Tuesday, July 25, 2006

Immigration Reform

I've been reading the very few immigration articles that have been published in the last week in the Washington Post, L.A. Times and NY times. There is little news out there, as the Middle East situation has rightly taken the front pages, but I plan to start posting the more significant articles here today.

The first is the new bill proposed by Kay Baily Hutchinson (R-TX) and Mike Pence (R-IN). It's a compromise that would allow the some 11 million undocumented stay in the U.S., but only after it is "certified" that the border is secure. In other words, this bill would do nothing, because the border can never be certifiably secure, thus the illegals would never receive documentation. The only thing certifiable about this proposal that puts border enforcement before addressing the real problem: allowing people into the country legally to do the jobs that no one currrently in the U.S. wants to do.

2 comments:

Bryan said...

I think your comment on the certification issue is actually 180 degrees turned around. The President today certifies that the border is secure. This is merely some artifical fig leaf that will be used to implement yet another amnesty plan. The US has "certified" that Columbia is making progress in the drug war, that Saudi Arabia provides freedom and deserves to get warplanes that may one day be used again American soldiers and American interests, that Russia is a democracy and deserves membership in the G8 (what used to be the G7). The list goes on and on.

I have absolutely no faith that certification will be used to actually make sure that the border is secure. It will simply be a formailty to be glosssed over, unfortunately.

Deb said...

I agree that the certification is a farce, but it's a farce that will allow nothing to change. There is no way anyone from Texas, or any other border state, could get away with saying the border is secure--too many people live next to it, and actually witness people crossing the border, for that to be the case.

So we agree, it is a formality to be glossed over. My point is that it is a formality that will prevent any other program move forward.