Administration doing the right thing on immigration (for once) for the wrong reason (as usual)

A good article by Mark Krikorian at National Review Online on the administration’s latest immigration ploy. It seems they really are starting to enforce some of the immigration laws—but, Krikorian argues, they’re doing it because they think the economic consequences will be so negative that the country will give up on enforcement and opt for amnesty.

One of the major new steps is that the Social Security Administration is sending “no-match” letters to companies whose employees’ names and numbers don’t match the SSA’s records. This measure alone, if pursued seriously, will result in many illegals voluntarily leaving their jobs and even leaving the U.S. Be sure to read Krikorian’s discussion about it—it’s very interesting.

Among other things, the article shows how easy real enforcement leading to attrition is and would have been all along. Think of how many times Busherino and his lying minions gave us the Nazi scare by saying that the only alternative to amnesty was to round up 12 million men, women and cute little bambinos in the dead of night and put them on cattle cars. Now it turns out that all it takes to get the illegals out of the country—and on their own two legs—is a letter. A letter.

- end of initial entry -

Ben W. writes:

Seven years ago I was working at a company in which I discovered by accident (in speaking to a fellow employee) that several employees at the company did not have the proper credentials to work there. Legally they had no right to be there. I went to the Human Resources department and pointed this out to them (I was a senior at the company so I wasn’t afraid of any consequences).

Within 24 hours that company went through its legal department to either rectify the situation or get rid of those workers (who had come in surreptitiously through the efforts of a vice-president of the company). Once the law was applied, that company did everything in its power ASAP to get out of an illegal situation.

Lesson: if we apply the letter of the law to every situation, businesses will move as fast as they can to avoid any appearance of illegality. They cannot afford to remain in a situation of illegality.

The fact that we don’t apply the letter of the law at federal, state and municipal levels, means that all these levels of government are in fact enacting immigration policies on their own, contrary to the electorate. This is what Giuliani was in fact doing in New York—running a parallel, unelected immigration department and policy of his own in the city. Bush by not stringently enacting immigration controls has in fact Enacting a defacto immigration “open borders” policy in spite of the law. Negligence of the law is a way of enacting a policy.

Dimitri K. writes:

Maybe one of the reasons for the liberal reluctance to defend oneself is the deep feeling of modern people that they are so terrible and mighty that any their movement will immediately result in millions of victims. Isn’t it to some extent the influence of WW2 and especially nuclear stand against the USSR?

Posted by Lawrence Auster at August 13, 2007 12:00 PM | Send