BCT Editorial – 4/7/05

This page was last updated on April 9, 2005.

Coming and going; Editorial; Beaver County Times; April 7, 2005.

Almost incredibly, not once does the editorial mention the national security problems caused by uncontrolled immigration. I think that’s what we usually refer to as “sticking your head in the sand.”

Below is a detailed critique of the subject editorial.

“Americans are patrolling the nation’s border with Mexico in an attempt to stop illegal immigrants from coming into the United States.

“They might as well be trying to plow the sea. As well-intentioned as their efforts are, they will not turn the tide. Immigrants, legal and illegal, will continue to come to America.”

[RWC] The Times isn’t being honest with us or isn’t paying attention. The “Minutemen” are patrolling primarily to draw attention to the problem. Their patrols are scheduled for only a month.

“President Bush has proposed positive changes in current immigration laws, including allowing some undocumented workers to win legal status. However, his proposals have run into a brick wall in Congress, where anti-immigrant sentiments run high.”

[RWC] Note the “clever” use of words.

First, the editorial refers to illegal aliens – those people who break U.S. law to enter the country – as “undocumented workers.”

Second, if you oppose illegal immigration, you are “anti-immigrant.”

The editorial also ignores that the states are getting fed up with the porous border as well. They are enacting laws to deny taxpayer-provided services to illegal aliens.

“Before we go any further, we must point out that other industrialized nations are grappling with immigration. It has emerged as a major political issue in England and the Netherlands, and France and Germany are having difficulty assimilating largely Muslim immigrant populations. Even the traditionally tolerant Scandinavian countries are re-examining this issue.

[RWC] Perhaps I’m being picky, but when it referred to “traditionally tolerant Scandinavian countries,” was the editorial implying the United States is intolerant?

“But the United States is different because it is a nation of immigrants. It started when the English, Dutch, Germans and Swedes colonized the Atlantic seaboard and continued with the Irish in the 19th century and the southern and eastern Europeans in the late 19th and early 20th centuries.

“Today’s immigrants are coming from South America and Asia. Like immigrants in the past, they are facing a wave of unjustified nativism.”

[RWC] I can’t speak for everyone, but I believe the problem is with illegal aliens, not legal immigrants.

“Contrary to popular myth, southern and eastern European immigrants were not greeted with open arms. In their time, they were seen as threats to the American way of life.

“Let’s also dispense with the Ellis Island myth. Many immigrants were sojourners who worked here and then returned to their homelands. Estimates are that about half of the Italians who came here in the late 1900s and early 20th century were sojourners.”

[RWC] Note the editorial didn’t address the legal status of its “sojourners.” That is, were the vast majority of “sojourners” legal or illegal immigrants?

“Today’s mass communications and mobility make sojourning even easier. Immigrants can keep in touch with their families and friends back home via cell phones and the Internet. Many can go home for the holidays and vacations on a regular basis. Yet our views on immigration are locked into the era of telegraphs, steamships and steerage.

“Something else that must change is the basis on which immigrants are allowed into the United States. Right now, family ties and national quotas determine who gets in, with only a small number of immigrants being allowed in on work permits.

“The law should be changed to reflect our nation’s labor needs, whether it is for Central Americans harvesting lettuce in the San Joaquin Valley or Indians and Chinese working in Silicon Valley.”

[RWC] Oops, I can almost hear the Times phone ringing off the hook. It’s their fellow travelers in labor union management calling.

A larger worker pool drives down wages. It’s also a form of outsourcing except it’s on U.S. soil.

“The more illegal immigrants we can turn into sojourners the better it will be for everyone.”

[RWC] I don’t understand what this means. Whether a person plans to make a life in the U.S. or simply wants to work here for awhile, he can’t be here illegally.

A porous border is not just an economic issue; it’s a national security issue.