How might you fare as an immigrant to Mexico?

DICK TUNISON
The Edmond Sun

EDMOND — My last column on ignoring the law, and immigration laws in particular, brought more responses from readers than any column I’ve written. Comments ranged wide and far, and some proposed tentative solutions to our current immigration problems that have sent hundreds of thousands of Mexicans into the streets protesting the machinations of Congress. Other comments have carped at me for my own views.

One reader sent extracts from the Mexican Constitution (1917 as amended) to illustrate the constraints under which an American immigrant to Mexico would fare in that country. I found the e-mail quite intriguing and decided to research the Mexican Constitution to verify the facts. It was an eye-opening experience. You may check it out for yourself by accessing the full document on the Internet by entering the following address: www.ilstu.edu/class/hist263/docs/1917const.html.

Dr. J. Michael Waller, of the Center for Security Policy in Washington, D.C., has written a tight summary of salient points in his article titled, “Mexico’s Glass House: How the Mexican constitution treats foreign residents, workers and naturalized citizens.”

He says, “In brief, the Mexican constitution states that: Immigrants and foreign visitors are banned from public political discourse. Immigrants and foreigners are denied certain basic property rights. Immigrants are denied equal employment rights. Immigrants and naturalized citizens will never be treated as real Mexican citizens. Immigrants and naturalized citizens are not to be trusted in public service. Immigrants and naturalized citizens may never become members of the clergy. Private citizens may make citizen arrests of lawbreakers (i.e., illegal immigrants) and hand them to the authorities. Immigrants may be expelled from Mexico for any reason and without due process.”

Some who read this will want to argue with me for making these comparisons.

But the items listed above do represent a stark contrast between rights of an American going to Mexico and a Mexican coming into the United States. It’s true, we have chosen a higher, more egalitarian ground, and by its nature, America is a land of free men regardless of their origin. But we should never lose sight of what most of the rest of the world is like.

Some people in America

prefer to wink at the problems illegal immigration is causing us. The famous plea of Emma Lazarus, “Give me your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, The wretched refuse of your teeming shore. Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me, I lift my lamp beside the golden door!” is often used to goad those who are perplexed about immigration.

Others accuse those of us who want a solution to the immigration problem as racists because of the current focus on Hispanic immigrants, fearing that a solution will be too exclusionary. To be sure, there are many isolationists in our society who harbor ill-feelings toward all foreigners. But I don’t believe they represent the masses of Americans who are just fed up with the complexity of the problem and our leaders in Congress who cannot come to an accommodation, mainly for selfish political reasons.

I read the other day that one in 10 native-born Mexicans are now living in the United States. Although I can’t verify that number anywhere, it rings as quite likely. The best estimate is there are 11 million Mexicans living in this country illegally. There are at least that many more living here legally. We know and understand the attraction. Although we have our own poor and disadvantaged citizens, poverty and the underclass in Mexico is beneath comparison. It is no wonder people who must live such meager lives want to follow their dreams.

But their desire to “become” Americans cannot be realized simply because one wants it and is willing to undergo the dangers of tramping across the desert. Requirements must be set and rigorously met, and a means of separating the worthy from the unworthy must be put in place. We should not forget the impact of the Mariel Boat Lift in the spring of 1980 that allowed Cuban criminals to escape to Florida. It should not be too much to expect Hispanic immigrants to follow new rules, even if that means starting a legitimate immigration process from scratch.

Much criticism has been aimed at the so-called vigilantes who have stepped forward to observe and report illegal border crossings. It may be difficult to understand the ire of the owners of property along the American side of the border whose land is constantly being used as a pathway into the country. I have seen the destruction and trash that has been left behind along Coyote routes around Temecula, Calif., where no consideration has been given by trespassers.

It may seem like a small thing to Americans living in the hinterlands, but it’s not to ranchers who have invested their life savings in their avocado orchards.

Wending its way among these concerns is the matter of economic impact. I’ll attempt to review some of that in a future column. I’m sure it won’t go away soon.

(Dick Tunison may be contacted at rtunison@cox.net.)

http://www.edmondsun.com/opinion/local_ ... ndarystory