McConnell: State can’t afford cost of illegals
I read the recent op-ed by Rep. Phillip Shoopman, R-Dist. 18, in which he criticized the call for a constitutional convention and said that South Carolina needed to act instead. I am glad to see that Rep. Shoopman has decided that the problem of illegal immigration is serious and warrants quick action.
Last year, the South Carolina Senate completed its study of the issue of illegal immigration after several months of public hearings across South Carolina and passed a comprehensive bill based on the Georgia model. That bill sat in the House Judiciary Committee without any action. I hope that Rep. Shoopman will help ensure its quick passage.
The Senate has taken action on this issue and will take more action, and we look forward to working with House Speaker Bobby Harrell and other members of the House of Representatives to craft measures that penalize businesses who knowingly hire illegal immigrants. This may make South Carolina less appealing for illegal immigrants, but it does not solve the problem nor can we be sure that a federal court won’t strike down any measure a state passes. The main issue is that the states can’t do anything with the core problem of keeping illegal immigrants out or deporting them when they are discovered. The challenge of illegal immigration begs us to act on all fronts and not delay again.
Over the past several months, we have gotten statistics to show how serious the problem is for our state. South Carolina has had a 1,000 percent increase in the number of illegal immigrants between 1990 and 2004 with a total population of approximately 200,000. The illegal immigration prison population in South Carolina increased by 71 percent between 1999 and 2002. Finally, nearly 75 percent of Latinos in South Carolina, according to a recent study, either cannot speak English or have poor English skills. The results are staggering. South Carolina taxpayers spend nearly $186 million annually on illegal aliens to provide education, emergency medical care, and incarceration based on a 2006 estimate.
These are costs that we cannot control by choosing to provide or deny those services. The federal government mandates those costs, and no matter what we as a state pass legislatively those costs will continue and are likely to increase until Congress addresses the issue. That is why I proposed a constitutional convention on the issue of illegal immigration. I would prefer not to have to take such a drastic action, but the problem we face as a state and as a nation is reaching one of catastrophic proportions. We can no longer afford to sit idly by and hope for federal action.
It is my hope that the call for a constitutional convention will be a wake up call to those in Washington that we as states are in trouble and must be allowed the means to take care of ourselves. I have already received inquiries from other states asking for copies of the resolution so that they can draft similar measures for their legislatures.
The constitutional convention call would prevent the federal government from restricting or limiting a state’s ability to enforce federal laws; allow states to decide what government benefits to provide or deny illegal immigrants; allow states to regulate immigration matters not addressed by Congress; and require the federal government to provide prompt assistance in expelling illegal immigrants found in a state. This would be basically self-defense against an illegal invasion we have no control over.
Some have concerns about opening up the entire Constitution to a constitutional convention. Since this is an unprecedented area of law, there is no clear answer to whether the convention can be limited. However, I believe that the states can choose to limit the scope of consideration in their call to the convention. I have included in my resolution a statement that the convention shall be called for one purpose and one purpose only — illegal immigration. The safety check is that anything done by the convention must be ratified by three-fourths of the states to be put in the Constitution.
South Carolina cannot afford to believe that any piece of state legislation will be a panacea when in fact it will be no more than a Band-Aid on a gaping wound. Illegal immigration will remain a major problem until our elected officials in Washington take a stand to protect our borders and enforce our laws. Unfortunately, it does not appear they have the will to do so. Perhaps the threat of a constitutional convention will scare them into action. For the well being of our state and nation, I hope it does.
Sen. Glenn McConnell is president pro tempore of the S.C. Senate
Post and Courier: State can’t afford cost of illegals
By Glenn McConnell
Tuesday, November 27, 2007
December 18th, 2007 at 10:12 pm
I whole-heartedly agree. Being a US-expat and living in the UK with my family for 2-years, we have seen and experienced many things that the US can benefit from duplicating. One such item is illegal immigrants. The previous and current Prime Ministers have dictated over the public air-waves that the UK is an English-only country. That is, if you come here to reside, you better assimilate to the current society and not try to do anything else. This includes reading, writing, and speaking English. There is no such second-language. Having lived in Maritta, Georgia for 20-years before coming to the UK, I greatly feared my children would have to learn Spanish for the wrong reason, i.e., because the illegals refuse to learn English. Seeing the US from outside the borders, there are many things that will need to change before I return with my family. I never served but my father served in the Korean war. I hope he didn’t fight just to allow lazy, system-leaching illegals to abuse the system at the cost of my US-tax dollars (which I’m still paying). Yep, there are some benefits to having some government control, one being illegals control.
Please promote your English-only policy on a nation-wide scale. Too bad for the business’ that hire illegals. Get the parents to get the teenagers off their butts and away from the video games and back to earning a living starting at an early age.
BTW, 4-years ago, my company announced that even though we’re an international and diverse company, we’re based in the US. This means the only language that all the Russians, Africans, and middle-easterners that we have employed as well as others are to speak English only (announced by one of the company Directors). There is no second-language within the workplace. The woman announcing this is of India-descent. I have no problems with illegals so long as they do the following: read/write/speak English at a fluent level, pay taxes, pay for their own medical, and assimilate into the society. If they do that, no problem. Speaking of medical, my sister works in the ER in an Arizona hospital. Illegals are a constant PIA. They know English but refuse to speak since they expect her to speak Spanish. They’re getting a free-ride (free-treatment) and my sister is trying to help but she doesn’t speak Spanish. No reason to. Yet, when an interpretor comes-in to explain things, they start into broken English. She hates her job because of them.
We’ll continue keeping an eye on how things develop in the US.
We’ve travelled a good part of Europe and guess what, EVERYWHERE in the EU, locals of each country speak English. I’ve inquired in each country and get the same response: English is seen as the International language. Even in Spain, they don’t teach spanish as much as they do English. When I mention to them about the illegals and Spanish language situation in the US, they shake their heads and laugh. They think the US is a joke with the way its handling the situation. My cousin teaches English in a German school in Stuttgart. She is absolutely baffled as-to why the US thinks it has to teach Spanish as a mandatory second-language. The wrong reason for learning a second-language exists in the US. In the International community, from everywhere I’ve been, including Moscow and Chita, Siberia, English is taught. Now, don’t get me wrong. Having several languages is a good thing. But the primary ones, when I’ve polled people, have been: 1-English, 2-French, 3-German, 4-Italian, 5-Chinese or Japanese, 6-Russian, 7-Spanish. My children will at least have the opportunity to learn alternate languages of their choice, not as a mandatory requirement.
Like I stated, once America returns to a English-only society where there’s no such thing as a second language, and, illegals are disposed-of, uh, er, removed from the US, my family & I will probably seek to return. Until then, we’re staying in this nicely formed country that has almost all the conveniences of the US, including good-ol’ Wal-Mart.
I could go-on but its slightly late here (10-pm, 5-pm EST). I hope this response doesn’t fall upon deaf ears and something is done to restore Americas’ image to the international community.
I’m responding to your Fox viewing with, I believe, E.D. Hill.
If you wish to converse more, just e-mail me. And, I’m in the white-pages (UK, i.e.).
Thanks, Gene
January 5th, 2008 at 7:26 pm
The co-dependency of this nation is staggering. What is good is now bad and what is bad is now good….exactly as the bible describes. We chastise those with common sense, who work hard, or try to be moral while coddling law breakers, the corrupt, or immoral. There is no common sense anymore–no black and white–only gray.
Our immigration law clearly states that those desiring naturalization are required to read, write, and speak english. Yet if you are illegally here or on a VISA, you may speak any language you like and we must educate you, provide welfare for you, and provide healthcare for you in YOUR language. For healthcare, I bet the cost is in the billions when you consider the litigation filed against healthcare organizations if a patient suffers due to their own inability to speak english. I do find it interesting however that the academic community receives lots of Federal funding yet it doesnt appear that universities are required to educate everyone in their native language.