Back in 1986, there were approximately two million illegal immigrants in this country. Whether you called them illegal immigrants or undocumented workers, the bottom line is, they weren’t supposed to be here, but they were.
After considerable debate, the consensus view by our leaders in Washington at the time, was “since we can’t round up two million people and deport them, we’ll grant them amnesty just this one time; and we’ll finally get serious about controlling our borders.”
Well, it’s 27 years later. We still don’t have control of our borders. And instead of two million illegal immigrants, we now have somewhere between 11 and 25 million.
Yesterday President Obama, and two days ago a bipartisan group of eight Senators, released their plans for “reforming” our immigration laws. Not surprisingly, what amounts to amnesty (although, they don’t call it that) is being proposed, and, oh yeah, we’ve got to do something about those darn borders. “Pathway to citizenship” apparently sounds more innocuous than amnesty, (just as raising “revenues” apparently doesn’t make us bristle as much as raising our “taxes” does, even though it hits us just as deeply in the wallet.)
I oppose this latest so-called comprehensive immigration reform plan, for a number of reasons.
First of all, we’ve been here before. The amnesty is granted now. The border control never happens. And in fact, it is likely to encourage MORE illegal immigration, because it sends the message loud and clear, come to the U.S. illegally, and if you stay long enough, eventually you’ll be granted amnesty.
Another reason I oppose both President Obama and the eight Senators’ plan, is that it is unfair to allow those who have willfully and intentionally broken our nation’s immigration laws to, in essence, cut in front of those who have been patiently and legally waiting their turn to become U.S. citizens, from all around the world. It is rewarding bad behavior. It’s un-American.
A sovereign nation has the right to determine who it wishes to accept as citizens, and who it does not. The United States should use its immigration laws to welcome the best and the brightest. We want people coming to our shores who will help our nation grow and prosper; we want job-creators.
We should minimize the entry to our country of people who have minimal education, minimal skills, and are likely to be a burden on American taxpayers. Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and our education system, are already under severe financial strain.
Let’s be frank. Mitt Romney did very poorly among Hispanic voters last November. And many political pundits (and some Republicans) have been saying that the way for Republicans to appeal to these voters is to agree to comprehensive immigration reform – and specifically, agree to amnesty. I disagree.
First, you can’t out-Democrat a Democrat. If Republicans move to the left, Democrats will just move further to the left.
We must win on principle. Republicans are better for Hispanics because our policies are better for them. More freedom, lower taxes, and less government waste, means a more vibrant economy, more job opportunities, higher wages. Republicans believe in school choice; a better education for our children. Democrats oppose school choice, and have thrown in with the teacher unions, not the children. Republicans believe in safer neighborhoods, strong families, protecting innocent unborn babies.
But too often Republicans have allowed ourselves to be defined by our liberal opponents. That’s got to change. Fortunately, there’s still time.
But supporting amnesty, is not the answer. Even though at least four Republican Senators, and an awful lot of political pundits, are convinced that it is.
