Thread: Endless cycle-If no one's enforcing the laws, why have them?

http://www.dailynews.com/Stories/0,1413 ... 02,00.html

Endless cycle
If no one's enforcing the laws, why have them?


Friday, June 24, 2005 - If the story about Wal-Mart getting away for years with employing illegal immigrants as janitors didn't make the United States' ambivalence about immigration law clear, the latest report from the General Accounting Office should do it.

The GAO, which does in-depth research for Congress, found that the feds have virtually stopped cracking down on employers who hire illegal immigrants. In 1999, for example, federal authorities sent notices of intent to fine to 417 employers. In 2004, they only sent those same notices to three employers. Similarly, the number of arrests made in workplace raids has plummeted from 2,849 in 1999 to 44 last year.

In a nutshell, the laws against hiring illegal immigrants are little more than a nuisance to employers.

So, employers continue to exercise selective perception when it come to the status of their workers, and thousands of low-wage illegal immigrants continue to stream across the border any way they can to do the work.

It doesn't exactly reinforce the idea of the United States being a place that honors the rule of law above all, does it?

The larger problem is that the nation's immigration laws serve a particular political agenda but not an actual need. There's no reasonable, legal way to import workers for agriculture, heavy industry and low-paid service work. As a result, there are an estimated 10 million people living among legal residents who are completely unknown and thus unaccountable, creating a situation that is both unfair and dangerous to all.

Even as federal officials turn a blind eye to employers who hire undocumented immigrants -- which amounts to a tacit endorsement of such practices -- individual states are finding ways to make it more difficult for those workers.

Sadly, the response has been to create reactionary and short-sighted policies that only serve to make life harder for those already living in the shadows. For example, Arizona, Virginia and Maryland have recently taken steps to punish illegal immigrants by denying health care or education to their families.

That kind of reaction lets the culprits behind the massive influx of immigrants off scot-free. If there were no jobs here for them, the immigrants wouldn't risk their lives and bodies to come. It's that simple.

Unless the federal government can come up with some sensible policy for making sure that all who enter the country to work can do so legally, and with proper screening so as to weed out criminals and terrorists, the cycle won't end.

And if federal officials can't do that, why have laws against immigration at all? Why maintain laws that no one has the will to enforce?

While we're at it, we can throw out labor laws that set the minimum wage and govern working conditions. If employers are using an undocumented work force, many surely don't bother to provide reasonable bathroom breaks, pay overtime or avoid hiring children.

Like we've said so many times before, illegal immigration is a national problem that needs a national solution.

This is my whole point. We cannot choose which laws to enforce and which to ignore. We either enforce all laws or no laws.

So if were not going to enforce the immigration laws then why bother having or enforcing any laws?