Matt Yglesias

23 Responses to “Immigration and Health Reform”

1. Don Williams Says:
   August 13th, 2009 at 4:26 pm

   The Democratic Caucus whoring for the Hispanic Lobby continues to be the big problem — not provision of healthcare.

2. Craig Says:
   August 13th, 2009 at 4:29 pm

   I think we should just include whatever crazy immigration related measures we need in order to pass this thing. There is no prospect in the immediate future that we would either cover illegal immigrants or decide that restrictions on immigration aren’t sensible so we should just punt.

3. Don Williams Says:
   August 13th, 2009 at 4:29 pm

   OH — and could the Catholic Church in USA try to remember that it owes its loyalty to Americans — not to co-religionists in foreign countries.

4. Craig Says:
   August 13th, 2009 at 4:33 pm

   Hispanic Lobby? Really? Immigration politics is totally insane.

5. Craig Says:
   August 13th, 2009 at 4:37 pm

   The Catholic church is an international organization. Naturally it worries about increasing its members everywhere not just in the US. I respect people of religious faith, but its really strange to be part of an international organization and then complain about its international character.

6. Bob Oso Says:
   August 13th, 2009 at 4:47 pm

   I posted something similar over at Tapped but this is just an excuse not to pass health care reform. Seriously, because we might pass immigration reform and it might result in giving health care to illegals sometime in the future?

   So we let U.S. citizens die for lack of health care just to make sure that scary brown people don’t get it. Talk about insane.

7. Hantu Says:
   August 13th, 2009 at 4:59 pm

   Don Williams Says:

   OH — and could the Catholic Church in USA try to remember that it owes its loyalty to Americans — not to co-religionists in foreign countries.

   Ummm, I’m not a Catholic, nor am I particularly religious, but isn’t the church’s position that we should be taking care of people (regardless of their legal status) the point of Christianity??

8. Why oh why Says:
   August 13th, 2009 at 5:01 pm

   What about abortion rights, gay marriage, teens having sex and marijuana legalization? This should all be debated at length and restrictions included in any eventual health care reform!

9. Why oh why Says:
   August 13th, 2009 at 5:03 pm

   I forgot: bringing concealed guns into emergency and delivery rooms.

10. JMG Says:
    August 13th, 2009 at 5:23 pm

    Why bother? Frankly, I’d rather be ruled by the crazies than the cowards in the Democratic party. We might as well cut to the chase of the collapse of the American idea.

11. Jasper Says:
    August 13th, 2009 at 5:54 pm

    I’m not a Catholic, nor am I particularly religious, but isn’t the church’s position that we should be taking care of people (regardless of their legal status) the point of Christianity??

    Don’t be ridiculous. That’s not Christianity you describe, that’s Papalism, or Unitarianism, or somesuch. Every REAL Christian knows that, far from being a Jewish radical, Jesus was actually a blue-eyed member of the Minutemen.

    Healthcare for criminaliens indeed!

12. Jasper Says:
    August 13th, 2009 at 7:20 pm

    Why bother? Frankly, I’d rather be ruled by the crazies than the cowards in the Democratic party.

    This is overstated. While I know it’s incredibly frustrating being a progressive who needs to rely on the Democratic Party of the United States, the fact is most Democrats in Congress are reasonable, non-cowardly people. The problem is the manifold veto points and the supermajoritarian Senate (and, I would argue, the frequency of federal elections). In other words, the problem is that our constitution was largely written by rich, white, conservative planters. Or, to put it another way, if we lived in a Westminster-style system we would have had national health insurance a long time ago. Think about it: most Democrats are perfectly solid progressives. But in our system most is not enough.

13. kafka Says:
    August 13th, 2009 at 7:24 pm

    “Think about it: most Democrats are perfectly solid progressives. But in our system most is not enough.”

    Hahahahaha….get a grip!

14. Brittancus Says:
    August 13th, 2009 at 7:26 pm

    The American people are at the end of their fuses, because for decades they have been supporting hundreds of thousands of businesses who hire illegal immigrants? Hundreds of billions of dollars are going into the pockets of corporate executives, because they pay–nothing–other than minimum wages to foreign nationals. Businesses are very well aware that taxpayers will keep supporting the 20 million plus already here, because a government mandated laws says its demanded of us? European Industrialized nations are also in the same place, having to deal with a EU parliament who are also forcing the same mandatory laws. In America there is a safety net for people who have lost their jobs and forced into the breadline?

    But illegal alien families who broke our sovereignty laws, have intentionally taken advantage of public welfare and federal legislation that gives them a right to our schools, health care and a whole barrel of benefits instead of US residents. Now President Obama wants to give AMNESTY, rewarding these people for crossing our almost defenseless border. This must not happen to the American workers and the rest of our population, because the Heritage Foundation has stated that just in retirement and pensions it exceeds $2 Trillion dollars. Even legal immigrants numbers have accelerated to 1. 5 million annually. We need no more poor, uneducated to sustain in America. We must cut down quotas to only the skilled contributors, who will not become a public charges. Then does anybody have an answer for those who will come after this AMNESTY? Eventually the millions who will come here, will lead to irreversible OVERPOPULATION.

    WE ALREADY HAVE IMMIGRATION LAWS, BUT HAVE SADLY BEEN UNENFORCED AND ARE NOT BROKEN? THE SPECIAL INTEREST GROUPS, WANT ABSOLUTELY–NO RESTRICTIONS– ON HOW MANY FOREIGN CHEAP LABOR CAN BE ALLOWED INTO THE US? OBSERVERS HAVE SEEN THE FINANCIAL IMPACT OF MASS ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION INTO THE SANCTUARY STATE OF CALIFORNIA?
    Get involved with the power of E-Verify, a composite of the SAVE ACT, to remove illegal immigrants from businesses. Promote in addition 287(g) police law to question persons about their immigration status and stop the weakening of ICE raids and NO MATCH LAW. DON’T LET YOUR POLITICIAN GET AWAY WITH THESE IMMIGRATION TRAVESTIES? Like millions of livid Americans call 202-224-3121 GOOGLE NUMBERSUSA for the Facts, not lies.

15. beowulf Says:
    August 13th, 2009 at 7:32 pm

    We shouldn’t deny health care to anyone, especially when Uncle Sam has someone else on the hook it can bill for its costs.

    In 1996, the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act (Public Law 104-208) strengthened public charge doctrine. This broad reform legislation raised the qualifications and obligations of individuals who “sponsor” an immigrant. Immigrant sponsors, who petition on behalf of a prospective immigrant, must pledge that they will assume financial responsibility for that immigrant, signing a legally binding affidavit of support.
    http://www.cis.org/node/186

16. John C Mccutchen Says:
    August 13th, 2009 at 7:59 pm

    Is there no end to the contrived controversies these fools won’t raise?

    Wanting to bar treatment to citizens who might be nationalized under future immigration reform legislation not even submitted???

    OK…If they can howl about Death Panels I suppose they can howl about anything, anything except what’s in the bills that is

17. wiley Says:
    August 13th, 2009 at 8:18 pm

    Uh. Isn’t catholocism, uh—catholic.

18. Alan Says:
    August 13th, 2009 at 9:22 pm

    The linked interview with White House Health Czar has Nancy Ann DeParle referring the deal with big Pharma as “our industry.” Slip of the tongue or the result of a decade as a for-profiteer? Likely the latter.

19. Njorl Says:
    August 13th, 2009 at 9:46 pm

    OH — and could the Catholic Church in USA try to remember that it owes its loyalty to Americans — not to co-religionists in foreign countries.

    You could make that argument about individual Catholics, but not the Church. It has no allegiance to the US at all. It’s a bit ridiculous to think any Church would have loyalty to the US. I certainly would oppose the US reciprocating in any way.

20. Silver Says:
    August 13th, 2009 at 9:50 pm

    OH — and could the Catholic Church in USA try to remember that it owes its loyalty to Americans — not to co-religionists in foreign countries.

    That’s an unreasonable expectation for an organized group of tax exempt child molesters…

21. FlipYrWhig Says:
    August 14th, 2009 at 12:44 am

    So if immigration policy changes, a lot of people will no longer be “illegal,” and that’s a problem, because in the future we’ll lose the ability to punish them for what they did under a different policy in the past.

    Also, if alcohol control policy changed, and people would be able to buy beer at a younger age, some people would no longer be underage, and thus we would be unable to arrest them for that. Which is, like, unfair, because they _used_ to be breaking the law, and we can’t, you know, lose our chance.

    Our politics is so stupid.

22. soullite Says:
    August 14th, 2009 at 10:28 am

    Flip, so if we make child molestation legal, we’ll have gotten rid of all the pedophiles! I should go register for the elections, cuz I have a sure-fire way to lower the murder rate to zero! Your logic is specious and insane. It ain’t just our politics that are stupid.

    I don’t have a problem with loosening immigration standards, we can take whatever momentary hit is required to people’s individual economy and any future damage can be mitigated by the economy as a whol;e expanding to accomidate these new citizens. However, I will never support any bill that has a ‘guest worker’ provision. It’s one thing to invite people to become part of our country, it’s quite another to let them suppress our wages.

23. FlipYrWhig Says:
    August 14th, 2009 at 6:12 pm

    @ soullite, maybe I wasn’t clear in my attempt to be sarcastic, but in my opinion if people who _currently_ are defined as “illegal immigrants” follow some yet-to-be-established process and become legal, they should in fact be able to receive any and all public services just like all other legal residents of the good ol’ USA. What the Republicans want is for people who are currently “illegal” to never get to be fully “legal,” not be eligible for public health care, etc. They’re supposed to be stigmatized for life, I guess. That’s just needlessly cruel. I can see why politicians want people here illegally not to benefit from public services, and that attitude is going to be hard to change. But once you’re legal, you’re legal like anyone else.