EDITORIAL: Immigration bill - Opinion

PRINT THIS Popular

May. 21, 2007
Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal

EDITORIAL: Immigration bill

Will compromise measure make any difference?

Congress and the White House on Friday announced a compromise "immigration reform" deal which proponents contend will end the current invasion of this nation by illegal aliens who scoff at the right of the sovereign government of the United States to set conditions for their entry and immigration.

The measure would allow illegals who are here right now to immediately come forward and pay $5,000 for a card which would "set them on the path to legal residency."

Most Popular Stories

LETTERS: Casinos learn gamblers want the human touch

EDITORIAL: Reverse discrimination

LETTERS: Reid's hometown rejects wind power? Oh my!

LETTERS: Berkley, Titus support witches' brew of taxation

GLENN COOK: Hypocrites! Hypocrites! Hypocrites!

EDITORIAL: Turn out the lights ...

EDITORIAL: Confronting witnesses

FROM OUR READERS: In the dark about the new light bulbs

Springs Preserve a positive for Las Vegas

EDITORIAL: Pricing probe

Proponents would thus be more honest to call their current proposal another "amnesty."

Perhaps we're not supposed to remember that 20 years ago, in 1986, President Ronald Reagan signed a "one-time-only" immigration amnesty law that allowed 1.3 million of those who had been in the country illegally since 1982 to apply for permanent legal resident status.

Then, after the INS obeyed the new law by turning away hundreds of thousands because they had not been in the country continuously for that five-year period as required, advocates for those who had been rejected filed class action suits that resulted in "consent decrees" that allowed them the same benefits, as well.

But Americans weren't to worry: It was all to be "one time only." Honest. New enforcement methods and technologies were to guarantee us there would be no recurrence of the need to "legalize" as many as 1.3 million trespassers, ever again.

Estimates of the number of illegal aliens currently in the country, anxiously awaiting their new amnesty? Twelve million to 20 million.

Does that mean the next amnesty, in 2027, could hand "green cards" to somewhere between 120 million to 200 million illegal aliens? Pretty soon, if we may paraphrase the late Sen. Everett Dirksen, this could start adding up.

But proponents of the new deal insist no more illegals will be allowed to enter the country, after this. Why, after all, the new plan calls for the hiring of 18,000 more border agents. Not only that, 370 miles of fencing will be erected along the 1,500-mile Mexican border.

Oh, and four new unmanned aerial drones will also be launched.

Close readers of last week's newspapers will have noticed congressman complaining they were "misled" when they allocated millions of dollars to include new "biometric identifiers" -- mug shots and digitized fingerprints -- in the nation's new border crossing cards. It now turns out the matching capability is rarely used. In fact, the scanning equipment hasn't even been installed in border vehicle lanes, for fear of worsening traffic jams.

But under the deal announced Friday, new "secure and effective identification tools" will guarantee us that no illegal alien will ever again be able to take a job in America!

There are a few good things in the proposed compromise -- assuming they can be believed, and that outraged Democrats (to whom the proposal seems too harsh, of course) don't immediately scuttle them.

Supposedly, after the new "one more time only, we promise" amnesty, just 380,000 new visas per year will be awarded on a point system -- 50 percent for employability, 25 percent for education, 15 percent for English proficiency, and only 10 percent on family connections.

Sounds good, if that really means 380,000 English-speaking Ph.D.s from Asia, Africa and Eastern Europe -- easily employable as doctors, chemists, computer engineers, and the like -- would receive priority.

Spouses and minor children of future immigrants would be allowed in, but not siblings and adult children. A slight improvement. And families could join our newly legalized "guest workers" here only if they could show proof of medical insurance and demonstrate their wages were at least 150 percent of poverty level.

Again, sounds good.

But it all comes down to: Why should anyone believe these "new safeguards" will be enforced any better than the old ones?

Share & Save

Leave Your Comment	5 Reader Comments
Terms & Conditions The following comments are provided by readers and are the sole responsiblity of the authors. The reviewjournal.com does not review comments before publication nor guarantee their accuracy. By publishing a comment here you agree to abide by the comment policy. If you see a comment that violates the policy, please notify the web editor. Some comments may not display immediately due to an automatic filter. These comments will be reviewed within 48 hours. Please do not submit a comment more than once.
Please enter your name Name: Please enter your email Email: Please enter a comment COMMENTS : (word count limit is 300) You have reached the maximum number of words allowed Current Word Count: Note: Comments made by reporters and editors of the Las Vegas Review-Journal are presented with a yellow background. Teri wrote on May 21, 2007 05:43 PM: I agree with J.J. Schrader in today's editorial. There is already a Union formed for Illegal workers demanding more money and benefits. SEIU. Does this mean all the criminals who also came across with no back ground check are granted amunity? What about the huge issue we have with the language barrier and our hospitals in chapter 11 and our schools over loaded. When people come here from other countries they respect our country, they don't desecrate our flag, they would learn the language and they would be glad and thankful to be here instead of expecting so much. I work with many American/Mexican's who tell me that they really want to take over the USA. The gang problem we have in Las Vegas proves that. We need border security and for crying out loud, let them do their jobs without throwing them in prison. If you don't beleive in immigration control talk to an American Indian. Steve wrote on May 21, 2007 10:44 AM: What the American voter needs to do to "fix" the illegal alien and amnesty problems is to vote AGAINST any politician who votes FOR the current amnesty bill. Ted Kennedy lied to America in 1986 (I know, it's nothing new that Ted Kennedy would lie about anything)and he and his ilk can't be believed today. Vote out any incumbent for a couple of elections and the "new bunch" will listen to the voters. Keep the incumbent in office and you deserve the crap you get. David Layland wrote on May 21, 2007 09:27 AM: To the Editor, I get such a kick out of how so many people treat the immigration issue as if it were one of recent history. Nothing could be further from the truth. Even going back as far as 1812 is just barely scratching the surface. Just Texas has been haggling with Mexico since the early 1600's. From 1812 to 1836 Texas fought for her independence. Sam Houston should have put Santa Anna on a ship for Spain with a message to the Spanish Crown not to come back. This country has had nothing but trouble with Mexico ever since and its nothing more than we deserve. Our biggest problem has been based in the indecisive way that we have dealt with Mexico to begin with. Its long past time that we did what Sam Houston should have done almost 200 years ago. Its time to do to Mexico by force what Mexico is trying to do to the United States by attrition. Its time to invade and by force bring these people into the 21fst century. Invade and make all those Mexican states U.S. states. All the way down to 50 miles south of Panama. The best time to have done this was right after WWII when Patton was still itching to fight but we ended up suing for peace instead. While the rest of the world was still healing from the wounds inflicted by Nazi Germany. Mexico would have fallen as easily as France did for the Nazis'. Its long past time Mexico had U.S. laws and and the kind of enforcement Americans rely on to insure their quality of life and pursuit of happiness that Americans have enjoyed for the last 200 plus years. Not to mention the responsibility that goes with it. Rogelio Viado wrote on May 21, 2007 08:40 AM: I have come not to trust our political ldrs/ We don't need another federal law to solve this immgration mess. Simply deport these lawbreakers. You reward these lawbreakers, millions more will come illegally. Soon the 2nd language will be English. Nick Cignetti wrote on May 21, 2007 03:41 AM: I am first generation born in the USA of parents and grandparents that entered this country by following the rules of entry into the USA. This bill is an insult to all of those immigrants that did it legally. The editorial stated it correctly why would we believe a government that has lied to us time and time again along with those in government violating our laws on a regular basis.