|
|
Latest
Column:
Though
Much Is Taken, Much Remains
The Other Side of the Tsunami Story
..........
CaliforniaRepublic.org
opinon in
Reagan country
..........
Michael Ramirez
editorial cartoon
@LA Times
..........
tOR
Talk Radio
Contributor Sites
Laura
Ingraham
Hugh Hewitt
Eric
Hogue
Sharon
Hughes
[Radio Home]
..........
Wounded
Warrior
Please
Help Today
..........
Current
Headlines
..........
|
|
Contributors
Mark Alexander- Contributor
[Courtesty of The Federalist Patriot]
Mark
Morrison Alexander is Executive Editor and Publisher of The
Federalist Patriot, the Web's "Conservative E-Journal
of Record" and now the
most widely subscribed Internet-based publication. [go
to Alexander index]
 A
National Security Imperative
Immigration policy…
[Mark Alexander] 12/16/04 |
|
In a day when political issues are so neatly dichotomous, left and right, down
the line, immigration policy has both fervent advocates and opponents on both
sides of the political divide. The Senate's passage of a much-ballyhooed intelligence-reform
bill this week, now certain to be signed into law by President Bush, requires
a resolution on whether trade or security will dominate immigration policy.
Immigration, now more than ever before, has become a national-security
issue. We live in a world in which asymmetric threats -- namely,
Islamist terror networks -- can project considerable threat by
way of WMD in great disproportion to geo-political influence
of their state sponsors. Conventional powers -- namely, nation-states
such as ours -- are by their very nature more vulnerable to these
asymmetric threats than they are to other overtly hostile nation-states.
And as the leader of the free world and its Western values, the
United States stands in strategic and ideological opposition
to the goals of these Jihadi terrorists. We are thus their prime
target, and a soft one at that, as demonstrated on September
11, 2001. And yet our borders remain wide open to those who would
destroy us.
First and foremost, dealing with immigration begins not with
reform, but with the enforcement of existing immigration law.
Contrary to what many appear to believe, illegal immigration
is still, well, illegal. That is why we believe the Bush administration's
chief shortcoming has been its failure to enforce existing immigration
law -- not unlike every other administration since WWII. In some
ways, the new intelligence-reform bill picks up the slack --
but much more remains to be done.
For starters,
the bill establishes a Human Smuggling and Trafficking Center
(although
one had already been enacted by the Departments
of Homeland Security, State and Justice). The Center will streamline
intelligence on human-smuggling activities across our borders
in coordination with the newly formed national counterterrorism
center. The bill also increases the U.S. Border Patrol "by
no less than 2,000 [agents]" and increases the number of
immigration investigators "by not less than 800." In
another important step, spaces for immigrants detained for deportation
are to increase by "no less than 8,000."
A good start,
to be sure -- but far from enough. Absent from the bill are
measures
pushed by Rep. James Sensenbrenner that
would have banned states from issuing drivers' licenses to illegal
immigrants, as well as provisions making it easier to deport
illegal immigrants without judicial review. Congressional negotiators
promised to deal with these issues later -- the only problem
being the intentional lack of precision in such Capitol Hill
staples as "promise" and "later."
Speaking
of the need for further security-based immigration reform,
Sensenbrenner
said, "We're doing this to stop the
next terrorists and to take necessary steps to protect the American
people. The bill will address the three most critical elements,
including real driver's license reform, tightening our asylum
laws to stop exploitation by terrorists, and finishing the fence
on California's border with Mexico. ... We will ensure that terrorists
like Ramzi Yousef, the mastermind of the first World Trade Center
attack in 1993, no longer receive a free pass to move around
America's communities when they show up at our gates claiming
asylum." Mr. Sensenbrenner went further, adding, "We
will end judge-imposed presumptions that benefit suspected terrorists
so that we stop providing a safe haven to some of the worst people
on earth."
As far as
immigration reform goes, the administration's plan, shelved
since the events
of September 11, 2001, does not represent
an "amnesty" arrangement for illegal immigrants, as
many have suggested. Complaints over this proposal -- equally
from the political left and right -- have at times bordered on
xenophobia. As this column contended at its inception, the President's
immigration-reform legislation -- aimed at matching willing workers
with willing employers in circumstances where no Americans are
available or willing to do the job -- is a legitimate solution
to a growing problem. Here, we applaud the President's willingness
to take on a hot-button issue from which previous administrations
have cowered.
Further, Mr. Bush's guest-worker program is not a compromise.
Rather, it represents an effort to let the free market, not government
regulation, lead the way. By and large, immigrants come to this
country for the opportunities it holds. Further, they are willing
to do work that other Americans (generally descendants of immigrants
themselves) are no longer willing to perform. Serving much the
same function as the much belied and belittled phenomenon of
outsourcing, the presence of such immigrant labor frees up the
American labor force to be more productive, creating greater
wealth and, yes, greater job growth.
For those
under the impression that a five- to six-percent unemployment
rate is
somehow bad, or that immigrant labor is somehow responsible,
kindly note that such a rate is generally considered by both
conservative and liberal economists to be the "natural rate
of unemployment" for our country. It's the preferred rate
for keeping inflation in check and the economy from overheating.
(Remember the super-low unemployment rates during the Clinton
boom years? Remember the bust that followed the boom?) Despite
the fear-mongering of the mainstream media, five- to six-percent
unemployment is an indisputably good thing.
The problem is not that the administration's plan attempts to
deal with border control by addressing economic issues, but that
it attempts to address economic issues first. In the context
of our war with Jihadistan, we contend that border control must
come first; only then can economic and labor concerns be responsibly
addressed.
Indeed, only when our borders are secure can we truly take account
of the free market's need for the free flow of labor. When we
meet the market's labor needs, we facilitate the processes that
create wealth -- processes that we do not fully understand. What
we do know is that free-market capitalism undergirds democracy,
and democracy promotes free-market capitalism. Consequently,
when the free markets are allowed to function optimally, they
promote stability across the globe. And global stability -- as
we know all too well -- is a critical component of national security.
Another major obstacle to true market reform is the corrupting
influence of the welfare state. Not only are immigrants enticed
by federal largesse to join the free lunch club, but the entitlement
mentality that welfare breeds very often kills the strong work
ethic that immigrants have traditionally brought with them. Although
illegal immigrants are ineligible for welfare benefits, our states,
cities, schools and other government agencies are simply unwilling
to say no. This issue too must be resolved -- which leads us
back to our assertion that the enforcement of existing laws is
the surest reform of all.
Our Latin American neighbors should support us in this endeavor,
for the benefit of all concerned, for if the rewards of economic
integration are to be aided by the free flow of labor, then all
parties must play by the rules.
As argued in this column many times before, we choose to fight
the terrorists abroad so that we don't have to fight them here
at home. If our borders remain porous, our ports of entry a free-for-all,
and enforcement and reform ineffectual, then our pre-emptive
approach to terrorism is all for naught. Only when we begin to
assess immigration for what it really is -- a grave matter of
national security -- can we begin to secure the home front.
Briefly put, we believe President Bush will do well to remember
that his mandate is largely one of national security -- and that
national security begins at home. Border security must trump
economic and trade interest in immigration policy. tOR
copyright
2004 Federalist Patriot
§
|
|
