Arizona Immigration Law--An Idea Whose Time Has Come!

Okay, I can't take it anymore. Every time I access a web page or turn on the TV, somebody from the left is talking about how "misguided" and "wrong" the new Arizona law on immigration is. Arizona's governor and legislature even backtracked a little and within two days passed a "fix" which makes it a crime to profile. I've seen the signs being held by the protesters calling the law "unfair" and "racist". I think the law is a great idea, for what has been going on is unprecedented in the history of the world. Never has any nation allowed what really is an invasion of their country and survived. We won't survive either unless we do something. Arizona, a state on the front lines of this problem, is trying to do something.
We have, by most conservative estimates, approximately twelve million illegal aliens here in this country. Yes, that's right, twelve million. It's probably more than that, but hey, who's counting? They don't pay taxes because they aren't about to file tax returns--the government would catch them here and send them back. Most get paid in cash by employers who, through their own greed and need for cheap labor, turn a blind eye to their status, and therefore become complicit in this illegal activity. However, they do use the services that all the rest of us taxpayers pay for. They drive on our roads, they attend our schools, which are hamstrung by the fact that they can't ask people their immigration status (is that crazy or what?!), and they suck up services such as free and reduced lunches. If that was the only problem, I feel we could deal with that. However, there is also a very high incidence of crime associated with people here illegally. In my opinion, the main problem is just that--they are here illegally--they have broken the law while hundreds of thousands if not millions of others wait in line like they're supposed to.
It is the federal government's responsibility, as we have heard many times since this story broke, to police this problem. What's wrong with this notion is that the federal government hasn't done that. Pat Buchanan wrote a brilliant op/ed piece on this very issue for World Net Daily. You can read it at:

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=146341

So, because the federal government wasn't doing anything, Arizona decided it would. And what is it they have done? They have given the police the power to check when they suspect they are dealing with someone here illegally. How is this racist? How is this wrong? Don't we allow the police the power to check anytime a crime is suspected? Remember, these people are here illegally. A person who is here legally might be checked, as are people who are not guilty of a crime are all the time. That's part of investigating crimes. That person will then be let go. How is it wrong? Is it now wrong to enforce the laws of the United States of America? Is it wrong to want the millions here illegally, who take jobs from those here legally and who use services they don't pay for, to leave and, if they want to return, to wait in line like everyone else? Is it wrong to try to stop the invasion which is happening and to try to protect the safety and security of our great country? I hope it isn't, but to some people you would think so.
This goes back to what I've said before. The Democrats want the votes these people represent. They want to make them legal. They are willing to sacrifice the security of this nation for political gain. I don't say just stop the invasion. I say close the borders, put the military down there if necessary, and send back all those who have broken the law back where they came from. I've heard the argument that these people do the nasty jobs others won't do, but I think that is an invalid argument. There are either Americans here willing to do that, or LEGAL immigrants waiting to get in who will work those positions. The Arizona bill isn't racist, and it isn't anti-Hispanic. It is anti-lawbreaker, however. I just wish that our federal government would get serious about this problem. Then we wouldn't need states like Arizona to assume the mantle of protecting this country, although so far I'm glad they have. Or maybe the left is correct and we should leave the people in these pictures alone. They're not doing anything wrong...

Fixing Congress

Yesterday, when I was discussing changes we need to make in our energy policies, I finished my post with the following:

To accomplish any of this, we must first make our lawmakers immune to the power of the lobbyists and the intoxicating effects of big money. How do we do this? This is fodder for another post, which I will write tomorrow, May 3rd.

So, how do we make our lawmakers immune from this type of corruption? Because that's what it is...corruption. Corruption usually denotes some sort of illegal activity, but one of the dictionary's definitions of the word is a "perversion of intergrity". This is what is happening here. Lawmakers are so scared of not being re-elected (and giving up their comfortable lifestyles) that they will do anything to get money for their next campaign. Since the House of Representatives stands for election every two years, the whole thing has become one constant campaign and search for money. Under these conditions, many lawmakers have crawled into bed with those forces which can provide them with the money they need to run successfully. My solution is simple. Term limits.
Now, we've heard this one before, but it's a hard ideas to implement. The Congress certainly isn't going to vote for this--they've got it too easy. They're the rulers, and they get to exempt themselves from every onerous burden they place on the citizens. Voluntary term limits don't work either--we've already been that route, and those Congressmen who once ran on term limits platforms have sadly changed their tunes. Now the mantra is that they can do so much more for their constituents from their office. The other thing I hear, especially concerning long serving Congressmen, is that they can direct money to their district more efficiently because the longer they're there, the more power they have. This is EXACTLY what we don't need happening. You multiply the billions of dollars getting directed here and there by the 535 members and soon you're talking about real money. This money doesn't materialize magically from the air. It is the taxpayer's money.
No, the people must demand term limits. If Congressmen won't limit themselves, the people must limit them. We must create a national environment where the lawmakers would realize that if they don't vote for term limits then they will be voted out. If a Congressman doesn't have to worry about being re-elected, then maybe he or she will do what is right instead of what is self-serving. They could then make those hard choices to cut programs without worrying about their re-election opponent accusing them of killing old people and children. For the one most important thing the Congress needs to do is get spending under control. If we don't stop the huge deficit spending, we are doomed as a nation. My recommendation would be four terms for a Representative, or eight years, and two terms as a Senator, or twelve years. If a Representative has finished his or her eight years, they could then run for the Senate. The most anyone could serve, then, would be twenty years, assuming they could get elected to the Senate. When I see people serving thirty, forty, fifty, or more years, I say to myself, "This is ridiculous." If we install term limits, Congress would be able to do the right thing without fear of not being re-elected, and we would have a constant turnover of fresh faces, all coming to Washington to do the right thing, kind of like Jimmy Stewart in "Mr. Smith Goes to Washington". Wouldn't that be nice?