Immigration reform has become far too complicated since it became such a political firestorm due to the many interest groups that have a hand in it. What is the issue in the simplest of terms can be asked in the following way. How do you balance the safety of a country's citizens and their interests, and the humanitarian perspective of allowing immigrants into the most powerful and largest economy in the world? Isn't that the basic question?
Every country has the right to protect its national interests and its borders. It also has the right to allow immigrants that represent the best option for the country. If educated immigrants are best for the country, then the country has the right to limit those only to the educated immigrant. If low cost labor is in the best interest of the country then it has the right to limit immigration to those who fit that description.
Is it wrong to take into consideration the best interests of the country before the humanitarian needs of those immigrants that are seeking a better life away from their own countries that may be persecuting them or that have high unemployment rates, economic underdevelopment, etc?
The answer is of course yes. Its citizens and their national interests come first and a country is in no way responsible for people outside of its borders. The world chose to be divided into sovereign nations with borders claiming what’s theirs within those borders for the people that constitute citizens of that particular country.
It happens that in the case of the United States being the largest economy in the world it does need immigration flow in order to maintain the growth of its economy and the appropriate workforce for its industries. And the United States chooses to allow a certain number of immigrants to flee persecution, war and poverty. But there is a limit to what it can do and what it should do without affecting its rightful citizens.
Unfortunately, many sleazy politicians have chosen to demonize the illegal immigrants that are already in the country. These people seek a better life for their families and to escape harsh conditions in their respective countries. Most of these people come from the 3rd world and just south of the U.S.'s southern border. Most of these people are unskilled workers that provide valuable unskilled labor in industries such as hospitality, construction, farming, food processing and others that require a large number of unskilled workers.
Likewise, those many interests groups such as La Raza and Chicanos por La Causa, etc. and those Democrats that make up the left side of the spectrum on this issue must also stop making this strictly a political favor. The more under educated immigrants that can become citizens the more political clout these groups will have, strength in numbers if nothing else. This author may be too cynical, but for them to make us believe that they are fighting for reasons of humanity and social justice should also sell us the Brooklyn Bridge. The realities are that the average Latino has a 3rd grade education and make combined family incomes (two income homes) of less than $22,000 a year even after 5 and 6 generation in this country. Many Latinos have been living here for 20 plus years and have trouble speaking the national language, English, and yes it is the national language whether it is made a law or remains unofficial. The same argument from this side of the spectrum has been that this country was and is founded by immigrants. The "melting pot" as it is referred to so often. The major difference is that the original immigrants had mostly common cultural backgrounds and values. The second wave in the early 1900's again had common cultural backgrounds and values from that of the original immigrants that founded the country. Most were from European working class backgrounds with many similar cultural beliefs and values. Now the last several waves starting in the mid 70's have come from the very poor 3rd world where double digit unemployment runs rampant, where corruption is ingrained in its every day culture. Many of these immigrants have been unemployed or underemployed for years and have very different set of cultural values from the Anglo Saxon majority of the United States.
The truth is that this country has a right to choose the immigrants and cultural backgrounds that bests suits it. And even if it is willing to allow other cultures to immigrate it has the right and obligation to insist that they assimilate into the national identity which is to speak English, abide by its laws, work hard and celebrate its flag, national customs and holidays that define it.
Every interest group manages to point out particular studies, of the countless number of studies that are conducted regularly in this country, which best fits their specific agendas. You can find many studies that will tell you that these illegal immigrants are a tremendous benefit to the economy and others that they are a drain to the economy. Many sleazy politicians and bias news media networks that demonize these simple people for their personal political careers and financial gains initiate xenophobic emotions from particular groups of constituents (mainly the less educated and less informed) will tell you that illegal immigration hasn't been a benefit to the economy. Economic statistics show that illegal immigrants have in fact been very beneficial to the economy and consumer markets. However, the scale is slowly starting to shift.
The more expensive health care becomes, the more expensive public education becomes and the greater number of illegal immigrants coming in will at some point in the future tip the scales the other way and they will become a drain to the economy. But let us not miss the point. There are many reasons why these people are illegal immigrants. Our government puts a limit to immigration according to workforce needs, and a percentage for humanitarian purposes and this is adjusted every year according to the needs. Those that don't fall within the legal status are in fact not necessarily needed other than for purposes of hiring cheap labor. And yes, there are always differences in determining the labor needs of US industry between the private and public sectors. But irregardless of those differences, lawful means to bring consensus to immigration reform are the only way to determine policy. Just allowing for mass illegal immigration and the practices of hiring cheap undocumented workers goes against the lawful national interests of the country.
How do you bring consensus and reconciliation between both sides of the political spectrum on this issue? This is most likely the most explosive issue in this country besides the war in Iraq. The many different interests groups that are restrictive vs. the nonrestrictive are millions of miles apart. To simply say that both sides must make compromises when the gap between them is so big is just naive.
Unfortunately, the blame for the mess that defines our current immigration policy was created decades ago. The person most responsible is the most revered Republican in modern history, Ronald Reagan. When President Reagan pushed through and blessed an amnesty program that allowed scores of undocumented workers to become legal aliens and were given a path to citizenship, the flood gates were open and have stayed open for many millions of new illegal immigrants hoping that history will repeat itself. And it is for this reason that a new amnesty program is a game of Russian roulette. Patch up the wound with a new path to citizenship for the illegal immigrants and hope that another 11 million or 20 million more will not take that as an invitation to cross the borders.
There is another new issue that was absent during the Reagan years, homeland security. The country has a new and probably the most formidable enemy in its history, fundamental Islamic terrorism. Border security takes a very different and imperative concern. Terrorist organizations are not only slipping in through the southern border but from the northern border as well. This enemy is cowardice as it does not wear a uniform and is clearly identifiable, this makes it very difficult to be stop Islamic terrorists from entering America. This further complicates the issue. Often times it is difficult to differentiate Arabs from Latinos because of skin color and other similarities in physiological facade. After all, most Latin Americans come from a mixture of Spanish and native indigents. Spain was conquered and ultimately ruled by the Arab Moors over a period of 500 years.
Islamic extremism is rapidly disseminating like an unstoppable plague. And the American homeland therefore becomes a greater target more and more everyday. Making it even more important to determine a strict set of criteria for who are candidates for legal immigration or guest worker programs. The US as unjust as it may seem to the liberal left, must deny further entry of Islamic Arabs and racial profiling must take a part in determining the criteria of the what constitutes the ideal legal immigrant.
Getting back to the need for immigration reform, if in fact the private sector is correct that there is a grave need for foreign workers, a policy that creates a guest worker program is essential. However, it is also important to clearly define such a policy and program. It must be restrictive in nature that addresses the national interests of the country. This gets back to defining the type of immigrant that bests suits the interests of this country. Do they need to be educated? Should they be required to speak the English language? Since it would be a temporary guest workers program, should they be allowed to bring with them their immediate families? Should the government discriminate based on race and religion? In other words, should Islamists be singled out and denied entry simply for their set of beliefs like those described in the Koran. The belief that infidels must die (infidels are defined as anyone that is not Islamist or Muslim). How often should they be required to return to their homelands to reapply for another term as temporary workers? Like these there are hundreds of unanswered questions that must be analyzed and clearly defined.
Even after many of those questions are well defined and a specific criteria is created that defines who exactly will make up this guest worker program, the issue of the 11 million illegal immigrants still remains. Do these illegal immigrants take precedence because they are already here and have employment? Are these people criminals because they are breaking the law by illegally immigrating here? These questions must be answered only after a specifically defined set of criteria is created for what makes up an ideal candidate to be a guest worker in the US. And only after that can we evaluate those illegal immigrants currently living in the US. Since they have already become part of the economic machine it becomes difficult to deport that many illegal immigrants. That does not exclude them however from having to meet the criteria. Those that meet the well defined and specific criteria determined by both private and public sectors based on the best interests of the country can stay and those that do not must then be deported.
It is important for our leaders to be completely objective and non-partisan (very unlikely, this is why this issue is so complex). Those politicians as stated earlier in this blog that use this issue to win votes by demonizing these people and fomenting racism for political favor will only worsen the gap between both sides of immigration reform. So are these people criminals? They are in fact breaking the law by crossing illegally into the US. But is there a legitimate argument that the intent to break the law exists or is absent in the minds of these people. Are they doing this to escape brutal conditions in their respective countries in order to save their families from famine, persecution and disease? Does that make them bad people? Come on now, who wouldn't do the same for their families? Anyone that has a speck of decency and love for their families should feel compassion for these poor people. But no matter how much one feels compassion, every sovereign country has the right to control and determine what is best for their countries with regards to immigration. Mexico deports illegal immigrants from Central and South America, so does Guatemala and so on. It is a horrible reality that these poor people have to risk their lives, live in the shadows and constant fear of racial persecution, but our government must first see for its own citizens. Period!
What really is disturbing is the gull of the current Mexican president and his predecessor and many other Mexican politicians that are campaigning for immigration reform in the US. Now that is something infuriating. He and any Mexican politician or Guatemalan politician, etc. should feel responsible and brought to justice for the fact that their greed and corruption are the reasons that these people must flee from adverse conditions in those countries. Mr. Calderon you want compassionate immigration reform then pay for it. Cut the US government a check to provide these people with the tools to meet the criteria that will make them candidates for a guest worker program or citizenship and the social needs that they will require. And while you are doing that fix the rampant corruption that creates the adverse conditions that your citizens are trying to escape.
In conclusion, the complexity of this issue brought by such a massive gap between both sides of the political spectrum of this issue has me unable to give a clear solution to the problem. I hope that at least I provide some more food for thought about this politically explosive issue. One thing is for certain every country has the right to control immigration according to the best interests of its citizens.
Every country has the right to protect its national interests and its borders. It also has the right to allow immigrants that represent the best option for the country. If educated immigrants are best for the country, then the country has the right to limit those only to the educated immigrant. If low cost labor is in the best interest of the country then it has the right to limit immigration to those who fit that description.
Is it wrong to take into consideration the best interests of the country before the humanitarian needs of those immigrants that are seeking a better life away from their own countries that may be persecuting them or that have high unemployment rates, economic underdevelopment, etc?
The answer is of course yes. Its citizens and their national interests come first and a country is in no way responsible for people outside of its borders. The world chose to be divided into sovereign nations with borders claiming what’s theirs within those borders for the people that constitute citizens of that particular country.
It happens that in the case of the United States being the largest economy in the world it does need immigration flow in order to maintain the growth of its economy and the appropriate workforce for its industries. And the United States chooses to allow a certain number of immigrants to flee persecution, war and poverty. But there is a limit to what it can do and what it should do without affecting its rightful citizens.
Unfortunately, many sleazy politicians have chosen to demonize the illegal immigrants that are already in the country. These people seek a better life for their families and to escape harsh conditions in their respective countries. Most of these people come from the 3rd world and just south of the U.S.'s southern border. Most of these people are unskilled workers that provide valuable unskilled labor in industries such as hospitality, construction, farming, food processing and others that require a large number of unskilled workers.
Likewise, those many interests groups such as La Raza and Chicanos por La Causa, etc. and those Democrats that make up the left side of the spectrum on this issue must also stop making this strictly a political favor. The more under educated immigrants that can become citizens the more political clout these groups will have, strength in numbers if nothing else. This author may be too cynical, but for them to make us believe that they are fighting for reasons of humanity and social justice should also sell us the Brooklyn Bridge. The realities are that the average Latino has a 3rd grade education and make combined family incomes (two income homes) of less than $22,000 a year even after 5 and 6 generation in this country. Many Latinos have been living here for 20 plus years and have trouble speaking the national language, English, and yes it is the national language whether it is made a law or remains unofficial. The same argument from this side of the spectrum has been that this country was and is founded by immigrants. The "melting pot" as it is referred to so often. The major difference is that the original immigrants had mostly common cultural backgrounds and values. The second wave in the early 1900's again had common cultural backgrounds and values from that of the original immigrants that founded the country. Most were from European working class backgrounds with many similar cultural beliefs and values. Now the last several waves starting in the mid 70's have come from the very poor 3rd world where double digit unemployment runs rampant, where corruption is ingrained in its every day culture. Many of these immigrants have been unemployed or underemployed for years and have very different set of cultural values from the Anglo Saxon majority of the United States.
The truth is that this country has a right to choose the immigrants and cultural backgrounds that bests suits it. And even if it is willing to allow other cultures to immigrate it has the right and obligation to insist that they assimilate into the national identity which is to speak English, abide by its laws, work hard and celebrate its flag, national customs and holidays that define it.
Every interest group manages to point out particular studies, of the countless number of studies that are conducted regularly in this country, which best fits their specific agendas. You can find many studies that will tell you that these illegal immigrants are a tremendous benefit to the economy and others that they are a drain to the economy. Many sleazy politicians and bias news media networks that demonize these simple people for their personal political careers and financial gains initiate xenophobic emotions from particular groups of constituents (mainly the less educated and less informed) will tell you that illegal immigration hasn't been a benefit to the economy. Economic statistics show that illegal immigrants have in fact been very beneficial to the economy and consumer markets. However, the scale is slowly starting to shift.
The more expensive health care becomes, the more expensive public education becomes and the greater number of illegal immigrants coming in will at some point in the future tip the scales the other way and they will become a drain to the economy. But let us not miss the point. There are many reasons why these people are illegal immigrants. Our government puts a limit to immigration according to workforce needs, and a percentage for humanitarian purposes and this is adjusted every year according to the needs. Those that don't fall within the legal status are in fact not necessarily needed other than for purposes of hiring cheap labor. And yes, there are always differences in determining the labor needs of US industry between the private and public sectors. But irregardless of those differences, lawful means to bring consensus to immigration reform are the only way to determine policy. Just allowing for mass illegal immigration and the practices of hiring cheap undocumented workers goes against the lawful national interests of the country.
How do you bring consensus and reconciliation between both sides of the political spectrum on this issue? This is most likely the most explosive issue in this country besides the war in Iraq. The many different interests groups that are restrictive vs. the nonrestrictive are millions of miles apart. To simply say that both sides must make compromises when the gap between them is so big is just naive.
Unfortunately, the blame for the mess that defines our current immigration policy was created decades ago. The person most responsible is the most revered Republican in modern history, Ronald Reagan. When President Reagan pushed through and blessed an amnesty program that allowed scores of undocumented workers to become legal aliens and were given a path to citizenship, the flood gates were open and have stayed open for many millions of new illegal immigrants hoping that history will repeat itself. And it is for this reason that a new amnesty program is a game of Russian roulette. Patch up the wound with a new path to citizenship for the illegal immigrants and hope that another 11 million or 20 million more will not take that as an invitation to cross the borders.
There is another new issue that was absent during the Reagan years, homeland security. The country has a new and probably the most formidable enemy in its history, fundamental Islamic terrorism. Border security takes a very different and imperative concern. Terrorist organizations are not only slipping in through the southern border but from the northern border as well. This enemy is cowardice as it does not wear a uniform and is clearly identifiable, this makes it very difficult to be stop Islamic terrorists from entering America. This further complicates the issue. Often times it is difficult to differentiate Arabs from Latinos because of skin color and other similarities in physiological facade. After all, most Latin Americans come from a mixture of Spanish and native indigents. Spain was conquered and ultimately ruled by the Arab Moors over a period of 500 years.
Islamic extremism is rapidly disseminating like an unstoppable plague. And the American homeland therefore becomes a greater target more and more everyday. Making it even more important to determine a strict set of criteria for who are candidates for legal immigration or guest worker programs. The US as unjust as it may seem to the liberal left, must deny further entry of Islamic Arabs and racial profiling must take a part in determining the criteria of the what constitutes the ideal legal immigrant.
Getting back to the need for immigration reform, if in fact the private sector is correct that there is a grave need for foreign workers, a policy that creates a guest worker program is essential. However, it is also important to clearly define such a policy and program. It must be restrictive in nature that addresses the national interests of the country. This gets back to defining the type of immigrant that bests suits the interests of this country. Do they need to be educated? Should they be required to speak the English language? Since it would be a temporary guest workers program, should they be allowed to bring with them their immediate families? Should the government discriminate based on race and religion? In other words, should Islamists be singled out and denied entry simply for their set of beliefs like those described in the Koran. The belief that infidels must die (infidels are defined as anyone that is not Islamist or Muslim). How often should they be required to return to their homelands to reapply for another term as temporary workers? Like these there are hundreds of unanswered questions that must be analyzed and clearly defined.
Even after many of those questions are well defined and a specific criteria is created that defines who exactly will make up this guest worker program, the issue of the 11 million illegal immigrants still remains. Do these illegal immigrants take precedence because they are already here and have employment? Are these people criminals because they are breaking the law by illegally immigrating here? These questions must be answered only after a specifically defined set of criteria is created for what makes up an ideal candidate to be a guest worker in the US. And only after that can we evaluate those illegal immigrants currently living in the US. Since they have already become part of the economic machine it becomes difficult to deport that many illegal immigrants. That does not exclude them however from having to meet the criteria. Those that meet the well defined and specific criteria determined by both private and public sectors based on the best interests of the country can stay and those that do not must then be deported.
It is important for our leaders to be completely objective and non-partisan (very unlikely, this is why this issue is so complex). Those politicians as stated earlier in this blog that use this issue to win votes by demonizing these people and fomenting racism for political favor will only worsen the gap between both sides of immigration reform. So are these people criminals? They are in fact breaking the law by crossing illegally into the US. But is there a legitimate argument that the intent to break the law exists or is absent in the minds of these people. Are they doing this to escape brutal conditions in their respective countries in order to save their families from famine, persecution and disease? Does that make them bad people? Come on now, who wouldn't do the same for their families? Anyone that has a speck of decency and love for their families should feel compassion for these poor people. But no matter how much one feels compassion, every sovereign country has the right to control and determine what is best for their countries with regards to immigration. Mexico deports illegal immigrants from Central and South America, so does Guatemala and so on. It is a horrible reality that these poor people have to risk their lives, live in the shadows and constant fear of racial persecution, but our government must first see for its own citizens. Period!
What really is disturbing is the gull of the current Mexican president and his predecessor and many other Mexican politicians that are campaigning for immigration reform in the US. Now that is something infuriating. He and any Mexican politician or Guatemalan politician, etc. should feel responsible and brought to justice for the fact that their greed and corruption are the reasons that these people must flee from adverse conditions in those countries. Mr. Calderon you want compassionate immigration reform then pay for it. Cut the US government a check to provide these people with the tools to meet the criteria that will make them candidates for a guest worker program or citizenship and the social needs that they will require. And while you are doing that fix the rampant corruption that creates the adverse conditions that your citizens are trying to escape.
In conclusion, the complexity of this issue brought by such a massive gap between both sides of the political spectrum of this issue has me unable to give a clear solution to the problem. I hope that at least I provide some more food for thought about this politically explosive issue. One thing is for certain every country has the right to control immigration according to the best interests of its citizens.
Posts
1 comments:
Way to go Raf! This is me Mike! I'm passing your blog along buddy!
Post a Comment