The Doctor
11-26-2007, 10:20 PM
Subject: reply to "City action no answer to immigration mess"
Des Moines Register, Tuesday November 20, 2007
The Des Moines City Council should not pursue the idea of prohibiting local police from conducting raids on illegal immigrants in Des Moines.
America's immigration crisis is a national problem that Congress and the White House must address. Their failure last summer to pass comprehensive reform has made matters worse, but this issue cannot be resolved jurisdiction by jurisdiction.
Instead of passing local ordinances, city officials across the country should pressure national leaders to put politics aside and reach a practical, humane agreement.
The possibility of such a proposal was discussed with at least one City Council member, Christine Hensley, about six weeks ago, the Register reported Monday. Two immigration-rights groups have discussed the idea of an ordinance to ban city departments, including police, from conducting raids or inquiring about a person's immigration status.
Numerous U.S. cities and counties have policies to protect undocumented immigrants, based on a list on the National Immigration Law Center's Web site. For example, a Durango, Colo., resolution says no city resources will be used to identify undocumented immigrants for the federal government unless a crime has been committed. And Cook County, Ill., adopted a resolution declaring itself a "sanctuary county" and prohibiting county employees "to the extent legally possible" from helping in the investigation of the citizenship status of county residents.
It's generally a poor use of local law-enforcement resources to enforce federal immigration law. But it defies common sense and risks breaking the law for a city council to state that local officers must not cooperate in this regard with federal agents. Law-enforcement officers are sworn to uphold the law. There's no exemption for laws that a city council disagrees with.
In May, the Register's editorial page called for a moratorium on immigration raids, which disrupt workplaces and tear families apart, saying it was a contradiction to deport the very people who stood to benefit from then-pending immigration reform.
That reform effort must be resuscitated. And it still would be a humane decision to halt the raids, which amount to harassment for employees with legal status and terrorize people who have otherwise abided by the law after their illegal border crossing.
Almost everyone recognizes that the United States will not return all illegal immigrants to their home countries. Setting aside how difficult it would be to find everyone or whether the public could stomach the photos of mass deportation, the country will not return all illegal immigrants to their home countries because they are important to this country's economy. The only reason such raids are conducted now is to appease fierce anti-immigration foes.
So let's be realistic.
It's time for comprehensive immigration reform that - in addition to secure borders - includes a flexible guest-worker program that protects worker rights, a path to citizenship for the estimated 12 million people in the country without documentation who otherwise have good records, and higher immigration quotas that recognize the need for a larger U.S. work force and family reunification.
And now the reply from a concerned citizen..
While a mass deportation is unrealistic for a variety of reasons, other
options have the gradual effect that may help alleviate the flood of
illegals, and the subsequent influxes of naturalized relatives that has
followed. Temporary jobs are already available, and can in the future also
be made available to those illegals who step forward, and reporting back to
their own country of origin allows the open job to be reassessed on an
annual basis. Eliminating the multitude of social services
currently made available to undocumenteds (food stamps, WIC, public school,
mandatory health services, etc.)and their families would further dry up the
environment which draws them here. And this can begin to reduce illegals
without providing the achilles' heel of S. 1348--the amnesty.
A moratorium on raids has the same end result as a total disregard for our
laws--larger waves of illegals making the journey to this country to cash in
on the porous system. If those illegals detained in raids were honest about
their family members, then they could take their whole family back with them
when returned to their rightful country, thus eliminating the "tear families
apart" which your editorial decries.
The reform as configured in S. 1348 should be tagged and buried, not
resusitated. It's time to move forward on the check of S.S. numbers,
allowing the laws to work out with regard to spotting phony identities used
on the backs of legal citizens. If the laws are not then enforced by the
feds, our own infrastructure will continue to be overburdened.
But if our own citizens need to know the true costs of U.S. citizen-produced
goods and services, then that day of reckoning is not well-served by your
editorial's pandering to law-breakers on the basis of "realism". It's not
reality to expect us to subsidize bad behavior by our employers or by anyone
wanting a better life in America.
And that path to citizenship for 12M undocumenteds ought to begin in their
own country, not on the trail across la linea by cover of darkness.
Wanting a better future shouldn't begin with breaking the law of a host
country, and then expecting a pass based on emotional appeal.
---That concludes the reply.
My question is how come our papers can be reassessed annually--such as vehicle registrations, bank cards, etc, but illegals can't be required to check back in with their country of origin? That would allow others to share in the opportunity for the temporary job.
So what do ya think?
Des Moines Register, Tuesday November 20, 2007
The Des Moines City Council should not pursue the idea of prohibiting local police from conducting raids on illegal immigrants in Des Moines.
America's immigration crisis is a national problem that Congress and the White House must address. Their failure last summer to pass comprehensive reform has made matters worse, but this issue cannot be resolved jurisdiction by jurisdiction.
Instead of passing local ordinances, city officials across the country should pressure national leaders to put politics aside and reach a practical, humane agreement.
The possibility of such a proposal was discussed with at least one City Council member, Christine Hensley, about six weeks ago, the Register reported Monday. Two immigration-rights groups have discussed the idea of an ordinance to ban city departments, including police, from conducting raids or inquiring about a person's immigration status.
Numerous U.S. cities and counties have policies to protect undocumented immigrants, based on a list on the National Immigration Law Center's Web site. For example, a Durango, Colo., resolution says no city resources will be used to identify undocumented immigrants for the federal government unless a crime has been committed. And Cook County, Ill., adopted a resolution declaring itself a "sanctuary county" and prohibiting county employees "to the extent legally possible" from helping in the investigation of the citizenship status of county residents.
It's generally a poor use of local law-enforcement resources to enforce federal immigration law. But it defies common sense and risks breaking the law for a city council to state that local officers must not cooperate in this regard with federal agents. Law-enforcement officers are sworn to uphold the law. There's no exemption for laws that a city council disagrees with.
In May, the Register's editorial page called for a moratorium on immigration raids, which disrupt workplaces and tear families apart, saying it was a contradiction to deport the very people who stood to benefit from then-pending immigration reform.
That reform effort must be resuscitated. And it still would be a humane decision to halt the raids, which amount to harassment for employees with legal status and terrorize people who have otherwise abided by the law after their illegal border crossing.
Almost everyone recognizes that the United States will not return all illegal immigrants to their home countries. Setting aside how difficult it would be to find everyone or whether the public could stomach the photos of mass deportation, the country will not return all illegal immigrants to their home countries because they are important to this country's economy. The only reason such raids are conducted now is to appease fierce anti-immigration foes.
So let's be realistic.
It's time for comprehensive immigration reform that - in addition to secure borders - includes a flexible guest-worker program that protects worker rights, a path to citizenship for the estimated 12 million people in the country without documentation who otherwise have good records, and higher immigration quotas that recognize the need for a larger U.S. work force and family reunification.
And now the reply from a concerned citizen..
While a mass deportation is unrealistic for a variety of reasons, other
options have the gradual effect that may help alleviate the flood of
illegals, and the subsequent influxes of naturalized relatives that has
followed. Temporary jobs are already available, and can in the future also
be made available to those illegals who step forward, and reporting back to
their own country of origin allows the open job to be reassessed on an
annual basis. Eliminating the multitude of social services
currently made available to undocumenteds (food stamps, WIC, public school,
mandatory health services, etc.)and their families would further dry up the
environment which draws them here. And this can begin to reduce illegals
without providing the achilles' heel of S. 1348--the amnesty.
A moratorium on raids has the same end result as a total disregard for our
laws--larger waves of illegals making the journey to this country to cash in
on the porous system. If those illegals detained in raids were honest about
their family members, then they could take their whole family back with them
when returned to their rightful country, thus eliminating the "tear families
apart" which your editorial decries.
The reform as configured in S. 1348 should be tagged and buried, not
resusitated. It's time to move forward on the check of S.S. numbers,
allowing the laws to work out with regard to spotting phony identities used
on the backs of legal citizens. If the laws are not then enforced by the
feds, our own infrastructure will continue to be overburdened.
But if our own citizens need to know the true costs of U.S. citizen-produced
goods and services, then that day of reckoning is not well-served by your
editorial's pandering to law-breakers on the basis of "realism". It's not
reality to expect us to subsidize bad behavior by our employers or by anyone
wanting a better life in America.
And that path to citizenship for 12M undocumenteds ought to begin in their
own country, not on the trail across la linea by cover of darkness.
Wanting a better future shouldn't begin with breaking the law of a host
country, and then expecting a pass based on emotional appeal.
---That concludes the reply.
My question is how come our papers can be reassessed annually--such as vehicle registrations, bank cards, etc, but illegals can't be required to check back in with their country of origin? That would allow others to share in the opportunity for the temporary job.
So what do ya think?