default avatar
Welcome to the site! Login or Signup below.
Logout|My Dashboard

Sensible immigration policies might have prevented today's divisiveness

Font Size:
Default font size
Larger font size

Posted: Wednesday, April 19, 2006 10:00 pm

When I think about the immigration protests of the past weeks and anticipate the big one on May 1, I'm reminded of the advice we get from our family dentists: "Don't wait too long to take care of this. If you do, it will only get more painful and more expensive."

That's where the U.S. is with illegal immigration today. Twenty years after the Immigration Reform and Control Act amnesty, scant attention has been paid to enforcing immigration law. And since the first days of President George W. Bush's administration in 2001, not even a token effort has been made to curb illegal immigration.

The result: illegal immigrants, emboldened by the total lack of resistance to their arrival and encouraged by Bush's misleading comments that migrants come only to do jobs Americans won't, are marching, demanding and fully expecting to win amnesty.

Yet history tells us that amnesty will only lead to more illegal immigration.

In 1986 about 3 million illegal aliens resided in the U.S.; today's total, according to Wall Street investment bank Bear Stearns, is about 20 million.

Assuming that immediately after the 1986 amnesty the illegal alien count was effectively zero, then 20 million have arrived during the subsequent two decades.

Not only did the past amnesty not even come close to reaching it advertised goal of ending illegal immigration, the other half of the Bush concept - guest workers - has been a failure of equal magnitude.

In the 1986 Special Agricultural Workers program, fraud dominated, only a handful of guests went home and people supposedly here to work in the field soon left to find better jobs, once held by Americans, in construction and other trades.

One of the many problems the country faces in its deliberations about illegal immigration is that it is incorrectly perceived to be a victimless crime.

Last week, the Washington Times reported that an Alabama-based employment agency sent 70 U.S. citizens at contractor's requests to various Gulf States for post-Katrina clean up.

Shortly after the men began their work they were dismissed because, according to agency manager Linda Swopes, the employers told her "the Mexicans had arrived" and were "willing to work for less."

And also last week, the BBC documented the case of Florida tomato-pickers from Mexico and Central America who are paid $3.50 an hour, nearly $2 an hour less than the federal minimum wage.

The blame for today's dismal state of affairs lies with three parties:

• The White House: Bush has sent the message to Congress, to illegal aliens living here and to potential illegal aliens worldwide that the U.S. is not serious about enforcing immigration law. Bush's every act confirms that, to him, illegal immigration is inconsequential. Look, for example, at Bush's stealth appointment of the inexperienced Julie L. Myers as head of Immigration and Customs Enforcement. Myers, allegedly acting on orders from the White House, prevented ICE agents from attending the alien demonstrations.

• The media: The coverage of the proposed Congressional legislation and the demonstrations does not even reach sophomoric standards. Virtually no criticism has been leveled at any aspect of the controversies. Here are two good examples: no journalist has questioned the long-term consequences of anchor babies born to the 500,000 annual guest workers. And the media has repeatedly insisted that "a wall cannot be built" even though wherever you travel in America, you see nothing but major construction projects. A wall could be built as easily as a new Wal-Mart.

• The American public: As with most public policy issues, Americans refuse to get involved, preferring to hope for the best while deliberating on which cell phone plan to subscribe to.

What Congress will do when it reconvenes is anyone's guess. Through their marches, the illegal immigrants have put on a formidable display. But Americans - having seen the Mexican flag waving and anti-American sentiment of the first rallies - are finally awake.

If only sensible policies had been pursued over the last 20 years, today's divisiveness might have been avoided.

Joe Guzzardi, an instructor at the Lodi Adult School, has been writing a weekly column since 1988. He can be reached by e-mail at joaquin@lodinet.com.

First published: Thursday, April 20, 2006

Rules of Conduct

  • 1 Use your real name. You must register with your full first and last name before you can comment. (And don’t pretend you’re someone else.)
  • 2 Keep it clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually oriented language.
  • 3 Don’t threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
  • 4 Be truthful. Don't lie about anyone or anything. Don't post unsubstantiated allegations, rumors or gossip that could harm the reputation of a person, company or organization.
  • 5 Be nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
  • 6 Stay on topic. Make sure your comments are about the story. Don’t insult each other.
  • 7 Tell us if the discussion is getting out of hand. Use the ‘Report’ link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
  • 8 Share what you know, and ask about what you don't.
  • 9 Don’t be a troll.
  • 10 Don’t reveal personal information about other commenters. You may reveal your own personal information, but we advise you not to do so.
  • 11 We reserve the right, at our discretion, to monitor, delete or choose not to post any comment. This may include removing or monitoring posts that we believe violate the spirit or letter of these rules, or that we otherwise determine at our discretion needs to be monitored, not posted, or deleted.

Welcome to the discussion.

1 comment:

  • posted at 7:03 am on Sat, Apr 22, 2006.


    The U.S.'s compassion and tolerance for immigrants goes far beyond the norm compared to other countries. Something the liberal media doesn't elaborate on much.


Recent Comments

Posted 8 hours ago by Ed Walters.

article: Letter: Ron Portal’s letters repeat the…

Kaur, with your slant on my posts [thumbdown]


Posted 10 hours ago by M. Doyle.

article: Letter: No one’s faith should be scorned

Nope, it was: "Three can keep a secret, if two of them are dead." He never implied killing anyone. Either way, what's your poi…


Posted 11 hours ago by Ed Walters.

article: Letter: Suggestions for committee appoi…

Fiske: Another new guy, you state JoAnne hates Bob, BS I know JoAnne and she is the most fair minded person on the counsel, and has been f…


Posted 12 hours ago by Shane Marcus.

article: ‘Taken 3’ takes a wrong turn with no ch…

This is an opinion, nothing more


Posted 12 hours ago by Ed Walters.

article: Letter: No one’s faith should be scorned

Ben Franklin also said, The best way to keep a secret between 3 people is to dispose of the first two.



Popular Stories



Your News

News for the community, by the community.

Mailing List

Subscribe to a mailing list to have daily news sent directly to your inbox.

  • Breaking News

    Would you like to receive breaking news alerts? Sign up now!

  • News Updates

    Would you like to receive our daily news headlines? Sign up now!

  • Sports Updates

    Would you like to receive our daily sports headlines? Sign up now!

Manage Your Lists