Council should try rational thinking

Most of our decisions are made not on a rational basis but an emotional one.

Think back to the last time you bought a car or went to Fashion Island or South Coast Plaza to shop. Whatever you bought, you bought not because you needed it but because you wanted it.

One of the important exceptions to this rule is safety. Unless we are G. Gordon Liddy, we don’t stick our hands in fire because we know it’s going to hurt.

Rationality is the reason why we wait at red lights instead of blazing right through them. We stop at red lights and wait patiently for the greens because we know that there is much greater chance of a citation, bodily harm or both if we run the red light.

The recent vote by a three-person majority of the Costa Mesa City Council to use the Police Department to enforce immigration laws was an emotional one.

Similarly, the incredibly bad decision to close Costa Mesa’s Job Center effective next month was also an emotional one.

Mayor Allan Mansoor’s decision to cease his subscription to the Daily Pilot was an emotional one. Unless he is trying to save money to buy more food, clothing, shelter or medication for his family, such a move will only have the effect of keeping him out of the loop on local issues and opinions.

And it is ironic to note that around the same time Mansoor was canceling his subscription to the Daily Pilot via the Los Angeles Times, actress Barbra Streisand, not exactly a law-and-order lady, was canceling her subscription to The Times too.

The lesson here is that you can’t please everyone.

Supporters of a tougher stance on illegal immigrants will hoot and holler about they are criminals and that’s that. It’s simple, they’ll tell you: These people broke the law, therefore they are criminals, therefore they must be rounded up and deported, prosecuted or both.

All emotional reactions to a rational matter.

Last week, it was noted here that the “dirty little secret” of illegal immigration was that businesses, large and small, don’t support crackdowns because they need the cheap labor to survive.

It was also mentioned that the illegal immigrants bring more benefits to our economy than they receive.

That last point has been made in studies several times, the latest of which was reported last Thursday by Michael Hiltzik in the Business section of the Los Angeles Times.

The subject of Hiltzik’s column was a fresh report by the Center for the Continuing Study of the California Economy, an independent think tank in Palo Alto, Calif.

This 15-member group is appointed by the governor and legislative leaders and chaired by Victoria L. Bradshaw, secretary of the state labor and workforce development agency.

Here’s the bottom line of the report: Immigration, legal or illegal, while imposing net fiscal costs on this state, produces a net economic benefit for the country.

Here’s one direct quote nugget: “Average wage levels in the state, in contrast with those in the nation, have soared. In 1990, the report says, the average wage was 10.9% above the national average. By 2004 it had moved to 13.4% above the average. Meanwhile, job growth has remained strong -- exceeding the national rate from 1994 to 2000 and pacing it since then.”

OK, so freely admitting that illegal immigrants are a drain on the state but a benefit to the nation is a rational answer to pursue Costa Mesa’s course?

Of course not.

First, it is important to note that the city of Costa Mesa may have a net economic benefit from illegal immigrants. That is certainly one question that should be answered.

Second, it should be noted that except for the money that flows back into Mexico to support families there, illegal immigrants spend their money in a very local way, thereby contributing to our economy.

This is not a call for amnesty for illegal immigrants, nor should this column or the report be seen as condoning criminal behavior.

What it begs for is a rational response to the challenge, two of which could be either a guest worker program similar to the one that President Bush has suggested or a California lobbying effort to get funds to make up the difference between the cost of our illegal immigrants and the benefits they produce for the nation.

And before anyone dismisses the merits of a guest worker program, it should be noted that such programs have been used successfully throughout the nation and throughout our history. Through the 1980s, sugar companies in Florida imported West Indian guest workers to harvest cane by hand. During the off season, the West Indians went home.

Unfortunately, the city of Costa Mesa has put an emotional stake in the ground. The City Council can stand on its head all day and shout about the criminals in our midst, but at the end of the day, the nation benefits from their presence.

Without an independent, rational examination of the costs and benefits of Costa Mesa’s illegal immigrants -- which has yet to be provided -- any course of action is an emotional one and should be avoided.

* STEVE SMITH is a Costa Mesa resident and a freelance writer. Readers may leave a message for him on the Daily Pilot hotline at (714) 966-4664 or send story ideas to [email protected].

20051217gzisd0ke(LA)