IMMIGRATION: WHAT PART OF “ILLEGAL” DON’T OUR LEADERS UNDERSTAND?
IMMIGRATION: WHAT PART OF “ILLEGAL”
DON’T OUR LEADERS UNDERSTAND?
by
Ken Eliasberg
Next to national security, the issue that figures to play a major—if not determinative—role in the election of 2008 (and, very possibly, the one in 2006) is immigration. Illegal immigration, to be more precise. And that point should be made early and often in any discussion: Americans are not upset about legal immigration. With the exception of native Americans, we are all from some other place. Some have been here longer—thanks to ancestors who either the opportunity and/or the foresight to see the fruits and freedom of America: and some have only been here a short while. It is this wonderful profusion of peoples converging on America from different corners of the globe that have made this country such a magnificent place to live. It is this
melting pot of diverse groups that have produced e pluribus unum (from many one (which, by the way is probably threatened as much by left-wing notions of multiculturism as it is by illegal immigration, but that is the subject of other columns). Here, I am concerned only with the subject of ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION. Now why should that pose a problem? We have detailed immigration laws on the books that immigrants have had to observe for decades. Why shouldn’t we just enforce those laws now? And that is the question with which this column is concerned. Why have we not cracked down on illegal immigration, particularly in view of how laxity in this area is completely incompatible with our national security concerns—given the fact that we are in the middle of the “war on terror.” Perhaps the simple answer is that there is no simple answer, but I get ahead of myself.
This is not merely just an appropriate question—it is the only question
That is relevant to a discussion of immigration today. And please, I understand the complexities and nuances of the problem, and the difficulties of implementing a solution once you have found the will to come up with one (and I intend to look at those difficulties in ensuing columns). Nonetheless, we never get to those implementation difficulties since we have never made a serious and determined effort to consider implementation. Our dialogue and discussion to date has generated a great deal of heat and very little light.
Before looking at the problem’s causes, let’s take a look at the magnitude of the problem. How many illegal aliens are currently in the U.S.? Estimates differ, ranging from a high of 25+ million to a low of 10+ million, depending on which source you consult. But you get the picture—TOO MANY! And their ranks swell by approximately 2,000 a day. The problem, of course, stems in large part from the fact that we share a contiguous border with Mexico of approximately 2,000 miles, which, even
under ideal circumstances, would be extremely hard to police. However, current circumstances are less than ideal since noone (other than the local citizenry, who have been unfairly labeled vigilantes; I prefer to think of them as voluntary militia) seems either willing or able to lend much muscle to policing our borders. Why won’t anyone do anything about the problem? Let’s take a look as the parties involved and their neglect or complicity, as the case may be.
First, let me observe that, politically speaking, the problem is bipartisan in nature. Republicans seem disinclined to touch it for two reasons: (1) they like the cheap labor that immigrants provide, and (2) they are very sensitive to being labeled racists—rich business types singling out poor Mexicans to bully. Democrats, on the other hand, are always looking for a new source of voters (their most recent scam being Hillary’s proposal to allow ex-felons to vote (it would seem that their base is getting smaller; perhaps their next move will be to just skip the “ex” part and go right to current felons). So neither party seems to have a strong incentive for getting off the immigration dime (Hillary, ever the opportunist, sensing that there’s blood in these waters, is trolling for new voters by taking a strong vocal position on this issue (however, one only has to check her voting record to note that there is a wide disparity between what she says and what she does).
Also, the Party lines are not that clearly drawn; Republicans picked up 44% of the Hispanic vote in the last election, and there is considerable evidence that a goodly number of legalized Hispanic immigrants are no more supportive of illegal immigrants (approximately 70%of whom are Mexican) than nonhispanics. Thus, Republican’s racial sensitivities in this area may not be born out by the evidence. Nonetheless, the problem can properly be laid at the doorstep of both parties, and any effort to arrive at a solution suffers from bipartisan neglect. This could prove to be a very serious mistake, and the Party tat first evinces the courage to belly-up to the bar on this problem may be a big winner in forthcoming elections.
How about Mexico? Have they evinced any interest in solving this problem? Hardly! Quite to the contrary—not only have they stoked the fires of this problem, they refuse to acknowledge that it is a problem—certainly
not one for them And why not? Because exporting illegals is one of Mexico’s largest industries; it is a very substantial source of income since the exported illegals produce one of Mexico’s largest imports—American dollars being shipped back to family members of the illegals. As noted, not only does Mexico seem disinclined to solve the problem, they are doing whatever they can to contribute to it. For example, the Mexican government has prepared a brochure or pamphlet which provides detailed instructions for the prospective émigré to the U.S. on how to circumvent our laws. It spells out with great precision as to how to cross the border in a manner calculated the émigré’s chances of getting caught.
Their president, Vicente Fox, who I thought was George Bush’s buddy, not only refuses to deal with the problem; as noted, he refuses to acknowledge that there is a problem. And he bristles at the use of the term “illegal” when referring to these border-crossing migrants. You have probably observed that it is no longer politic to speak of these visitors as illegal aliens; protocol—i.e a healthy respect for their feeling—demands that they be referred to as “undocumented workers” —at least until such time as we can call them “guest workers.”
By the way, the problem poses considerable danger to individuals who would attempt to take matters into their own hands, and I’m not talking here about merely being labeled a “vigilante” —particularly since I have tremendous respect for these people: I would certainly not be too happy if illegals were coming in, guided by criminals, and endangering and dirtying up my neighborhood. If the government won’t take action, my smpathies are entirely on the side of the “border militia.” However, it is more serious—and, consequently, more dangerous than just coyotes—the mafia is heavily involved in shipping these people North. As previously noted, it is big business, and the government of Mexico is not going to arrest anyone engaged in it. I shall have more to say about Mexico’s culpability in this matter, but, for present purposes, I strongly recommend Heather MacDonald’s November 1st column at frontpagemag.com entitled Mexico’s Undiplomatic Diplomats. For a more global take on the illegal immigration problem, I refer the reader to a monograph entitled The Open Borders Lobby and the Nation’s Security After 9/11 by William Hawkins & Erin Anderson published by the Center for the Study of Popular Culture. The authors of both publications are both knowledgeable and gifted and the publications are very informative. More on this next week.