Thread: Amnesty? Not so fast (opinion)

http://www.dfw.com/mld/dfw/news/opinion/11159048.htm

Posted on Thu, Mar. 17, 2005
Amnesty? Not so fast
By Ruben Navarrette Jr.
San Diego Union-Tribune

SAN DIEGO - • President Bush needs to focus on shoring up the border rather than finding ways to reward people who broke the law.

Following on the heels of chief executives who didn't dare go anywhere near the explosive topic of immigration, President Bush deserves credit for trying to fix a system that is beyond broken. But you can't even think about achieving real reforms until you make border security a top priority.

Bush hasn't done that. Instead of dwelling on how immigrants do jobs that Americans won't, or how willing workers should be matched with needy employers, he needs to get back to basics.

Personally, I would hope that the president would talk more about the fact that individuals and companies that employ illegal immigrants are breaking the law and deserve to be punished. They certainly shouldn't be rewarded with "reforms" such as amnesty and guest workers.

Amnesty is good for employers. Once a worker obtains legal status, he or she may be more likely to stay put and not have to worry about returning to the home country. Staying put means staying on the job. Guest workers increase the pool of available labor, which allows employers to pay even lower wages.

But even if Bush, a pro-business Republican, isn't willing to go that far and bite the hand that feeds him, he should at least focus more attention on the border. He needs to acknowledge that the United States has the right to stop illegal immigrants before they enter this country, and that the administration has a responsibility to dedicate the resources to make that possible.

Border Patrol agents say that this isn't happening, and that, more than anything else, they need more foot soldiers on the front lines -- and quickly.

Members of both parties are blasting the White House for not focusing more attention on the border.

While debating the Homeland Security Department's $41.1 billion budget, Senate Democrats criticized Bush's proposal to hire only 210 new Border Patrol agents for the next fiscal year. The Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 authorized 2,000 new agents in each of the next five years -- an increase that Bush, when he signed the bill, called "an important step in strengthening our immigration laws." Critics include Democratic Sen. Robert C. Byrd of West Virginia, who opposes the administration's plan to hire just 210 border agents next year -- instead of the 2,000 authorized.

House Republicans are also upset. Judiciary Chairman F. James Sensenbrenner Jr. of Wisconsin sent Bush a letter last month asking him to fully fund the increases in border agents authorized in the bill. The letter was signed by all five of the House Republicans who led the fight for the intelligence reform bill.

I rarely find myself siding with members of Congress over President Bush -- especially on immigration -- but I have to on this issue. I'd rather have 2,000 new Border Patrol agents than 210.

I'll always criticize reactionary measures that punish illegal immigrants already in the United States for our unwillingness to keep them out. But the United States has the right to protect its borders, and it's never been more important to try to get a handle on who is coming and going.

But this idea doesn't seem to be getting through to the president, who in his enthusiasm for a free market and a ready supply of labor has staked out a position that sounds an awful lot like he supports an open border.

Consider Bush's remarks at a Dec. 20 news conference: "We want our Border Patrol agents chasing crooks and thieves and drug runners and terrorists, not good-hearted people who are coming here to work." Or the president's Jan. 26 news conference, where he tried to make the case that his plan protects the border by giving people a way to come to the United States legally and undercutting immigrant smugglers.

Sorry, Mr. President. You don't protect the border by inviting people to trample it, let alone by giving amnesty to those who already have trampled it. And you don't protect the border by telling Border Patrol agents to ignore one kind of trespasser and focus on another.

By Ruben Navarrette Jr. ???

This article doesn't sound like the Navarette I've heard. Usually he sounds like a FROBL, only worse. Someone must have made him a better offer! LOL!

JUST AMAGIN HOW FEW BORDER PATROL AGENTS WE WOULD NEED IF ONLY OUR CORRUPT GOVERNMENT WOULD ONLY START JAILING THE EMPLOYERS!!!!!!






AND OUR CORRUPT GOVERNMENT STILL CHOOSES TO DO NOTHING!!!!!!!

Great read......another one wakes up.

Originally Posted by dataman

Great read......another one wakes up.

One by one

Say .... what do you think of the Senate approving funding for 2,000 border agents?

Story at http://www.alipac.us/ftopict-825.html