ORDER AT THE BORDER
NEW YORK POST
Editorial
March 28, 2006
The full U.S. Senate today begins debating legislation dealing with what arguably is the most vexing domestic issue facing this country: the crisis of uncontrolled illegal immigration.
Vexing, because everyone agrees that the system is broken - but what to do?
Let's be clear on one point: The issue at hand is illegal immigration, what its proponents disingenuously refer to as the cause of "undocumented immigrants." It is not about ending legal immigration.
As President Bush rightly noted yesterday: "Our immigrant heritage has enriched America's history. It continues to shape our society. Each generation of immigrants . . . adds vitality to our culture."
But as the president also told new immigrants at a swearing-in ceremony, this is a nation of laws - and "to keep the promise of America, we must enforce the laws of America . . . No one is served by an immigration system that allows large numbers of people to sneak across the border illegally."
On that, most agree. After all, 9/11 provided a deadly lesson in how dangerously porous America's borders truly are.
So there was scant argument yesterday when the Senate Judiciary Committee voted to double the size of the Border Patrol, now just 11,300 agents.
Problem is, what should be done with the 11 million or so illegal immigrants already here - and who continue to enter, mostly from Mexico, at the rate of 500,000 a year?
The House voted last December to criminalize illegal immigrants and those who aid them, as well as businesses that fail to verify the legal status of all employees. The Senate - and President Bush - favor less-harsh measures.
Fact is, many of those who've crossed the borders illegally came here for a better life - and many have become productive, taxpaying members of society.
Their cause was not helped over the past few days by the hundreds of thousands of demonstrators who took to the streets across the nation to protest any crackdown on illegal immigration.
Folks who have been asked to support outsiders seeking to share in the "American dream" likely were shocked by the thousands waving Mexican flags and chanting "Mexico, Mexico."
The marches were provocative, and meant to be so.
Is it not reasonable also to see in them an implicit bid to effectively move Mexico's border north?
All the more reason why simply declaring what is illegal to be legal won't work; nor will blanket amnesty do the trick.
Especially when so many others - like the new Americans sworn in yesterday by the president - followed the rules and waited their turn.
Yet that essentially is what the Judiciary Committee approved late yesterday, adopting a mostly Democratic bill that removes criminal penalties, offers new "guest worker" opportunities and clears the way for illegals to become citizens without having to leave the country.
This is just what Congress tried back in 1986: an amnesty, combined with a ban on hiring future illegals that came with few enforcement teeth - all guaranteeing more illegal immigration.
This time there can be no amnesty, by whatever name, until Washington begins enforcing existing immigration law.
That's the central point of the House bill, which beefs up border control while throttling down on the supply of jobs awaiting illegals here that are vastly superior to what is available at home.
This would slow illegal entry, but be vastly more fair to those immigrants who respect the rules.
Forced repatriation, also under consideration, is a drastic - and politically explosive - option. But it needs to be part of the debate, if only to underscore the gravity of the current debate.
Self-respecting countries defend the integrity of their borders. A failure to do so carries consequences.
In the final analysis, that's the issue.
nypost.com |
