A Commentary on President Obama’s Recent Immigration Speech

A recent report on CNN stated “President Barack Obama renewed his push for comprehensive immigration reform Thursday[7/1/2010], calling for bipartisan cooperation on an issue that has repeatedly proven to be a major cause of deep social and political division.

The president tried to find what has often proven to be an elusive middle ground on the subject, highlighting the importance of immigrants to American history and progress.”

If he was trying to find an elusive middle ground, he didn’t look very hard or very far. There is no denying America’s “immigrant past” but the operative word in that phrase is the word “past.” Our country is now fully settled and developed and has a limited need for more immigrants. More in this case means less for everyone – a lower standard of living, a lower quality of life, more pollution, more demand for energy and the use of fossil fuels, and the depletion of finite natural resources already spread too thin.

The middle ground is not so elusive; it is right there staring us in the face. The goal post on one end of the playing field is mass deportation; on the other it is amnesty and mass legalization. In search of the middle ground both of those extremes need to be abandoned or rejected and neither the President nor the Congress has shown any inclination to do so. The way to heal the deep social and political division in this country regarding immigration is to stay a little closer to the fifty yard line. There is plenty of room there for a statesman but the charlatans, demagogues, and partisans will have to sit closer to the goal posts in the cheap seats.

What could be more reasonable than to tie the immigration rate in each sector of our economy to the unemployment rate in that sector? That is the middle ground on the numbers of immigrants we should admit.

Must we sacrifice the employment rights and opportunities of American labor to satisfy applicants for immigration and the special interest groups that support them? I say no, that is not the middle ground.

What could be more reasonable than to require employers to present irrefutable proof that they have been unable to fill their jobs with citizen labor by offering a living wage and a hiring preference before they can even consider retaining or hiring foreign labor? That is the middle ground.

Obama acknowledges “the fear and frustration many people now feel with a system that seems ‘fundamentally broken’ ” but provided no details.

There is no evidence to support the unfounded allegation that our immigration system is “fundamentally broken.” That term is just a cliché. It is one of the many used by the politicians in Washington when the facts say otherwise. This is just a ploy of those who want a looser and more expeditious immigration process even though the one we currently have has already permitted Russian sleeper agents and terrorists to enter our country easily without challenge.

The fear and frustration arises from the people’s distrust of an Administration that refuses to enforce the immigration laws already on the books and secure the borders.

“According to CNN, Obama asserted that the majority of Americans are ready to embrace reform legislation that would help resolve the status of an estimated 11 million illegal immigrants.”

Indeed they are but, considering what happened after the last amnesty, they are not ready to embrace another one. Even Obama admits that another amnesty could lead to a surge in more illegal immigration. The best way to resolve the status of an estimated 12-20 million illegal aliens is to make E-verify mandatory across the board for all employers, public and private, and all employees, current and prospective. Vigorous internal enforcement is the only thing that will stem the tide of illegal aliens streaming across the border on a daily basis, taking jobs, and swelling the ranks of unemployed Americans. If we grant another amnesty that allows all of the illegal aliens to stay and work, that will create a huge incentive for millions more to violate our borders.

The East Germans found to their dismay that people would brave machine gun towers, mine fields, and multi-layered fences and walls to escape to the West. The reason they were willing to take these incredible risks is because if they were successful, they knew they would never be repatriated.

Similarly, illegal aliens are willing to cross the hot and forbidding deserts of Arizona and other border states because they know that if they can escape the immediate environs of the border, they will be home free. Under the current Administration’s non-enforcement policies, the probability of being apprehended internally and repatriated is extremely low. What President Obama and Secretary Napolitano refuse to admit is that to secure the borders requires more than just improvements in staffing, infrastructure, and rules of engagement improvements; it requires vigorous and continuous internal enforcement with expeditious repatriation of all of those who are apprehended. That is the missing ingredient of border security in depth. The borders can never be secure without the sure threat and actuality of repatriation of the large numbers of the illegals who are surplus to our economy. Obama and Napo seemed to have missed the lesson learned by the East Germans or are simply ignoring it to pander to the Hispanics who seem to have a greater loyalty to their ethnic brethren than they do to America and, for that matter, even to their own enlightened self-interests.

"I believe we can put politics aside and finally have an immigration system that's accountable," Obama told an audience at Washington's American University. "I believe we can appeal not to people's fears, but to their hopes, to their highest ideals. Because that's who we are as Americans."

Yes, but he has not put politics aside as he continues to pander to the immigration special interests and ethnic communities that apparently believe American has an unlimited capacity to absorb more people without any adverse effects. They think our finite natural resources can somehow be stretched ever farther without impacting the quality of life and standard of living for all of us, including those misguided and shortsighted immigration advocates.

An immigration system that is accountable should take cognizance of the rate of unemployment by sector in our economy. It should be accountable to U.S. citizens not to foreign interests or special interest groups who give precedence to foreigners over the wishes of the American people.

By making our immigration system accountable, the hopes and aspirations of Americans can still be realized, despite the current prolonged recession. It is not contrary to American ideals to focus on the needs of our economy and our people rather than the desires of all those who may wish to come here. We have no need for or obligation to accept more immigrants than we can reasonably assimilate and accommodate without economic dislocations. That number is no greater than 250,000 annually in all categories including chain immigrations or so-called family reunifications and including the estimated number of illegal aliens who slip through our borders undetected. This overall limit, however, should be exclusive of foreign students, tourists, and temporary migrant farm workers.

“The president targeted Arizona's controversial new immigration law, which requires immigrants to carry their alien registration documents at all times and requires police to question people if there's reason to suspect they're in the United States illegally. It also targets businesses that hire illegal immigrant laborers or knowingly transport them.”

He is dead wrong to criticize the Arizona law. In fact, the Arizona law should be the centerpiece of any immigration reform. Anything less would constitute mere lip service to border security, something we may soon regret when the next terrorist incident occurs. Border states have a special problem that Obama has yet to recognize.

“The Arizona measure -- currently under review by the Justice Department -- has ‘fanned the flames of an already contentious debate,’ Obama said. It puts pressure on police officers to enforce rules that are ‘unenforceable’ while making communities less safe -- in part, by making people more reluctant to report crimes. It also has ‘the potential of violating the rights of innocent American citizens and legal residents, making them subject to possible stops or questioning because of what they look like or how they sound.’"

Those flames should be fanned. That seems like the only way to get the attention of the Administration. This is too important an issue to be left solely to politicians interested only in their own re-election. Obama might be surprised how many law enforcement officers welcome the new rules as a tool they have long needed to do their jobs effectively. There are ways to minimize the imposition on loyal American citizens and legal residents but there should be little sympathy for those who aid and abet the illegal aliens physically or by supporting their cause.

“Arizona's Republican governor, Jan Brewer, responded Thursday that Obama’s failure to secure the border with Mexico is what forced her state to act on its own.

‘Do your job. Secure the border,’ Brewer said of the president in a speech to a Republican group. She pledged to ‘defend this law against every assault, including attacks by the Obama administration.’"

In his speech, Obama warned that rounding up everyone in the country who has entered illegally would be both "logistically impossible" and "tear at the fabric of the nation." At the same time, the president indicated it would be wrong to offer blanket amnesty for people who came into the United States unlawfully. He got that second part right!

He said to do so "would suggest to those thinking about coming here illegally that there will be no repercussions for such a decision. And this could lead to a surge in more illegal immigration. ... It would also ignore the millions of people around the world who are waiting in line to come here legally." The problem with this statement is that the repercussions he proposes would have no deterrent effect whatsoever on any foreigners bent on violating our borders.

Ultimately, he was right when he said, "our nation, like all nations, has the right and obligation to control its borders and set laws for residency and citizenship. And no matter how decent they are, no matter their reasons, the 11 million who broke these laws should be held accountable."

However, he was wrong about the logistic feasibility of rounding up and repatriating a substantial number of the illegal aliens . The logistic feasibility of such an effort was amply demonstrated by the repatriation of eight million ethnic Germans back to the German heartland from the Eastern Territories in less than a year following the close of World War II in 1945-6. And this was done using a war-ravaged transportation system. However, we don’t need to round up and repatriate every one of the 12-20 million illegals to make a point. Most will get the message if we begin a systematic and effective program of apprehension and repatriation without delay.

“Obama said those who entered the country illegally must admit they broke the law, register with the appropriate authorities, pay taxes, pay a fine, and learn English. They must ‘get right with the law before they can get in line and earn their citizenship.’"

Surely you jest, Mr. President! Admitting they broke the law is meaningless and laughable. We don’t let other law breakers off the hook just because they plead guilty!They can only get right with the law if they come into compliance with the law as it existed at the time they violated the border. They need to return home and apply for legal immigration under whatever quotas might be available to them.

What is Obama thinking of? Is he thinking at all? In any event, he did not propose any mechanism or funding to enforce the registration, payment of back taxes and a fine, and provide testing to assure that they are learning English. Those provisions are either unenforceable or will simply be unenforced just like the current immigration laws.

“The president urged Congress to tackle immigration reform legislation, but stressed that it would require support from both Democrats and Republicans.

‘That is the political and mathematical reality,’ he said.

“Despite Obama's call for bipartisan immigration reform, several senior Democratic sources said Thursday that they see virtually no chance of Congress taking up such a measure before November's midterm elections.

Though some hold out hope for potential movement during a lame-duck session of Congress after the election, most sources say the more realistic earliest target is next year. But even that, according to one source, may be ‘happy talk.’”

At the same time as the President is calling for bipartisan immigration reform, he continues to support what is known euphemistically as “Comprehensive Immigration Reform” (CIR). Most understand CIR to be a code term for the granting of amnesty to or the mass legalization of millions of illegal aliens. That term also encompasses a major increase in legal immigration quotas which are already way too large. If the President wants bipartisan support for immigration reform, he needs to narrow his focus to border security as the first step. The number of illegals transiting the border must be reduced to no more than 10,000 per year. The actual achievement of this goal must be attested to by border patrol and ICE agents in a privately administered confidential survey before any other reforms should be considered. That level cannot be achieved without intense internal enforcement and the repatriation of relatively large numbers of the illegals. That is the only way to create the necessary disincentive.

We can do this humanely at little cost to the government. If the illegals paid their way here, they can certainly pay they way back. If not, their employers should pick up the difference. The most important thing is to expedite their removal rather than keeping them in detention facilities for long periods of time. To accomplish that goal, we should pay the detention facility operators on the basis of throughput rather than detainee-days.

In the meantime, a study should be done to determine how best to determine the real needs of our economy for immigrants and to propose a way of adjusting our immigration quotas so that they are more precisely metered to those needs. Our objective should be to stabilize our population before it is too late.