Alexander's Column

The Immigration Debate Begins

Mark Alexander · Jul. 20, 2001

President Bush is back in Europe preparing for the G-8 summit, where he will continue to defend his rejection of the Kyoto (global warming ruse) Protocol and his support for missile defense – both positions enthusiastically supported by The Federalist.

Bidding Mr. Bush farewell, Senate Plurality Leader Tom “Thumb” Daschle said, “I think we are isolating ourselves, and in so isolating ourselves, I think we’re minimizing ourselves.” He added, “I don’t think we are taken as seriously today as we were a few years ago.” His comments earned him this week’s “Donkey-Derrière” Award.

Memo to Tom: Wonder why the United States is not taken seriously anymore. The Soviets and Chinese took Reagan seriously. Saddam took Bush(41) seriously. As for Clinton…. Let’s just say it will take years to recover from the domestic and foreign debacles created by Clinton and his cadre of Leftpinkies – that’s you, Tom!

Mr. Bush departed U.S. shores shortly after his administration “leaked” plans that a panel headed by Attorney General John Ashcroft and Secretary of State Colin L. Powell has been formed to recommend whether or not the President should give immunity to the estimated 5-7 million illegal immigrants from Mexico.

Regarding the status of the 6 million illegal immigrants from other nations, the Donkey-Derrière mentioned above insisted that Mr. Bush “not only limit it to Mexican immigrants but broaden it to other countries as well [including] Salvadorans, Guatemalans, Nicaraguans, Hondurans, Haitians.”

“Immigration is not a problem to be solved,” Mr. Bush commented in a speech announcing changes in INS procedures to expedite immigration applications. And in a speech to the National Council of La Raza in Milwaukee, Presidente Vicente Fox called for legal status for illegal immigrants from Mexico living and working in the United States, declaring, “Consistent with U.S. history and traditions, there should be a clear and consistent path to legal residence for those migrants who want, and are otherwise eligible, to do so.” (Break out your pocketbooks; the FICA confiscated from your wages is about to double.)

“No tan rapido, senores!” Our Constitution assigns Congress “power … to establish an uniform rule of naturalization,” and it’s an especially egregious usurpation for the executive branch to violate this particular point of separation of powers.

The United States is indeed a nation of immigrants who came to be Americans. However, the legitimate purpose of entry into this country for a lengthy stay is “naturalization” leading to citizenship – not the “regularization” (AKA amnesty) being floated as an addition to that under the Bush task force’s proposals. The only consideration Congress should invoke in setting that “uniform rule of naturalization” is citizenship in this country, with undivided allegiance to our nation. Providing a pool of laborers for specific industries must be a subordinate consideration to that of citizenship.

Materialistic analysts get this wrong, as they view entry slots (as in the H-1B visa program) as legitimate fodder to exchange with politicians for campaign dollars and support, and “guest-worker” programs would similarly be inappropriate as a consideration; particularly so, as such programs invariably increase rather than decrease levels of illegal immigration.

Illegal immigration is a serious form of trespass and theft – obviously so for U.S. property owners along the border, but also for U.S. residents generally, by eroding opportunities and benefits to citizens already here legally, and whose labor and taxes created those “national, state and local community assets” in the first place. The Federalist’s recommended approach: Our laws should be enforced and our border secure; a nation that doesn’t take its borders seriously really isn’t a nation at all.

Subscribe! It's Right. It's Free.