The Observer, April 14, 2006
Volume XXXVIII, Issue 24
Current immigration laws should be followed
Yes, America is a nation founded by immigrants. That doesn't negate the fact that laws are laws and need to be followed. I cannot abide by the demonstrations en masse of illegal immigrants protesting and demanding citizenship.
According to the Monday issue of The New York Times, reporter Robert D. McFadden wrote that "Demonstrators flying banners of immigration reform marched in cities across the nation yesterday to demand citizenship and a share of the American dream for millions of illegal immigrants."
I am not, by any means, an extremist nationalist. I just cannot understand why any criminal immigrant feels entitled to the rights and benefits of American citizenship. I understand the legislative need for immigration reform; in fact, I support reform in favor of the immigrants, the immigrants that do so legally and lawfully. My family did; I do not see why it is so hard for this wave of immigrants to do the same.
McFadden also reported that: "The crowds at many of the protests also cheered speakers who denounced a system that has driven more than 11 million illegal immigrants into shadowy lives of subterfuge, and who called for a new deal that would extend basic rights to them and a chance of eventual citizenship."
Essentially then, speakers at these immigrant protest rallies have been accusing the United States of "driving illegal aliens into shadowy lives"? I have never heard anything so preposterous. The U.S. government does not drive anyone to do anything, let alone illegal aliens to live "shadowy lives of subterfuge."
I just cannot understand why we are supposed to feel sorry for the aliens that have entered illegally and are whining about not having rights or citizenship.
If the aliens are forced to live shadowy lives, it is because they are international criminals who have violated the laws of the US. On another note, if desperate need for immigration exists and the process must be expedited for safety purposes, then those immigrants should appeal for political asylum or appeal to an international NGO.
The Senate Immigration Reform bill that failed last Friday proposed that the United States would, as per McFadden, "open doors to citizenship for most illegal immigrants if they paid fines and learned English. It would also create a guest worker program for 325,000 people a year to meet the needs of business, and would tighten border security to satisfy conservatives."
Notwithstanding the issue of the fines to aliens for citizenship, I cannot understand why this otherwise logical and moderate bill failed. I think that learning English is necessary. Other waves of immigrants throughout the twentieth and early twenty-first centuries learned to speak English; when the Eastern Europeans immigrated in droves during the last century, no one protested for Slavic languages to be taught in schools or printed on food labels.
In the latter half of the century following an influx of immigrants from Asian countries, including India, no one protested demanding immediate rights and language privilege.
Also, work programs and tighter border security benefits everyone both economically and politically.
Ultimately, the question is this: why should the enormous waves of illegal aliens, (predominantly those from Central/Latin American) demand immediate citizenship and citizen rights? Even convicted felons that are American citizens do not have all of the privileges and rights of their law-abiding counterparts.
As such, I applaud Congress for holding out for a reform bill that not only benefits the immigrants but also the current citizens. Exceptions cannot be and are not made for common criminals and convicted felons, so why should illegal aliens have an exception for immediate and effortless citizenship?
