the law enforcement component of this problem
We were discussing the solutions that had been bantered about by cable’s talking heads. Sure, there were exceptions, but you know the caricatures: Republicans wanted a border fence and massive
like deportation; Democrats wanted “amnesty” for those who have entered this country illegally.
I said that, as is typical of the two major political parties these days, neither side had a workable plan. It’s pretty expensive to coordinate the location, detention and deportation of 12 MILLION ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS. Where’s that money going to come from? Certainly not the same tax-is-a-four-letter-word Republicans who scream about protecting the border. The possibility exists only in theory that GOP lawmakers would agree to the kind of new taxes that Immigrations and Customs Enforcement personnel would need to convert standard GOP stump speeches into public policy.
As for Democrats, they seemed to want to turn a blind eye to the law enforcement component of this problem, forgetting that America’s national sovereignty and the credibility of her laws were on the line. Many Democrats in state and local offices throughout the country—especially in big cities—actually forbid local law enforcement from detaining someone they discover is in the United States illegally. Not only is this a slap in the face to the millions of immigrants who have gone through proper channels and waited their turn to pursue the American dream, but it makes a mockery of Congress itself: If its own members don’t support the enforcement of the laws they themselves approve, then what is the point of passing those laws?
When I worked in state government in Florida, we would occasionally get calls from folks who needed help with their visa applications. Of course, since these are federal issues, we would refer them to the congressman’s office. But they would call us back, desperate for help with the Embassy: After 9/11, some folks were told that it could be anywhere from two to NINE YEARS before their visas were approved—and that was if laws didn’t change to amend eligibility provisions or contract the number of visas available per year. This was the case even in situations involving families who were separated – some for periods of two years or more.
