Well it looks like the US Senate failed to produce the 60 votes to invoke a cloture motion on the amnesty bill. So for the moment it looks like the so-called compromise wasn't as big as the news was touting yesterday. As I noted yesterday, the US Congress shouldn't be dabbling into an amnesty bill but should be tackling the whole issue of securing our border from the massive influx of illegal aliens(I'm opposed to all forms of illegal alien activity).
While the folks in the Senate think that they're relieving the whole issue of illegal immigration by offering an amnesty to some eleven million folks they are ignoring the plight of US citizens living in the Southern-Border states. Almost everyday these people are bothered by a constant stream of people from Mexico trespassing on their property living tons of trash, drug paraphernalia, and Lord knows what else. Aside from littering these individuals also wreak havoc on the resident's ranches by breaking down fences, disturbing their livestock, injuring their dogs, as well as threatening or inflicting bodily harm to the home-owner/rancher who stands in their way.
I for one would be hopping mad if such a thing was happening daily and all the folks in the US Senate we're discussing granting amnesty thus opening the door for millions more. Now illegals already here are a big problem but it's a heck of a lot better to deal with the question of 11 million than 15 to 18 million. Someone who seems to be on the secure-the-border page(worry about the rest later) is Washington Post columnist Charles Krauthammer who points out in his most recent column that we should just construct a huge hulking wall/fence along the border and patrol the heck out of it with beefed-up border patrols and cameras. He notes that if the border folks can demonstrate that if they can effectively secure our border and shut-down the current wild and raging river of illegals crossing over then they could then tackle the question of what to do with the eleven million already here. I think Krauthammer pretty much summed up the feelings of a lot of Americans who see the border security run amok and just want them secured with the following:
Forget employer sanctions. Build a barrier. It is simply ridiculous to say it cannot be done. If one fence won't do it, then build a second 100 yards behind it. And then build a road for patrols in between. Put cameras. Put sensors. Put out lots of patrols.From the looks of recent polling, it seems that a fence and other ideas of securing our borders seem to be gaining more strength amongst the US citizenry than the MSM is letting on. Thank G-d that there's folks in the US House of Representatives who understand the necessity of securing our border and are actively working on such a solution.(Maybe the US Senate should take note. At least they have a two week break to hear from their voters and have a rethink.)
Can't be done? Israel's border fence has been extraordinarily successful in keeping out potential infiltrators who are far more determined than mere immigrants. Nor have very many North Koreans crossed into South Korea in the last 50 years.
Of course it will be ugly. So are the concrete barriers to keep truck bombs from driving into the White House. But sometimes necessity trumps aesthetics. And don't tell me that this is our Berlin Wall. When you build a wall to keep people in, that's a prison. When you build a wall to keep people out, that's an expression of sovereignty. The fence around your house is a perfectly legitimate expression of your desire to control who comes into your house to eat, sleep and use the facilities. It imprisons no one.
Of course, no barrier will be foolproof. But it doesn't have to be. It simply has to reduce the river of illegals to a manageable trickle. Once we can do that, everything becomes possible -- most especially, humanizing the situation of our 11 million existing illegals.
If the government can demonstrate that it can control future immigration, there will be infinitely less resistance to dealing generously with the residual population of past immigration. And, as Mickey Kaus and others have suggested, that may require that the two provisions be sequenced. First, radical border control by physical means. Then shortly thereafter, radical legalization of those already here. To achieve national consensus on legalization, we will need a short lag time between the two provisions, perhaps a year or two, to demonstrate to the skeptics that the current wave of illegals is indeed the last.
No comments:
Post a Comment