America's Illegal Pioneers - Forbes

Excellent column in Forbes about the history of illegal immigration in the US and what can be done about it today:

"Everyone knows that America was settled by immigrants. But few realize how much of this settlement was done illegally. Shortly after winning independence, Congress enacted legislation that called for newly acquired western lands to be divided into large 640-acre plots and sold for a dollar an acre.

This scheme proved proved impractical. As economist Hernando de Soto has written, few settlers had either $640 or the legal expertise to navigate America’s cumbersome property laws. And so thousands of migrants simply ignored the law and settled illegally on vacant land."

The 2011 MLB All-Star Game, Live from the "Papers Please" state

Roberto Clemente, Jr. wonders why the proposed boycott of this year's All-Star Game fizzled after Arizona passed the "Papers Please" law. It's really sad because I remember the Phoenix Suns making their protest in a very unique way. Hopefully, one of the 21 Latinos playing in this year's All-Star Game will remind us of this issue in his own unique way. Or at least one can hope so.

Immigration, Canadian-style

In a blog post on May 12th, I weighed in on a Slate article about our immigration policies and compared it to the Canadian model, which is more welcoming to highly-skilled immigrants and got some positive thoughts in a blog post on The Economist:

"...the United States really should be more open to high-skilled immigrants. They're good for the economy, and an uptick in demonstrably uncontroversial immigrants might mitigate anxiety about the group as a whole."

Making the drain go up...

The Economist weighs in on the same topic I blogged about yesterday:

"At a time when America is concerned about excess housing supply and anxious to boost its innovative capacity it is madness that so many willing immigrants, including high-skilled workers, including those educated in America, find it difficult to impossible to gain permission to work in the country on a stable, long-term basis."

What if we were the bottom of the (brain) drain?

Great article in Slate Magazine about how flawed our immigration policy is against the most qualified applicants:

"The country does not cap the number of "family-based" green cards, available to relatives of U.S. residents. But it does cap the number of "employment-based" green cards—the ones often needed by entrepreneurial super-immigrants—at 140,000 per year."

I've seen this flaw many times over as I've seen numerous immigrant families in which the one successful sibling emigrated to the United States and subsequently sponsored the not-so-successful/educated siblings to come over without any issues getting them here but plenty of adjustment issues once they got here.

The Slate article gets to the heart of what New York Times columnist Tom Friedman always asks about why foreign students upon receiving a Ph.D. from an American university aren't given a green card along with their degree. Personally I wouldn't mind seeing something similar to the Canadian system, which has a separate and distinct category for working professionals wanting to emigrate to Canada.

Immigration Reform North of 37 degrees North latitude vs. South of 37 degrees

Great op-ed piece in The Washington Post today about how immigration reform north of 37 degrees north latitude differs from immigration reform south of the 37th parallel:

"Conservative Republicans here [in Utah] - and Republicans don't get much more conservative than the statehouse variety in Salt Lake - say their bill is a gauntlet thrown down to the feds for their inability to deal with illegal immigration and the nation's demand for unskilled labor."

Interesting how the redder state of Utah has a more just and tolerant immigration law than the Papers Please Law to its south in Arizona.

Some Monday Evening Light Reading

Some articles I came across today that were interesting to read for a variety of reasons:

• David Callahan writes about the “greening” of the wealthy, where more and more of the affluent are environmentally conscious. It seems like a very optimistic approach to the failure of the Senate to take up climate change legislation.
• Ross Douthat writes a very confusing column about the overturning Prop 8 in California. He lays out solid arguments in favor of gay marriage based on cultural and historical factors but says there is something about straight marriage that is different and must be honored. However, he never quite says what that something is.
• Paul Krugman continues to anchor himself firmly on the left of the political divide. Much like Ross Douthat’s opinions on gay marriage, I agree with Paul Krugman most of the time but still feel as though that elusive reason for disagreeing with him is out there somewhere.
• Matt Bai writes a great piece about the xenophobia on the right these days and how this is not a new phenomenon. On a side note, I always thought the deciding factor of the 2006 election was the fact that George W. Bush could not pass comprehensive immigration reform in spite of his popularity with his own party. In much the same way Bill Clinton passed NAFTA and Welfare Reform, going against his own party’s entrenched positions, the failure of immigration reform seemed like the canary in the coal mine for the Republicans as they approached the 2006 mid-term elections.