What “comprehensive” immigration reform really means

Reader Joseph C. has some excellent observations on the amnesty bill. He writes:

I am not at all surprised that the amnesty bill is making a comeback in the Senate. As I have said before, too many Republicans in the Senate are moderates—in temperament if not in viewpoint. While most people look at problems and try to solve them, moderates seek merely to manage them.

Anyone with two eyes and common sense can see that unfettered immigration costs (which are large and visible) exceed the supposed benefits (which are trumpeted but never backed up with hard data). And for most Americans, that is a problem worth solving. Hence the populist unrest in this election year.

As bad as the Democrats are (and would be) on national security, the Republicans thoroughly deserve to lose power this year—because they have not delivered. For the typical American, illegal immigration is the problem and border enforcement solves the problem. For the GOP poltroons in the Senate, populist unrest is the problem, and “passing something” before Election Day will solve the problem.

Any talk of “comprehensive reform” is a smokescreen. Comprehensive is just a euphemism for “let’s not set any priorities.” Sure we need to attack the problem on many fronts, but border security is the sine qua non of any reform. Until the spigot is shut off, there is no way to begin discussing the 11 million (or 12 million, or 20 million) interlopers, because the number will just keep growing.

Imagine you were planning to furnish a house and wanted beautiful oak furniture for your bedroom, but were unsure the floor could handle the weight. Imagine further that you decided to call an engineer, but were also going to consult your decorator, retailer, and friends on what type of furniture to buy—as part of a “comprehensive” plan. The trouble is, if the floor could not handle the weight, any discussion of what to buy would be premature. And so it goes with immigration reform. Until Congress secures the border—by any means necessary and regardless of the consequences for Mexico or the US Chamber of Commerce whores—any other talk is premature, short-sighted, and deliberately misleading.

Posted by Lawrence Auster at April 25, 2006 12:31 AM | Send