Conservatives are upset over the results of a new study released by the University of Missouri Kansas City (UMKC) regarding immigration. KCMO 710′s Greg Knapp‘s main beef this week was that the study didn’t seem to differentiate between so-called legal and illegal immigrants. In his opinion the two groups were conflated by the researchers.
But is this a problem? What if there isn’t any significant difference? Could it be that not having official permission from federal bureaucrats to live and work here isn’t really necessary to ensure productivity and peaceful coexistence? The answer of course, is no. There is no fundamental difference.
The fact that some immigrants resort to using forged documents — such as driver’s licenses and social security cards — to get hired is viewed negatively. It’s supposed to be an indicator that such immigrants are prone to breaking the law. The legitimacy of these laws, particularly needing government permission to work, are the real issue, and that should be the focus of the conversation, not where someone’s mother gave birth to them.
It’s pretty clear that most conservatives are opposed to expanding immigration on the basis that it will expand the Democratic party’s voting roles. Remarkably, Republicans seem to have decided that opposing changes to immigration legislation, building walls, raiding businesses, harassing, jailing, and deporting people is the solution.