A few thoughts for a long weekend (posted by DT)

Some things rattling around in my brain:

Illegal Immigration
One thing I don't see mentioned in the debates about the Arizona illegal immigration law is the role of resources and money. I hear supporters of the crackdown on illegals constantly say that "the federal government won't do anything, so we have to step in". But what exactly do they want the feds to do?

It seems to me that they're demanding better enforcement of our porous Mexico border, but these are the same people screaming about high taxes and big deficits. How do they expect to pay for increased border patrols?

It seems kind of simple to me. If we wanted to, we could probably put into place an Israeli-type patroling system that would lock up the border really well, as Israel does around the Gaza Strip and West Bank and its international borders. But the cost would be astronomical! It's a really long, really remote border. You can't just put up a fence and go away, because central Americans aren't stupid and know how to cut through or climb over a fence. If you want the feds to "do something" you have to be prepared to spend billions of dollars every year to patrol the border much more intensively with boots on the ground. Is that worth it if you also want to lower deficits and lower taxes? To stop unskilled laborers to come to the states? Over a border that has never been shown to be the entry point for a single terrorist?


Gulf Oil Spill
I really hope that BP pays for every dollar of economic destruction that this spill is causing. That includes not just cleanup, but beach cleanup and reimbursement of shrimping and tourism industries, etc. Now I'm not sure this is going to happen- they probably have pretty good lawyers- but if we believe in capitalism, and we believe that companies will regulate themselves because they don't want to risk such catastrophes, then we should want BP to pay dearly, if only to scare them and others into improving their safety standards.

This brings home to me that disconnect between conservative bromides about tort reform at the same time they push for lowering regulations and red tape on industry. If you don't regulate carefully, you have to at least make sure that a company that destroys something is forced to pay for what it's done, even if it is bankrupted in the process. If you oppose holding companies responsible, and at the same time oppose regulating them to force responsible behavior, then you're not really concerned with keeping government out of our lives so much as concerned about protecting corporate profits at the expense of everyone else.

The same argument applies to financial reform. We have to regulate strongly, or we have to find ways to hold these companies responsible for their bets. If we do neither, we're just stuck in an endless cycle of bailouts.


Don't Ask Don't Tell
So now the military is fine with ending DADT, an overwhelming majority of Americans are comfortable with it, we have a liberal congress and president, and it's still going to be a battle in Congress. The Republican party looks likely to attempt to filibuster repeal of the law, even though all of their justifications have gone up in smoke.

The list of civil rights issues opposed by conservatives is long and storied: conservatives opposed integration of the military, voting rights for Blacks in the South, integration of schools throughout the country, and now gay marriage and integration of gays into the military. In 20 years they'll be running away from these positions too. Luckily the Good Guys keep winning these fights.

I think Memorial Day would be a great time to repeal DADT. Lots of veterans served as closeted gays, and it's a scandal.