How tough is it to honestly discuss United States immigration policy? Nearly impossible for Miguel Perez and others of his persuasion, as Mr. Perez repeatedly demonstrates in a recent column titled “Bashers Will Meet Defeat.” Rejoicing in Tom Tancredo’s withdrawal from the Presidential race, Mr. Perez confidently predicts other “immigrant bashers” will soon meet a similar fate. “The candidates who used illegal immigrants as guinea pigs will suffer surprising defeats in the primaries,” boasted Mr. Perez, aiming his accusation exclusively at Republicans. With the primary season about to get underway, average Americans will be waiting on pins and needles to see if Mr. Perez’ prediction materializes.
There’s just three small problems with Mr. Perez’ analysis. One is that he cleverly hedged his bets by not naming the candidates he doomed to defeat, an oversight difficult to explain since all seven Republicans still in the race hold positions similar to Tancredo’s on illegal immigration. Mr. Perez’ forecast can’t miss, making him the front runner for prognosticator of the year. Why, he’s about to eclipse Isaiah as world’s greatest prophet! Across the board, candidates from both parties have come out for strong border enforcement and vigorous sanctions against employers hiring illegal aliens (see the candidate statements below), an inconvenient truth for illegal immigration proponents like Mr. Perez.
Next, Mr. Perez foolishly plays fast and lose with the truth, repeating a long-disproved contrivance designed to justify unlawful entry into the United States. ”Americans still recognize that most immigrants — even those who came here illegally — have been assets to the country,” asserts Mr. Perez, a falsehood nowadays believed only by far-left cool-aid drinkers. Americans know illegal aliens cost somewhere in the neighborhood of $5 for every $1 they contribute to society, bilking the U.S. taxpayer out of billions for a host of free services. Worse, criminal illegal aliens are terrorizing neighborhoods, choking the justice system, and filling prisons beyond capacity, further fleecing law-abiding citizens. For instance, efforts to deport criminal illegals have been abysmal failures, as a recent LA Daily News story made distressingly clear. “A national effort dubbed the Fugitive Operation Program target[ed] 597,000 immigrants who have been ordered by a judge to leave the country but still remain,” a wasteful and, in this age of terrorism, dangerous misallocation of police resources. The American voter has said “Enough!” leading even former pro-amnesty advocate John McCain to get religion on illegal immigration. Positioning himself as sensitive to voters’ concerns, McCain said, “The message is the American people want the border secured.” Ending illegal immigration has become the leading issue in Iowa, for goodness sakes.
The third flaw in Mr. Perez’ opinion piece is his incessant ad hominem attacks – name-calling for those of you residing in West Palm Beach. Resorting to schoolyard tactics when the truth doesn’t back your argument is an easily detected ruse, thanks to Bill Clinton’s oft-used policy of character assassination. Here’s a sampling of Mr. Perez’ debate style, calling his opponents “mean-spirited, intolerant, immigrant bashing, extremist, ugly American, inhumane, un-American, ruthless xenophobe, fear mongering.” Most of these invectives appear in the first three paragraphs, proving Mr. Perez gets to the meat of his argument early on.
In case Mr. Perez is wondering, Americans know we are a nation of immigrants, but not illegal immigrants. Back in the day when United States immigration policy made sense, an orderly process guaranteed successful immigration, aiding the country and those coming here. My mother’s family came to America from Germany in the early 1920s, largely to escape the eviscerating economic conditions of the Weimar Republic. Here, in short form, is what mom and her family experienced. My maternal grandfather gained entry to the U.S. only after securing an American sponsor and employment. That’s right; a job was waiting for him when he got here, the happy circumstance arranged by the sponsor. Grandfather worked for two years, building financial resources and establishing a home of his own, before his family — my grandmother, mother, and her two sisters — were allowed to follow. Settling in San Francisco in 1925, my mom and her sisters immediately enrolled in school. No one in their classes spoke German, and they knew not a word of English, a barrier quickly overcome by determined effort. Years later mom recounted the endless trips to the library, a regimen insisted on by her mother and rewarded with rapid and flawless apprehension of the English language. All five immigrants became United States citizens and lived long, productive, law-abiding, taxpaying lives. They and the country benefited each other.
Mom’s story used to be the norm, and can be again. Determined, relentless, informed average Americans can restore sane immigration policy as we force more and more elite inside-the-beltway characters, like John McCain, to see the light. As for Mr. Perez, once he puts the interests of immigrant and nation ahead of his own ambition, he may also become a proponent of legal, rational, mutually beneficial immigration. He’s welcome any time.
Candidate positions on illegal immigration, viewed on campaign websites:
Rudy Giuliani: “Border security and homeland security are inseparable. A core responsibility of the federal government is to control our borders. To do this, we need to build a physical fence and a high-tech fence. We need a larger, better-trained border patrol. We need a tamper-proof biometric ID card for all non-citizens and a single national database to keep track of foreigners entering and exiting our country. If a non-citizen commits a crime they should be deported. Finally, we need to reconnect immigration with Americanization, requiring immigrants to read, write, and speak English. Rudy Giuliani believes we need to end illegal immigration…”
Mitt Romney: “Stop Illegal Immigration.” “Secure The Border. Follow through on Congressional commitment to build a physical and technological fence along the southern border, and secure other points of entry. Implement An Enforceable Employer Verification System.Issue a biometrically-enabled and tamperproof card to non-citizens and create a national database for non-citizens so employers can easily verify their legal status in this country. Reject Amnesty. Do not give amnesty or any special pathway to those who have come to this country illegally. Punish Sanctuary Cities. Cut back federal funding to cities that are ‘sanctuaries’ for illegal immigrants and refuse to comply with federal law or aid federal law enforcement.”
Mike Huckabee: “In this age of terror, immigration is not only an economic issue, but also a national security issue. Those caught trying to enter illegally must be detained, processed, and deported. As Governor, I ordered my state troopers to work with the Department of Homeland Security to arrest illegals and enforce federal immigration law.”Fred Thompson: “No Amnesty. Do not provide legal status to illegal aliens.” “Attrition through Enforcement. Reduce the number of illegal aliens through increased enforcement against unauthorized alien workers and their employers. Without illegal employment opportunities available, fewer illegal aliens will attempt to enter the country, and many of those illegally in the country now likely will return home.” “Enforce Existing Federal Laws. Enforce the laws Congress has already enacted to prevent illegal aliens from unlawfully benefiting from their presence in the country.”John McCain: “I have always believed that our border must be secure and that the federal government has utterly failed in its responsibility to ensure that it is secure. If we have learned anything from the recent immigration debate, it is that Americans have little trust that their government will honor a pledge to do the things necessary to make the border secure. As president, I will secure the border. I will restore the trust Americans should have in the basic competency of their government. A secure border is an essential element of our national security. Tight border security includes not just the entry and exit of people, but also the effective screening of cargo at our ports and other points of entry.”
Duncan Hunter: “I have a 27 year record of fighting illegal immigration and promoting border security. As a member of Congress with a Southwest border district heavily impacted by the effects of illegal immigration, I have steadfastly opposed amnesty proposals, including voting against the 1986 amnesty law, while tirelessly working to strengthen border security. Amnesty is not the answer. In fact, it encourages a whole new wave of illegal immigrants who seek to catch the next amnesty.
Hillary Clinton: “Hillary strongly believes we need to do more to know who is in our country by securing our borders and ensuring that employers comply with the law against hiring and exploiting undocumented workers. She supports deploying new technology that can help stop the flow of undocumented immigrants into the country and an employer verification system that is universal, accurate, timely, and does not lead to discrimination and abuse by employers.”
Barack Obama: “Obama wants to preserve the integrity of our borders. He supports additional personnel, infrastructure and technology on the border and at our ports of entry. Obama will remove incentives to enter the country illegally by cracking down on employers who hire undocumented immigrants.
John Edwards: “The first step in overhauling the immigration system is to secure our borders and stop illegal trafficking. Edwards supports doubling the number of border patrol agents and investing in surveillance technology to police the borders. We also need to crack down on employers that hire undocumented immigrants. Edwards supports more vigorous workplace enforcement and increased fines for businesses that knowingly break the rules.”
Posted by Jerry Pomeroy in Campaign 2008, Illegal Immigration, Politics