The other day, I opined on how I’m skeptical about banning preferences for immigrants. Ward Connerly sent me this email earlier today (and said I could post it a few minutes ago):

Hello Jonah, Long time no chatty! A few days ago, I happened to read your commentary in “The Corner” about my proposal to deny newly-minted “Americans” any future right to race or ethnic based preferences. You indicated that you would be willing to entertain consideration of this proposal in the event I have some “fiendishly clever” rationale for wanting this. Regrettably, my reasoning is quite straight-forward. I believe we are in the process of unwinding these programs throughout the nation. We are just one major Supreme Court decision and/or a few ballot victories away. I appreciate the perspective that “an American is an American is an American.” However, making an estimated 12 million illegal aliens “Americans” by an act of Congress is not the normal path to citizenship. That constitutes a political path. And, it seems to me that if one who has “lived in the shadows” for breaking the law is brought into the sunlight by an act of Congress that individual is subject to the political terms involved in that conversion of their status. As a former U.C. Regent, I can tell you that the most grief that I received for ending race preferences in California came not from blacks but from “undocumented” students of Mexican descent. They used the tactics of militancy reminiscent of the “black power” days. Their argument was that “affirmative action” was necessary to build the Latino middle-class and that it was their right because of the claim that we had taken their land and created this artificial border. Jonah, my friend, I am absolutley convinced that if we don’t take preferences off the table in this bill, we will bestow on a new group of Americans an expectation of preferences that will make Sandra Day O’Connor’s 25-year aspiration seem like a weekend. This new group will figure in the computation of “underutilized labor force” in every community in which they reside. In those four states where “minorities” are now the majority, these new Americans will create a set of demographic numbers and political pressure that will make preferences harden rather than erode, as now seems to be the case. Finally, there is nothing “creepy” about saying that amnestied Americans will not be entitled to preferential treatment. We deny those who are not born in America the right to become president. So, clearly, we can set the terms and conditions of citizenship for those who are not born in our nation. I hope this gives you a better perspective about my thoughts on this.