By: @RUDY_MAYOR
In
short time, the Gang of Eight’s comprehensive immigration reform bill will be
reviewed by the Senate after many months of delicate negotiation and an
exhausting media tour by the bill’s proponents. If the media blitz and the
events of Boston have taught us anything it is this: we cannot wait another
year for immigration reform.
The
arguments already conjured up against the bill are falling flat. The word
amnesty is thrown around as if the bill doesn’t include strong provisions
requiring the payment of multiple fines and back taxes for circumventing the
legal immigration process. It requires individuals who came to the U.S. illegally to get to the back of the line and requires them to learn English. The bill puts the toughest border enforcement mechanisms in the history of the U.S. and fines businesses that hires illegal immigrants over American residents and citizens. What is the alternative?
Jail
time is not feasible and would not solve the legal status problem once immigrants
are released. Mass deportations are also not reasonable due to the hefty price
tag on such a massive operation. Not to mention, such a wide-scale operation
strikes me as uncompassionate and reminiscent of witch-hunts. Are we really
going to gather people up, place them in temporary holding facilities that
don’t presently exist, or at over-capacity prisons, waiting just to be kicked
out? Are we really going to maintain all these people in jail, entire families,
until we have the buses or airplanes necessary to take them to their country of
origin? Are we to drop millions of people on the
U.S.-Mexico border and expect them to run back to their country of origin? A
country of origin which, as the Boston Marathon attack reminded us, includes
European countries, Russia, and Kazakstan? Imagine the national security implications that
this and other countries would have by forced deportations of an estimated 12
million people. This operation would be of a global scale since, contrary to a
misguided belief, not all 12 million illegal immigrants are from Mexico.
Surely, this option would be an unnecessary stain in American history and doing
nothing is equally dangerous as a de facto amnesty.
Opponents
also have issues with the triggering mechanisms for border security, arguing
that they are too subjective and subject to Secretary Napolitano’s politically
motivated discretion. I agree that Napolitano paints a rosy picture of the
border and our national security. Border security is a long-term process that started with 9/11 under Bush and continues under Obama. It is sad - but true - that the border has never been more secure despite there still being huge
holes that need covering.
Not
every foot of the border needs a physical fence, however, since heat detecting sensors
and drones can be used to capture illegal entrants miles within our territory. We have learned that physical borders won't keep people out who have the will and find a way to get to the greatest nation on earth. The
key is catching them before they do any harm or disappear – and we know we have
the capability if we commit the resources to it. This bill significantly increases our capacity to capture illegal entrants and provides specific funding
that is dispersed as needs change. Without the bill, we can be sure that improvements
in border security will be slow and ineffective. With the bill, we will see significant improvements that will keep our country safe. The benefits outweigh the
burdens.
We
also know that no pathway to citizenship, even one that is twenty years down
the road for most persons here illegally, is a non-starter for Democrats and reason
dictates it should be for Republicans as well. First, not all 12 million
illegal immigrants will be eligible for a permanent residency status or
citizenship; not all of them will choose this route and not all will qualify.
Second, what is this GOP insecurity I sense about 12 million Democratic voters
ready to be legalized? Are the members of this – my – party so insecure about
the GOPs core beliefs that we somehow think our values are incompatible with
minorities or newly arrived immigrants? 19th century political
parties used to greet immigrants at the ports of New York ready to engage them
and win them over. Is the GOP of today really going to put their hands up and
refuse to engage these folks because they are new to this country? This is not a winning strategy.
When
the bill is debated, we all expect a vocal opposition and few Amendments that offer
adaptable alternatives. The fact that this bill is 800 pages long is also no
reason for opposing it - can we get to the merits? This piece of legislation makes America safer and more
economically competitive in the 21st century. The GOP establishment
has already said that giving up and not engaging minorities is not an option if
this party is going to be a viable one in national elections. Doing nothing
with respect to immigration is also not an option anymore. Ronald Reagan and
the Republicans of the 80s were unable to foresee the consequences of granting
amnesty. But this, my friends is no amnesty. The conservative approach to
immigration reform is here and it needs our support.
No comments:
Post a Comment