Conflicting narratives drive immigration debate
SAN ANTONIO — Everything is big in Texas — ranches, trucks, egos, a huge pride in our state, and a gigantic love of our country.
But there are also big divides among us regarding such emotion-filled issues as concealed gun carry, abortion, election reform, education funding, poor health programs, and the like.
Such issues typically take on the conflicting flavors of liberal and conservative politics, with the usual partisan rationalizations. But these pale relative to the volatile subject of immigration.
As a border state, nothing quite raises the ire of Texans more than the illegal crossing of our borders by our southern neighbors. Most Americans agree that immigration reform is overdue. The 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act championed by conservative icon Ronald Reagan failed in its attempt to bring sanity to this difficult issue.
Liberals decried it as not going far enough. It provided legal status to “only” 3 million undocumented immigrants.
Conservatives complained that the law ignored sanctions against employers who harbored “illegal aliens,” and in its surrender to “amnesty.”
There has since been no substantive progress on resolving this issue.
On the one side is the lament that, after all, the law is the law, and until it is changed, we as Americans have an obligation to stem the tide of lawbreakers.
On the other side, are claims that such assertions reflect a racist bent since illegal immigration through our border with Canada is tacitly ignored.
The fact remains, however, that illegal immigration from Canada is miniscule relative to that from Mexico. Further, Canadians of all races and ethnicities do not generally have the baggage often carried by a significant number of those from Mexico in terms of the lack of needed English language and occupational skills, poor educational backgrounds, and the associated stresses these put on public social welfare, health, and educational facilities.
Nevertheless, there is emotional appeal in the plight of “dreamers” who innocently suffer from the past actions of their parents; of desperate people depending on greedy “coyotes” as guides to a better life; of the hazards crossing rivers and dry sagebrush country; and all the other examples of hardship.
Americans are a compassionate people. And the strength of the United States rests significantly on the diversity of cultures that have long formed the foundation of our great nation.
It is also clear that a stable, vibrant democracy such as ours rests largely on the rule of law. There are lawful processes to seek change; there is merit in believing that the millions of undocumented immigrants within our borders should not enjoy the fruits of their illegal status while law-abiding documented immigrates await their turns.
So what should be done?
It is apparent that attempting to deport 11 million human beings, the vast majority of whom are freedom loving and hard working families, would be cruel, and wasteful.
One possibility is to require undocumented immigrants who arrived in this country prior to a certain date to register for a no-fault, fast-track process permitting them to remain in place until properly documented as permanent residents without citizenship.
Those wishing to additionally seek citizenship would pursue it through normal channels while taking their places in line behind those who are seeking immigration legally.
We need solutions; you have been presented one possibility — let us find others.