Results 1 to 3 of 3

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

  1. #1
    working4change
    Guest

    Immigration reform foiled by 9/11

    Immigration reform foiled by 9/11

    By MARY SANCHEZ

    Edging up on the 10th anniversary of Sept. 11, 2001, the nation will soon get its fill of recounting the harrowing events of that day.

    We will get to relive the horrors of so many innocent lives lost to those cowardly attacks, and we will remember the grim realization that followed for so many previously unaware Americans. After that day, there was no deluding ourselves that these shores were invulnerable to attack.

    But away from the solemn ceremonies at Ground Zero, beyond the appropriate mourning for the dead — including grief for military men and women killed in the wars that followed 9/11 — we need to begin a different sort of reflection.

    We need to think deeply and critically about how the United States responded — and continues to respond — to the attacks, and whether the right choices have been made. We need to reflect on the way the attacks have reshaped public policy on immigration, security measures that affect our daily lives and commerce and public perceptions of Muslim people, including those who are fellow U.S. citizens.

    Before 9/11, the United States was poised to revamp its immigration system in a significant way. The now-politically distant dream of comprehensive immigration reform was on the horizon. The plan, preached by Presidents George W. Bush and Vicente Fox of Mexico, held the promise of meeting U.S. labor needs with legal means for low-wage workers to arrive, finally closing many of the doors left open by the amnesty signed into law by Ronald Reagan. A resolution seemed finally within reach for millions of undocumented immigrants, their employers and the communities burdened by so many people living in the shadows of legality.

    Instead, a shocked nation learned that 19 hijackers had maneuvered through our immigration system with ease. It was time to clamp down.

    The old system of INS was dismantled. The Department of Homeland Security emerged, along with a gargantuan budget. A new report by the Migration Policy Institute notes that Homeland Security spending rose from $19.5 billion to $55.3 billion between 2002 and 2010.

    Meanwhile, a patchwork of get-tough legislation was passed at the state and local levels, much of it predicated on the notion that the federal government wasn’t doing enough to control flows of dangerous migrants. One of the signal achievements of this legislation has been a raft of expensive litigation wending its way through the courts.

    Ironically, the illegal immigration that concerns many — the influx of people from Mexico and Central America — has all but slowed to a trickle. Experts do not believe this has much to do with ramped-up border enforcement or measures to make life and employment difficult for migrants. Rather, a relatively resilient economy in Mexico, at a time of severe recession in the United States can claim credit.

    If 9/11 was a severe shock to Americans’ self-image and feeling of security, 10 years on we are still dealing with the collateral damage it did to our national sense of tolerance and liberality.

    A vocal minority of Americans continues ostentatiously to demonize the Muslims who live among us, even at the risk of alienating the many among them who could be counted on as allies to help authorities ferret out those who do wish harm.
    [b]
    The outsized backlash that foiled plans for a mosque/community center near Ground Zero is the best known example. Others are New York Rep. Peter King’s circus hearings on homegrown terrorists and the asinine legislative efforts to ban Sharia law in various states and municipalities.

    This fever pitch of alarm has helped to keep any real reform of our immigration policies — which have precious little to do with Muslims — off the table. Instead, our government has contented itself with muscular shows of enforcement and punishment, which may create the illusion of “doing somethingâ€

  2. #2
    Senior Member HAPPY2BME's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    17,895
    Before 9/11, the United States was poised to revamp its immigration system in a significant way. The now-politically distant dream of comprehensive immigration reform was on the horizon. The plan, preached by Presidents George W. Bush and Vicente Fox of Mexico, held the promise of meeting U.S. labor needs with legal means for low-wage workers to arrive, finally closing many of the doors left open by the amnesty signed into law by Ronald Reagan. A resolution seemed finally within reach for millions of undocumented immigrants, their employers and the communities burdened by so many people living in the shadows of legality.
    =============================================

    Believing that either of these two leaders coming to a national agreement on 'immigration reform' without amnesty is ludicrous.

    Amnesty was their goal from the day (then Texas Governor) George W. Bush met with Vicente Fox in Mexico. That was before Bush was president of the USA or Fox was president of Mexico.
    Join our FIGHT AGAINST illegal immigration & to secure US borders by joining our E-mail Alerts at http://eepurl.com/cktGTn

  3. #3
    Senior Member miguelina's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    9,253
    Before 9/11, the United States was poised to revamp its immigration system in a significant way. The now-politically distant dream of comprehensive immigration reform was on the horizon. The plan, preached by Presidents George W. Bush and Vicente Fox of Mexico, held the promise of meeting U.S. labor needs with legal means for low-wage workers to arrive, finally closing many of the doors left open by the amnesty signed into law by Ronald Reagan. A resolution seemed finally within reach for millions of undocumented immigrants, their employers and the communities burdened by so many people living in the shadows of legality.
    Nice spin, not buying it.

    1. They were going to quietly push amnesty through, because we had no idea how many millions more illegals came in after '86.

    2. The '86 amnesty included enforcement measures which were never employed, that's how the "door" was left open.

    3. NO amnesty, we demand enforcement!
    Join our efforts to Secure America's Borders and End Illegal Immigration by Joining ALIPAC's E-Mail Alerts network (CLICK HERE)
    "

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •