As an English teacher in Mexico (I currently teach high school and college levels) I find this article interesting, it’s entitled “Not Even Teachers Can Speak English”.

It’s about the recent inspection of schools in Arizona that revealed the poor English skills of many of the state’s English teachers.

Now common sense would tell us that, if the kids’ English teachers can’t speak English well, that’s an impediment to the students learning English well.

Some of us might even conclude that it’s a sign that we’re importing too many people to successfully assimilate, especially if the teachers themselves aren’t fully assimilated.

Being a second-language speaker of Spanish myself, I can sympathize with immigrants whose native language is not English. I make mistakes all the time when I speak Spanish. But on the other hand, the Mexican government does not pay me to teach Spanish to non-speaking Spanish immigrants in Mexico. In fact, I recommend they don’t hire me for that job.

As for the Arizona problem, don’t worry, the Arizona educrats have a plan.

“The state under a new plan is requiring that schools put language learners into four hours of classes each day where the students will learn English grammar, phonetics, writing and reading.”

OK, great. But once again, what if the teachers don’t speak English well?

Well, there’s another program:

“It also has a new program to help school managers train teachers in the new procedures.”

OK, that’s great. But will it help the English teachers (remember, we’re talking about English teachers here) to speak English better?

One of the less noticed groups lobbying against American national security is the travel industry. It routinely fights against passports and visas (in particular the dangerous Visa Waiver program)
as making travel more troublesome for foreigners, and therefore lessening profits for hotels, airlines and other members of the “hospitality” industry.

“Tourists complain that U.S. immigration officials are rude and disrespectful, and they don’t think that’s a good way to start a vacation,” Bloomberg said. “This is another one of those things that is diminishing our competitive edge.”

Travel industry advocates say the U.S. should be working harder to maintain an industry that brought $107.9 billion into the country in 2006 — essentially making services to travelers one of the nation’s major exports.
[U.S. Tour Industry Focuses on Foreigners, San Francisco Chronicle 9/02/07]

That’s big money for travel honchos to protect. Incidentally, there’s no reason why immigration officials cannot be professionally polite as well as thorough in checking entrants for potential enemies.

Many of the Visa Waiver countries are in Europe, now home to tens of millions of Muslims, a considerable proportion of whom are hostile to Western values. Retired Immigration Officer Michael Cutler recently underlined the connection between the tourist industry and the Visa Waiver program, which allows citizens of 27 countries to enter America without the important screening that a visa application requires:

I have been told by unimpeachable sources in Washington that it is the executives from the travel, hospitality and tourism industries that have been behind the continuation of the perilous Visa Waiver Program.
[Government's Illusional Border Security, News with Views 6/11/07]

Peter Gadiel of 9/11 Families for a Secure America made the same point when he testfied before Congress on March 20 of this year.

My members and I paid a terrible price for the open borders espoused by the travel industry, which profits from our government’s failure to properly screen the millions of aliens who enter our country each year. So I will not mince words: the policies that the travel industry successfully lobbied for led directly to the admission of the terrorists of September 11 and thus to the murders of 3000 Americans.

It’s sad to contemplate that our national security remains severely compromised by the travel industry’s harmful demands and Washington’s slavish obedience to business above all else.

Larry Craig’s vigorous endorsement of amnesty throughout his Senate career may have played a role in his resignation.

Let’s speculate on how it might have turned out differently.

Idahoans are strongly opposed to illegal immigration. During a CNN report from Boise last week, one unidentified male said: “The reason I would like to see him go is because he voted for amnesty, despite what Americans, or what Idaho citizens wanted.”

The two Idaho representatives, Bill Sali and Mike Simpson, have A- records on immigration reform. Sen Michael Crapo has an identical A- grade.

Craig, however, is C- overall but a defiant D- on amnesty.al

But suppose Craig had publicly argued against amnesty. There’s a chance that Idahoans might defended him post-scandal saying: “Craig is our guy. He stared down President Bush on amnesty because he knows that’s where the state is on the issue.”

And Craig, with local support, could have refused to resign. After all, no one can force him to do it. Craig could have toughed it out by insisting that for the time being, he’s remaining and he’d evaluate his 2008 re-elections plans as time went forward

G.O.P. leadership threatened long and embarrassing public hearings unless Craig resigned.

But, think about it, why would the Republicans do that? All it would mean is protracted, negative headline producing media that would reflect poorly on not only Craig but also the entire party. [“Rising Pressure From G.O.P. Led Senator To Quit,” Carl Hulse, New York Times, September 2, 2007]

Too bad Craig didn’t heed his constituent’s wishes for stern immigration reform. Had he done so, Craig might have been able to ride out the storm.

Senator Elizabeth Dole recently met with front-line law enforcement in her state of North Carolina to discuss the growing problem of illegal alien crime. At least one county there has instituted the 287(g) program of checking the immigration status of arrested persons with the feds.

A handful of Triad-area sheriffs were involved in the latest meeting in Greensboro. They estimate in some cases up to 40 percent of their crime involves illegal immigrants

“Everything from prostitution, drugs, trespass, driving while impaired,” said Guilford Sheriff B.J. Barnes, “the whole gamut of crimes we have out there, and they’re committing a lot of them.”

Authorities say it can be difficult to identify illegal immigrants, and difficult to move them through the judicial system and then there’s the issue of jail overcrowding. [...]

Dole says that’s an important part of homeland security, and addressing the issue of illegal immigration “If you want to feel safe and secure in your homes, this part of it needs to be done,” she said, “because nothing else really matters, does it, if you can’t feel secure.”[News 14 | Dole meets with Triad sheriffs, by Bob Costner, August 31, 2007]