Published Sunday, November 18, 2007 in Perspective Section of the East Valley Tribune as “Immigration Debate: What is Preferable: Police state or political solution?”
Sen. Hillary Clinton inadvertently stepped into the mire of illegal immigration when she recently appeared to support and then back away from New York Gov. Eliot Spitzer’s former proposal to establish a tiered system of drivers licenses which includes unauthorized immigrants to ensure public safety.
Six years ago a similar policy was considered in Arizona, but as the anti-illegal immigrant movement led by politicians like Russell Pearce, Andrew Thomas and Joe Arpaio has grown, such policy is now unthinkable.
Contritely stated, the movement against illegal immigrants suggests we’re being invaded by people who criminally cross the border, take jobs that might otherwise go to U.S. citizens, abuse our healthcare system, and send their Spanish-speaking kids to school at our expense. The suggested policy response is to make life difficult for them by enforcing stern sanctions on employers who give them jobs and to harass them wherever they might be identified so that they’ll pack up and leave. They should, it is argued, go back to their countries of origin and wait in line like those who play by the rules and enter the country legally.
How long to do we expect them to wait? Under current law we grant only 5,000 visas annually to those with a high school education or less. Prospective immigrants seeking a better life, especially those who have hopes and dreams for their children, could wait years with little likelihood of receiving permission to enter the United States, so many take the treacherous journey to enter the United States without authorization. Read the rest of this entry »