A little too libertarian

Re “Where the votes are,” Opinion, March 20

I agree with every one of the points made by Nick Gillespie and Matt Welch, except one. Granting amnesty to illegal immigrants is lunacy. We would, by that action, signal that we essentially have open borders; uncontrolled immigration would grow even more. The authors are libertarians. So am I, more or less. I care nothing about most social issues such as same-sex marriage, abortion, gambling, prostitution and marijuana. But Milton Friedman, one of the pillars of the libertarian philosophy, said that open borders are incompatible with a welfare state.

Yes, almost all immigrants to America are people intent on working. They are almost all young, healthy and so on. I get all that. But don’t think that we are not a magnet for people with expensive illnesses who sneak in here to get treatment at taxpayers’ expense, women intent on giving birth here to their little “anchor baby” to secure benefits, and many others who are of no benefit to our country.

We need immigration laws, which need to be enforced. Without them, this country would simply not be as nice a place as it has been.

Mike Burns

Bakersfield

--

So candidates who promise to legalize pot, ban eminent domain, legalize online gambling, make the Internet tax moratorium permanent, bring the troops home and support single-payer health insurance can win “every national election for the next several decades”? Are Gillespie and Welch serious? Do they really expect Ron Paul, Ralph Nader and others to not only start surging in the polls but also take the White House the next few elections?

They don’t need to wait to legalize pot; they’re obviously already smoking it.

Ray Walker

Camarillo