A couple from Brazil, seeking a better life for themselves and their 2-month-old daughter, enter the United States unlawfully. They settle in Massachusetts, where 18 years later the girl graduates from a public high school, as assimilated and acculturated an American as her classmates in every respect – except that they are US citizens, and she, by virtue of a decision made when she was a baby, is not. Her classmates can attend the University of Massachusetts, paying $9,704 a year in tuition, the price tag for Massachusetts residents. She can attend only if she pays the out-of-state rate of $22,157; if that’s more than she can afford, she’s out of luck.
How is that a rational public policy? How is Massachusetts improved by making it impossible for an accomplished high-school graduate, a lifelong resident of the state, to gain a university degree? Who benefits when her education – along with the higher earning potential it would lead to – is cut short? She doesn’t. You don’t. Massachusetts taxpayers certainly don’t.
Jacoby then helpfully demolishes the usual line about freeloading:
Those taxpayers, remember, include illegal immigrants. More than two-thirds of illegal immigrants pay Social Security and income taxes. Between 1996 and 2003, payments from tax filers using Individual Taxpayer Identification numbers – a nine-digit substitute issued by the IRS for taxpayers ineligible for Social Security – totaled $50 billion. More than 35,000 such taxpayers, most of them illegal immigrants, annually file returns in Massachusetts.
And, finally, the bottom line, which is really startlingly well stated:
Of course illegal immigration is a problem. But it can only be solved by overhauling our dysfunctional immigration laws, not by demonizing or scapegoating illegal immigrants. Those immigrants didn’t come here in order to be lawbreakers; they broke a law in order to come here. That’s a distinction with a crucial difference – one that sensible and principled conservatives should be able to understand.
Coulda knocked me over with a feather when I finished reading that column. I’m guessing the same holds true for most of Jacoby’s fellow conservatives. Someone tell RMG.
He’s generally such a hash of predictable talking points. I must have written the Globe twenty letters over the years expressing outrage at one thing or another he’s said and imploring them to at least replace him with an intelligent conservative.
I’m such a typical liberal snob, I usually don’t even bother to read him. Now I guess I’ll have to.
E X C U S E D
<
p>No, you don’t have to read Jeff Jacoby.
<
p>In a few years, when he says something intelligent again, I’m sure it’ll be picked up by David’s watchful eyes.
wasn’t looking forward to it to tell the truth.
But let’s be clear: that’s not conservatives being right about something. That’s Jacoby being right about something. That is not the conservative position.
I thought to myself, “Where did that come from?”
Thought maybe he plagiarized the wrong article this time. This was probably the most articulate column he’s ever done. Not just mindless cut/paste of other rightwing diatribes. He’s got actual numbers in this column. Real ones.
<
p>Maybe he’ll recognize that some people BORN in this country, are equally hardworking, struggling, and battling mindless discrimination and an uneven playingfield. That there are lots of people trying to be good contributing members of society, and that maybe the government could give them a little help along the way. Tham maybe the blind hatred of all those “them’s” that so dominates the rightwing mentality and media is wrong.
<
p>This line, for me, sums up the entire immigration debate:
<
p>
<
p>No kidding.
<
p>Happy Thanksgiving Jeff. Take the big drumstick. As long as it’s organic and free range, you’re good. Even better if it’s tofu. đŸ™‚
and having a guatemalan son probably makes it harder for a human with a conscience to jump on the typical bandwagon of conservative demagoguery and bigotry.
<
p>http://www.jeffjacoby.com/5263…
…but not for Jeff Jacoby.