children? Again, as long as they pay taxes, should it matter? How about opening quick immigration to everyone with a large tax ($10,000?) for entry?

    4.) Couldn’t care less about official language. You can have that one.

    5.) I can’t agree with forcing employers to be discriminatory. Just feels too much like a modern manifestation of Jim Crow laws. Unfortunately, there’s not much I can do to compromise here…

    6.) Repatriation of dollars is probably the most effective anti-poverty mechanism in the world and I can’t see a legitimate reason to stop someone from helping their family overseas. If anything, this causes deflationary pressure because we got the person’s productivity but they didn’t use the money to bid up prices. Sounds like win-win to me.

    Is the list intended to stop illegal immigration or encourage?

    • #40
  11. LilyBart Inactive
    LilyBart
    @LilyBart

    Mike H:

    BrentB67: No incentive to come illegally in the first place. No contorted 14th Amendment interpretation that extends citizenship to the children of these criminals.

    You’re kidding right? You don’t really think the largest incentive to come here is to have your child be a citizen?

    It’s their ticket into the country.  It their child is a citizen, then we probably won’t deport the parent, but will provide all manner of financial support to the parent as a means to support the new little citizen.

    Its quite a good  deal, and many are incented to take advantage of this ‘door’.

    • #41
  12. LilyBart Inactive
    LilyBart
    @LilyBart

    Frozen Chosen:The problem is the federal govt needs to be good at something they’re horrible at – accurately tracking large amounts of Visa holders, guest workers, legal immigrants, illegal immigrants, etc. The whole thing should be privatized and turned over to a company that can manage a complex database.

    Until that happens it will just be a fiasco no matter what you do.

    They aren’t good a it because they have no will to do it.  That is the real obstacle here – our government and their cronies benefit from the current situation – they don’t WANT to fix it.

    • #42
  13. Fake John Galt Coolidge
    Fake John Galt
    @FakeJohnJaneGalt

    The King Prawn:

    Fake John Galt:11 million people managed to get into this country illegally with little or no problem. I can’t seem to understand the logic that they can not leave this country just as easily. All it takes is a will to do so.

    Given the same time frame, sure.

    That is fine.  Reverse the flow and lets see how long it takes.  The US government has managed to ignore immigration law for 30+ years.  If they would enforce it for the same amount of time things would resolve themselves.   For one the people like me would not feel like deporting the political class too.

    • #43
  14. Rick B. Member
    Rick B.
    @

    I see one problem with your scenario.  Once your changes are implemented, when that Mercedes runs into you the couple will not wait around for the police (knowing that they will be deported), they will flee the scene.  Certainly the question of what to do once illegals are in custody is valid, but I think it would make them much more resistant to the police.

    • #44
  15. BrentB67 Inactive
    BrentB67
    @BrentB67

    Rick B.:I see one problem with your scenario. Once your changes are implemented, when that Mercedes runs into you the couple will not wait around for the police (knowing that they will be deported), they will flee the scene. Certainly the question of what to do once illegals are in custody is valid, but I think it would make them much more resistant to the police.

    Good point, but what I am hoping for is that word gets back home that the U.S. means business on the issue and don’t come here in the first place.

    • #45
  16. Yeah...ok. Inactive
    Yeah...ok.
    @Yeahok

    Rick B.:I see one problem with your scenario. Once your changes are implemented, when that Mercedes runs into you the couple will not wait around for the police (knowing that they will be deported), they will flee the scene. Certainly the question of what to do once illegals are in custody is valid, but I think it would make them much more resistant to the police.

    Probably true. Then I would also hope they fear applying for food stamps or hanging out at home depot or begging for money on the corner.

    • #46
  17. EThompson Member
    EThompson
    @

    For once, I have absolutely nothing to add to this. Pts. #2 and #5 are particularly effective suggestions.

    • #47
  18. Umbra Fractus Inactive
    Umbra Fractus
    @UmbraFractus

    BrentB67: I am not convinced there needs to be anything legislated with respect to 14. I’ve read some good arguments, including here on Ricochet, that it was never intended to implemented with its current broad interpretation.

    The original intent of the relevant language was to grant citizenship to freed slaves so, yes, an originalist case can be made.

    Good luck getting it past the Supreme Court, though.

    • #48
  19. Umbra Fractus Inactive
    Umbra Fractus
    @UmbraFractus

    Mountain Mike: I see no real prospect for eliminating the IRS either, but I would like the tax code to be shredded down to a few hundred pages in plain English. I cannot do my taxes anymore – S corp and personal just take too much effort and resulting fear of error.

    The IRS isn’t going anywhere. Even if we can shred the tax code as we all would like, the government still needs people to collect and process the returns.

    That doesn’t mean it shouldn’t be downsized and de-powered, mind you.

    • #49
  20. Fake John Galt Coolidge
    Fake John Galt
    @FakeJohnJaneGalt

    Rick B.:I see one problem with your scenario. Once your changes are implemented, when that Mercedes runs into you the couple will not wait around for the police (knowing that they will be deported), they will flee the scene. Certainly the question of what to do once illegals are in custody is valid, but I think it would make them much more resistant to the police.

    What makes you think they stick around now?  Why would I care if they stayed at the scene anyway?  So they can tell me they do not have insurance?   So they can figure some way to sue me?

    • #50
  21. Freesmith Member
    Freesmith
    @

    Congratulations on a fine set of solutions for our illegal immigrant crisis, BrentB67.

    Next up, rewrite our legal immigration laws so they serve the interests of middle-class Americans and resurrect the old nationalities quotas to preserve rather than fundamentally transform the historic American nation.

    Finally, turn your attention to Comprehensive Emigration Reform, to facilitate the departure of all of those who really would like to live somewhere other than this “systemically racist,” unjust country.

    • #51
  22. Mike LaRoche Inactive
    Mike LaRoche
    @MikeLaRoche

    Great post!

    • #52
  23. Rudolf Halbensinn Inactive
    Rudolf Halbensinn
    @RudolfHalbensinn

    Frank Soto: This line about not being able to deport 11 million people strikes me as a straw man.

    In the 1800’s it was proven that heavier-than-air flight was mathematically impossible.  That went out through the same door as global cooling, remember?  Now we have Kasich bleating that it’s just too hard so let’s give up.  It would be impossible. Let lawbreakers slide.

    During the debate enlightenment came to Mr. Kasich in the form of a panic of blathering, interrupting and ‘hey look at me’.  And uttering a famously un-American statement like “we can’t do that…it’s too hard.”

    • #53
  24. Rudolf Halbensinn Inactive
    Rudolf Halbensinn
    @RudolfHalbensinn

    7. Fine the jalapeños out of any company employing illegals.

    • #54
  25. Liz Member
    Liz
    @Liz

    Umbra Fractus:

    Mountain Mike: I see no real prospect for eliminating the IRS either, but I would like the tax code to be shredded down to a few hundred pages in plain English. I cannot do my taxes anymore – S corp and personal just take too much effort and resulting fear of error.

    The IRS isn’t going anywhere. Even if we can shred the tax code as we all would like, the government still needs people to collect and process the returns.

    That doesn’t mean it shouldn’t be downsized and de-powered, mind you.

    Decentralize. Leave tax collection to the states. The Fair Tax does this, and I know Brent’s got ideas on the subject, too.

    • #55
  26. Tom Meyer, Ed. Member
    Tom Meyer, Ed.
    @tommeyer

    Mike H: 6.) Repatriation of dollars is probably the most effective anti-poverty mechanism in the world and I can’t see a legitimate reason to stop someone from helping their family overseas. If anything, this causes deflationary pressure because we got the person’s productivity but they didn’t use the money to bid up prices. Sounds like win-win to me.

    I’d be curious to hear a rebuttal of this point. Sounds solid to me.

    • #56
  27. Tom Meyer, Ed. Member
    Tom Meyer, Ed.
    @tommeyer

    The King Prawn: You’ll get some push back about rights to due process, but that only means (to me at least) that a process must be established for this. We’ve got way too many lawyers, so hire a passel of them to act as judges rubber stamping the deportation orders of those caught living here illegally.

    I think that’s going to be the tricky part.

    Unless I’m missing something, no one has an illegal status: rather, they have a lack of a legal status. If the couple in Brent’s scenario insists that they are legal, but left their identification at home, shouldn’t they be allowed to attempt to retrieve it? What if they can’t find it, but insist it’s been misplaced or stolen? These may be obvious, transparent lies, but — in a system based on the presumption of innocence — I’m not sure that’s sufficient cause to put someone on a plane.

    I’m not saying we shouldn’t get tougher; I think we should. I just think it’s going to be a very difficult thing to do in a way that isn’t truly unsettling. Again, that doesn’t mean we can’t do much better.

    I’d be very curious to hear from those who are legal immigrants on the matter.

    • #57
  28. BrentB67 Inactive
    BrentB67
    @BrentB67

    Tom Meyer, Ed.:

    Mike H: 6.) Repatriation of dollars is probably the most effective anti-poverty mechanism in the world and I can’t see a legitimate reason to stop someone from helping their family overseas. If anything, this causes deflationary pressure because we got the person’s productivity but they didn’t use the money to bid up prices. Sounds like win-win to me.

    I’d be curious to hear a rebuttal of this point. Sounds solid to me.

    I think Mike’s reasoning regarding anti-poverty is mostly sound.

    However, it misses the point. Does the USA exist to allow people to come here illegally and repatriate our funds and serve as the world’s anti-poverty welfare program?

    The issue we are discussing isn’t people coming here legally, earning a living and choosing to send some of it home to their family which is their God given right.

    The issue is that this becomes an inducement for people to come here illegally. As we’ve seen repeatedly that if someone is so brazen as to break our laws on national sovereignty it doesn’t stop there. They have no shame misappropriating citizen’s SSN’s, claiming tax credits, exploiting public healthcare, claiming birthright citizenship, etc.

    The USA does as much or more than every other nation combined combatting global poverty. We don’t need to trash our national sovereignty to somehow prove our generosity.

    • #58
  29. Guruforhire Inactive
    Guruforhire
    @Guruforhire

    The poorly informed Mr. Trump is unaware we already have a deportation force and its called the INS.

    The commitably insane Mr. Strain at National Review is apparently in his basement gurgling in mortal terror that the INS exists.

    • #59
  30. Tom Meyer, Ed. Member
    Tom Meyer, Ed.
    @tommeyer

    BrentB67:I think Mike’s reasoning regarding anti-poverty is mostly sound.

    However, it misses the point. Does the USA exist to allow people to come here illegally and repatriate our funds and serve as the world’s anti-poverty welfare program?

    You and I are in 100% agreement here.

    However, purely as a matter of national self interest, I can see how letting people send money home might decrease the demand to come here. If one illegal can support four of his family members back home, that means they’ve that much less reason to come here. Basically, I agree with your goal, though believe this specific policy may be the wrong means to achieve it.

    BrentB67: The issue is that this becomes an inducement for people to come here illegally. As we’ve seen repeatedly that if someone is so brazen as to break our laws on national sovereignty it doesn’t stop there. They have no shame misappropriating citizen’s SSN’s, claiming tax credits, exploiting public healthcare, claiming birthright citizenship, etc.

    These things are quite illegal, yes? Then let’s prosecute the stuffing out of people who do them.

    • #60
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.