Who’s a Second-Class Citizen?

passport_eagleIn the February 4, 2014 edition of The New York Times, Daniel Tichenor, a professor of political science at the University of Oregon, wrote about the current immigration debate, “Few democratic principles are more elemental than the notion that people who are subject to government authority have political rights to influence how that authority is exercised.”  For him, that means that illegal aliens should have a path to U.S. citizenship.

Think about that though. Should foreigners in the United States as guest workers or foreign students or illegal residents or tourists have access to U.S. citizenship just because they are subject to the authority of the U.S. government? It is hard to imagine anyone would agree with that thesis.

Tichenor’s argument is similar to the cries from the amnesty advocates that it is unfair and un-American to treat illegal aliens as “second-class citizens.” That may sound catchy, but it is meaningless. The illegal aliens have a citizenship in the country they came from; they have no U.S. citizenship whatsoever.

The real issue in the immigration debate is whether the American people should be forced to accept foreigners who violated our immigration laws in the same way that those who come legally are accepted. That is the issue for the U.S. Congress to decide, although President Obama has been trying to prime the pump for an amnesty by tying the hands of the nation’s immigration law enforcement officers and by giving temporary amnesty to young illegal aliens.

A Prime Example of Libertarian Concern Trolling on Immigration

trollNick Gillespie, editor at Reason.com has an article at The Daily Beast that provides a perfect example of libertarian concern trolling on immigration enforcement.

The Rational Wiki says that “A concern troll visits sites of an opposing ideology and offers advice on how they could ‘improve’ things, either in their tactical use of rhetoric, site rules, or with more philosophical consistency.”

The Daily Beast isn’t a conservative site, and Gillespie already has a platform at Reason where he (and other writers) can bang the open borders drum.

Instead, this is concern trolling targeted at a general audience of non-Republicans, pointing out supposed inconsistencies in Republican rhetoric on immigration.

Here are two quotes that should establish what Gillespie is trying to do.

 

“Yet with a Senate majority in plain sight, the GOP faithful is crying that ‘Amnesty=Suicide’ and Republican leaders are calling for massively invasive new rules that will only increase the size, scope, and spending of the federal government. And this is the party of small government? No wonder the country is so screwed.”

“Republicans insist that the federal government is too inefficient and incompetent to deliver the mail or to oversee health care, but it’s nonetheless qualified to police thousands of miles of borders and run employment checks on hundreds of millions of workers? Come on guys, get your story straight.”

The basic gist of this argument is to get the reader to the conclusion that if the GOP were only more libertarian, then they would be consistent. It is not about actually improving the GOP argument on enforcement. Even libertarians acknowledge that law enforcement and protecting national security is a legitimate function of government. (In the eyes of some libertarians, it is the only legitimate function of government.)

House GOP Retreat on American People

elephants

On Thursday, the House Republican leadership waved the white flag and are now attempting to surrender America’s sovereignty to the open borders lobby by officially endorsing amnesty legislation. Tellingly, the two-page document, titled “Standards for Immigration Reform,” adopts the language of amnesty advocates by generically stating that “[o]ur nation’s immigration system is broken” and even referring to illegal aliens as “Individuals Living Outside the Rule of Law.”

The main component of the proposal is a large-scale amnesty for the 12 million illegal aliens in the United States. The plan calls for illegal aliens to “come forward” and “admit their culpability,” undergo “rigorous” background checks, pay “significant” fines and back taxes, learn English and civics, and be able to financially support themselves so they can “get right with the law.” If this sounds familiar, that’s because these eligibility standards are nearly identical to the Senate Gang of Eight’s outline last January before they released their mass guest worker amnesty bill! Perhaps wanting to sound tough on enforcement, Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) & Co. added the adjectives “rigorous” and “significant” to prove they really, really mean it. The GOP leaders claim, much like the Gang of Eight talking points, that “[c]riminal aliens, gang members, and sex offenders” will be ineligible for amnesty. Of course, we know that the Gang of Eight lied about criminal aliens and gang members not being eligible for amnesty as well as lying about the requirement to pay back taxes and learn English.

In addition to this one-size-fits-all amnesty provision, the House GOP plan calls for an expedited path to citizenship for minors, or “DREAMers” as amnesty proponents refer to them.

Regarding enforcement, the Republican plan uses broad statements of “securing our country’s borders, enforcing our laws, and implementing robust enforcement measures.” Interestingly, the workplace enforcement point does not specifically mention the highly effective E-Verify program. If you guessed that the Senate bill also gutted E-Verify in favor of building a new program from scratch, you would be correct. Moreover, the plan declares that “[w]e must secure our borders now” but does not specifically call for any border fencing. The proposal also includes a cursory statement on implementing a biometric entry-exit system which has been required by law for years.

Remarkably, the House GOP appears to have abandoned the American worker in favor of special interests. With only three percent of American adults rating immigration as “the most important problem facing this country,” and 52 percent of Republicans and 42 percent of independents saying they would be less likely to vote for politicians who support a “path to citizenship for illegal immigrants,” clearly the GOP is not listening to its constituents. Instead, they are listening to special interests like Facebook’s Mark Zuckerberg—who, for what he lacks in substantive knowledge of immigration policy, apparently makes up for with his checkbook.

Finally, given that the U.S. Chamber of Commerce clearly played a role in drafting these so-called principles, you would think their high paid lobbyists would know the difference between “principles” and “principals.” Apparently not, as the GOP document foolishly declares: “These are the principals [sic] guiding us in that effort.” (emphasis added)

Dan Stein Op-Ed: How Sen. Schumer Set the Amnesty Trap

From Dan Stein’s Latest Op-Ed:

Whatever else one might think about Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), we can all agree that he is a very savvy and partisan politician. With his party in political trouble over the state of the economy, declining middle class wages, and the disastrous rollout of Obamacare, Schumer is busy setting a trap to distract Republicans from the core issues that concern American voters and trick them into doing the Democrats’ political bidding.

In a January speech to the Center for American Progress (CAP), a left-leaning think tank that functions as the Obama administration’s farm team, Schumer astutely identified the issue that will determine the outcome of 2014 and 2016 elections: Widespread angst about the decline of the American middle class. “Since 2001, median income in the U.S. has declined by 10 percent,” he told the CAP audience.

Read the rest at The Hill.

House GOP Immigration Principles Omit the Most Important Principle: Protecting the Interests of the American People

In response to today’s release by the Republican House leadership of their principles for immigration reform, the following statement was issued by Dan Stein, president of the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR):

“Instead of standing up for Americans, House Republicans have unfortunately offered nothing more than a vague set of principles in a seeming effort to satisfy special interests, while wholesale ignoring the American People.”

Read the full statement here.

What True Immigration Reform Looks Like: Secure Our Borders

The last time our government measured border security, only 13 percent of our borders are under “operational control.” That is simply unacceptable. To get the job done, we must use all the tools at our disposal. We must put more boots on the ground, add infrastructure (such as fencing) and implement proven technology to reduce the flow of illegal aliens across the border.

The Obama administration thinks the border is already secure. The Senate and House proposals have no teeth to ensure border security and prevent continued illegal immigration.

Take back immigration reform by promoting measures that make border security a priority to finally stop the flow of illegal aliens into the U.S.

What True Immigration Reform Looks Like: Secure our borders

Learn more: