In A Land Of Immigrants, No Just Immigration Law & No Real Border Protection

In a land where almost everyone has a heritage of immigration from someplace, we have a long history of unfair immigration laws, policies and practices. In fact, in many ways our immigration laws are unjust, discriminatory and irrational. We have separate rules for immigrants and illegals coming from different nations. Latinos coming from South and Central America are treated differently than folks coming from Cuba, Haiti and the Dominican Republic. Asians have been prevented from coming to this country at all at various times in our history. During WWII we put first and second generation Japanese-Americans in internment camps but allowed German and Italian immigrants and second generation citizens to roam freely... even though FBI records demonstrate that there were tons more German spies in America at the time.

We also pursue enforcement of immigration laws in inequitable ways. For instance, Boston and New York has a ton of illegal Irish living and working in those cities, but when was the last time we saw an immigration round up that netted a bunch of Irish illegals? However, Cambodians, Vietnamese, Chinese, Mexican, Guatemalan, South American, South American and Middle Eastern illegals are rounded up on a regular basis.

Our current immigration policies and practices are essentially dysfunctional. We punish illegals for eeking out livings in under-the-table (and way under the minimum wage) jobs, but leave the employers with nothing more than a minor smack on the wrist. In the mean time, we are now considering passing a law that would punish anyone that leaves potable water in desert locations so that PEOPLE crossing over our borders illegally won't die in the process. Something is wrong with this way of thinking...

We have also done a poor job of protecting our borders, so now we have a problem of undocumented and/or illegal aliens living among us in droves. Our borders have been permeated by illegals on a regular basis... and by drug smugglers almost as often. Our border security is--and remains--as big of a security hole as our ports and chemical factories.

If we had better border security, and a fair and balanced immigration policy, we would have far less attempts to cross our borders. If people from the countries that have traditionally fought their way to our borders and paid "coyotes" to convey them across could come across in a legal manner, many of them would choose to do so.

As for the argument about guest workers... it's a smoke screen. Those industries and people that have used illegal aliens as their workforce have been violating the law, violating basic human rights, enticing illegals to come into the country, and undermining our national security... as well as tilting our national economy.

The great argument is over the idea of amnesty. None of the previous amnesty offers have really been effective. Previous efforts to have illegals apply for legal status only created a demand for an already overtaxed INS workforce. These previous efforts have done almost nothing to stem the tide of new illegals, stop people from exploiting illegal workers, and still sent our economy into a tilt.

Bush Is Facing a Difficult Path on Immigration

In the days before the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, immigration policy was going to be President Bush's signature issue. It was central to his thinking as the former governor of a border state, key to his relationship with President Vicente Fox of Mexico and essential in attracting new Hispanic voters to the Republican Party.

Five years later, Mr. Bush has at last realized some momentum on immigration policy, but it is probably not the activity he once anticipated.

He has lost control of his own party on the issue, as many Republicans object to his call for a temporary guest-worker program, insisting instead that the focus be on shutting down the flow of illegal immigrants from Mexico. It is not clear how much help he will get from Democrats in an election year.

The issue will come to the floor of the Senate next week, and the debate is shaping up as a free-for-all that will touch on economics, race and national identity.

At the end of next week, Mr. Bush is scheduled to meet with Mr. Fox in Cancún, Mexico. Immigration is likely to be a source of tension in their talks.

In short, Mr. Bush is facing another test of his remaining powers as president.

On Thursday, he called for calm in a White House meeting with groups pressing for changes in American immigration laws.

"I urge members of Congress and I urge people who like to comment on this issue to make sure the rhetoric is in accord with our traditions," the president said.

He added, in a warning to members of Congress, that "the debate must be done in a way that doesn't pit one group of people against another."

The discussion has intensified as Mr. Bush finds himself caught between two of his most important constituencies: business owners and managers on the one hand, conservatives on the other.

And now we have the opportunity to exploit this issue in the political arena.

Immigration Debate Is Shaped by '08 Election: Presidential Hopefuls Offer Their Proposals Ahead of Senate Vote

President Bush's effort to secure lawful employment opportunities for illegal immigrants is evolving into an early battle of the 2008 presidential campaign, as his would-be White House successors jockey for position ahead of next week's immigration showdown in the Senate.

Bush called on Congress yesterday to tone down the increasingly sharp and divisive rhetoric over immigration, as he renewed his push for a guest-worker plan that would allow millions of illegal immigrants to continue working in the United States. But Bush's political sway is already weakened by public unease about the war in Iraq and by Republican divisions.

Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-Tenn.), whom Bush helped elect as party leader, is threatening to bring a new immigration bill to the Senate floor early next week. It would tighten control of the nation's borders without creating the guest-worker program the president wants.

Meanwhile, Sen. John McCain (Ariz.), a rival of Frist's for the Republican nomination, is promoting Bush's call for tougher border security and the guest-worker program as he embraces the president to shore up his standing with Republican leaders. In the House, Rep. Tom Tancredo (R-Colo.) is garnering support for a long-shot presidential bid with his fierce anti-immigration rhetoric.

And after weeks of sitting on the sidelines, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) jumped into the immigration debate Wednesday. She declared that Republican efforts to criminalize undocumented workers and their support networks "would literally criminalize the good Samaritan and probably even Jesus himself."

As much as there has been flack over Hilary's comment, I think her intent was to direct attention to the provision of classifying the provision food and water to those risking a border corssing as a criminal act. But the ultra-conservative response to her comments was almost as stupid as the over-reaction of the entire Muslim world to political cartoons depicting Muhammed... While we can understand how such things are offensive, we Christians must remember Christ's teachings that we will suffer insults because of Him. As for the Muslims, they too must remember that the depiction of Muhammed by infidels will, according to the Koran, be dealt with by Justice Himself... for one of the 99 names for God is Al Hakam (الحكم) The Judge, the Arbitrator... another is Al 'Adl (العدل) The Utterly Just... and another is Al Hasib (الحسيب) The Reckoner... all of which indicate that God is perfectly capable of measuring out justice in His own fashion.

But then even our foreign policy and trade measures are somewhat schizophrenic (or at least schizoid... or perhaps hystrionic). Bush is railing against protectionism and isolationism as a result of the backlash against the Dubai Ports World deal being put on the Caybosh, and the recent revealtions that other, very similar deals have already gone through an improper process and present a threat to our national security and our economy. But according to the Bush gang, there really isn't a threat, our relationship with the world is secure... except in Iraq, Iran, Pakistan, Yemen, Palestine, Afgahnistan, Myanmar, Indonesia, North Korea, former Soviet Bloc nations, etc., etc.

Speak Softly and Carry a Smaller Stick

WE shouldn't allow isolationism and protectionism to overwhelm us," said President Bush in his press conference on Tuesday, building on the concerns that he expressed in his State of the Union address about Americans turning inward.

Recent opinion surveys affirm that isolationist sentiment has increased in recent years. Notably, a survey by my center and the Council on Foreign Relations last fall reported that the percentage of the public who said that the United States should "mind its own business internationally and let other countries get along the best they can on their own" rose to levels seen during the mid-1970's, following the Vietnam War, and in the 1990's after the cold war ended. And a companion poll of opinion leaders found that they, too, had become less supportive of the United States playing a world leadership role.

But while these trends represent significant shifts in attitudes, it would be a mistake to conclude that this country is becoming isolationist. There is no sign that most Americans want the United States to turn its back on the world or that anti-foreign sentiment in this country is rising. Discontent with Mr. Bush's policies, notably on Iraq, has led to widespread public frustration. And while it has also created more isolationists, they remain a minority.

The number of Pew respondents agreeing that the United States should mind its own business and let other countries get along as best they can climbed to 42 percent last year from 34 percent in 2004. Agreement with this statement has been roughly this high only twice in the last four decades: in 1976 and in 1995. Now as then, however, most Americans continue to disagree with this sentiment. And huge majorities, including many who express some isolationist sentiments, believe that the United States should consider the views of its allies in making foreign policy, and they acknowledge America's leadership role in the world given its power.

Polls also find no rise in broad-based anti-foreign sentiment. Americans, in fact, rate most countries more favorably than people in other countries rate the United States. For example, a February Gallup survey showed 54 percent of the public holding a favorable view of France and 79 percent a favorable opinion of Germany. In contrast, just 41 percent of the Germans and 43 percent of the French expressed favorable views of the United States in last year's Pew Global Attitudes Survey.