Kyl has been Bush’s hand puppet on every issue.  Every issue, that is, except the illegal alien invasion from Mexico.  On that issue Kyl is foursquare for border enforcement first.
 
That poses a dilemma for this voter.  Kyl’s position on other issues pushes this voter in the direction of his probable Democratic opponent, Jim Pederson.  But …
 
Illegal aliens from Mexico are invading our country.  This is a front burner issue for this voter.  Many politician now find it expedient to make a cursory nod in the direction of border security as they drive by before they vigorously put the pedal to the metal for “guest worker” legislation.
 
Kyl is not doing that.  His genuine call is to secure the border, period!  Once that is done, then and only then can we talk about those illegal aliens among us.  It is two separate issues, and the solutions are separate and distinct. 

I'm not so sure Jim Pederson sees it that way.  Let's take a look at his posted position on this issue.

Mr. Pederson's website says: 

“The first step toward getting comprehensive immigration reform is to take out the gimmicks and stop the political games. “

Amen!  But what are those gimmicks?  What are those political games?

“Everyone - Democrat, Republican or Independent - ought to be able to agree that we need to do a better job securing our border.”

Yup!

“Better enforcement means utilizing new technologies. It means increasing the number of Border Patrol agents. It means reinvigorating the Community Oriented Policing Services program so we can put more police officers on the streets.”

OK.  But it also means enforcing our current laws against hiring the illegal aliens.  I’m sure Mr. Pederson meant to include that in the paragraph above.

“Next, we have to get real about the millions of undocumented workers residing in the United States.”

Hopefully Mr.  Pederson is emphasizing NEXT.  The amnesty program back in 1986 mandated border security too, but it never took place!  All the emphasis was on the AMNESTY features in the law.

How do we “… get real about the millions of undocumented workers residing in the United States.”?

“Any border security plan must include the relief valve of an effective guest-worker plan.”

Oh oh.  Was that a border security drive-by before speeding on to the real plank in his platform , AMNESTY?  The NEXT (or better yet, SIMULTANEOUS) step must be the enforcement of laws on the books today.  Tough employer sanctions, in the form of family fortune busting fines and serious jail time, will dry up those jobs for illegal aliens from Mexico faster than those illegal employers can say God Bless America! 

A good portion of the illegal alien problem would dissipate as these people de-immigrated back across the border.  They won’t stay here without income.  Solution accomplished!  No one is talking about roundup and deportation here.   It's automatic and the transportation is on the illegal alien, whether its afoot or on horseback.

Now we can talk about a “guest-worker” program.  But only after securing our borders and getting serious about enforcing laws already on the books!

“Make no mistake, a guest-worker plan is crucial to national security. It allows law enforcement to meticulously track who is in the United States. And it allows us to effectively differentiate between the migrant worker seeking to care for his or her family and the al-Qaida terrorist.”

Right!  All those people that de-migrated back across the border can now get in line for a green card (Oh.  Wait.  Don’t we already have a guest worker program?!?)

“We could pile thousands of enforcement officers behind a 50-foot wall and not keep out a hungry worker willing to fill a job that no one here wants. It's got to be Americans first when it comes to any job, but if that job goes unfilled we must match that job with the worker and make sure that worker pays taxes, obeys our laws and learns English. With that kind of law, we could throw the book at any employer who hires an illegal immigrant.”

Americans first?  “…jobs that no one here wants” at the wages that the employer knows he can offer that “guest-worker” standing right there behind that American was what Mr. Pederson meant, I’m sure.

And why not “throw the book at any employer who hires an illegal immigrant” under laws already on the books?  Would a new law be enforced where the current law has not been?!?

“Finally, let's give the millions of undocumented people already here an incentive to come out of the shadows. By doing this, law enforcement would know exactly who is in our country.”

AMNESTY!  AMNESTY!  Watch the stampede of illegal aliens now as they position themselves for the next capitulation.  It happened after the 1986 “amnesty but wink at enforcement” law was passed.  Here we go again (Wink. Wink.)

Let me rephrase the solution for you.  Dry up the illegal job market.  That is THE INCENTIVE.  Period. But Mr. Pederson is a business man, so he probably knows this.

“At the same time, blanket amnesty would be wrong. Along with the opportunity to gain legal status comes the responsibility to pay penalties for coming here illegally.”

A rose by any other name is still a rose.  Amnesty by any other name …

“Some in Washington, D.C., are more concerned about playing election-year politics than actually getting things done. That is the motivation behind an unrealistic plan circulating in Congress that would require illegal immigrants to voluntarily turn themselves to be deported.”

See if you can find the grammatical error in the last sentence.   See if you can find the political boilerplate in the preceding paragraph.

“Let's get real about illegal immigration. And let's stop pandering to partisan politics. We know what the answers are, but Washington is not willing to do it. I am. That is why I am running for the U.S. Senate.”

Right.  But this voter needs to be convinced that Jim Pederson has as realistic a view of the issues as does Jon Kyle.  

And therein lies the conundrum for this voter.