BCT Editorial – 5/5/10

For the second time in just over a month, a Times editorial distinguished between illegal and legal immigration.  Is this simply another proofreading error as I opined in a previous critique, or does it represent a change of position?

As for the “making it easier for these workers to come and go” comment, it’s an old Times position.  A 2007 editorial tacked “fairly and legally” on the end of that comment but didn’t define “fairly and legally.”  In “Folly,” the Times asserted “The best way to deal with illegal immigration is to make it as easy as possible for foreign workers to come and go legally.”  In going from “The best way” to “a practical first step,” the Times appears to have dialed back its certainty.  Then again, I could be reading too much into the differing verbiage.

What the Times doesn’t appear to get is the first steps must be securing our borders and enforcing our current immigration laws.  Until we do those things first, there’s no way “to make it as easy as possible for foreign workers to come and go legally” unless we simply open our borders to everyone.

Finally, I never cease to be amazed that the Times treats op-ed pieces as data sources the same as you and I would treat real facts.