Friday, December 28, 2007
THE IMMIGRATION CONUNDRUM
Immigration is a hot button issue that divides Americans. Generally, we fall into one of three categories in our views.
Some of us are sure that we know the answer, and that answer is drastic action. Not only do these want to close the border with a fence, but they would also find ways to identify and round up undocumented immigrants and send them home, accompanied by any children who may have been born while they were in our country.
This group would require landlords, employers, schools, medical facilities, government agencies, and maybe all American citizens, to report suspected undocumented residents under penalty of law. Good Samaritans helping illegal residents in any way would be prosecuted.
This first group knows what its goal is, and they are willing to take the necessary steps to accomplish that goal, regardless of any outcry to the contrary.
A second group consists of supporters of a program similar to the “comprehensive immigration plan,” which failed in Senate last year. This failed because a large majority of Americans opposed it. This was called “amnesty,” and that was not acceptable to a majority of Americans.
Perhaps activists fanned the flames of prejudice against “amnesty,” but more likely they just gave voice to the mood of the public. Americans were reacting negatively to their country being flooded with illegal immigrants taking jobs at a cheap wage, speaking a different language, and remaining in conclaves rather than integrating into American society.
A third group of Americans consists of those who are vexed and troubled over the social and economic problems surrounding the immigrant flood. This group is often conflicted, and even confused, about its position on proposed solutions, either drastic or soft. They may vacillate from time to time in their views, depending on new information or new media assaults.
This third “eclectic” group knows there is a problem that is becoming increasingly urgent. They agree on controlling the borders. They oppose broad-scale amnesty, or similar plans for citizenship which will ultimately blanket in another 12 million or more culturally and ethnically different citizens converting American neighborhoods into barrios.
While this eclectic group may not be ready for the mass deportation of 12 million people in this country illegally, they would like to see some large number go home. They would certainly like to see every immigrant registered, documented, traced, and continuously accounted.
This eclectic group would favor requiring employers to report, register, and submit for a clearance process, every employee who is not a citizen. Employers must document an unmet need for workers at a prevailing fair wage standard.
Most Americans support strong penalties for employers of illegal immigrants. They may support penalties for landlords. But citizens do not support the prosecution of Good Samaritans who give humanitarian aid to these. Neither will they support requiring public service personnel to report those whom they serve, nor making the average citizen spy for the government. Most see nothing wrong with making English the official language or a requirement for citizenship.
The extreme solutions will not work. Some compromise within the eclectic zone needs to be found.
Immigration appears to be not only a complex economic issue, but also a hot social issue. Reasonable, rational, and manageable solutions need to be found.
Dr. Edwin E. Vineyard
Some of us are sure that we know the answer, and that answer is drastic action. Not only do these want to close the border with a fence, but they would also find ways to identify and round up undocumented immigrants and send them home, accompanied by any children who may have been born while they were in our country.
This group would require landlords, employers, schools, medical facilities, government agencies, and maybe all American citizens, to report suspected undocumented residents under penalty of law. Good Samaritans helping illegal residents in any way would be prosecuted.
This first group knows what its goal is, and they are willing to take the necessary steps to accomplish that goal, regardless of any outcry to the contrary.
A second group consists of supporters of a program similar to the “comprehensive immigration plan,” which failed in Senate last year. This failed because a large majority of Americans opposed it. This was called “amnesty,” and that was not acceptable to a majority of Americans.
Perhaps activists fanned the flames of prejudice against “amnesty,” but more likely they just gave voice to the mood of the public. Americans were reacting negatively to their country being flooded with illegal immigrants taking jobs at a cheap wage, speaking a different language, and remaining in conclaves rather than integrating into American society.
A third group of Americans consists of those who are vexed and troubled over the social and economic problems surrounding the immigrant flood. This group is often conflicted, and even confused, about its position on proposed solutions, either drastic or soft. They may vacillate from time to time in their views, depending on new information or new media assaults.
This third “eclectic” group knows there is a problem that is becoming increasingly urgent. They agree on controlling the borders. They oppose broad-scale amnesty, or similar plans for citizenship which will ultimately blanket in another 12 million or more culturally and ethnically different citizens converting American neighborhoods into barrios.
While this eclectic group may not be ready for the mass deportation of 12 million people in this country illegally, they would like to see some large number go home. They would certainly like to see every immigrant registered, documented, traced, and continuously accounted.
This eclectic group would favor requiring employers to report, register, and submit for a clearance process, every employee who is not a citizen. Employers must document an unmet need for workers at a prevailing fair wage standard.
Most Americans support strong penalties for employers of illegal immigrants. They may support penalties for landlords. But citizens do not support the prosecution of Good Samaritans who give humanitarian aid to these. Neither will they support requiring public service personnel to report those whom they serve, nor making the average citizen spy for the government. Most see nothing wrong with making English the official language or a requirement for citizenship.
The extreme solutions will not work. Some compromise within the eclectic zone needs to be found.
Immigration appears to be not only a complex economic issue, but also a hot social issue. Reasonable, rational, and manageable solutions need to be found.
Dr. Edwin E. Vineyard
