Every American is an immigrant, or his or her ancestors were immigrants. Even the American Indians are descended from those who crossed the Bering Strait—or the “Bering land bridge”—according to anthropologists. America is the world’s only true melting pot, with people here from every other country on the face of the earth. Indeed, that is one of its strengths. Yes, we disagree and we squabble and we even discriminate, but we are a nation of immigrants, and we pull together and bury our differences when times get tough or 9/11s occur. Then, we are all Americans, white or brown or black or whatever the color or religion or political persuasion.
My ancestors came from Germany, Scotland, Ireland and England, and the heritage of most Americans is equally diverse. The spouses of my daughter and son have one parent who is of Mexican ancestry, and so the story goes throughout this great country. For me, however, the immigration issue is simple, and its solution is equally straightforward. All illegal immigrants must be deported now, or as soon as humanly possible; and if workers are needed to fill their jobs, they should be drawn first from Americans who are here legally and willing to work, and then from the lists of those from other countries who have been waiting in line patiently to come here. The latter group should be admitted first, and today’s illegal immigrants should go to the back of the line—if they decide to apply at all, once they have been sent back to their countries of origin.
That may seem harsh to some people, but no other solution is fair and just. I met a lovely Irish woman in Dublin 23 years ago when she was 23 years old; and we traveled across the Atlantic for many years to be together, before she joined me here in the States. Each of us made 12 trips, with some of them lasting as long as three weeks; and both of us got to know and appreciate Ireland and the United States even more during our times together. Among other things, I came to appreciate my country, as seen through the eyes of an immigrant. I have old friends from Germany and other countries too, and I have seen America through their eyes as well, which is always enlightening and generally very positive.
My German ancestors, a husband and wife who had 16 children, landed in New York on September 18, 1849; and in 1860, the husband served with his fellow Minnesotans in the Union Army. The assimilation had taken only 11 years, but he was proud to serve; and I am sure many other immigrants felt that way who served with the Confederacy. An Irish ancestor of mine first came to the States in 1850; and an English ancestor came almost a century before, in 1760. I am not entirely certain when my Scottish ancestors came here, but my mother’s maiden name was “Duncan” before she married my father, and it is my middle name. I am proud of all legal immigrants; and I am equally proud of those of Mexican and Hispanic heritage.
What I found when my Irish love moved to California to live with me at the end of 1996 was that she could not get a job because she did not have a “Green Card.” She wanted to work, but she could not. The U.S. had a lottery for Irish immigrants, and her sister applied on a whim and received a Green Card, so she came too and got two jobs, but my Irish love could not work at all. Could she have found work anyway, and used a phony Social Security number and ID like so many illegal immigrants? Sure she could have, but neither of us was willing to take the risks involved.
We played by the rules and she was never able to work, and finally she got homesick and returned to Ireland. We did everything legally and it got us nowhere. She did not overstay her visas, and she did not work illegally, and she is in Ireland today. Why should illegal immigrants from Mexico or any other country be treated differently than she was? Why shouldn’t they be required to wait in line just like she did? Why shouldn’t they be arrested and deported just like she would have been if she had broken the laws?
Having been born and raised in Southern California, I love its Mexican and Spanish heritage, and Spanish architecture is my favorite, and I love Mexican food, and some of the hardest workers whom I have ever met are Hispanics. They are wonderful people; however, all immigrants should be subject to the same rules that my Irish love adhered to, or no one should be required to obey those laws. It is just that simple. No frills—the same rules for every immigrant, regardless of where he or she is from. Fundamental fairness requires that; and we owe it to all who have come to this country legally and who have contributed so much to our heritage.
I have watched President Bush’s speeches on the subject, and I have seen the demonstrations on TV, and I have listened to the debate. However, I am fed up with the fact that no politician is willing to do what is right. Again, from my vantage point, the issue is simple and its solution is straightforward. There is no mystery about what needs to be done. Whether any of our politicians will have the courage to do the right thing remains to be seen, but I am not optimistic. If they fail to do so, the problem will fester for generations to come, and immigration will be an area of the law that applies to some people but not to others, which is wrong and fundamentally unfair and unjust.
Finally, how much does the plan outlined by President Bush before a national television audience on May 15, 2006, differ from what I believe must be done? The first objective of his plan calls for this country to secure its borders, using the National Guard to strengthen and supplement our Border Patrol; and I agree with that as long as the Guard remains in place to effectively shut the border to illegal immigrants, criminals, drug dealers, and terrorists. The second objective is to create a temporary worker program. I have doubts about such a program, and believe it would be best to eliminate temporary workers altogether, and replace them with Americans who are willing to work, or immigrants who are seeking entry to the United States legally and have been waiting patiently to get in.
The third objective is to hold employers to account for the workers they hire, and I agree with that as long as it is enforced vigorously. The fourth objective is essentially amnesty for those illegal immigrants who are here already, and I disagree with that. The president’s fifth objective is described as recognition of the fact that “we must honor the great American tradition of the melting pot, which has made us one nation out of many peoples.” Few Americans disagree with that; however, it can be achieved best by legalizing only those immigrants who followed the rules, not those who ignored this nation’s immigration laws.
At best, the president’s plan would close our southern border, but do nothing about our northern border; and it would stop employers from hiring illegal immigrants, which might send them scurrying back to their countries of origin, to get in line and come here legally. Thus, actual deportation would work in tandem with attrition, and the goals that I believe are necessary might be achieved over time. However, any notion of amnesty is a mistake, as is the idea of a temporary worker program. While many of the president’s proposals constitute steps in the right direction, they do not go far enough.
© 2010, Timothy D. Naegele
[1] Timothy D. Naegele was counsel to the U.S. Senate Banking Committee, and chief of staff to Presidential Medal of Freedom and Congressional Gold Medal recipient and former U.S. Senator Edward W. Brooke (R-Mass), the first black senator since Reconstruction after the U.S. Civil War. He practices law in Washington, D.C. and Los Angeles with his firm, Timothy D. Naegele & Associates (www.naegele.com). He has an undergraduate degree in economics from UCLA, as well as two law degrees from the School of Law (Boalt Hall), University of California, Berkeley, and from Georgetown University. He is a member of the District of Columbia and California bars. He served as a Captain in the U.S. Army, assigned to the Defense Intelligence Agency at the Pentagon, where he received the Joint Service Commendation Medal. Mr. Naegele is an Independent politically; and he is listed in Who’s Who in America, Who’s Who in American Law, and Who’s Who in Finance and Business. He has written extensively over the years. See, e.g., www.naegele.com/whats_new.html#articles
[2] This article was published first at MensNewsDaily.com on May 16, 2006. See http://www.naegele.com/documents/IllegalImmigration.pdf
More than four years have passed, and George W. Bush’s presidency ended and Barack Obama’s presidency began. However, the underlying issues remain the same and are still as relevant and timely as when I wrote it. Our national immigration policies continue to be a disgrace. Some people play by the rules, such as my long-time Irish love, and they are penalized for doing so. All immigrants should be subject to the same rules, or no one should be required to obey our immigration laws.
“Anchor Babies” Are Not Entitled To American Citizenship
Ann Coulter makes a well-reasoned and convincing case in this regard, which states in part:
See http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=38409
Here’s my solution to illegal immigration…..
The Federal government should begin vigorously enforcing the current laws throughout the country (vs just at the border) with a focus on tracking down recent arrivals. This would need to begin with a census identifying those here illegally.
Once it’s clear real enforcement has begun and we have some idea of the extent of the problem, offer those who haven’t committed crimes and who’ve been here for several years (families, jobs, etc.) a special one time permanent legal status – almost citizen – with two exclusions. One they can never obtain full citizenship (i.e. never can vote), and two they cannot bring in or sponsor others to immigrate (no relatives). Anyone who evaded the census and was discovered later would be deported immediately. This offer shouldn’t be available to recent arrivals and anyone with a criminal record.
This isn’t perfect by any stretch. While deporting a few million of the more recent illegals is possible, the great majority have been here too long and have families. They speak English and have absorbed the culture – deporting these latter isn’t feasible and would tear us (they have become ‘us’) apart. Letting them stay is the appropriate solution.
Real enforcement deporting many of the more recent law breakers would set an example for those contemplating coming and also prove to Americans in general that the Federal government has changed its ways and is now serious about enforcement going forward.
A permanent status short of citizenship would recognize that illegal entry cannot and should not be rewarded and also would frustrate the Hispanic Nazi types who have an agenda other than becoming Americans, and would reassure the majority of Americans (who support immigration, but oppose the illegal version) that our political processes will not continue to be distorted by the huge wave of mono-cultural immigrants.
Once the prospect of 15 or 20 mil new Democratic votes is simply taken off the table, both parties and the people can focus more towards what’s good for the country instead of who can appease the growing Hispanic vote with one bribe or another.
Thank you for your thoughtful comments.
While what you suggest may be a step in the right direction, it still does not address what my Irish love and I went through, which is true to this day with respect to immigrants from a vast number of other countries too (e.g., New Zealand). They must go through an immigration process that takes time and costs lots of money (e.g., in lawyers’ fees), and there is no shortcut for them. If they fail to follow the rules and stay here illegally, they risk being deported and never allowed back into the country.
Everyone should face similar rules, or no one should. What you are suggesting would establish a dual system: one for Hispanics—whom I believe are wonderful people, by and large—and another for everyone else. This is not fair.
Once the illegal problem is solved, or seen to be well on its way to a solution, then the system resources now wasted on illegals and related issues would be diverted to handling a larger volume of legal immigrants more efficiently.
The only non PC aspect of my recommendation would be to include a macro formula that would restrict certain cultural groups while encouraging diversity so as to ensure those who do come assimilate as efficiently as possible. While I understand that many past groups (e.g. Italians, Germans, Irish) spent considerable time in their own neighborhoods on the way to full assimilation by later generations, the process can be accelerated by putting brakes on groups that for whatever reason are flooding the country. Currently, I would put an almost full stop on Mexicans and hispanics in general, and looking to the future, we might need to slow down the intake of Indians and Han Chinese. The populations of the latter two and their rapidly improving standards of living are hitting the sweet spot in which the pace of emigration is likely to increase beyond our capacity to absorb without significant and traumatizing cultural shifts to our American culture.
Thank you for your additional comments.
First, with the economy getting far worse between now and the end of this decade, governmental resources will become scarcer, and few if any will be diverted to helping with legitimate immigration issues. Hence, if your recommended solutions were adopted, there would still be the dual system that I mentioned above, with gross inequities arising from one’s country of origin (e.g., Mexico versus every other country).
Second, with due respect, I am anti-PC regarding essentially all issues. Whatever is PC, I am against.
Third, there have been country quotas for years. This is not new. As I recall, about 40,000 Irish immigrants were permitted entry into the U.S. and Green Cards each year based on a lottery when my Irish love applied. As mentioned in my article above, on a whim, her sister applied and received a Green Card and came here to work, but my Irish love could not work because she did not have such a Green Card. Illegal immigrants ignore such “niceties” altogether, which I find repulsive. Either everyone complies, or no one should.
Lastly, these are thorny problems, and Congress—being a largely corrupt group that only “greases squeaky wheels” that translate into votes and/or money—is never likely to do what is fair, just and right.
I agree there’s a possibility of a dual system emerging which would target Mexicans, but hopefully if both increased enforcement were combined with sustained levels of legal immigration (including lower income from non Hispanic sources) the demands for the system condoning large numbers of illegals being brought in to provide cheap labor and or future votes would be removed.
And as I said upfront, my solution is to some extent not PC. I believe your fairness calibration is more liberal/leftist than you suspect. What’s “fair” IMO is what’s good for the US. Why do we have to be fair to Mexicans treating them the same as the Irish? or the Chinese? Or any other group? Part of my solution is specifically that from the point of the view of the country we should make decisions about how many from what sources to allow into the existing national pool. And given how close Mexico is, sharing a border and how many have already entered the country, there are sections of the country in which the Americanization process has weakened considerably. I’m not advocating any stopping of immigration, just adjusting the flow to the country’s advantage so as to maximize the numbers coming in while maintaining the Americanization process at peak efficiency. It’s is to our advantage economically to keep the flow going.
As far as the economy goes, the essential economy is strong. A modest shift in a few policies would get rapid growth going again quickly. One such policy would be a grand compromise on what to do with the current illegals and reform of the enforcement mechanisms.
The idea for the compromise arose from my own attempt to reconcile the fact I know illegals and my own reluctance to deport people I believe will make great citizens with the fact that rewarding the huge numbers of illegals now here with full citizenship will likely end badly for the country inviting huge numbers of additional illegals arriving. As those 15 million or so start voting, there would be simply no hope of ever getting control of the borders. So the compromise of allowing most to stay but granting them a limited form of nonvoting, non-sponsoring status that will enable them to stay and the country to avoid the hugely disruptive and damaging attempt to deport so many people. The limited status ensures their political impact is minimized and seems a modest punishment for coming here illegally – a punishment that I believe most conservatives could eventually accept as sufficient.
IMO deportation is not a viable option and will never be implemented.
Finally regarding fairness to Mexicans, one final point. You mentioned “gross inequities arising from one’s country of origin” targeting Mexicans as being unfair. It seems to me that restricting future immigration from Mexico would be more acceptable and fair, than right now targeting Mexicans living among us for immediate deportation or some form of aggressive attrition process to force them to leave by making the everyday life impossible. There is no doubt that because the great majority of illegals here are from Mexico that they would escape the feeling they were being unfairly single out.
A compromise with amnesty granting limited citizenship is a one time program. Hopefully, aggressive enforcement would have widespread support and remove future needs for granting second tier citizenship ever again.
In-State Tuition For Illegal Immigrants Preserved By California Supreme Court
The Los Angeles Times is reporting:
See http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2010/11/undocumented-students.html; see also http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703326204575616984215381558.html?mod=WSJ_hp_MIDDLENexttoWhatsNewsThird
Illegal immigrants from Mexico or any other country must be treated the same, and arrested and deported—or existing laws must be changed for all. In effect, we have a double standard: our immigration laws are not being applied and enforced against those who are in this country illegally from Mexico; whereas, we have stringent immigration laws for those who come from Ireland, Australia, New Zealand and all other countries.
The California Supreme Court decision is outrageous. No wonder so many Americans have little or no respect for lawyers and the judiciary. Also, it underscores why many Americans view California as “la la land,” and why Congress may be unreceptive when federal funding is needed to bail out California. The chickens will have come home to roost, in spades, and deservedly so.
Those kids who were brought here as minors (as opposed to an adult who made the choice to break the law in order to gain access to greater job opportunities) should be given a permanent legal status short of citizenship that effectively allows them to take advantage of instate tuition (in this case) but would not allow them to ‘anchor baby’ 25 ‘family’ members into citizenship.
California has a pattern of defying Federal law in connection with immigration – particularly the illegal sort. It’s revealing that when Arizona passes a law which basically mirrors Federal law [it] is immediately forced into Federal court, but when California refuses to enforce Federal law (e.g. sanctuary cities) not a finger is lifted.
U.S. Senate Blocks Bill For Illegal Immigrant Students, And Rightly So
The New York Times has reported:
See http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/19/us/politics/19immig.html
The proposed legislation would have rewarded illegality, and that is not the message to send, ever. As discussed in the article above, people from Ireland, Australia, New Zealand and many other countries wait patiently and work diligently to be admitted legally to the United States. It would be a mockery of their efforts to enact misguided legislation such as the so-called “Dream Act.” Lots of people have legitimate dreams and hopes of coming to America; and they should be rewarded if anyone is.
While it might seem harsh and cruel to some people, those illegals who filled the spectator galleries of the Senate should be arrested and deported. If our laws mean anything, they require nothing less. Those who seek to come here legally from Ireland, Australia, New Zealand and many other countries know and accept those risks.
I’m sympathetic to the those young underage people (basically under 16) who were brought here by their parents. However, the Dream Act seems to be another monstrous size bill (deliberately?) that is described one way positively, but which contains much more than advertised – including much that likely could not survive a vote if done out in the open air and sun.
I haven’t read the act, but have read summaries that make it unacceptable. It basically is an amnesty bill for millions of people who entered illegally. Not only are the definitions loosely structured as to whom it would apply, but once one person in a family is tagged then effectively their whole family is set on a pathway to citizenship. In other words if parents accidentally or by design happened to bring over an underage child then they too will be getting amnesty. That covers a lot more people than advertised in the media.
We don’t need a 2,000 page bill to help those who were brought here. An acceptable bill should be narrowly defined, require significant proof, and apply only to the person brought over – not their families. Any pathway to citizenship and the right to sponsor other family members should be off the table – just legal status granted with citizenship barred permanently – should they decide to exercise this pathway to legal status.
The idea (floated in earlier amnesty bills) that paying over a few hundred or thousand dollars as a fine for illegally entering the country is a joke. At that price we will have tens of millions seeking to enter in the near future – how good are you at learning tonal-based languages?. The penalty has to be meaningful, nor should people who chose to enter illegally ever be able to influence the political direction in our system.
This is not racism, but a simple exercise of sovereignty.
Thank you for your thoughtful comments as always.
I am not sympathetic at all to the young people who were brought to the United States illegally by their parents. They are illegals; and if our laws mean anything, they must be subjected to the full consequences of those laws. Otherwise, such laws are meaningless; and in effect, there would be no immigration laws at all, affecting anyone. We would have totally open borders, which of course is utter nonsense.
In my judgment, there should not be any amnesty bill for the millions of people who have entered the United States illegally. This is discussed fully in my article above. Next, parents do not “accidentally . . . bring over an underage child.” They do so intentionally; and they certainly do not deserve amnesty, period. They should be arrested and deported, and barred from ever entering the States again.
This is what would happen to immigrants from Ireland, Australia, New Zealand and many other countries. There must not be a double standard. Either the immigration laws apply to all, or they apply to none. Indeed, there are lots of Americans today who immigrated to the States at young ages from countries other than Mexico, and such legislation would constitute “nothing less than a slap on the face to all of us who came to the United States legally,” in the words of one of them. I agree completely.
Those people from other countries who try for years to enter the United States legally—and in some cases get in, while others never do so and finally give up—are the real “heroes” in the immigration process, if there are any. By definition, while it may seem cruel and harsh, the illegals are criminals and must be treated as such.
. . .
Lastly, Mexico is growing more lawless with every day that passes. The human tragedies mount, as the following article underscores, in spades. It tells about a courageous mother, Marisela Escobedo Ortiz, who waged a two-year battle to bring her daughter’s killer to justice—a 17-year-old daughter who was burned and dismembered, and found in a rubbish bin in June of 2009.
The mother was shot to death—possibly by the same man suspected of murdering her teenager—in front of the governor’s office in the northern city of Chihuahua.
See http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1339800/Marisela-Escobedo-lost-daughter-drugs-war-gunned-demanding-justice.html
Until the people of Mexico rise up and say enough is enough, and until Mexico’s government deals with such violence and moves strategically to put an end to it, the pressures on America’s borders will be enormous. One can certainly understand why illegals from Mexico may not want to return to their country. Also, the violence below the border has been spilling into the States more and more; and steps must be taken by both countries to stop this. It is in the best interests of all Americans to do so—including Hispanics who are here legally, and may become victims in their own communities.
Los Angeles, Mexico
This is the title of an article at one of the Tea Party Web sites, which is worth reading because it reflects the beliefs—and yes, deep-seated prejudices—of lots of Americans. There is no question that illegal immigration has gotten out of hand, and our country is being changed by it.
See http://www.teapartynation.com/forum/topics/los-angeles-mexico
My views with respect to the article are as follows:
The Immigration Fiat: Another Reason To Remove Obama From The Presidency
The Washington Post‘s Charles Krauthammer has a fine article about Obama’s lawlessness, which is worth reading—and it simply adds to the myriad of reasons cited above with respect to why Obama must be removed from the presidency at the earliest possible date. In his article entitled, “Obama’s amnesty-by-fiat: Naked lawlessness,” Krauthammer writes:
See http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/charles-krauthammer-obamas-amnesty-by-fiat–naked-lawlessness/2012/06/21/gJQAa5PltV_story.html
Obama and Napolitano must be removed from office immediately, along with Eric Holder!
See http://naegeleblog.wordpress.com/2010/12/03/barack-obama-is-a-lame-duck-president-who-will-not-be-reelected/#comment-2200 (“The ‘Fast And Furious’ Scandal Is Turning Into President Obama’s Watergate”) and http://naegeleblog.wordpress.com/2010/07/30/illegal-immigration-the-solution-is-simple/ (“Illegal Immigration: The Solution Is Simple”)
What has been done by Obama could be done by a Republican administration; for example, in shutting down all abortion programs, practices and facilities, and arresting those involved—again, by presidential fiat.
If this was done, the cries for impeachment from the far-Left and its captive media would be reminiscent of Watergate; however, they are conspicuously silent now—or cheering Obama on—when he nullifies our laws and shreds the Constitution.
The Death Of America?
In an important article entitled, “Democrats’ ideal voter: Illegal alien, convicted felon,” conservative Ann Coulter has written:
See http://www.humanevents.com/2012/07/18/ann-coulter-democrats-ideal-voter-illegal-alien-single-mother-convicted-felon/(emphasis added); see also http://naegeleblog.wordpress.com/2010/07/30/illegal-immigration-the-solution-is-simple/ (“Illegal Immigration: The Solution Is Simple”)
Illegal Immigration: The Opiate Of America
Like the issue of legalizing marijuana and other so-called “recreational drugs,” which is utter nonsense, Barack Obama wants the following—in the words of the Washington Post‘s Charles Krauthammer:
See http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/charles-krauthammer-immigration–the-lesser-of-two-evils/2013/02/21/d20213cc-7c63-11e2-9a75-dab0201670da_story.html
The reason, again in the words of Krauthammer: “Democrats have little real interest in border enforcement. They see a rising Hispanic population as the key to a permanent Democratic majority.”
Conservative Ann Coulter adds:
See http://www.humanevents.com/2013/02/20/ann-coulter-hispanicked-gop-elite-theyll-respect-us-in-the-morning/
Once again, Democrats are “evil,” and Republicans are “Neanderthals.”