Thread: s it all immigrants' fault?

Sunday, March 2, 2008

Is it all immigrants' fault?
Crime would decrease if U.S. deported American-born citizens and replaced them with immigrants

STEVEN GREENHUT
Sr. editorial writer and columnist
The Orange County Register
sgreenhut@ocregister.com
Comments 0 | Recommend 0

In nearly 10 years here, I have yet to devote a Register column to the subject of illegal immigration, yet irate readers frequently contact me about the subject. When I write about entitlement and pension reform and the trillions of dollars in unfunded liabilities that politicians have imposed on current and future taxpayers, retirees write in and insist that illegal immigrants, and the costs they impose on society, are the real problem. If only we kicked "them" out, there would be plenty of money to go around, they argue.

When I write about efforts by city governments to use eminent domain and other property-rights-sapping and tax-spending "tools" to redevelop local cities (i.e., Santa Ana's Renaissance Plan), some readers cheer on these ham-fisted plans because they will "clean up" areas populated by illegal immigrants. When I write about law enforcement and jail issues, and infrastructure issues also, people call and blame the region's crime and congestion problems on – you guessed it! – illegal immigrants. Pick an issue – any issue, no matter how seemingly far afield from immigration – and I've heard from readers who have made an immigration connection.

There's always some truth to these arguments, but they rarely are made in a rational way, and they rarely are based on any careful look at the data.

Yes, illegal immigration causes problems, mostly related to an overly generous U.S. welfare state (especially emergency rooms and schools), to potential Balkanization and to national security. The best approach – the one advocated by Freedom Communications libertarian adviser Tibor Machan, a Chapman University professor and immigrant from Hungary – is to allow anyone to come to the United States provided they pass a background check, have a job lined up, are committed to a free and pluralistic society and reject public assistance. But given that our government refuses to limit so-called entitlements, and appears on a dangerous course toward providing even more of them, immigration becomes an understandably contentious question.

I've advocated for restrictive immigration policies, given the welfare-state and Balkanization issues in particular, but I'm increasingly inclined to view the cure as something worse than the disease. Do we really want a militarized border? Do we want to empower federal police agencies to demand IDs, search homes and shut down businesses simply to rid the nation of poor people who mostly are here to work? And let's not get on our high horse about the "rule of law," given that crossing the border illegally is a misdemeanor. I'm sure none of my readers have ever, say, broken a traffic law, right?

Ironically, the people who are most angry about illegal immigration describe themselves as conservatives, yet they advocate every big-government idea known to mankind to fight this problem. They show no concern about the police-state tactics and civil-liberties-destroying policies that would be necessary to send every illegal immigrant back home. They show no compassion for the people who come here, and refuse to recognize that "we" – that is, American citizens – would do the exact same thing if the roles were reversed, and we weren't able to find jobs to feed our families on this side of the border. (By the way, we would settle around other Americans, would eat American food, read English-language publications and make demands on the Mexican government, too.)

Some of the frustration is understandable, but the level of anger is troubling. Most of the people I hear from claim they aren't against immigration per se, but only against illegal immigration. Fine, then why not increase immigration quotas so that people from Mexico and elsewhere can more easily come here legally or adopt a guest-worker program? They tend to get apoplectic at that suggestion. But why not liberalize quotas if the issue is merely about legality? The correct answer, offered by former California State Librarian Kevin Starr in his book "California," is that many illegal-immigration foes use it as a proxy issue for their anger about California's rapidly changing demographics.

There are plenty of legitimate issues to debate here. A society doesn't have an obligation to have open borders. In Israel, for instance, an open-border policy would result in the rapid extinction of the Jewish state. In Europe, a liberal immigration policy has resulted in the erosion of liberal democracy given that many Muslim immigrants would prefer sharia law. They outwardly reject a pluralistic, secular society. Fortunately, America doesn't have such problems. We are a wealthy nation, bordered by a poor one, but the immigrants who flock here for jobs are not "invaders" – an incendiary term that deliberately casts our gardeners as enemies.

One cannot find a simple solution in 1,200 words. But it would be nice to focus the debate on the right issues and put the kibosh on some of the anger, emotionalism and meanness. For instance, we hear frequently that illegal immigrants are bringing a crime wave to America. But a newly released study from the moderate-to-liberal Public Policy Institute of California finds no such correlation. "Like any form of population growth," the study explains, "immigration is likely to add to the total number of crimes committed."

The study finds, however, that "U.S.-born adult men are incarcerated at a rate over two-and-a-half times greater than that of foreign-born men. The difference only grows when we expand our investigation. When we consider all institutionalization (not only prisons but also jails, halfway houses, and the like) and focus on the population that is most likely to be institutionalized because of criminal activity (men ages 18-40), we find that, in California, U.S.-born men have an institutionalization rate that is 10 times higher than that of foreign-born men. … And when we compare foreign-born men to U.S.-born men with similar age and education levels, these differences become even greater."

That final point is important, given that most illegal immigrants are younger males with low education levels, a demographic that commits a disproportionate number of crimes. But the study finds that illegal immigrants, despite some spotty data here, seem to have a much lower crime rate than U.S.-born citizens. This has been born out by Costa Mesa's experience cracking down on illegal immigrants by placing a federal immigration officer in the jails. The program has nabbed only a few felons, but lots of illegal immigrants who commit misdemeanors or infractions. And like most new "tough" policies, Costa Mesa's ends up being more intrusive than promised, given that the city had pledged only to check the status of people arrested for major crimes but has ended up checking their status for infractions.

PPIC also considers the possibility that increasing immigration takes away jobs from American workers and therefore leads to broader criminal activity, especially in the inner city. Its conclusion: "We find that, on average, between 2000 and 2005, cities that had a higher share of recent immigrants saw their crime rates fall further than cities with a lower share. This finding is especially strong when it comes to violent crime."

An obvious conclusion is that crime would fall dramatically if America rid itself of all U.S.-born male residents and replaced them with immigrants, legal or otherwise.

I'm guessing I'll hear from some readers about that idea.

Contact the writer: 714-796-7823 or sgreenhut@ocregister.com

http://www.ocregister.com/column/immigr ... orn-people

This guy makes me sick! The obvious conclusion about Greenhut is that he is about the most anti-American journalist I've seen on this issue.

STEVEN GREENHUT
Sr. editorial writer and columnist
The Orange County Register
sgreenhut@ocregister.com

Comments on his article can also be left at the article's website:
http://www.ocregister.com/column/immigr ... orn-people

A few radicals (every group has them) may try to blame all our ills on illegal immigrants. Most of us do not.

I am one of the American citizens fighting illegal immigration. Here are my reasons.

I see Mexican flags being flown above American flags.
I hear Mexican people (here illegally) in California, shouting "This is Mexico"
I hear of elementary classes in a Texas school reciting the Mexican Pledge of Alegience.
I see cartoons, watched by toddlers, teaching Spanish to our children.
I see our government agencies printing American government forms in Spanish so they don't have to learn our language.
I see students, attending American public schools, celebrating the Dominican Republic's Indepence Day and pouring into the streets to damage property, block traffic and injure our police officers. (If, as they say, it was a peacful celebration until the police showed up - why were they carrying baseball bats when they left the school?)

These and many other examples show me that illegal immigrants, particularly those from Mexico, are not here simply to work and/or become citizens. They have no desire to become a part of the "melting pot" society of America. They are here to take whatever they can get from America without having to work for it.

Yes, my reasons may seem to be as "emotional" as you describe some you have heard. But I have the right to be emotional about something as vital as my pride in being an American. If people who come here, legally or illegally, from other nations cannot respect our laws and our way of life, they are not welcome here.

I just posted a comment too. See Good2bx, that's me.

When I write about law enforcement and jail issues, and infrastructure issues also, people call and blame the region's crime and congestion problems on – you guessed it! – illegal immigrants.

Well I know when I was there they were the 99% cause of crimes. Drug dealing, theft, spouse abuse....not to mention the group of illegals that came in and shot and killed people in the bank. People never had to lock their doors or anything before but there were home invasions, farmers were having their gas stolen......it literally changed almost overnight.

Steven Greenhut, you have a really STUPID opinion and you are lacking in alot of the facts.

An obvious conclusion is that crime would fall dramatically if America rid itself of all U.S.-born male residents and replaced them with immigrants, legal or otherwise.

You cant really believe this can you?
If you replaced all US born male citizens with illegal aliens, all hell would break loose. It would be common for crimes such as for rapes, murders, molestations, beheadings, arm and leg removals, theft, arson, and every other criminal activity to occur 24/7. It would be the outright destruction of an entire nation. IT WOULD BE HELL ON EARTH.

This guy makes me sick! The obvious conclusion about Greenhut is that he is about the most anti-American journalist I've seen on this issue.

Trust me, he fits right in over at the Orange County Register! There's much worse at that paper!

Now everyone can understand why this is my hometown newspaper and why I no longer read, much less suscribe to this rag. It's notorious for this type of soft reporting when it comes to its beloved illegal invaders.

In fact, I didn't even read this article in its entirety because I already know what position it will take. Pro-illegal invader!

Based upon the comments, it looks as if that's the case.