Today on Blogcritics
Home » Prop. 187 is back. And that’s a good thing.

Prop. 187 is back. And that’s a good thing.

Please Share...Tweet about this on Twitter0Share on Facebook0Share on Google+0Share on LinkedIn0Pin on Pinterest0Share on TumblrShare on StumbleUpon0Share on Reddit0Email this to someone

Neocons did their best to defeat this California initiative for not supporting
illegal aliens the last time around:

Blogged
on VDare
, quoting Mort Kondracke from Roll
Call
in 1994:
 
" Credit for Prop 187’s swift decline," wrote
Mr. Kondracke, "goes
mainly to defeated California Republican gubernatorial candidate Ron Unz,
who convinced influential national conservatives Bill Kristol, Jack Kemp,
and Bill Bennett to come out against it…. Kristol then convinced
Bennett at a lunch in New York to reverse his position on 187, and Kemp
joined him
in leading a charge against it."

[Note: Bill Kristol is the son of neoconservative grand-daddy
Irving Kristol and editor of the extreme right Weekly Standard. He co-founded
the
Project for a New American Century, the organization that started pushing
preemptive military attacks by the US, particularly against Iraq, during
the 1990s. He was Dan Quayle’s chief of staff during the first Bush
administration,
and held a similar position under William Bennett during the Reagan
years. I don’t know why he felt he had to interfere with California’s
illegal
alien policy.]

With homeland security a major issue, maybe the neocons will have the
sense to stay out of it this time.

Background:

The 2000 Census says there are 2,200,000 illegal aliens, a third of the national
total, in California. (Many think that’s low and that there are at least as
many as 12 million illegals in the US.) The non-partisan California Legislative
Analyst’s
Office says about $1 billion is spent by the state on health care for illegals.
Another $550 million goes for jailing and supervising parole of illegals (the
feds cover only $150 million of that). And at least
$2.6 billion
goes on education of about 450,000 illegal children in California schools.
84,000 children who were born in the US and are citizens are not included
in that last figure.

That adds up to an annual cost of $4 billion, so
Californians came up with Proposition 187 to eliminate the cost of suporting
illegal aliens. Note
that we’re not talking about "immigrants" and not "undocumented" anythings
– we’re talking about people who are here illegally and are illegal
aliens
.
From the perspective of a Californian, my not paying to support them seems
eminently reasonable.

Opponents called the measure anti-immigration, xenophobic and racist.

In spite of that, 60% of Californians voted for the measure because Proposition
187 was none of the above.

It simply said
that Californians would not pay for the health care and schooling of

illegal
aliens. In spite of that, a federal court ruled in 1998
that Prop. 187 was unconstitutional. (I read the constitution again
recently and don’t see where having to pay to
support
illegal
aliens
in
any way,
shape or form is even mentioned.)

Further Comments:

Proposition 187 in its latest incarnation will be a good thing, and it’s too bad the
original hadn’t survived the courts.

Because if Prop. 187 had gone into
effect, by now we would have developed a rational immigration policy.

We do
need many of those who are currently here illegally. With a change in immigration
policy, maybe a new "Guest Worker Program", many of the current "illegals"
would be here legally. That would solve some
of their problems without them having to risk death to get the kind of life
they can’t get in their own country. They would get that better life, and
would contribute their fair share to the country providing it. Both sides
would win.

And maybe best of all, we wouldn’t have Vicente Fox constantly crossing the
border and twisting arms to get the US to solve his political,
social and economic problems [Corruption
in Mexico: A Different Landscape?
]
.

I really hope Kristol butts out this time.

 

Postscript and a peek at the future:

Things may get ugly here.

We’ve already had a one-day
boycott of schools by illegals
. Legal
immigrants don’t necessarily agree, and one of them wrote this to the Times:

I, along with my parents, were "legal" immigrants to the U.S.

If they are here illegally, not respecting this nation’s laws,
not willing to get in line and wait their turn to emigrate, they have no
right
to clamor for those privileges to which they are not entitled. [LATimes
subscription]

Another Californian wrote that the illegals "… should permanently
boycott schools. This would drastically reduce spending for public education
and ease
the overcrowding
in our schools." (Problem solved!)

Joaquin Avila of the UCLA’s Chicano Studies Research Center, then took
the next step into La-La Land: UCLA
study says non-citizens should be able to vote
.

Maybe the rest of the country is right about California.

 

[Printable version here – click on the printer image]

Powered by

About Hal