Saturday, July 1, 2006

A Chance for Moderation?

Tamar Jacoby of the Manhattan Institute argues in today's Washington Post that the delay on the immigration bill might not be such a bad thing.  Although the writer urges that we "get a border deal done," Jacoby does not think that the House proposition to debate the issue further is necessarily a bad thing:

The debate won't, of course, convince the angriest voters -- the ones who want to seal the border and deport or drive out illegal immigrants. That 20 to 25 percent of the public -- and poll after poll shows that's how strong they are, no more, no less -- is probably not open to persuasion. But what the discussion could do is energize some of the other 75 percent: voters who, most surveys show, are more pragmatic -- including being willing to legalize the 12 million -- though generally less intense in their beliefs and less likely to voice or vote on them.

For the full op-ed, click here.  Given the state of both bills, it is clear that a moderating influence would be a good thing.  I am perhaps less sanguine than Jacoby that moderation is what will come out of the House-led discussion of the immigration issue, but only time will tell.

-jmc

https://lawprofessors.typepad.com/immigration/2006/07/tamar_jacoby_of.html

| Permalink

TrackBack URL for this entry:

https://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341bfae553ef00d8352f51a653ef

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference A Chance for Moderation?:

Comments

Post a comment