I’m Conservative and I’m Pro Immigration
By Michael Laffey
I will put my Conservative credentials up against just about anyone. The first President I voted for was Ronald Reagan. I was a founder of the Conservative Student Union on my College Campus. As a lawyer I have given countless pro-bono hours to conservative legal causes and worked on the campaigns of some of the most conservative politicians this state has seen. As a result I tend to get a little testy when somebody tells me I am not conservative enough because I am pro- immigration and support immigration reform. The truth of the matter is that pro- immigration is the conservative stance. Whether a position is conservative or not depends not on what Rush Limbaugh says but on whether it adheres to bedrock conservative principles.
For instance, we believe in a government of limited powers enumerated in the Constitution. Nowhere does the constitution explicitly give Congress the right to regulate immigration. You can find the power to regulate immigration only if you infer it from other enumerated powers in the Constitution such as the Naturalization clause or the Commerce clause. Of course we have all seen what happens when liberals “infer” powers from the Constitution.
It is only natural that the Founding Fathers would not mention immigration in the Constitution. In an era when the rest of the world tightly controlled who could migrate and immigrate Americans believed they could come and go as they pleased and both before and after the revolution often ignored the laws of England, France and Spain that tried to prevent settlers from moving into their territories. Prior to 1875 individual States not the Federal Government regulated immigration. The First Federal Law dealing with immigration was passed in 1875, ninety nine years after the birth of our nation. The Page Act also known as the Asian Exclusion Act, outlawed the importation of Asian contract laborers, any Asian woman who would engage in prostitution, and all people considered to be convicts in their own countries. Then in 1882 in an act of blatant racism Congress passed the Chinese Exclusion Act. The Chinese Exclusion Act stated that there was a limited amount of immigrants of Chinese descent allowed into the United States for 10 years. The Federal Government has been mucking up immigration ever since.
Conservatives also believe in free markets. This includes free labor markets. Why is it we trust the free market to allocate other resources and seek decentralization and limited government intervention in all other areas but not immigration. The truth of the matter is that if the jobs are not there the people will not come. We require individuals to in effect get a government permit to come here and work and the permits are granted in an arbitrary and restrictive manner based primarily on where a person is born. Engaging in commerce and selling’s one labor is a natural right that should not be limited by arbitrary government regulations. Let’s apply the free market capitalist approach to immigration that we apply to other economic activity.
Now many of you are saying wait a minute what about the rule of law. That’s a conservative principle. These people are here illegally. Well that’s true. They have violated a civil law. However it is an unjust law and we Americans have a habit of ignoring or circumventing laws that are unjust. The reason we have so much illegal immigration is because our laws make no sense. They are not aligned with the reality of the labor market. Quite frankly I would give this argument a little more credence if the people spouting it called for stricter enforcement of the people breaking the criminal laws. That is the businessmen who hire the “illegal” immigrants and the suburban homeowners who use them as domestics and for mowing their lawns. If you really wanted to stop illegal immigration cold that is where your enforcement efforts should be focused.
In his farewell address to the nation in January 1989, President Reagan eloquently stated his vision of America: “I’ve spoken of the shining city all my political life, but I don’t know if I ever quite communicated what I saw when I said it. But in my mind it was a tall, proud city built on rocks stronger than oceans, windswept, God-blessed and teeming with people of all kinds living in harmony and peace; a city with free ports that hummed with commerce and creativity. And if there had to be city walls, the walls had doors and the doors were open to anyone with the will and heart to get here.”
That’s why I am a conservative who is proudly pro- immigration.
Michael Laffey is a lawyer, conservative political activist, life long Republican and resident of Tinton Falls NJ.
More from my site
Political Conservatism and Religious Conservatism
Christie to Dreamers: You are an inspiration
Conservative Republicans Resist Boehner’s Plan to Avoid Budget Fight
Unaccompanied Central American Children Showing Up In Freehold
Trump says he’ll ‘suspend immigration’ because of coronavirus, offers no details
Federal Judge dismisses Sanctuary State challenge
Pandering Pallone Lies About U.S. Soccer Team To Boost Amnesty
Five Questions After Obama’s Immigration Speech
Would an Obama immigration order be on firm legal ground?
Overcrowding crisis: Should N.J overrule voters, approve $33M school expansion?
I am pro immigration too….legal, limited and verifiable immigration. Go to Sweden or England to see how unlimited immigration has ruined a country.
So Mr. Laffey you are for Open Borders and amnesty?
Mr. Scarano , I am for amnesty and I am for more open borders.
Please tell me where you stand on the entitlements that come with amnesty. Where do you stand on the benefits that illegals receive when they have anchor babies?
Please tell me where you stand on the American Dream Act.
How do we have immigration reform without entitlement reform?
What reform do you stand for? It is not enough for you to say you are pro immigration without outlining the reform you are in favor of.
Who isn’t pro immigration? I am the product of immigrants that came here legally within the system, learned the language, build businesses and fortified the American Dream.
To say you are pro immigration is not enough. What reform are you in favor of????????
Your article is smoke and mirrors with no solutions. We have a major problem with illegal immagration and the entitlement benefits that come with it.
Ok, let the labor markets regulate immigration while at the same time taking away the saftey net of entitlement programs that illegal immigrants take advantage of.
Your analysis is flawed because you believe that immigration is controlled by the demand for labor while entitlement programs make this untrue. We do not have a free labor market when we have entitlement programs. We have not had a free labor market since the 1930’s and the New Deal.
If you do not want to acknowledge this fact, that is your choice, but it is a huge problem whether you care to address it or not.
For you to insinuate that Conservatives are not Pro Immigration is presumptuous and inaccurate.
Maybe Conservatives are not Pro Amnesty and recognize the problem that we have now with entitlement programs and the bigger problem Amnesty will cause with these programs.
Maybe Conservatives realize that the Government will only screw up Amnesty as you so strongly make the case that the Feds have screwed up immigration laws since they first got involved in 1885.
The United States of America has an immigration policy and every smart sovereign Nation in the world has one and needs one to survive.
So maybe your article should say ” I am a Conservative and I am Pro Amnesty”
The United States has an Illegal Immigration problem.
As President Regan said the doors are open to anyone that has the will and the heart that gets here.”
The heart and the will means anyone that believes in the ideals and values of the American way not the “entitlement way”.
I do not believe in giving entitlements to immigrants. Immigrant should only be allowed here if they can support themselves. You are correct that entitlement programs skew the free market approach to immigration. I do believe in making them legal so they become taxpayers. Once they taxpayers I support their children getting the same benefits related to higher education that everyone else gets. This is good for them and good for us. We need an overhaul of our immigration system. We need to give willing workers a way to come here legally and fill jobs that would not otherwise be filled. If you define amnesty as allowing people who came here illegally access to that system without penalty then yes I am for amnesty.
I’m an R and I know what the mantra about immigration is supposed to be, but as I went through news articles from the Civil War era and the turn of the 20th Century…people were openly attacking the Irish for coming to the U.S.
I am for legal immigration above all, but you cannot blame someone who is legitimately trying to give their families and themselves a better life.
JOEY….couldn’t agree with you more! Illegal immigration has not only changed countries such as Sweden and England, but has changed the face of Germany as well. We know what steps Spain undertook several centuries ago to “reclaim” their country from an ever-changing Spain due to unregulated, undetected and illegal Muslim immigration from Northern Africa.
Immigration yes–but through a legal and verifiable vetting process that ensures no hostile intent on those coming here. And to ensure that those staying here temporarily on work or student visas–leave, when their visas expire.
well of course we want to keep out people with hostile intent but that is not the purpose of the current system and that is not what it does.
Let’s not have the same debate England is currently on. They made a past mistake about immigration, and we should not be doing the same.
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/douglas-murray/2013/11/rather-than-apologising-for-immigration-lets-keep-our-borders-tighter-in-the-first-place/
A bipartisan immigration reform bill passed the Senate in June by a vote of 68-32 (written by the Gang of Eight.) The bill dealt with the Visa program, boarder security and a path to citizenship for 11 million undocumented immigrants.
After TP criticism, Rubio has now bailed on his own bill and seems to favor the go slow piecemeal approach of Republicans in the House.
The 14 Republican senators who voted for the legislation:
Lamar Alexander of Tennessee;
Kelly Ayotte of New Hampshire;
Jeff Chiesa of New Jersey;
Susan Collins of Maine;
Bob Corker of Tennessee;
Jeff Flake of Arizona;
Lindsey Graham of South Carolina;
Orrin Hatch of Utah;
Dean Heller of Nevada;
John Hoeven of North Dakota
Mark Kirk of Illinois;
John McCain of Arizona;
Lisa Murkowski of Alaska;
Marco Rubio of Florida.
to @mlaffey,
We are not Europe. We have a long history of successfully assimilating large numbers of immigrants. The kids that are born here and whose parents are from Mexico are as American you and me. Further the cultural gap between us and Central Americans is much narrower then the Gap between Europe and the people from Africa and Asia who are migrating there.
Interesting….
You say you are not in favor of giving entitlements to immigrants. Did you know that $10 billion a year is spent on illegal immigrants for entitlement programs?(welfare, food stamps, medicare , section 8 housing subsidies etc. ). This number was reported by the NY times verified by OMB so please all you liberals on the site do not try to refute it. You see this is supposed to be illegal and the Government is supposed to verify immigration status, but they do not. This 10 billion does not include money spend on anchor baby benefits.
How do we stop this after amnesty. Do you really believe that the illegal immigrants on entitlement programs are going to give them up and become tax paying citizens once they recieve amnesty?
Did you know that they vast majority of illegal immigrants are part of the underground economy? Are they just going to say please do not pay me in cash. I want to pay taxes?
So how do we avoid giving immigrants entitlements that you are not in favor of now that the “horse has been let out of the barn”
Did you know that the OMB did not include amnesty and the millions that will qualify for healthcare subsidies in its cost estimates for Obamacare?
After amnesty the electoral landscape of the United States will be forever changed. The newly minted citizens about 12 mllion of them, are going to support anyone with a socialist agenda that will continue to promises the funding of entitlement programs.
Every good conservative knows that amnesty is a ploy of the left to build their voting block.
Are you really comparing today’s illegal immigrant with the legal immigrants that came to this country when it comes to assimilation? We do not assimilate immigrants anymore the way we used to when my ancestors came to American. That does not happen anymore. One example of this is the fact that immigrants do not even have to learn the language anymore.
If you don’t want to learn from England you are doomed to repeat their mistakes. Immigration reform applies to the world not just Central American. Oh and by the way there is a very large Muslim and Socialist population in Central America.
The children born here from Mexican parents are not as American as you and me. I have school aged children and can tell you this as a fact. Take a look at how many English as a second language classes are in our public schools today.(funded by our tax dollars) They do not speak english at home and do not follow the customes of our country. Call that assimilation?
Oh and lastly, I could care less which Republican Senator supported the so called Bi Partisan legislation. I know who supported it, I know what was in the bill and just because some Senator supported it does not make it right.
For once, take a deep breath do some research and try to determine the intended and unintended consequences of the Amnesty legislation.
Signing off
Republican in Name and Actions, a proud second generation U.S. Citizen of Latin American desent.
English as a second language (shouldn’t it be primary?) is costing millions. Before long, if it isn’t happening now, streets signs, books, classroom curriculum will be costing millions and billions in conversion costs.
Look at Canada: Many French speaking citizens reside in the province of Quebec. So much so, they wanted to secede in the 80’s, since they were the majority with it’s own language and customs. They did not assimilate. It seems the large Hispanic (illegal) migration will be problematic in the future.
A possible breakaway?? Time will tell.
I just think to be pro-immigration and conservative is truly an oxymoron.
I agree with you on the ESL comment. I hope you read my post as being Against amnesty.
I do think that you can be pro immigration and conservative though.
I am the product of immigrants. These immigrant as well as I served our country in peace and wartime. We are all conservatives and believe that smart immigration is important to the success of our nation.
We are against illegal immigration and amnesty laws that pave the way for illegal immigrants to become citizens.
There is a difference between Pro immigration and Pro amnesty.
There is a difference between pro immigration that is managed by a solid set of immigration laws that are enforced by the administration than offering amnestry.
Keep this in mind the following US companies were founded by immigrants:
Google( Russian Immigrant)
ATT (bet you did not know Alexander Graham Bell immigrated from Scotland)
Goldman Sacs(Germany Immigrant)
Ebay(French Immigrant)
Radio Shack (English Immigrant)
Khols(Polish Immigrant)
Comcast(German Immigrant)
Big Lots(Russian Immigrant)
Yahoo(Taiwanese Immagrant)
Norstrom(Swedish Immigrant)
Colgate(English Immigrant)
Sara Lee (Canadian Immigrant)
Dupont (French Immigrant)
Kraft Foods (Canadian Immigrant)
Pfizer (German Immigrant)
Proctor and Gamble(Irish Immigrant)
These are US companies Founded by US naturalized citizens that come here legally with a dream. These companies employ millions around the world.
Immigration is important to the US. Here is why:
We do not have the market cornered on intelligence and desire. What we do have is a free capitialistic society that rewards hardwork .(at least for now.) This system is the envy of the world.
Legal immigration that is managed, verified, enforced and insures that quality immigrants are entering our country is good and important.
Illegal immigration and Amnesty is not good for our county.
I agree with you on the ESL comment. I hope you read my post as being Against amnesty.
I do think that you can be pro immigration and conservative though.
I am the product of immigrants. These immigrant as well as I served our country in peace and wartime. We are all conservatives and believe that smart immigration is important to the success of our nation.
We are against illegal immigration and amnesty laws that pave the way for illegal immigrants to become citizens.
There is a difference between Pro immigration and Pro amnesty.
There is a difference between pro immigration that is managed by a solid set of immigration laws that are enforced by the administration than offering amnestry.
Keep this in mind the following US companies were founded by immigrants:
Google( Russian Immigrant)
ATT (bet you did not know Alexander Graham Bell immigrated from Scotland)
Goldman Sacs(Germany Immigrant)
Ebay(French Immigrant)
Radio Shack (English Immigrant)
Khols(Polish Immigrant)
Comcast(German Immigrant)
Big Lots(Russian Immigrant)
Yahoo(Taiwanese Immagrant)
Norstrom(Swedish Immigrant)
Colgate(English Immigrant)
Sara Lee (Canadian Immigrant)
Dupont (French Immigrant)
Kraft Foods (Canadian Immigrant)
Pfizer (German Immigrant)
Proctor and Gamble(Irish Immigrant)
These are US companies Founded by US naturalized citizens that come here legally with a dream. These companies employ millions around the world.
Immigration is important to the US. Here is why:
We do not have the market cornered on intelligence and desire. What we do have is a free capitialistic society that rewards hardwork .(at least for now.) This system is the envy of the world.
Legal immigration that is managed, verified, enforced and insures that quality immigrants are entering our country is good and important.
Illegal immigration and Amnesty is not good for our county.
@ Republican in name and action.
I think you miss the point that the only reason we have an illegal immigrant problem is because our immigration system is broken. If we had a just and economically efficient immigration system we would not be talking about illegal immigration. It is not just and is not aligned with free market ideals conservatives believe in. You can not fix the system without dealing with the illegals already here. Mass deportation is impractical and will never happen. If allowing them to participate in the new system is what it takes I am willing to do that. If you want to call that amnesty so be it. The problem with the last amnesty was not the amnesty is was that the system was not fixed. Additionally I have a problem with penalizing people who came here illegally butwith good motives, a better life for them and their families. As to assimilation the kids in ESL are not the kids born here they are the kids born in Mexico that came here with their parents. I have met many kids born here in the USA but with Mexican parents. they speak great english and are assimilated Americans. That is my personal experience. Your points about entitlements are valid and does need to be addressed but that is not an excuse to not move forward. Maintaining the status quo is a much worse choice. That amnesty is a ploy to build a voting block is quite frankly another xenophobic red herring for limiting immigration. These people are coming here because they want to work not to get entitlements. If Republicans did not bash them all the time many of them would align with Republicans on many issues. Arguments about assimilation and being a drain on society and speaking english are the same tired arguments that have been made against every wave of immigrants to hit our shores. They were not true then and they are not true now. Immigration has been a boon to this country.
To those who smugly say that “my ancestors came here legally” Don’t be so sure.
In 1925, the
Immigration Service reported 1.4 million immigrants living in the U.S. illegally.3
A June 17, 1923,
New York Times article reported that W. H. Husband, commissioner general of immigration, had
been trying for two years “to stem the flow of immigrants from central and southern Europe, Africa
and Asia that has been leaking across the borders of Mexico and Canada and through the ports of
the east and west coasts.” A September 16, 1927, New York Times article describes government
plans for stepped-up Coast Guard patrols because thousands of Chinese, Japanese, Greeks,
Russians, and Italians were landing in Cuba and then hiring smugglers to take them to the U.S.
illegally.
Many immigrants were also violating the laws of their home countries which required
them to get permission to migrate, complete military service, or pay off debts prior to leaving.
Many European immigrants benefited from amnesties. Acknowledging the large numbers of
illegal Europeans in the U.S., the government devised ways for them to remain in the U.S. legally.
“Deserving” illegal European immigrants could benefit from various programs and legalize their
status. The 1929 Registry Act allowed “honest law-abiding alien[s] who may be in the country
under some merely technical irregularity” to register as permanent residents for a fee of $20 if they
could prove they had lived in the U.S. since 1921 and were of “good moral character.” Roughly
115,000 immigrants registered between 1930 and 1940—80% were European or Canadian.
Between 1925 and 1965, 200,000 illegal Europeans legalized their status through the Registry Act,
through “pre-examination”—a process that allowed them to leave the U.S. voluntarily and re-enter legally with a visa (a “touch-back” program)—or through discretionary rules that allowed immigration officials to suspend deportations in “meritorious” cases. Approximately 73% of those
benefitting from suspension of deportation were Europeans (mostly Germans and Italians).
I think the word “amnesty” gets tossed around a bit with no definition attached. The bipartisan Senate approved bill I mentioned above does include a 13-year pathway to citizenship that includes paying back taxes and passing English tests and criminal background checks.
to MLaffey
Since you state that those that claim smugly “my ancestors came here legally” I am sure you are addressing my comments since I am the only posted that posted about their ancestors.
So for your information, my post was not smug. I have no idea how you could infer that from the written word that does not convey expression.
So for your benefit, I have done extensive research on my family tree as extensive as visiting seraching records from my ancestors native countries and had a great grandparent that live to 101 years old so my statement that my ancestors came here legally is FACT.
Therefore I know my roots and how my family immigrated to the United States.
It is nice that you have a computer and know how to do an internet search. Good for you. NOW that was smug.
Have a nice day.