Monday, January 28, 2013

Brief and Direct: Immigration Policy

First in an unscheduled series of short commentaries on current events

Talk of "comprehensive immigration reform" bubbled to the surface last week. We've seen this coming for some time. Since long before the last election. In fact, as long ago as July, 2006. Then, today,

Rubio Pitching Bipartisan Comprehensive Immigration Reform

"A bipartisan group or [sic] Senators including Senator Marco Rubio are set to unveil a new comprehensive immigration reform package at a Monday afternoon press conference in Washington.
The sweeping overhaul of immigration laws would reportedly include a path to citizenship for the 11 million illegal immigrants in the country. The bipartisan deal also includes border security, non-citizen or “guest” workers and employer verification of immigration status....
According to the framework of the plan it will contain four basic legislative “pillars:” [starting with]
  1. Create a tough but fair path to citizenship for unauthorized immigrants currently living in the United States that is contingent upon securing our borders and tracking whether legal immigrants have left the country when required...."
Without going into how much of the entire agenda is strictly political, I'll only point out that very little of it addresses what many of us agree is the problem: our porous border.

Although the first pillar depends upon "securing our borders," none of the remainder do, and even the first one describes a "fair path to citizenship," rather than a means to achieve legal residency. And now that the door has been opened to comprehensive immigration law reform, it's clear to me that the idea of "security first, legislation reform to follow," has been pretty much abandoned by our leadership, including Marco Rubio, for whom I otherwise have tremendous respect. This is a direct result of President Obama's re-election, and our failure to elect more conservatives to Congress.

I promised to be brief and direct, so I will. Whatever plan they come up with under the guise of "reform," the result will be the same as every other plan we've tried in the past--and border security isn't really on their list of necessities. If the border is left unsecured, the day will eventually come when conditions in Mexico will be so unattractive to its citizens that sneaking into the United States will again (if it has ever stopped) look like the least bad of their alternatives, and the tide of illegal immigration will resume. Ignore the nonsense being mouthed today by people like John McCain. Whatever bill is proposed, its primary beneficiaries will be politicians, not the American people.

1 comment:

Flagstaff said...

Senator Rubio provided some details in interviews today. Two were with Rush Limbaugh and Mark Levin. I still don't like what they're doing, and here's some more about "why."

When this issue comes up as it always does, the psychology of the situation isn't often addressed. Psychology is the reason I and others have demanded "border security first," before we even start talking about the "comprehensive" stuff. Why? Because as soon as you start on the other stuff you give away any bargaining position you have to get the border secured, and you tell future invaders just what they'll probably get if they cross the border illegally and then keep their noses clean for a while.

As it is, very little or nothing has been done in the last four years to make the border more secure. Money was appropriated, but the Sec. of Homeland Security admits it was wasted. Yet the administration is already trying to tell us that the border is more secure than ever, and we should grant de facto amnesty NOW.

Second, I disagree with the idea that Americans are clamoring for a "solution for the 10 to 20 million illegals already in the US.

I believe the fact is that NOBODY is much exercised in any but the most theoretical sense about the presence of people who are here illegally but peacefully. Those 10 to 20 million Mexicans are in reality a gigantic barrel of red herring, designed to be rolled in front of any attempt to secure the border. We're told that we can't stop the inflow unless the barrel of fish are also dealt with, which simply isn't true.

Senator Rubio says that nothing will happen until the border is secure, and I believe he's sincere. But he's also wrong. If HIS bill is passed, the immediate result will be to tell millions of potential interlopers exactly what they have to do to achieve legal residency in the US, followed by eventual citizenship. They will know FOR SURE they won't be deported.

But why do we have to grant them a place in that citizenship line at all? Why not simply say, "You got here illegally, so part of the deal is that you can stay here but you NEVER will become a citizen of the US." I suspect that most honest illegal immigrants would gladly accept that deal, because it takes them out of illegal status. I also suspect that no Democrat, honest or dishonest, would.

Details like this are why "comprehensive" is a synonym for "never get done right." Take it one step at a time, and we can avoid a 2700 page immigration reform act that nobody can understand.