The market for immigrants

Daniel Henninger:

People tend to regard the idea of "democratic" politics with high reverence, when in practice it consists most of the time of the right of any citizen to describe one's opponent as an idiot, or worse. With the illegal immigration debate, this sacred right is being exercised with uncommon vigor. Standing at the center of this democracy of accused dunces, the elected politician serves as the punching bag for all. So it is almost touching, even archaic amid the current political culture, to see the lengths to which these politicians go, as in the current immigration debate, to remain outwardly civil in public.

At the Republican debate at St. Anselm's College the other night, much of it about the immigration bill in Congress, Sen. John McCain spoke of his immigration legislation as an attempt at common purpose: "We've done exactly what you expect us to do, my friends, and that is come together." After Mr. McCain took a mild shot at Gov. Mitt Romney's fluid positions on immigration, Mr. Romney chose to be, well, civil: "He's my friend. He campaigned for me two times."

The truth is that if Gov. Romney's public stance on "temporary Z visas" for illegal workers has migrated from support to opposition, it has little to do with civility and a lot to do with the blowtorch of opposition from Republicans to anything--from A to Z--having to do with illegal workers from Mexico or Latin America.

Indeed the proprietor of this column was released from the burn ward just days ago after arguing last week in this space that some 12 million illegal workers employed by seven or eight U.S. industries across numerous states was an important market signal and that it was not in the interests of conservatives to dismiss market forces as irrelevant.

One of the first of many emails to breach the asbestos shield around our Outlook Inbox stated the author's opinion of my views with unsurpassable democratic eloquence: "I am shocked, shocked that the U.S.'s last great conservative rag would have a blind spot big enough to drive a Mexican truck through when it comes to the issue of immigration!" A reader from Illinois said: "It is not a balance between respect for the law and respect for work as you suggest. It is about fixing broken systems that currently demote both values."

What do these folks want?

They want the borders secured, the laws obeyed, English spoken, taxes paid, costs raised on employers of illegal workers, welfare payments suppressed, enclaved Spanish neighborhoods broken up and a very, very long path to citizenship. In the current debate, these complaints pour forth almost randomly, based on whichever datapoint needs to be refuted.

To those of us on the other side of the argument, a lot of this often seems unsupported, contradictory, impossible to achieve or confused. Wherever the truth lies, whenever a political movement like this erupts and takes root in most regions of the country, some primary American nerve has been touched. What we've hit here is the country's central nervous system--the idea of citizenship.

...

There can't be too many people in this debate more upset with the status quo than those who emailed me about last week's column. What galled these readers, often small businesspeople, was the feeling of rank unfairness; they incur costs for liability and workers comp, which they believe the hirers of illegals evade. However angry, most of these Journal readers want to move forward, not back, as summarized here: "By the way, this doesn't make me anti-immigrant or a racist, either. If labor shortages are that big of an issue then lobby to adjust our legal immigration and work visa policies." Agreed.

The path to citizenship should be the legal path and not the illegal one that the current bill is choosing to excuse. Henninger at least finally comprehends the opposition, but it appears the senators do not. They should take note before it is too late. Many will be making a career decision while insulting the intelligence of their voters. Some understand the problem, such as Sen. Cornyn and Sen. Sessions who have been profiles in courage in their opposition to this bill. More are needed. Rewarding the dishonest and putting them ahead of the honest is no way to fix a market place. It is just another form of corruption that corrupts the whole.