It's clear immigration laws aren't working

If you've ever discussed immigration reform with a friend, neighbor, relative or co-worker, you've probably heard someone say we should just enforce the laws we already have on the books. It's the same line we hear about preventing gun violence, cleaning up our environment, keeping workers safe on the job and preventing workplace discrimination.

The thing is, it's not true.

Our current laws created the mess we have now.

Our problem isn't that we're not enforcing our laws; it's that our laws are out of date and often impractical or unenforceable. It's comforting to believe we could solve everything by hiring more law-enforcement agents, but that would barely scratch the surface.

If you believe immigration reform boils down to an enforcement question, consider the likely results of a nationwide crackdown. If we deported every one of the estimated 11million undocumented immigrants in this country, it would wreak havoc on the legal economy -- the loss of customers and the families suddenly without breadwinners would be just the start. No increase in Border Patrol spending will change that.

Besides, we've thrown money at the problem before and it hasn't made a difference. Border Patrol enforcement costs keep going up, but the agency's reported number of annual apprehensions has been decreasing steadily for years. The cost to taxpayers per apprehension has skyrocketed from $238 in 1990 to $10,431 in 2011, according to Business Insider. Are we happier with the results?

Undocumented immigration to the United States has slowed more or less to zero. The major policy question we're facing today isn't how to stop more immigration; it's how best to respond to the presence of the millions of people already here.

The solution is to create a reasonable earned-pathway system for undocumented workers to come into compliance and start to work legally in this country. Spending billions of dollars on get-tough fantasies is not going to happen, and it would be a disaster if it ever did.

Just as importantly, the "enforce the laws we have" rallying cry ignores huge opportunities that we as a country should be taking advantage of. The Senate reform bill passed earlier this year increases the number of U.S. Customs and Border Protection officers by 3,500 over the next four years, which the University of Southern California found would create more than 115,000 new jobs and add $7billion to the U.S. economy annually. That's a big improvement that needs to be made today.

Unfortunately, prominent figures such as House Speaker John Boehner and Texas Gov. Rick Perry have decided that running out the clock on immigration reform is better for the Republican Party than addressing our country's needs.

As Perry said at the Republican Governors Association meeting in Arizona last month, "I think immigration reform is going to be very passé." Boehner said Nov.13 that on his watch, the House won't negotiate at all with the Senate on the issue.

That's not a political gamble. It's a total failure of leadership.

No one thinks our system works well right now. Even if you disagree with the efforts of comprehensive-reform advocates, you probably don't think we're living in the best of all possible worlds today. The status quo has no serious defenders, but it's exactly what Boehner, Perry and their friends are keeping in place.

Everyone should be able to agree that they want a better immigration system than the one we have now.

We can disagree about what that would look like, but it's important to move past the "enforce the laws we have" talking point.

It keeps us from having the serious conversation we need to have about what to change and how.

U.S. Rep. Raúl Grijalva, a Democrat, represents Arizona's 3rd Congressional District.

Copyright 2013 The Arizona Republic|azcentral.com. All rights reserved.For more information about reprints & permissions, visit our FAQ's. To report corrections and clarifications, contact Standards Editor Brent Jones. For publication consideration in the newspaper, send comments to letters@usatoday.com. Include name, phone number, city and state for verification. To view our corrections, go to corrections.usatoday.com.

Posted

View the original article here

Clear Lake Area Republicans host candidate forums Thursday - Houston Chronicle

If you are a Republican in Harris County, you need to mark your calendars and be on hand this Thursday for three candidate forums to be held by the Clear Lake Area Republicans.

The Clear Lake Area Republicans are hosting a candidate forum for the Republican primary races for the Harris County District Attorney, Tax Assessor, and Republican Party Chairman on Thursday evening, March 1, 2012 at the Bay Oaks Country Club (14545 Bay Oaks Blvd., Houston, 77059) . The event will start at 6:30 p.m., and the forums will start promptly at 7:00 p.m.

I really don’t care much about the Tax Assessor/Collector race. I mean, by all accounts, incumbent Don Sumners has done a decent job and hasn’t done anything that would typically warrant a primary challenge. I don’t like the fact that Houston City Councilman Mike Sullivan ran for reelection this past November knowing full well he didn’t want that job – and will have to resign early if he defeats Mr. Sumners. This just plays into the charge in recent years that R’s run not to govern but to move to other offices. A charge that unfortunately rings with some truth. Regardless, either man would do a decent job as Tax Assessor/Collector.

And then we have the race generating the most headlines, with incumbent District Attorney Pat Lykos being challenged by Mike Anderson. Once again, we find that DA Lykos hasn’t done anything would typically warrant a primary challenge unless you count being mean or not being a debutante, choosing instead to work in a man’s world. But there is a challenger and he does have a different vision for that office, a vision that many Republicans have traditionally preferred, so come on out and let the chips fall where they may.

And last but not least, we have what could be the most important race on the ballot, the one for party chair. I’m finding it hard to be too enthused about it this year after the disappointment of failing in an all out effort in 2010 but perhaps a forum is just the thing to get me pumped up about the possibility of replacing decade long officeholder Jared Woodfill. Jared is a very nice person and is a devoted spokesperson for the party – but he isn’t chairman material, no matter how many times he gets elected. The party is broke, not only financially but it is void of new ideas and energy. Committees have zero input, there is no outreach to the middle or to minorities, candidates are shaken down for money, and precinct chair positions remain unfilled with no effort to fill them because the ones applying might not be the “right kind” of Republicans. Can Paul Simpson address all or some of these issues? Frankly, I don’t know. That is why I need to be there to listen and try to figure it out. I do know that he has put in a lot of time as a volunteer trying to recruit precinct chairs and setting up precinct information databases, stuff that the party should have been doing.

So come on out and together we’ll figure out who is best to carry the Republican banner in November.

Click here for a map and directions.

View the original article here