U-T Editorial: Dangers of overreaching

Some of the left's immigration proposals amount to an open border
2:00 a.m. January 27, 2009


Losing is no fun, but winning comes with its own set of perils. At the top of the list is the danger of getting intoxicated on one's perceived power and overreaching.

In the immigration debate, both sides have made that mistake. When Republicans controlled Congress, they couldn't resist abandoning common sense and proposing half-baked ideas that helped sour the discussion and inflame the opposition. Instead of maintaining the high ground in defense of secure borders and more deportations – arguments they could win – conservatives suggested building fences, making unauthorized presence in the country a felony, and punishing social service agencies for aiding illegal immigrants. They also tried unsuccessfully to alter the legal immigration system by scrapping family reunification as the guiding principle and replacing it with a merit-based admissions policy. And, of course, what would immigration reform be without an attempt to make English the official language.

Now, Democrats and their supporters are poised to make similar mistakes. Given President Barack Obama's support for comprehensive immigration reform, those on the left might have a shot at achieving earned legalization for millions of illegal immigrants, provided those immigrants pay fines, learn English, undergo criminal background checks, go to the back of the line and meet other conditions. That's an argument they can win, especially since anti-immigration advocates don't have much of a counter argument.

But do you suppose liberals are going to stop there and quit while they're ahead? Of course not. Some activists want an end to all residential and workplace immigration raids; to any collaborative agreements between federal immigration authorities and local law enforcement agencies; to the speedy deportation of illegal immigrants; and to the practice of sending “no matchâ€