Our Broken Immigration System

The question was asked "Could somebody tell me what's 'broken'

within the immigration system?  I simply don't understand why the current system, if enforced, is not workable." In order to address the question and the follow-up statement, it is necessary to understand what Democrats means when they say that a particular law or some aspect of a government program is "broken."

First, understand that politicians do not speak English. Most Americans speak and understand English as defined by "The Oxford Dictionary of the English Language" or "The Merriam-Webster Dictionary of American English." Political language utilizes the same words but groups within the body politic understand those words very differently. For example, when a democrat/liberal politician uses the word “bipartisan” he/she means that the Republicans/Conservatives must march in lockstep with their decision. Conservatives understand the word to mean that there is general agreement and consensus on a subject or issue.

Democrats, specifically "liberals," fall into discernible subgroups. The largest group within the liberal universe might be described as “Liberal Utopians.” They believe that society has an obligation to make sure everyone is equal socially and economically. They refuse to recognize that people are different and will be unequal just because they are different. 

Liberal utopians blindly embrace socialism and its accompanying high taxes and government control of society. They see government as the great equalizer and willingly, even happily, submit to the requisite intrusion into their lives. They disdain capitalism and personal responsibility. They look at our immigration system as unfair to the downtrodden masses of the world. 

Since liberals also view America as a world evil, they adhere to the notion that the downtrodden are in their situation because of policies forced upon the world by the evil United States. Liberal utopians embrace a borderless society as part of the solution to an unfair society. They also support higher taxes so the “less fortunate” can have what they consider "a better life." Naturally, the administrator of that confiscated wealth is to be the same government that has repeatedly demonstrated its only skill is creating more poor downtrodden masses. 

They blindly vote for the next group.

The second major group within liberal society is the “Liberal Elites.” All liberal elites are also utopians but not all utopians qualify as “Elites.” Elites believe that it is their birthright to rule over the great unwashed masses. They gravitate to politics for no other reason than their burning belief that they are smarter than everyone else. They assume that the “fact” of their superior intelligence and by virtue of the birthright they are qualified to dictate to the rest of us how we should live. Ted Kennedy, Barack Obama, Joe Biden, Franklin Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson have implied that they [liberals, socialists, elites] are smarter than the rest of us! Ted Kennedy openly declared it on several occasions, even from the floor of the Senate. 

Joe Biden, in his miserable 1988 presidential bid, said in response to a voter that had the sheer gall to disagree with him that, “I have a much higher IQ than you do.” http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D1j0FS0Z6ho

Woodrow Wilson - “We want one class of persons to have a liberal education, and we want another class of persons, a very much larger class of necessity in every society, to forgo the privilege of a liberal education and fit themselves to perform specific difficult manual tasks.” (In other words, the ruling class should better be educated than the rest of us…) We have established that the Elites do not speak English and they look upon the rest of us as lowborn plebs, not able to make intelligent decisions about our own life. 

Now let’s look at the key word, “broken.” The dictionaries define “broken” as “not functioning properly; out of working order.” It is easy for rational thinking people to conclude, using English, that our immigration system would not be broken if the existing laws were enforced. Therefore, if enforcing existing law would fix the broken immigration system and the government refuses to enforce those existing laws then it must be concluded that politicians have a goal other than enforcing the law thereby fixing the broken system. They are using a politician’s definition for “broken.”

All Democrats and most Republicans in Congress view getting reelected as their primary job. They use rhetoric, government money and power to insure that reelection. Democrats know that the country is starting to swing back to rationality so they are desperate for votes. They need to secure their America hating voter base (the utopians) as well as increasing the head count of those indebted to them for their existence. In the mind of liberal elites, fixing immigration means weakening those laws, weakening the southern border, and weakening voter laws. In their mind enforcing immigration law would break the system even more because it would make it considerably more difficult for them to get reelected. So, to return to our original premise, we shall define "broken" as understood by liberals. "Broken" means there are still immigration laws on the books that, if enforced, will reduce the Democrat voter count.

Fixing the "broken" system means doing away with laws that impede the free flow of Democrat voters into the country.

If current immigration laws are enforced, the number of Democrat voters will steadily decline. That can't be allowed to happen! This is the engine powering government policy including sanctuary cities and states!

Link to this blog post, copy and paste this URL  https://tinyurl.com/ya8we5ms

Term Limits and the 17th Amendment

Term limits is not the solution because term limits is not the problem. Imposing term limits is like taking aspirin for the brain tumor. You might feel a little better but you are still gonna die!

Originally the Constitution provided for the citizens of a State to be represented by the members of the House of Representatives, elected for a two year term by the "People" of the state. The Senate was to represent the state governments and was selected according to state law, (by vote in the legislature or appointed by the governor with advice and consent of the state legislature) for a term of six years. The Senator might be selected from the state legislature’s membership, from a list maintained by the governor or from completely outside government, as sometimes happened.

Article 1, Section. 2.The House of Representatives shall be composed of Members chosen every second Year by the People of the several States,

Article 1, Section. 3.The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each State, chosen by the Legislature thereof [Modified by Amendment XVII], for six Years;

Essentially, the Senate was designed to represent the state governments in Washington while the House represented the citizens of the states. The Seventeenth  Amendment provided for the direct election of Senators and effectively left the governors and legislatures without a voice in DC. Senators became "Representatives at Large." State laws, prior to 1913 allowed governors or legislatures to change their Senator at the end of the senators six year term. If the governor’s office or the legislative majority changed party then the change in the states senators was essentially guaranteed. That was a true bicameral government.  If the bicameral system still existed, then the governors could put a stop to any type of insanity Washington might come up with.

Obamacare would not happen. The governors could say "not just no but hell no!"  The tax rates and IRS would not be out of control. The governors could say "not just no but hell no!" The "unfunded mandates" would not happen! The governors could say "not just no but hell no!" All the abusive acts by the federal government would not have happened! 

Governors and state legislatures can be easily changed by the voters.  Alexander Hamilton noted in Federalist [paper] No. 59 that, "The interest of each State, ... to maintain its representation in the national councils, would be a complete security against an abuse of the trust." That representation ended with the ratification of the Seventeenth Amendment and "abuse of the trust" became standard operating procedure in Washington, DC.

Equally importantly, since Senators would not be elected by the general population then term limits of either federal legislative body would be moot.

It should be noted that the progressives in the early part of the twentieth century stated in an editorial (unfortunately I can't recall the publication) that the Constitutional election of Senators stood in the way of implementing their agenda. The direct election of senators became their primary goal. They succeeded in 1913 with the ratification of the Seventeenth Amendment! It has been downhill for the American Dream since then. Woodrow Wilson and William Jennings Bryan led the charge to water down our bicameral system. The progressives knew their agenda would never happen if the states had the ability to stop it. I won't go into the reasons for the 17th other than to mention that corruption and/or legislative inaction in making appointments was the impetus for passage. The progressives used high explosives to "solve" the problem when a surgical solution was needed!

Also, importantly, the rise of lobbyists can be traced to the direct election of Senators. Power abhors a vacuum and something had to fill the power vacuum left when the states were cut out of the federal government. There have always been lobbyists in Washington. Even George Washington worked as a lobbyist after his presidency. The loss of state representation in Congress gave lobbyists effective control of the government. It is an interesting study for anyone that wants to do the homework!

Imposing term limits will create more problems, unpredictable problems, and do nothing to give governors and legislatures their proper representation in Washington. Term limits does not reestablish our Constitution as the proper restraint on the federal government.

The solution is to reinstate the bicameral government our Founding Fathers gave us. Repeal the 17th Amendment. It might be a good idea to lower the term for Senators from the current six years to three or four years, so the governor or legislature could quickly change the Senator, if appropriate. The term of Senator could also be tied to the term length for the governor. Some governors serve for two years and others for four years.

Anything else is just fluffy stuff!

Link to this blog post, copy and paste this URL  http://tinyurl.com/jhjzygb