Financial Times Editorial - Illegal immigration
Financial Times Editorial - Illegal immigration
Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2006
Published: July 19 2006 03:00 | Last updated: July 19 2006 03:00
If there was ever a clear example of the contrasting temperaments of the US House of Representatives and the Senate, it is in the bitter debate over illegal immigration. This week, House members resumed a bizarre summer tour of populist "field hearings" on the dangers of giving "amnesty" to America's estimated 12m illegal aliens.
Facing mid-term elections in November, House leaders believe they are on to a winner attacking the Senate's rival bill, which would offer illegal aliens a potential route to American citizenship. In contrast, the House bill would make felons of all illegal aliens and construct a 700-mile security fence along the US-Mexico border.
Turning America's highest legislative body into a parody of the Jerry Springer Show is bad enough. But House leaders are tarnishing more than just their reputation for reasoned deliberation. By linking illegal immigration - principally from Mexico - to terrorism and US national security, they are attempting to whip up xenophobia over a complex issue that merits rational and comprehensive treatment.
The campaign to boil down America's illegal immigration to a question of border enforcement has also pitted House Republican leaders against the US president. On this subject, George W. Bush has consistently shown statesmanship. Mr Bush instinctively grasps that making scapegoats out of hard-working families who have risked much to enter the US labour market undermines a central element of America's cultural and economic identity.
Nor do House Republicans necessarily have public opinion on their side. It is true a majority of Americans want to curb illegal immigration, which is running at an influx of about 500,000 a year. But most Americans also support the temporary guest-worker programme that Mr Bush and the senate have proposed. When put to them in accurate form, Americans also support the proposal to give illegal aliens a route out of the underground economy. Illegal aliens would have to pay backdated taxes and would go to the back of the citizenship queue. This could take as long as 12 years. By no stretch of the imagination could it be described as "amnesty". Nor would it hinder America's ability to fight terrorist groups.
What is missing from the debate is an analysis of America's economic needs. There are two strong reasons to support an expansion of America's guest-worker programme. First, there is strong employer demand. With unemployment at just 4.6 per cent, the illegal influx has clearly not displaced US-born workers. Second, America faces a demographic challenge when the baby-boomers start to retire in 2008. Now is not the time for the US to create self-inflicted wounds. Since the House is in a draconian mood, it would be better if the Senate held off from reconciling the two bills until after November. Hopefully by then, legislators will have regained their senses.
Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2006
Published: July 19 2006 03:00 | Last updated: July 19 2006 03:00
If there was ever a clear example of the contrasting temperaments of the US House of Representatives and the Senate, it is in the bitter debate over illegal immigration. This week, House members resumed a bizarre summer tour of populist "field hearings" on the dangers of giving "amnesty" to America's estimated 12m illegal aliens.
Facing mid-term elections in November, House leaders believe they are on to a winner attacking the Senate's rival bill, which would offer illegal aliens a potential route to American citizenship. In contrast, the House bill would make felons of all illegal aliens and construct a 700-mile security fence along the US-Mexico border.
Turning America's highest legislative body into a parody of the Jerry Springer Show is bad enough. But House leaders are tarnishing more than just their reputation for reasoned deliberation. By linking illegal immigration - principally from Mexico - to terrorism and US national security, they are attempting to whip up xenophobia over a complex issue that merits rational and comprehensive treatment.
The campaign to boil down America's illegal immigration to a question of border enforcement has also pitted House Republican leaders against the US president. On this subject, George W. Bush has consistently shown statesmanship. Mr Bush instinctively grasps that making scapegoats out of hard-working families who have risked much to enter the US labour market undermines a central element of America's cultural and economic identity.
Nor do House Republicans necessarily have public opinion on their side. It is true a majority of Americans want to curb illegal immigration, which is running at an influx of about 500,000 a year. But most Americans also support the temporary guest-worker programme that Mr Bush and the senate have proposed. When put to them in accurate form, Americans also support the proposal to give illegal aliens a route out of the underground economy. Illegal aliens would have to pay backdated taxes and would go to the back of the citizenship queue. This could take as long as 12 years. By no stretch of the imagination could it be described as "amnesty". Nor would it hinder America's ability to fight terrorist groups.
What is missing from the debate is an analysis of America's economic needs. There are two strong reasons to support an expansion of America's guest-worker programme. First, there is strong employer demand. With unemployment at just 4.6 per cent, the illegal influx has clearly not displaced US-born workers. Second, America faces a demographic challenge when the baby-boomers start to retire in 2008. Now is not the time for the US to create self-inflicted wounds. Since the House is in a draconian mood, it would be better if the Senate held off from reconciling the two bills until after November. Hopefully by then, legislators will have regained their senses.
posted by Carlos T Mock at 12:42 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home