Amnesty for ‘Dreamers’ is not an option. Congress must secure our border instead.
Amnesty for ‘Dreamers’ is not an option. Congress must secure our border instead.
January 1, 2018 8:36 am
https://bdn-data.s3.amazonaws.com/up...16-600x600.jpg
One of the issues Congress is grappling with is the sticky issue of the status of DACA recipients. Those covered under DACA (Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals) were brought to the country illegally as children and teenagers, and as adults they were granted deferment from deportation. But President Donald Trump suspended the program in September.
This will be a contentious issue during the debate leading up to the Jan. 19 deadline to pass the 2018 fiscal year budget. Surprisingly, 34 GOP representatives are among those supporting legalization for the 690,000 current DACA recipients, and they recently sent a letter to Speaker of the House Paul Ryan urging a “permanent legislative solution” for DACA recipients.
One of those signatories is Maine’s 2nd District representative, Bruce Poliquin. The “solution” mentioned in the letter is not defined, but it goes on to say that any remedy must give “them the opportunity to apply for a more secured status in our country as soon as possible.”
Translation: amnesty.
Poliquin asserts he is against amnesty, but anyone with even a casual knowledge of immigration issues knows that granting legal status eventually leads to citizenship, in spite of whatever restrictions would be included in any legislative solution. Any legalization leading to citizenship would, through chain migration for family members, expand the number far beyond the 690,000 DACA recipients into the millions, dwarfing the 1986 law that saw amnesty given to 2.7 million illegal aliens.
Instead of spending time on considering amnesty, more attention should be given to border and other security issues. Indeed, the letter to Ryan states, “we all agree that our border must be enforced, our national security defended, and our broken immigration system reformed.”
So let’s attend to these worrisome issues. There are several pieces of pending legislation that would do just that, two of which are Kate’s Law and the No Sanctuary for Criminals Act.
Kate’s Law was introduced in response to the killing of Kate Steinle in 2015 in San Francisco by an illegal alien, who had been deported five times. A jury in November acquitted Jose Ines Garcia Zarate of murder in Steinle’s killing.
It should not have happened. San Francisco is one of the several hundred “sanctuary cities” around the country that have prohibited local law enforcement from cooperating with immigration enforcement officials. Kate’s Law would increase the maximum sentences for non-criminal and criminal aliens who “unlawfully reenter the United States.”
The No Sanctuary for Criminals Act would require “sanctuary jurisdictions” to cooperate with immigration enforcement officials, and if they do not do so, they would be ineligible for federal law enforcement grants.
Let’s not forget that Portland has an ordinance barring city officials and police from asking anyone about his or her immigration status, a measure that resulted in the Center for Immigration Studies classifying it as one of the 340 sanctuary jurisdictions in the United States.
These two bills would directly address the national security concerns Poliquin and the other 33 representatives noted in their letter to Ryan. Kate’s Law and No Sanctuary for Criminals Act have both passed the U.S. House of Representatives and were sent to the U.S. Senate.
Consider this: President Barack Obama exceeded his authority by establishing DACA, usurping the authority of Congress under Article I, Section 8, of the U.S. Constitution, which gives Congress the authority “To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization.”
Granting amnesty to DACA recipients is an act that would endorse Obama’s unconstitutional action.
Poliquin should reject the idea of a “permanent legislative solution” — amnesty — for DACA recipients, remove his name from the letter to Ryan, and focus on the border and other security items.
https://bangordailynews.com/2018/01/...order-instead/
Amnesty for ‘Dreamers’ would be a nightmare for Mainers
Amnesty for ‘Dreamers’ would be a nightmare for Mainers
https://bdn-data.s3.amazonaws.com/up...24-600x600.jpg
December 7, 2017 6:53 am
Always be wary of strange bedfellows.
Maine’s premiere big business and big labor organizations are in bed together singing from the same page of leftist folk music — amnesty for illegal immigrants, the so-called Dreamers.
The harmonic convergence of union bosses and captains of industry demanding amnesty for illegals no doubt serves the narrow self-interests of the union hierarchy and corporate CEOs — but it fails to serve the best interests of Mainers.
The amnesty campaign relies on two very weak arguments to convince Congress that beneficiaries of President Barack Obama’s likely unconstitutional Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) executive order should be granted permanent amnesty in the United States.
First, they claim people who arrived in this country illegally as minors are not culpable for having broken the law, and it would be unfair to remove them from the only country they have ever known.
The second talking point against enforcing immigration law is that we’d also be hurting ourselves in the process.
Neither of these shallow, emotion-based arguments stands up to critical scrutiny.
Let’s start with the first false narrative, the fairness argument.
While it may be true that many — but not all — illegal aliens who arrived here as minors were brought by their parents who entered the country illegally, we are not obligated to reward them. And while the son should not be punished for the sins of the father, the absence of a benefit is not the same thing as a punishment.
In fact, it is the parents responsible for bringing the DACA beneficiaries to the U.S. who should be punished — not Maine taxpayers and unemployed or under-employed Maine workers competing for jobs with illegal immigrants.
In all other areas of law, when parents act illegally while placing their children in harm’s way, society holds those parents accountable for the hardships endured — not their neighbors.
If Congress cements Obama’s executive order into statute, the swamp critters in D.C. will be sending a very clear message to the whole world — amnesty and citizenship are yours if you are patient.
Sneak across the border with your minor children, and eventually they will enjoy all the rights and benefits of American citizenship.
Mass illegal immigration harms any country that allows it. This truth is universally understood, hence why every nation on Earth has immigration laws. In fact, the U.S. already has some of the most liberal and loose immigration policies you’ll find anywhere across the globe.
Contrary to the cherry-picked anecdotes depicting DACA recipients as valedictorians and first responders, many of the Dreamers demanding amnesty aren’t exactly model citizens. Of the several hundred MS-13 gang members arrested around the country last month, at least a third of the suspects would have been classified as DACA eligible.
Whatever the percentage of bad apples in the DACA barrel, the claim that rejecting amnesty will hurt Maine is absurd on its face.
There are a grand total of 95 DACA beneficiaries in Maine, out of a population of 1.3 million people and a total workforce that numbers 679,000.
Those who suggest the long-term viability of our state depends on welcoming people who violate our nation’s immigration laws are not only wrong — but they are insulting the intelligence of Maine people.
Like many states, Maine’s population is aging and our state’s economy has already been harmed by globalization and loss of industry. But the answer to these problems is not more mass immigration.
Importing cheap, unskilled labor may be good for big business, and it may boost organized labor’s sagging membership, but it harms Maine people by driving down wages.
The solution lies in refocusing vocational and technical education in Maine; training and transitioning Maine workers for the new digital and robotic economy; and lifting the burdens and barriers on entry to entrepreneurship and sole-proprietorship careers.
As state officials, it is our job to look out for Mainers. It is our duty to make Maine an attractive place for the people and industries that will ensure our long-term prosperity as a state. And it is our responsibility to avoid turning our state into a mecca for low-skilled, low-wage, government-dependent illegal aliens.
We must not allow misplaced compassion and sloppy economic theories to dictate our immigration policies.
And it is high time we stop asking what’s fair to people who are here illegally and start first asking what’s fair for life-long Mainers.
Lawrence Lockman, R-Amherst, is serving his third term in the Legislature, representing House District 137. He serves on the Labor, Commerce, Research & Economic Development Committee. He is co-founder and president of New England Opportunity Project. He may be reached at larrylockman22@gmail.com.
http://bangordailynews.com/2017/12/0...e-for-mainers/
