What Happened To Reagan's City on the Hill?

Larry Kudlow asks what all the fuss is about in addressing immigration. I pretty much agree with him. People point out that Reagan's amnesty bill was a disaster. But looking at the US economy since then shows something different - the contrary in fact.

If we compare the US with Japan or Europe, the biggest major difference is that their populations are either stagnant or declining, while ours is not. Without immigration, the US would be similar to these old economies.

The US legally allows very few people into the country every year. The 65,000 H1B visa quota for skilled workers is already used up until October 2007. So no new skilled worker can enter the country for another 18 months unless the process has already begun. This is why Microsoft and Intel are begging the government to increase its woefully low quotas. And if they don't, guess what? These companies will start moving R&D facilities abroad in their search for qualified people. The US government is forcing our successful companies to do this now.

On social security, immigrants will likely solve our underfunded system, not break it. Most immigrants who enter either illegally or legally are young. Half of Mexico's population is under 15 (compared with 20% in the US).

If we're worried that immigrants are leeching off the system, then we need to cut the benefits that can be leeched, simple as that. On the language issue, English should be the only one used for public documents - end of story, and it's not racist if you say that.

I'm in favor of legal immigration, but unfortunately, it's almost impossible to enter the US legally these days. The US needs twice as any people as we're currently taking in. Let's change this.

I agree with Kudlow. Bush has a reasonable plan, certainly more reasonable than rounding up 12 million people and sending them home.