2006 October 22 Sunday
Republican House Districts Getting Most Illegal Immigrants

Why the Republican Party is going to die unless illegal immigration is stopped and reversed:

Of the 50 House districts nationwide with the fastest-growing immigrant communities, 45 are represented by Republicans. All but three of those lawmakers voted for a bill that would make illegal immigrants felons.

Overall, GOP districts added about 3 million immigrants from 2000 to 2005, nearly twice the number that settled in districts represented by Democrats, according to an Associated Press analysis of census data.

The numbers help explain why illegal immigration is such a big issue in rural Georgia, eastern Pennsylvania and in suburbs throughout the United States.

They also help explain why House Republicans passed five bills on border security in the weeks before Congress recessed for the Nov. 7 elections. Only one measure, calling for a border fence, has become law.

The AP wire service that did the analysis above also has a PDF file of immigration data which you can download and read.

You might be indifferent to the fate of the Republican Party or even hostile toward it. Fine. But if these Republican districts go Democrat because of Hispanic immigration they'll also go high poverty, high crime, high white flight into expensive enclaves, high crowding, low trust, more expensive to live in, worse places to be. So will go the rest of the country.

Steve Sailer says the poor illegals rush into the places that are most affluent and ruin them.

It's one of those natural processes, like the locust. Illegal immigrants go to prosperous places, raise the cost of living, lower wages, drive out the Republicans, increase the number of government jobs needed to take care of their social traumas, and then, when the place is Democratic voting, crowded, unattractive, and electing lots of corrupt anti-business Democrats so jobs are scarce, they move on to new Republican districts. Rinse and repeat.

I hear the Eagles singing about California "Call some place paradise and kiss it good bye" and "There is no new frontier, we have got to make it here". But the problem is that we are ruining here - or letting other people ruin here. Once the demographic changes happen there's no turning back the clock to get rid of the high crime, high political corruption, low trust, low IQ immigrants and the crowding, taxes, less productivity-raising and safety-increasing innovation, and other bad things they bring.

Some people are lackadaisical about the demographic changes wrought by immigration. They think they can go to some other place that hasn't been ruined yet. But the places you most want to go to are the places that are most likely to get ruined. Want to flee to the West? Denver, Tucson, and Phoenix are now white minority cities. Where you going to go? Not to the top Republican districts. They are too affluent with too many high paying jobs. So all the Hispanics are flooding in to work in construction, wash dishes in restaurants, mow lawns, and clean houses.

We absolutely must stop all illegal immigration and greatly decrease legal immigration. We absolutely must deport all the illegals. If we make these moves now some parts of the country can still be saved.

Share |      By Randall Parker at 2006 October 22 10:29 AM  Immigration Demographics


Comments
John S Bolton said at October 22, 2006 3:20 PM:

This is one of the reasons construction will falter as well. Few will spend time and money to move out to new houses on the exurbian fringe if the schools are already in a vicious circle of downward moves in quality from immigrant help getting to put their children into those very same districts, which are supposed to be the attraction of those places.
Low-quality immigrants drive menials' wages down and rents up to the point where they're pushed out to less-affected areas.

Rob said at October 22, 2006 7:20 PM:

John, of course they'll move: It hasn't happened yet. Gated communities and eventually gated cities will keep the elites safe from the damage they've done.

Do criminal aliens count towards proportional representation? Maybe conservatives will get a boost in the house for a while. More likely, it'll drive out conservatives and leave wealthy "liberals" who like having brown servants.

What are the precedents for successful population transfers?

Would a Marshall Plan for Mexico + Wall be a palatable trade? Plus repatriation of course: The ones here can use their new skills and abilities to lead their brethren into the enlightenment. Or whatever, as long as they go home.

Time to start checking out some Dystopian movies and books.

John S Bolton said at October 22, 2006 11:19 PM:

Looking at the political effects, a leftward move is assured.
You can't increase the proportion on net public subsidy without enlarging the constituency for more redistribution.
Whether this causes party balances to shift is less certain.
The underlying process of immigrants getting themselves accomodated, when they're lacking in language,literacy and productive skills, IQ and so on, implies wages and rents under pressure at each step down the percentiles.
It has to be worse the higher the percentages of such immigrants, those who establish themselves in that way, in a locality, to such extent that they displace not only citizens but other immigrants, to the periphery.
This is very different from the process of urbanization, or of the settlement of the land prior to that, which did not involve major declines in quality of population.

Vanishing American said at October 23, 2006 1:46 AM:

Now if only we can convince many of the GOP faithful, who absolutely accept the party line put out by Ken Mehlman et al: the idea that all these illegals will eventually vote GOP, since they are 'natural conservatives'.
And even if the districts with large numbers of illegals and other Hispanics don't go Democrat immediately, they will still become high crime, high poverty, crowded, and so on.
And you are one of the very few people who will mention deportation and curtailing legal immigration. So many people are caught in the PC mindset which says that all legal immigration is good; only illegal is bad.

John S Bolton said at October 23, 2006 2:22 AM:

There is a reluctance to mention concern over quality of population, which leaves politicians to imagine that the concern is over legality, and saying they can fix that the easy way.

Rusty Mason said at October 23, 2006 11:38 AM:

Any change for the better will only come once Whites allow themselves the freedom to talk openly and honestly about race/ethnicity. As it stands now, no one wants to say the obvious because they are afraid that they will be called nasty names and have their income and property threatened. So the problems continue to grow. When I can say openly that I want to live exclusively in a community of people with my same ancestry (British-American) and not be condemned as a multicultural heretic (a vicious racist, anti-Semite, Islamophobe, etc.) then we will be able to have an honest discussion about immigration.

Joseph Hertzlinger said at October 23, 2006 1:21 PM:

This is a bit surprising. Since illegal aliens take the sort of jobs that were done by adolescents a generation ago, they should be expected to move to areas where there's an adolescent shortage. Those areas tend to vote Democratic.

I suppose by now the areas that had adolescent shortages are now starting to have employer shortages.

Rusty Mason said at October 23, 2006 3:31 PM:

Adolescent shortages might be occuring in the more affluent areas, as you suspect. Most middle class and financially successful people I know do not discipline their children to work for their own money, they just give the children money and electronic equipment for nothing.


Post a comment
Comments:
Name (not anon or anonymous):
Email Address:
URL:
Remember info?

      
 
Web parapundit.com
Go Read More Posts On ParaPundit
Site Traffic Info
The contents of this site are copyright