Newt's humaneness; humane to whom?
Newt's humaneness; humane to whom?
Add a comment Brian McElwee,
Scranton Immigration Policy Examiner
December 5, 2011
Former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich is enjoying his new found status as Republican front runner. And why shouldn't he? He was written off early in the campaign, despite the respect which all seem to have for his intellect. However, as all front runners will find, such as Herman Cain recently did, everything they say and do will come under the powerful microscope of scrutiny, exposing every personal and ideological flaw.
For me, a glaring crack in Gingrich's veneer has already surfaced, and no amount of clarification and/or posturing will cover it. The crack surfaced regarding the hotbed issue of illegal immigration, when Gingrich offered his opinion that he would not, indeed Americans would not want families broken up by deportation, such as might occur with aliens who've resided in this country for decades. Gingrich reasoned that such deportations would not be humane. So then, does that not beg the question, is allowing them to stay humane, and if so, to whom?
With the former Speaker's remarks, the timing of a recent Pew report comes into light, highlighting that a good percentage of illegal aliens are in this country long term, 63% residing here for 10 years or longer. The report breaks down a few segments of alien tenure, notably, those here for 15 years or longer (35%), those here between 10-14 years (28%), those here between 5-9 years (22%), and those here less than 5 years (15%). Speaker Gingrich chose to focus on a specific time frame of 25 years. His reasoning is that it simply would not be the compassionate to hold an alien accountable for a single mistake they made a quarter of a century ago.
Did your eyebrows arch along with mine upon Newt's revelation? Let's look a little closer at this.
Call it what you will, but what Gingrich proposes here is nothing short of amnesty. True, his plan calls for the long term aliens to be legalized, but not granted citizenship. He also ties this legalization to a few assumptions, though. First, the aliens are thought to be decent, hard working, family oriented people who have paid taxes while here. Also, Gingrich ties their legal status to church attendance/membership.
First of all, I do not accept the premise that an alien residing here for even a quarter century is guilty of making a single mistake twenty five years ago. Yes, the decision to either come here illegally or stay upon expiration of their visa is a mistake which occurred a long time ago. But also true is the fact that the decision to remain here, illegally, is made every single day of their lives. Once here, they are guilty of affecting the job market, both in taking available jobs and reducing the pay scale for legal citizens, a responsibility they share with unscrupulous business owners. They have impacted our economy by sending so much money out of the country via remittances. Additionally, many have received government assistance of one form or another, further costing the taxpayer. Worse yet, they are guilty of aiding and abetting other aliens. But, many of them are also guilty of a more serious crime, document fraud. And let's not forget that the aliens who crossed our border illegally have endangered the lives of the border patrol agents whose job it is to track, pursue and intercept such unwanted visitors.
On to Newt's humaneness. Merriam-Webster defines humane as “marked by compassion, sympathy, or consideration for.â€
