Reflection On The Immigration Legislation
By Jack Ward
Jun 16, 2007

During the debate on the Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act of 2007, S.1348, I decided to read the previous immigration laws and the new improved proposals in this legislation. Surprise – surprise, most of the problems that the politicians said S. 1348 would correct were already written into previous laws but the laws were not enforced. Why do we need news laws if the government won't enforce the existing laws? The simple answer is we don't. What is even worse is that many provisions in S. 1348 would undermine U.S. safety and culture.

Fifty three years ago President Eisenhower faced the same flood of illegal immigrants and he solved the problem in a very short time by enforcing the existing laws. What a novel idea – enforce the law! By enforcing the law, the flood of illegal immigrants over the border ceased and many of the illegal immigrants began to self-deport. President Eisenhower didn't need the provisions in new improved immigration law, so why do our current politicians think we need a new law?

First, after the Eisenhower administration, the commitment to uphold the immigration laws diminished. Second, by definition, politicians create laws. Politicians believe it is their duty to create laws even if they aren't needed. So the politicians decided they needed to write new immigration laws, and we got the 1965 immigration law. Then of course we got the 1986 immigration amnesty law. So rather that demand that the administrative branch enforce the existing laws, the legislative branch writes new laws.

S. 1348 has too many flaws to cite in a single opinion column, so I'll be brief. In the haste to create 'something', some very poor ideas made their way into the legislation. For example: As with previous legislation, there is a provision to screen the application of all immigrants. But this legislation would only allow one business day to conduct a background check to determine whether an applicant is suitable for citizenship or if they are a criminal or terrorist. It has been reported that there are still 15,000 applications for amnesty from the 1986 immigration amnesty legislation. It is understood that screening applicants for residency or citizenship is a time consuming process – but 20 years is ridiculous. So what makes any Senator think that the government can adequately screen 12 million illegal immigrants in one day when the State Department can't screen passport applications for U.S. citizens or 1986 amnesty applications in a timely manner?