Hey, stop looking at that correction on today’s editorial page, and think about something else. How about a discussion of today’s lead editorial?
Compromise bill offers
best hope on immigrationTHESE ARE PERILOUS times in America to try to work with those across the political aisle.
No one knows that more than the brave members of both parties who came together to try to forge a deal on one of the nation’s thorniest political issues: illegal immigration. They worked for weeks to try to balance the nation’s contradictory impulses and craft a balanced bill for Congress to debate. For their pains, they were pelted with invective as soon as the doors opened. Pro-immigration groups are fuming over some of the possible new restrictions, while anti-immigration groups have tossed about their own scarlet letter A, for “amnesty.” Sen. Jim DeMint particularly was eager to get his licks in before he hadeven read it.
This is all the more reason to praise their efforts, especially those of Sen. Lindsey Graham, who has taken considerable political risk. The only way in this environment that an immigration bill is going to pass is if a group of lawmakers from both parties who know how to take and hold the political center can come together. Anything that appeals to either extreme will fail to get the 60 votes needed in the Senate. More importantly, a centrist compromise — after a thorough debate, rather than being rushed through in a week — can include ideas from all sides.
And this is an issue that needs to be addressed. Our border is too open — to illegal immigrants who often fall prey to traffickers, to smuggled drugs and to intruders with criminal or even terrorist intentions. But that is only half of our problem. The nation has a shadow society already in place, with millions living here outside the bounds of the law. They build our businesses, drive our roads and seek help in our hospitals. Our economy encourages them to come and profits from their labor. The idea that those who wish to stay will be sent packing by the millions is ludicrous. We need a system that offers a route — not a shortcut, but an opportunity to be earned — to enter the legitimate world, where they pay all taxes and obey our laws.
This compromise bill offers a balanced way to do that, overall. It would greatly strengthen border enforcement, including an eventual doubling of the ranks of the Border Patrol. It calls for a tamper-proof ID that employers can check to know they are not hiring an illegal immigrant. It also calls for a new Z visa, which an illegal immigrant can obtain. But to keep it will require the visa holder to pay thousands of dollars in fines. Z visa holders would have to wait for the backlog of legal applicants to be processed before starting toward citizenship — a wait of eight years. That’s not amnesty; it’s paying some dues.
If anything, the bill has gone overboard to be punitive. The route to citizenship for those already here is too onerous to be effective: It would take a minimum of 13 years and cost at least $5,000 in reparations. Becoming a legal citizen, after breaking the law to sneak into the United States, shouldn’t be easy. But this bill lays out a path so long that it likely will not draw many illegals out of the shadows. That’s necessary if we really want to address this problem.
We hope that the Senate has the wisdom to improve the Z visa proposal and to reject the many amendments coming forward that are intended to sink the whole bill. Not every provision in this compromise plan is perfect, of course, but it seems the best chance for some time to craft the all-encompassing correction our immigration policy needs.
What? Is that not controversial enough for you? Do I have to come up with something else? Well, I’m busy, and that might take time. For now, chew on this instead.
Related Posts
Anyone having the slightest to do with this amnesty should be voted out of office. And never should be allowed to hold office in the future.
Here’s a not-so-bold prediction: This immigration bill will have the same effect as present law. Nothing will change, save that more people in the United States will speak the Mexican version of Spanish, because Congress would rather budget something as useless as a cheese museum in West Virginia than spend money to stop the stream of potential votes for Democrats flowing north into the United States.
It’s facinating how so many Americans worry about all the wrong things. This immigration hysteria is one example. The Mexicans streaming across the border are doing so for economic reasons. Their motivation is to make a better life for their families. That’s primarily the reason everyone has always had for immigrating to American.
Throughout our history those who are already here have feared the “hoards” from abroad. Eventually the immigrants are assimilated into the mainstream fabric of the nation and we become a better place, in spite of those who would keep them out at any price.
Lighten up folks. The current wave of Mexicans coming into the U.S. are industrious hard-working, semi-skilled people who will only make our country better. We should be worried about disease, accidents, healthcare, half-baked military adventurism and above all energy. Let’s go ahead and pass this unnecessary piece of legislation and move on. We’ll all be better off in the end.
It’s amazing how you and the Chamber of Commerce are all for legitimizing the mass migration, yet you ignore or purposely oppose the interests of American workers. Of course, as usual, American workers are going to get the shaft, and our corporate aristocracy will reap the benefits of giant pool of legalized cheap labor. Now you can legally hire that maidservant for slave wages-no questions asked! Even better, you can wrap it up in the American flag and call it altruism. Everyone who opposes your view can be labeled as a racist or a xenophobe-it’s a plutocrat’s dream, come true!
I want to be altruistic also. These poor immigrants need the right to unionize lest they be exploited. As a matter of fact, all American workers need the right to unionize. Yeah, that’s it: a totally unionized American workforce. Thanks for the justification fellows. Let ‘em in!
Here is recent piece about the illegality of the United States’ participation in NAFTA, GATT, and the World Trade Organization by Michael Parenti:
Globalization and Democracy: Some Basics
“With international “free trade” agreements such as NAFTA, GATT, and FTAA, the giant transnationals have been elevated above the sovereign powers of nation states. These agreements endow anonymous international trade committees with the authority to prevent, overrule, or dilute any laws of any nation deemed to burden the investment and market prerogatives of transnational corporations. These trade committees–of which the World Trade Organization (WTO) is a prime example—set up panels composed of “trade specialists” who act as judges over economic issues, placing themselves above the rule and popular control of any nation, thereby insuring the supremacy of international finance capital. This process, called globalization, is treated as an inevitable natural “growth” development beneficial to all. It is in fact a global coup d’état by the giant business interests of the world.”
Participation in these “agreements” is in violation of the US Constitution because these agreements take precedence over the Constitution itself. Also, these “agreements” are really treaties and they were never ratified by two thirds of the Senate.
If politicians are supposed to do the will of the people then this bill won’t be passed. Too many people are against it. I don’t want to reward these illegal aliens for breaking our laws which is what we will be doing if we make them legal. I don’t care if they are coming here for better financial stability. They need to follow our laws and go by the guidelines that are already in place. We are a nation of laws. If we lose sight of that when we are doomed.
Thousands of people come into this country every year legally. If they can do it so can the people sneaking over the border. Why are they too good to follow the rules like everyone else?
People who are pro-illegal aliens say that they are doing jobs no American would do. NOT TRUE! They are displacing Americans and keeping wages too low. If Mexico’s economy was comparable to ours, not only wouldn’t they be coming here but they would need higher wages on which to live. The Mexican government needs to get off its butt and do something effective about keeping its people out of this country illegally. They are very effective at keeping illegal aliens from other parts of South American from coming into Mexico so what gives them the right to complain about what we do at our border?
NBC did a special the other night on how vegetable crops are rotting in the fields in Texas, because they can’t get enough migrant workers to harvest them.
And of course this kind of work is too good for us Americans. I think they said the pay was $7 to $10 per hour, but I forgot to note it, and I have a memory like a sieve. It if is, it reinforces my suspicion that we are just a little bit too lazy.
We wouldn’t have an illegal immigration problem if we simply adopted and enforced the immigration laws currently in effect in Mexico.
Linsdsey Graham is full of arrogance and is totally out of touch with the voters. He will be ousted next time whether or not he votes for or against this bill based on how he has been exposed. A bill that all sides agree on is one that secures our borders..unconditionally and not related to “bribes” or “triggers”. Its a matter of national security stupid and not to the appeasement of La Raza or to this most unpopular President of all times. Any elected official who says we are incapable of securing our borders unless there is a guest worker or amnesty bill shows their incompetence and/or lack of political will to do the right thing. Adios, Lindsey.
Snake in the grass, closet liberal, supercilious, condescending, I-know-better-than-you-little-people Lindsey Graham. Government is the only business I know of in which the people who run it continually attempt to tell the customers why they’re wrong. In the case of illegal immigration and secure borders we customers know very well that we ARE NOT wrong, and no amount of lying and spinning by snake in the grass Lindsey Graham is going to convince us that we are. I agree whole-heartedly Gerry: Adios Lindsey. Ed
It’s nice to agree with bud for once.
Except I don’t think it’s unnecessary. I did, but McCain reminded me that the open border does present a security liability — but only because someone other than Mexicans can get in the same way.
That’s why Mexico City was pretty much the New World’s Berlin during the Cold War — a great place for the KGB to operate from.
When people go on and on about Mexicans (often in ways that don’t make one terribly proud of the human race), one can forget that there IS a serious issue here.
Why is compromise a good thing in this case? How difficult would it be to have TWO bills – one for border security and the other for the sham amnesty plan? This is not a win-win situation that a compromise should achieve.
National id cards? Check.
Stronger border security? Check.
Hefty fines for employers who use illegal labor? Check.
Citizenship on sale for the low, low price of $5000 (and no need to pay any back taxes on any money earned while here illegally)? No way, Jose!
What part of “ILLEGAL” do you guys not understand?
This bill will never pass. Graham/McCain/Kennedy have seriously misread the American public on this one.
I wouldn’t say that the bill has to pass just as it is, but what you suggest is to do away with the “compromise” part.
You’re suggesting they keep the parts you like, ditch the parts you don’t like.
But there’s going to have to be a compromise of SOME kind — this one, or some other one — for there to be a deal on the stuff you like. That’s just the way it works when people who disagree with you also get a vote.
As for stressing that they are ILLEGAL — you’re absolutely right, they are. So why not bring them out of the shadows and get paperwork on them, and make them pay a fine that is pretty significant to a campesino?
Even if we build an impermeable wall along the border, those 12 million people are still here. I don’t understand how anyone can think that a government like ours — without the powers and resources of the Gestapo or KGB, thank God — can round up that many people who don’t want to be found. Even the idea that cracking down on every single employer who employs an illegal will send them home is a good theory, but good luck making something that huge work.
So if you can’t get them out, what’s a good alternative? There might be several, but THAT is what the conversation is about.
If you make the fines large enough for employing illegal workers, the problem will take care of itself. If it’s $5,000 for citizenship, let’s first try $50,000 for employing an illegal. Let’s try one year of enforcement before we open the floodgates.
And what do you propose be done with those illegals who do not come forward? Do you really think 12,000,000 are going to come out of the shadows if it means paying taxes? Let’s say half of them come forward… what then? What does the bill say will be done with those who do not come forward? And how long do the illegals have to make that decision?
And do you really think the current illegal employers are going to want to start paying social security, workers comp, etc.? Fat chance. What’s in it for them?
Split the bill into two. Enforcement and amnesty. Work out the compromises on each separately… not by trading one for the other. This is bad politics and bad legislation.
We can’t catch all bank robbers, so let’s bring them out of the shadows and get paper work on them too, Brad. And child molesters. And murderers. Sure, we’ll get some paperwork on ’em, make ’em pay a fine, and everything is OK, right? Is that your logic? We don’t do what’s in this “compromise” for any other class of criminal, and it’s really so ridiculous that no one even proposes it for murderers and child molesters. Why are we even contemplating it for illegal aliens?
I know Randy and RTH and others will have reasons at the ready as to why we ought to do legitimize this crime, but why must we really do ANYthing right now other than focus on border security? A country without meaningful borders isn’t long for this world. There was a time not so long ago that no one would even debate whether we need a secure border or not…we would have just made it happen. Given the dithering and outright intransigience and obstinance we see at the highest levels today, maybe this country IS nearing the end. Ed
And if it is, we have people like Lindsey Graham and John McCain to thank for it. I cannot wait to cast my vote against Graham. I only wish I could do more to ensure that he is removed from office. I hope that many Arizonans feel the same way about McCain. Ed
Add long distance mind reading to your list of failures.
LOL.
What, you mean you don’t have a bleeding heart liberal legitimization for the crime of illegal entry into this country? Hallelujia! there may be hope for you yet RTH. I wasn’t attemptimg mind reading, I was simply extrapolating from liberal positions I’ve already seen you take in recent months. This is indeed an instance wherein I rejoice in being wrong. Ed
“I hope that many Arizonans feel the same way about McCain.”
Oh, don’t worry, ed, we do. You help us boot McCain and we’ll be happy to help you boot Graham.
This blog provides a complete information package to me. So many people commented in this blog. Its great job. I was looking for this kind of immigration information. But its good to see all required information at one place.
I have got a real informative legal stuff on the subject of immigration law; have a look @ http://www.lindakaplan.com, this might help.