Illegal Immigration: Reasonable Solutions

I have had the opportunity to ponder somewhat on the illegal immigration issue over the past couple of weeks.  While visiting with folks in the district it appears that illegal immigration is going to be a big (if not the biggest) issue on voters minds this election season.  With that in mind, I thought that now would be an appropriate time to articulate my views on immigration and what we can do as a state to deal with it.

THE PROBLEMS

First, throughout the history of the United States, we have had immigration to our country.  Sometimes,and often, those immigrants came in such large numbers that assimilation was slow. Our founding fathers wondered if the immigrants would ever abandon their native tongues and traditions to assimilate and become full-blooded Americans.  Benjamin Franklin expressed this very concern about the large number of inhabitants in Pennsylvania clinging to their German heritage.  Ultimately, Pennsylvania assimilated, although over the course of several generations. 

The reasons for people coming to America are many. Economic, social, and political forces abroad have made the freedom and opportunity of America an attraction to the world.  Our way of life is coveted by many people of the world and they desire to come here to take advantage of what our nation has to offer.

Nevertheless, throughout the history of the Unites States, we have exercised control over the number of people that have come here.  We have also had in place standards that dictate the quality of individuals seeking to immigrate. In the past, Ellis Island served as a clearinghouse for new immigrants coming across the Atlantic.  Those with diseases, extremely unskilled laborers, or those deemed likely to be a burden on society were turned away at Ellis Island and sent home.

Today our immigration is processed by foreign embassies.  We make exceptions for refugees and other people seeking political asylum.

Unlike the past where our immigration was primarily from mainland Europe and the British Isles the bulk of immigration today is disproportionately from nations across our southern border.  The Senora Desert is an obstacle to those trying to come here but it is not as great a barrier as the Atlantic Ocean once was. Additionally, unlike the past, our process for allowing for legal immigration is now entirely unfit for the purpose. However, the desire to come here has not diminished but rather, to America’s credit, it has at the very least remained constant or even increased.  Hence, our Southern border today leaks like a sieve and people come and go almost at will and unaccounted for.

The majority, I believe, of these individuals come seeking a better life for themselves with the goal of working to earn for their families.

Another layer of complication in this issue is the Federal ambivalence to enforcing its own existing laws on immigration.  Although the complexity of state's rights vs. federal prerogative has not been fully explored, it is clear that the Federal government has delegated authority over immigration:

“The Congress shall have Power…To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization” Article 1, Section 8 of the US Constitution.

Just the same as the Utah Supreme Court does not have jurisdiction over or the power to enforce Arkansas State law, the State of Utah cannot have jurisdiction over or by some unknown right enforce Federal Law. Federal Law is enforced by the Federal Government. State Law by the state government. As a Constitutional conservative, I believe in upholding and sustaining our constitution and that we must work within our Federal structure to bring about a true and lasting solution to our broken immigration system.

With that said, Utah can be a leader in the very type of reform we need to see happen at the Federal level. Therefore, I believe Utah should find its own equitable solution in the absence of Federal enforcement.  Interestingly, we may see this debate unfold soon as Arizona now faces down the Department of Justice on this very issue of states rights.

THE SOLUTIONS

So what can Utah do to support our local economy, live by the spirit of Liberty pronounced in our founding documents, and also reduce the burden that undocumented workers place on our society?

Within the federal system we live, we must encourage Utah’s representatives in Congress to propose and pass the kind of reform that is right. Utah can also build a coalition of States as State Legislatures, Governors, and those respective state’s federal delegations work towards the type of truly American reform we are so badly in need of.

As broken as our immigration system is, the Arizona approach to immigration reform appears to be unconstitutional.  It is also extremely shortsighted in that it may portend the future doom of conservative values as a majority voice in politics a generation from now as our demographics change. We would have been wiser had we never allowed ourselves to come to this crossroads.

Being the party of Liberty and Republican ideals, we should be sponsoring immigration reform that:

1.    Encourages the free flow of labor for the benefit of Americans and American business.
2.    Allows all to come to America who are healthy, employable, productive, and not criminally minded.
3.    Welcomes immigrants into our way of life.

How do we do that?


First, this coalition of states would recommend the revision of the existing quota system as it is outdated and counterproductive to the free flow of labor.  The new quota system would be based on demand for foreign laborers and what our society could reasonably absorb.  Quotas would be balanced between those wanting to become citizens vs. those wanting to work here only temporarily.  Citizens tend to take ownership in our society while temporary workers do not.   

Second, the coalition would support the creation of a new version of an Ellis Island at the main ports of entry at the Southern border.  This would have significant symbolic meaning and also provide a "go to" place for individuals wanting to immigrate to the country.  Individuals immigrating here must be employable, be free from disease, prove that they will not be a burden to society, and have a sponsor.

Third,  this coalition would support a new Federal program for verifying that employees are documented workers.  Immigration is generally not an issue for the FBI, ATF or the CIA. A new division just for ensuring compliance with immigration law would need to be created but would be an important part of protecting our population from criminals and possible terrorists.  With this, I would support strict penalties for those hiring undocumented individuals as well as penalties for those undocumented workers.  This is an important element currently missing in our existing law.

Fourth, we would remove all special incentives provided to immigrants such as out-of-state tuition waivers.  As someone who paid out of state tuition here, I find this practice a misuse of public funds.

Fifth, those immigrants who choose not to adhere to these laws (which would accommodate the legal status of more of the immigrant community than current law) would be subject to deportation or confinement.  

The purpose of these ideas would be to allow labor to travel more legitimately that it currently does while also requiring immigrants to take financial responsibility for themselves.

By creating a process for people to come here legally and through main ports of entry, it would all but eliminate the flow of illegal immigrants through our open borders. It would also allow the border to be patrolled to find those who really are dangerous, criminally minded and/or terrorists.

It is also my hope that we can strike a balance between justice that must be served and the mercy that we extend to those who come here.  Perhaps by increasing justice and mercy simultaneously, we can meet the needs of our economy, unburden our schools and hospitals, and provide a way for those seeking life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness as those generations who have gone before us..

A.B.A.T.E Meeting Letter

I was invited recently to speak to American Bikers Aiming Toward Education at D&R Spirits this last Sunday.  Unfortunately, due to ecclesiastical obligations, I was unable to attend the meeting.  However, I did write a letter in my absence:

To the Distinguished Members of American Bikers Aiming Toward Education:

Thank you for your interest in my campaign and for the invitation to speak to you as a group.  I hope you can forgive my absence as I attend to duties today which prevent my presence.
In the end, you may be grateful that I wrote a letter rather than show up in person.  I have spared you from having to listen to one more long-winded self-promoting politician.

On a serious note, I do look forward to speaking to you individually and listening to your concerns.  As a conservative minded candidate, I believe that society is best served when government allows individuals the freedom to make decisions for themselves.  This includes the freedom to ride with or without a bike helmet.  Also, I believe that people make the best decisions when they are properly educated.  If we teach correct guiding principles, people will govern themselves. 

I hope that you can support me as the effective, responsive, and enthusiastic alternative in this years House race.  I look forward to hearing from you.

I have included my contact information below for anyone who needs it.

Thank you again and best regards,
Jeremy Peterson – Candidate House District 9

The Immigration Dilemma

With Arizona's new law taking affect next month and now Utah's elected officials talking about enacting a similar law, I thought it would be timely to articulate my position on illegal immigration.

I believe that illegal immigration is an issue about fairness.  Lets talk about a few of the issues that make illegal immigration unfair:

Depressed Wages

It is unfair to legal immigrants who come here to work to have to compete with an unlimited supply of illegal immigrants for work and wages.  Economics 101 tells us that supply and demand dictate price.  When supply increases and demand remains the same, prices go down.  This is what immigrants of all varieties are experiencing due to the massive influx of undocumented workers.  They are competing for their livelihoods and depressing wages.

Increased Medical Expenses

Many, if not most, illegal immigrants do not carry a personal health insurance policy nor do they have the cash to pay for services up front. Our hospitals typically will not deny emergency services to anyone who is uninsured or poor.  Thus, the cost for caring for the uninsured is unfairly placed on the shoulders of the hospital and insurance companies who pass that expense along to its policy holders or paying users...you and I.

Fractured Community Schooling

There is a movement among schools to make the school a hub of the community.  You find in many suburban settings that this works well as people will often spend decades in a neighborhood to raise their children and send those kids to one school.  This tends to build cohesion between teachers and parents and builds a partnership that is in the best interest of the children.  In contrast, the illegal immigrant population is very mobile.  In Ogden City schools, student mobility is 30% annually!  This movement disturbs the partnerships that take time to create between parents and teachers.  This mobility is often traumatizing to a student's education and brings test scores down accordingly.  Thus, the school system (and ultimately society at large) is unfairly burdened by the frequent movements of those in the illegal immigrant community.

Entitlement Graft

Unfortunately, many illegal immigrants ask for and receive welfare assistance from Utah taxpayers.  Food stamps, in-state tuition, and other assistance provided by the taxpayers of Utah are an unfair burden and an irresponsible use of public funds when distributed to illegal immigrants.

~~~~

So here we have illustrated just a few of the issues that are negatively affecting our state.  The next question is how to we solve this problem?

It seems to me that the immigration issue is mostly a pocketbook issue for those coming here.  They want to work and therefore they go where work is to be had.  The pay is better than their home countries and those working can afford to send a large portion of their paycheck home to family out of the country.  In fact, money transfers from the U.S. to Mexico is the 2nd largest revenue generator for Mexico's national income!  Oil production is 1st by the way.  That shows the huge impact that this immigration inflow is having and the huge incentives that countries like Mexico have to export their working poor to our communities.  My proposal to solve this problem would be to mandate checks on proof of citizenship at all money wire facilities.  This would accomplish two things:

1.  It would keep the money earned here by illegal immigrants in the local economy.
2.  Those seeking employment for the purpose of exporting their income abroad will have a huge disincentive to move to Utah.

I also would advocate the end of welfare benefits for non-citizen residents.  These two ideas, in my opinion, remove the incentives for illegal immigrants to move here. Given such, the immigrants will ultimately "self deport" to their native lands and save the taxpayer the burden of paying for expensive law enforcement initiatives.  It also is less controversial than "rounding people up" and jailing them prior to deportation.  I believe that by removing the incentives, the problem will solve itself.     


Immigration is a very complicated issue and this post just touches on a few caveats of the dilemma.  I will post more later as the debate unfolds this election season.

Candidate Survey: Planned Parenthood

Its time for another survey.  This week's questionnaire comes from none other than Planned Parenthood.  Given my strong social and fiscally conservative attitudes, I was surprised to find that I did agree with a couple of their questions.

Before we get to those though, here is the vision statement of Planned Parenthood's organization:

On many levels I disagree with Planned Parenthood's approach to reproduction.  Reproduction is not just a right...its a responsibility.  Given such, I believe that their emphasis is focused on the results of abortion, contraception and sex education rather than focusing on preventative causes and correct attitudes toward sex and its consequences.  In essence, I feel their organization promotes eliminating the natural physical consequences of sexual activity and thus a "liberation" from social mores that would otherwise cause healthy restraint among our citizenry.     

Now, lets review our survey:

1.  The first question is in regards to requiring kids to be taught age-appropriate information about contraception and abstinence.

My Response:  Surprisingly I found myself agreeing with this statement.  I believe that sexual relationships are something that are best shared in marriage.  My wife and I will be having our first birds-and-bees discussion with our 7 year old daughter here in a few months.  We will not be talking about contraception (hopefully) but talking to our daughter about the special and private nature of her body.  Given our faith and moral values, we will be teaching our daughter the virtues of abstinence.  However, as she gets older, it will become important for her to know the realities of preventing pregnancy as she comes closer to adulthood and begins to make important decisions for herself.  However, not every child comes from a family with conservative moral values.  Nor does every child choose to listen to parents who espouse those values. Therefore, I believe that AGE APPROPRIATE education on abstinence and contraception would be beneficial to our young adults.      

2.  The second question should be reworded.  It should read "Will you give Planned Parenthood more money?" 

My Response: My answer is no.

3.  The third question asked whether I would support forcing insurers to cover prescription contraception like they are forced to cover other drugs. 

My response:  Why is government forcing private business to provide specific products to its clients in the first place?  If we wonder why our premiums are high, this may be the first place to look.  If people want an insurance company to provide coverage for a specific drug, perhaps they can cancel their policy with the company that doesn't provide that coverage.  The same goes for contraception. 

4.  The fourth question asks whether I support educating and promoting "emergency" contraception. 

My response:  No.  This gets back to pushing the perception that there are no consequences to our actions.

5.  The fifth question asks if I support minors secretly receiving contraceptives, abortions, and STD testing.

My response:  Absolutely not.  This kind of policy is an open affront to the family and subverts the governance that occurs in the household.  Minors have no right to privacy.  If minors can't legally sign a binding contract due to age, how in the world can we expect them to make life altering decisions about their bodies and the bodies of the unborn?  This proposal is complete folly.

6.  The sixth question asks if I support a doctor and woman choosing the most healthy way to terminate a pregnancy.

My response:  While the thought of a mother willingly terminating the life of her unborn child is repulsive to me, the law of our land still gives her the right to chose such a course.  Therefore, I do support the doctor and woman in being able to choose the most appropriate way to pursue such a course.

7.  "Do you support a minors access to confidential abortion services?"

My response:  NO! (See question 5.)

Candidate Survey: National Right To Work

I recently received a questionnaire from the National Right to Work Committee. Two of the issues facing states right now are bulging pensions and increasing public employee payrolls. Despite the contraction in the private sector with jobs and payrolls, it seems in many states across America, the public payrolls have grown larger.

This is unfortunate because it is taxes from private industry that pay for public employee benefits.

Worker's unions played a significant roll in balancing the work vs. quality-of-life dilemma that was being addressed during the turn of the 20th century. Thanks to the unions we have a 5-day work week, Labor Day, and a myriad of other quality of life enhancing practices that are part of our work environment.

However, since most of the 19th century labor abuses have been solved, the unions seem to be falling into irrelevance. Some of the issues now being pushed by unions are now simply out of line with benefiting society and have more to do with benefiting union power than anything else.

The National Right to Work Questionnaire addresses a few of those issues. Here are my responses:

Candidate Survey: NRA

The NRA sent me their candidate questionnaire this week. Here are the results:

We're locked and loaded.

Union Attitudes

I found this video online of an SEIU worker talking to the California legislature. I think this video shows a candid moment that exposes the attitudes of many unions.