The following editorial contains excellent advice for Virginia voters on the issue of illegal immigration:
When it comes to fighting illegal immigration, talk is cheap. Action isn't.Voters need to keep that in mind when weighing the words spewing out of the mouths of politicians as the November elections approach.
[...]
Virginia voters are going to be swamped with rhetoric about illegal immigration in the upcoming campaign. They should listen only to those candidates who acknowledge the limits of what state governments can do and who put a price tag on their ideas.
Voters should be particularly skeptical of expensive, promise-the-moon proposals by Republican candidates. There are three main reasons for this skepticism. First, motive: Republicans are desperate for an issue this November, in order to distract from their failures and lack of accomplishments in office. Given their record of failure and their obvious self-interest in creating an issue -- which they could have done something about, but didn't, in previous years -- why should we listen to them now on anything?
Second, voters should closely scrutinize any and all immigration (or other) proposals for practicality. For instance, as the Virginian-Pilot points out, it would be not only ineffective but actually damaging to "turn the state police into an arm of the Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE)," as Attorney General Bob McDonnell has requested. Last time I checked, the state police have lots on their plate already and strains on their resources; we should think long and hard before pulling them off of other cases and straining them even further.
Finally, there's the crucial issue of cost, especially at a time when Virginia is facing a major budget crunch that already is forcing cutbacks in education and other areas. Before we take on new burdens, we'd better figure out how we're going to pay for them.
With regard to Bob McDonnell's idea, the Virginian-Pilot cites Governor Kaine's analysis that "no federal cost, once assumed, ever reverts to Washington." Why would Virginia voluntarily take on a huge, unfunded federal mandate at a time of severe budget problems? Are people willing to pay higher taxes or accept further cuts in services? When a politician comes around talking tough on illegal immigration, ask them very simply how they're going to pay for their proposals, how high your taxes are going to go, and/or what they're willing to cut (pre-K? other police functions?). Something tells me that the answers -- or more likely, lack thereof -- will be highly illuminating.
Residents of Prince William county are asking these very questions, and not liking the answers:
In Prince William County, where local supervisors have taken one of the most aggressive stands in the nation against illegal immigrants, the board is now fraying over the cost of its proposed actions.Supervisors blithely voted in July to ratchet up police enforcement to the limited extent that's allowed under federal law. Then came the police chief's estimate of the cost: $14.2 million over five years in a cash-strapped county. Suddenly, the idea is on hold, pending a vote later this month.
The bottom line is that it's far easier to pound your fist on the table than to actually accomplish anything. Right now, unfortunately, fist pounding is about all we're getting from Virginia Republican politicians on the issue of illegal immigration. It's not surprising, given that they've been in power for years and have done nothing about it. It's also not surprising given that this is overwhelmingly a federal issue. What next, Virginia Republican politicians demand local and state action on ending the Iraq war? On second thought, maybe that wouldn't be a bad place for them to put their (misplaced) energies.
P.S. Also, see the Washington Post editorial, "The Price of Intolerance: Prince William discovers that hounding immigrants doesn't come cheap."