Reasons to Cut Immigration

* Kudos to Ric Oberlink for pointing out several largely neglected reasons for a substantial reduction in immigration levels (“The Case for Shutting the Door,” Commentary, Nov. 3).

Perhaps even more than the huge local government costs, the decline in the quality of our children’s education due to mass immigration should concern us all. Candid teachers will admit that large influxes of students, many who lack English fluency, force them to spread individual attention and class resources more thinly among students. This phenomenon likely adds to the pool of the marginally educated who turn to the crime and welfare use that worries policy-makers and all U.S. residents.

Environmentalists of all kinds should be concerned about the collective impact of hundreds of thousands of new residents moving here intent on becoming high resource-consuming Americans.

With replacement-level immigration of 200,000 per year, as Oberlink suggests, the U.S. would reach a balance between pursuing its social, economic and environmental needs and maintaining its traditional openness to those of other nations.

DEREK DeNARDO

Los Angeles

* Your subhead (“Quebec Isn’t a Model for America,” by Frank del Olmo, Commentary, Nov. 5) states, “The ‘bilingualism threat’ is a political red herring. Assimilation into the U.S. mainstream is the norm for immigrants.”

If the assertions made in this column are correct, why is it the most listened-to AM radio station in the area is Spanish-speaking; why is it that my C-Span 2 was dropped to make room for more Spanish-language stations on my cable system? Granted, watching the workings of the Senate probably is not as financially rewarding as Spanish-speaking programs.

I wish Del Olmo were right but I have known too many immigrants over the past 40 years to agree with him.

VEDA STOVER

Whittier