(Bush needs to)Get serious about immigration reform

President Bush seems impaled on the false choice of appealing to the Hispanic vote or enforcing laws against illegal immigration. Politically, legally and morally there is no conflict — and there is a great deal of synergy — among these objectives.

Bush, searching for a way to recapture the national agenda, needs to seize this issue and make it his own. A full and reasoned program will galvanize national support and unite the nation behind tough measures to enforce our laws and maximize opportunities for those who already live here legally.

• Back the fence. Walls work. Just as the Israelis whose West Bank fence keeps terrorists out and has reduced terrorist attacks inside Israel to a fraction of their former number and intensity. Good fences make good neighbors and the United States should act to regularize the traffic of immigrants into the country by the kind of border control that only a well positioned fence can offer. This is no Great Wall of China seeking futilely to keep out the rest of the world. It would be a modern, high tech affair, spotting breaches and relaying the information to highly mobile border guard units to plug them up.

• Establish a legal guest-worker program. Nobody can deny the manifest need of Americans — both individuals and businesses — for the work that currently illegal immigrants provide. They would not be coming if they did not have access to jobs, and there would be no work if there were no demand.

Bush’s current program for legal guest workers is a good one and should be adopted in the context of broader immigration reform. But the plan should include a track to citizenship for these workers, providing certain criteria — such as English fluency, English literacy and no arrest record — to let them earn the right to become American citizens.

A guest-worker program will end the leper colony within our borders of disenfranchised, invisible illegals who have no rights and no responsibilities.

• Prosecute visa overstays. Half of the people who live here illegally entered the United States with legal visas and overstayed them. All 19 of the Sept. 11 hijackers came here under the law and then stayed on after their visas had expired (or should have been revoked because they did not attend school, having entered on student visas).

That we cannot rid our country of these illegal immigrants is hard to understand. We have their names, photos, fingerprints, addresses and phone numbers, but we do not deport them.

The main reason for their immunity is the lack of deportation judges and courts and the inadequate number of holding cells for detainees. Of the 160,000 people the United States arrested as illegal immigrants last year, 120,000 were released, without bail, back onto our streets. We need a massive expansion of judicial infrastructure to cope with the problems of illegal visa overstays.

President Clinton helped to lower the crime rate by doubling the prison space under his 1994 anti-crime bill. We need a commitment of similar magnitude.

• Regularize cash shipments home. A vital form of foreign aid for Mexico and the impoverished countries of Central America is the remittances sent each week by illegal immigrants to their families back home.

Last year, Mexican men working here sent $11 billion to their wives and children — the second leading source of foreign-currency earnings after oil for the nation. We need to regularize this flow of cash and provide immigrants with security, bank accounts and low-cost ways to send money home.

Combating illegal immigration need not smack of racism. It is important to all American citizens — Latinos and Anglos — and is in the national interest. But it is also in our interest to allow immigrants to come and settle here legally.

Immigration is keeping America young and vital. If not for the annual flow of 3 million people — about half legal and half illegal — we would be much like the nations of Europe, losing population and watching their populations age. But we cannot afford the current chaotic flow of immigrants over a theoretical border. We need to enforce the law and make it fair.

Funny how you quote Proverbs 17, a chapter which contrasts individuals' behaviors: it is pointing to the difference between those whose behavior is upright and those who are wicked; this has NOTHING to do with ALLOWING a person to act as a CRIMINAL, to ALLOW a person to break a country's legal and legitimate laws because he takes issue with those laws (which are not immoral laws). Those with an upright character follow and obey laws; the wicked do not, rather, they seek selfish gain. Illegal aliens are breaking American laws for selfish gain. God does not condone criminal behavior. It is disingenuous of you to suggest otherwise.

Luke 20:21 And they asked Him, saying, Master, we know that thou sayest and teachest rightly, neither acceptest thou the person of any, but teachest the way of God truly:
22 Is it lawful for us to give tribute unto Caesar, or no?
23 But He perceived their craftiness, and said unto them, Why tempt ye me?
24 Shew me a penny. Whose image and superscription hath it? They answered and said, Caesar's.
25 And He said unto them, Render therefore unto Caesar the things which be Caesar's, and unto God the things which be God's.

The Bible says that God loves the alien (Deuteronomy 10:17, Zechariah 7:10, Leviticus 19:10, Ezekiel 22:29 Deuteronomy 24:14 ..etc).

Again, you wrongly use the Scriptures to twist God's meaning and intent.

When Jesus said, "render to Caesar what is Caesar's," He wasn't just talking about taxes; He wanted to make sure that His followers understood they are to follow and obey the laws of the land under which they are subject....this theme is throughout ALL the Scriptures. The only time there is a suggestion that man's law may not be followed is when it clearly goes against God's moral laws. And since you freely quote the Scriptures, I'm sure you know there are countless instances where the Prophets, Jesus, and His Disciples forbid God's followers from breaking a country's laws, committing crimes for personal gain, encouraging others to commit crimes, or making excuses for lawbreakers.

Even the devil knows Scripture and quoted them to Christ:

Then the devil took him to the holy city and had him stand on the highest point of the temple. "If you are the Son of God," he said, "throw yourself down. For it is written:

'He will command his angels concerning you, and they will lift you up in their hands, so that you will not strike your foot against a stone.'
Jesus answered him, "It is also written: 'Do not put the Lord your God to the test.'" — Matthew 4:5-7

"Funny how you quote Proverbs 17, a chapter which contrasts individuals' behaviors: it is pointing to the difference between those whose behavior is upright and those who are wicked; this has NOTHING to do with ALLOWING a person to act as a CRIMINAL, to ALLOW a person to break a country's legal and legitimate laws because he takes issue with those laws (which are not immoral laws). Those with an upright character follow and obey laws; the wicked do not, rather, they seek selfish gain. Illegal aliens are breaking American laws for selfish gain. God does not condone criminal behavior. It is disingenuous of you to suggest otherwise."

Sorry if I wasn't clear in my previous posting. I never said criminal behavior should be allowed. I never said that it is OK to break laws. I was saying that in CERTAIN cases where the person broke the law, there should be a chance for atonement that doesn't involve them losing everything they worked for and us losing an economic contributor. You can accuse me of advocating milder punishments ..but I absolutely did not advocate ALLOWING crime. I realize that crossing a border illegally is not the same as speeding or DUI so there should be stiff punishments. But still for certain exceptional cases I am advocating forgiveness, or a reduced punishment such as a fine or maybe a short jail term rather than deportation. This only would apply to those whose effect on the country has been the same as a citizen or legal immigrant since their arrival (that is, not caused a net loss to the economy and society). Is there really any harm in earned legalization to those few (AGAIN NOT MOST) who have spent years here building their lives here without destroying it for others? Again, I am not saying to allow hoardes of barbarians into the country!

God sets the boundaries of the peoples, etc., etc.

I take it this means you are against LEGAL immigration as well?? Can you please let me know which verse you are referring to so that I can tell you my view on it? I am going to assume you are referring to Deut. 32:8? If so, clearly this doesn't mean to close US borders to LEGAL immigration, I don't see how it means that ..it is describing God's powers and not asking people to keep out legitimate immigrants or anything like that. Surely then all the travel and hospitality to aliens in the Bible would not be possible. In the Bible, there are many instances of people moving among nations and also see the references to how aliens are supposed to be treated and God's opinion of them in my previous posting. More than once God has expressed displeasure at people or nations who maltreat aliens. And plus, I assume you are living in America? Are you 100% Native American? If not, how does that stand with your implied interpretation of Deut. 32:8 ?

He's selectively quoting the Bible, and deliberately ignoring the many verses that say the opposite of what he's trying to say. Like don't steal, don't covet, be in submission to the authorities over you, a city without walls is a bad thing, take care of those of your own household first

I didn't say that stealing is OK. And I did not say that it is OK to break laws. I am against law breaking obviously, but I do have a similar view as our President when it comes to blanket punishment.

Rewarding bad behavior begets more bad behavior, either with the individual or, with the example it sets for others.

We have millions of "others" already in this country, illegally, with no hope of it halting.....why? Because of the bad behavior that has been, and continues to be, allowed.

Threats must be followed by consequences, otherwise they're hollow and empty; actually, empty threats are worse than no threats, as it does not do anything but encourage further bad behavior.

This can be seen in any restaurant. Look at the wild children compared to those who behave. Want to guess which of those children are greeted with consistent discipline, void of empty threats?

Behavior/choices, good or bad, should have appropriate consequences. Rewarding bad choices/behavior further encourages sames.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.