Archive for Friday, May 19, 2006

Immigration bill would change character of U.S.

May 19, 2006


President Bush's immigration address to the nation Monday night might have been more convincing had it come before political pressure from his conservative base made it appear that his motives might be suspect.

In February 2005, the president signed into law a bill that was supposed to add 10,000 border patrol agents along America's border with Mexico. But the president's 2006 budget funded only 210 new agents. Budget restraints were cited for the drastic cutback in funding.

Now the president is asking Congress for money to hire 9,000 to 12,000 new agents. He would also deploy National Guard troops to "back up" the border patrol.

Throughout his address, the president kept referring to the immigrants and their rights and desires. What about those of us born in America, or who legally immigrated to this country? Don't we have a right to preserve the nation the way it was handed down to us, with our English language, our culture and our loyalty to this country?

There is more to the immigration issue than the president revealed in his speech. The Senate Immigration Reform Bill, now under consideration by the Senate, runs to 614 pages. With a document that long, there is bound to be some hidden mischief.

According to Robert Rector, senior research fellow in domestic policy studies at The Heritage Foundation, the bill would allow up to 193 million new legal immigrants into the United States in the next 20 years. Such a staggering number comprises 60 percent of the current U.S. population. Is our economy so strong and our national identity so weak that we could successfully absorb so many immigrants in so short a time, or at any time?

The rapid population growth would come not only from new immigrants, but also from their family members who would also be part of the deal. Because immigrant families are generally larger than ours (due not only to our decision to have fewer children, but also because of abortion, which has claimed the lives of more than 40 million unborn Americans in the last 30 years) their population would overwhelm what we have here now.

This isn't about "fairness" or being a "welcoming society." If anything close to the current Senate bill passes, we will be a different nation. Sen. Jeff Sessions, Alabama Republican, says the Senate bill would make immigration to the United States an "entitlement." Sessions told The Washington Times, "The decision as to who may come will almost totally be controlled by the desire of the individuals who wish to immigrate to the United States rather than the United States government."

On Wednesday, the Senate voted 83-16 in favor of construction of a fence and 500 miles of vehicle barriers along the border. It was the first victory by conservatives who have been pushing for stronger border enforcement. Just before that vote, senators, by a 66-33 vote, rejected a proposal to remove from the bill the right of illegals in the country for more than two years to apply for citizenship, thus giving the president a victory for his "guest worker" proposal.

I prefer the way the Swiss government handles immigration and citizenship to the virtual open-door policy advocated by the president and the Senate bill. The Swiss appreciate tourists and businesspeople, but if one wishes to become a Swiss citizen, the government makes it difficult. The reason? The Swiss want to preserve their culture.

There is no "right" to be a Swiss citizen. Being born in Switzerland doesn't automatically make one Swiss. The government regulates the right of citizenship through descent.

People who wish to be naturalized in Switzerland must live a minimum of 12 years in the country; submit to complete integration into Swiss life, which includes familiarity with Swiss habits, customs and traditions; comply with the Swiss rule of law; and demonstrate that they are no danger to Switzerland's internal or external security. Local towns may add additional requirements.

President Bush employed the classic "melting pot" metaphor, but changing the character and culture of America through uncontrolled immigration - legal or not - would drop a glacier into the pot that would never melt.

This is about more than politics and votes. It goes to the nature of who and what we are. Current citizens had better make sure this is not an invasion masquerading as immigration.

Cal Thomas is a columnist for Tribune Media Services.


SeaFox 11 years, 11 months ago

"Because immigrant families are generally larger than ours (due not only to our decision to have fewer children, but also because of abortion, which has claimed the lives of more than 40 million unborn Americans in the last 30 years) their population would overwhelm what we have here now."

Wow, isn't it sneaky how he threw that Roe v. Wade bit in there. Let's focus on the issue, Mr. Thomas.

I'm in favor of increaing the number of immigrants allowed in annually, but this does sound a little too open. Maybe this is somewhat of a white flag from the white house. "We aren't going to be able to keep them out of here, so if they're going to come in in huge numbers, lets at least make them legal." I dunno.

Coincidently, has anyone here investigated emmigrating to Canada. It's actually not that easy.

geekin_topekan 11 years, 11 months ago

What is this culture that the writer speaks of? That is hilarious. Large families seem to be a liability to the writer.That is the culture he speaks.Everything is a burden and a liability. Mexican families are larger because unlike american culture they don't abandon theirs.Children or elders remain family and in the home.Even if it means sacrafice of time and

longbeachbabe 11 years, 11 months ago

Cal,the last thing you should do is throw in a devisive reference to abortion. But since you did - why do you think Mexico is such a disaster? No birth control, no abortion.. Every statistical study shows that hispanic illegals - and legals - have much higher birth rates than any other group. So believe me, being anti-birth control ain't gonna help the fight against illegals!

Here in Los Angeles, I have to watch as health care and school systems in California become bankrupt because of illegal Mexicans coming her by the millions. All the while Bush spends his time sucking up to Vicente Fox and other Latin American "leaders". Fox doesn't have to bother fixing his country's disastrous financial situation. He knows all he has to do is keep his citizens trespassing to the US so they can send back the money they earn into Mexico - that's Mexico's #1 revenue source: illegally earned US dollars. Yet Bush cozies up to him like he's his best friend - all for a few hispanic votes!! Or to please a few unpatriotic companies who welcome the chance to increase their bottom line by employing illegals off the books, pay them below minimum wage, pay no payroll tax, no health care, no worker's comp. Of course those illegals also are not paying any kind of taxes to city, state or federal despite the fact they use our hospitals, roads, schools etc. how UNAMERICAN can you get! Now I hear Bush won't back English as America's official language!

The Iraq debacle, cell phone spying, despicable treatment of our returning soldiers, selling our country to the Mexicans, yet ignoring and abandoning our Southern citizens during Hurricane Katrina - Can anyone give a good reason why this traitor should not be impeached? `

Commenting has been disabled for this item.