America has a long history of granting amnesty
America has a long history of granting amnesty
Copyright by The Chicago Sun Times
May 6, 2006
BY GERALD D. SKONING
Conservative hard-liners are howling in protest over any element of the proposed immigration legislation that smacks of amnesty. Letting illegal immigrants stay, work and escape punishment is viewed as coddling scofflaws. Lawmakers are terrified of committing the political sin of appearing "soft on crime" during an election year.
The hue and cry against amnesty should be put in context. The truth is that we are a very generous, forgiving people. History shows that our government at the local, state and federal level regularly grants amnesty to lawbreakers.
During the Vietnam War, 210,000 young Americans were formally charged with violating draft laws. An estimated 90,000 of them moved to Canada, where they were welcomed as immigrants and were protected from extradition. In 1974, President Gerald Ford granted qualified amnesty to all draft dodgers. Three years later, President Jimmy Carter issued a general amnesty in the form of a pardon to all draft evaders as part of what he called a "cultural reconciliation" at the end of the unpopular war.
States and local government regularly use tax amnesty programs to generate additional uncollected back taxes. For example, in 2003, Illinois offered full amnesty to delinquent taxpayers. They were allowed to pay their past due income and sales taxes with no penalties, no interest, no threat of prosecution, no questions asked. As a result of the program, the state received an additional $80 million in unpaid taxes, while thousands of Illinois tax dodgers were spared criminal prosecution.
Interestingly, even in California, a measure proposed by law-and-order Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger offered a generous Tax Amnesty Program in 2005, allowing delinquent taxpayers to avoid penalties and criminal prosecution on unpaid taxes if they paid in full.
Even the City of Chicago has jumped on the amnesty bandwagon by offering an eight-week amnesty period that ended in December of last year for previously unpaid fines and traffic tickets. The program raised an extra $2.9 million.
In addition, presidential pardons have been used to grant full amnesty to former President Richard Nixon; former Secretary of Defense Caspar Weinberger and a variety of other prominent government officials who either were threatened with prosecution or convicted of federal crimes.
Of course, we've been down the immigration amnesty road before. The 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act (certainly a most ironic title, particularly the "control" part) granted blanket amnesty for an estimated 2.7 million illegal immigrants and enacted controls designed to stop illegal immigration entirely. Eleven million illegal immigrants later, the failure of that legislation could not be more complete.
So, when we hear screeches of outrage over amnesty in the ongoing debate over immigration reform, we should all take a deep breath and reflect on the history of amnesty and forgiveness in our country.
Put in the proper context, amnesty is not nearly as frightening. In certain circumstances, it's not being soft on crime . . . it's just common sense.
Gerald D. Skoning is a Chicago lawyer.
Copyright by The Chicago Sun Times
May 6, 2006
BY GERALD D. SKONING
Conservative hard-liners are howling in protest over any element of the proposed immigration legislation that smacks of amnesty. Letting illegal immigrants stay, work and escape punishment is viewed as coddling scofflaws. Lawmakers are terrified of committing the political sin of appearing "soft on crime" during an election year.
The hue and cry against amnesty should be put in context. The truth is that we are a very generous, forgiving people. History shows that our government at the local, state and federal level regularly grants amnesty to lawbreakers.
During the Vietnam War, 210,000 young Americans were formally charged with violating draft laws. An estimated 90,000 of them moved to Canada, where they were welcomed as immigrants and were protected from extradition. In 1974, President Gerald Ford granted qualified amnesty to all draft dodgers. Three years later, President Jimmy Carter issued a general amnesty in the form of a pardon to all draft evaders as part of what he called a "cultural reconciliation" at the end of the unpopular war.
States and local government regularly use tax amnesty programs to generate additional uncollected back taxes. For example, in 2003, Illinois offered full amnesty to delinquent taxpayers. They were allowed to pay their past due income and sales taxes with no penalties, no interest, no threat of prosecution, no questions asked. As a result of the program, the state received an additional $80 million in unpaid taxes, while thousands of Illinois tax dodgers were spared criminal prosecution.
Interestingly, even in California, a measure proposed by law-and-order Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger offered a generous Tax Amnesty Program in 2005, allowing delinquent taxpayers to avoid penalties and criminal prosecution on unpaid taxes if they paid in full.
Even the City of Chicago has jumped on the amnesty bandwagon by offering an eight-week amnesty period that ended in December of last year for previously unpaid fines and traffic tickets. The program raised an extra $2.9 million.
In addition, presidential pardons have been used to grant full amnesty to former President Richard Nixon; former Secretary of Defense Caspar Weinberger and a variety of other prominent government officials who either were threatened with prosecution or convicted of federal crimes.
Of course, we've been down the immigration amnesty road before. The 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act (certainly a most ironic title, particularly the "control" part) granted blanket amnesty for an estimated 2.7 million illegal immigrants and enacted controls designed to stop illegal immigration entirely. Eleven million illegal immigrants later, the failure of that legislation could not be more complete.
So, when we hear screeches of outrage over amnesty in the ongoing debate over immigration reform, we should all take a deep breath and reflect on the history of amnesty and forgiveness in our country.
Put in the proper context, amnesty is not nearly as frightening. In certain circumstances, it's not being soft on crime . . . it's just common sense.
Gerald D. Skoning is a Chicago lawyer.
posted by Carlos T Mock at 9:22 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home