Amnesty is Not the Answer to
Illegal Immigration
By
Bobby Eberle
Beginning with comments by Homeland Security Secretary Tom
Ridge on December 9 and continuing through information released from the White
House ever since, a growing number of conservatives are bracing for what appears
to be the administration's push to grant amnesty to a sizeable portion of the
estimated 8-12 million illegal aliens currently residing within the borders of
the United States. Although the "a" word is not used and even denied,
this rose, by any other name, still stinks.
Speaking at a townhall meeting in Miami, Sec. Ridge said,
"The bottom line is, as a country we have to come to grips with the
presence of 8 to 12 million illegals, afford them some kind of legal status some
way, but also as a country decide what our immigration policy is and then
enforce it."
Ridge is right about several things. First, there are 8-12
million illegal aliens in this country, and second, we must decide what our
immigration policy is and then enforce it.
However, one should immediately ask, "Don't we have an
immigration policy?"
Policy? Maybe. Immigration laws? Definitely. The problem is
that with 8-12 million illegals in the United States, we are clearly not
enforcing our existing immigration laws.
"I'm not saying make them citizens, because they
violated the law to get here," Ridge added in an attempt to clarify the
matter. "So you don't reward this type of conduct by turning over a
citizenship certificate. You determine how you can legalize their presence, then
... you make a decision that, from this day forward, this is the process of
entry, and if you violate that process of entry we have the resources to cope
with it."
Didn't the secretary just say above that America is not
trying to reward illegal behavior? Doesn't granting "legal status" to
those here illegally reward the illegal behavior? Am I missing something?
Reaction to Ridge's comments was swift. In a letter signed
by 36 Members of Congress, Ridge was told that the "mere discussion of the
possibility of amnesty" encourages illegal immigration. The members
expressed their "grave concern" over his remarks and asked for
clarification.
"We must enforce existing immigration laws," the
congressional members wrote. "The law enforcement approach would reduce the
migration of illegal aliens, reduce the ill-gotten net gain from illegal
immigration, raise American wages, improve American working conditions, reduce
the overall illegal population, and reduce the number of crimes committed by
illegal aliens."
The letter was signed by conservative leaders such as Rep.
Steve King (R-IA), Rep. J. D. Hayworth (R-AZ), Rep. Tom Tancredo (R-CO), Rep.
Kevin Brady (R-TX), and Rep. Charles Pickering (R-MS), among others.
The members bring up an obvious point in their letter which
is being overlooked by many of today's lawmakers: amnesty programs don't
work.
In 1986, under former President Reagan, a general amnesty
program was put in place whereby approximately 2.7 million illegal aliens were
granted legal status. In addition, Congress enacted a new set of laws and
policies aimed at eliminating illegal immigration. The result? Rather than
looking at 2.7 million illegal aliens, we are now faced with the problem of 8-12
million people who are inside the United States illegally. Clearly, the efforts
did not end illegal immigration, but rather sent the message that illegal
behavior can be rewarded. Is that really the message America wants to send
again?
At his end of the year press conference, President Bush
said that his administration is "firmly against" blanket
amnesty.
"I have constantly said that we need to have an
immigration policy that helps match any willing employer with any willing
employee," Bush explained. "It makes sense that that policy go
forward. And we're in the process of working that through now so I can make a
recommendation to the Congress."
The president is right in that it is smart for America to
have an immigration policy which aids business whenever possible. If there are
certain jobs which are not being filled by Americans in the work force, then
having a policy in place in which someone from another country can step forward
and perform the task is a good idea. However, granting legal status to those in
the country illegally does not help the problem. In addition to the economy, we
must also look at security. Rewarding illegal behavior only encourages more
illegal behavior.
Unless we do more to end the flow of illegal immigration,
we are asking for trouble. What's easier: hunting down terrorists who have come
to America illegally and who are now embedded and hidden until the time to
strike, or stopping the terrorists from entering in the first place?
There is no doubt that some form of guest worker program
will be one day be heading toward the president's desk. If drafted correctly,
this type of program could be a win-win for all sides: business, immigration
advocates, and all Americans concerned with homeland security. But, a guest
worker program will only work if thorough background and security checks are
performed prior to someone entering the country. Security starts at the borders,
and men and women who are here illegally should not be afforded a status which
is currently being sought by countless other men and women through legal
channels. It's up to all Americans, not just those who are politically
conservative, but all who are concerned with homeland security to say no to
amnesty. Illegal activity should be prosecuted, not rewarded.
Bobby Eberle is President and CEO of GOPUSA (www.GOPUSA.com),
a news, information, and commentary company based in Houston, TX. He holds a
Ph.D. in mechanical engineering from Rice University.
|
