Immigration reform- Simple or complex?

By Larry Dreiling

For many members of Congress wrapped up in election year politics, immigration reform can be an issue that is simple or complex, given a member's point of view.

Take the views from members of one state, Kansas. Particularly in the southwest part of the state, home to four large beef processing plants in three counties that hire thousands of immigrants, the issue of immigration reform can be considered a hot-button topic.

The state's two Republican senators take opposing views on the issue, despite being members of the same political party. Meanwhile, all four of the state's delegation to the House voted last December in favor of tough new immigration laws.

Sen. Sam Brownback co-sponsored the immigration reform bill that passed the Senate in May. Sen. Pat Roberts voted against it.

In explaining his vote Brownback, looked upon by most analysts as a sure candidate for the GOP presidential nomination in 2008, said the Senate bill emphasized compassion rather than punishment.

"In order to have a workable immigration system we must fix the existing problems," Brownback said. "We learned from the mistakes of the 1986 amnesty bill and the 1996 enforcement-only bill that immigration reform must be comprehensive.

"We must be a nation of laws, but we must also be compassionate. Right now, there are more than 12 million immigrants in the country illegally, and we must bring these people out of the shadows without rewarding them for past transgressions."

Roberts, in voting against the bill, insisted that border protection was paramount.

"While our illegal immigration problems are critical, I was disappointed that the Senate bill doesn't address the most vexing problem of border security first," said Roberts, who has informally announced his bid for re-election in 2008. "Without secure borders to protect our national security, reform won't mean much in the end. The Senate measures to deal with guest workers and to legalize millions of immigrants are convoluted; lack of needed funding and lack time to train new personnel.

"I hope that the House and Senate negotiators will listen to the majority of Americans who want to take back control of our borders and will make that a priority in the final agreement. An immigration policy that addresses social and economic needs is important, but won't be possible without strong border protection."

While all four members of the House from Kansas voted last December in favor of its version of the immigration reform bill, there are differences between parties on how to fully engage the nation in such reforms.

Again election year politics play a part in these votes. Analysts say Democrat Dennis Moore is, as always in the Kansas Third District, in for another dogfight for re-election this year and is loathe to give Republican opponents any ammunition against him.

The views of Republican Jerry Moran, whose First District includes southwest Kansas, lean toward the historic isolationism of the area.

Moran said the bill, "tightens loopholes to prevent terrorists from crossing U.S. borders and strengthens current illegal immigration enforcement provisions...requires the mandatory detention of all illegal immigrants who are apprehended along U.S. borders until they are removed and requires businesses to verify the legal status of employees.

"My top priority is the appropriate enforcement of laws already in place and the development of an immigration agency that protects our nation while operating in a fair, efficient and timely manner for those seeking legal entry into the United States."

Moore for his part offered several caveats to his vote, with a tone that reads that he would have preferred to have voted for a bill similar to that of which Brownback voted for.

"I voted in favor of H.R. 4437 because I think that overall border security and immigration enforcement are a crucial part of the solution to our nation's immigration crisis," Moore said. "As the 9/11 Commission has recommended, increased immigration enforcement personnel, stronger surveillance, tougher entry-and-exit procedures, and the use of better technologies along our nation's borders and at our ports of entry are a necessary part of our post 9/11 world.

"But our nation's immigration problems cannot be solved entirely by stronger enforcement. It is not financially or logistically feasible to expect our federal government to investigate, locate, prosecute, and eventually deport millions of illegal immigrants who simply came here seeking a better life for themselves and their families."

Moore called for finding a way for "hard working and law abiding people" to legally immigrate to the United States. And we must address, in a humane manner, the issue of an estimated 11 million undocumented residents currently living in the U.S.

"I favor creating an earned pathway, not an amnesty, towards legal status in the United States. If current undocumented immigrants are willing to learn English and our nation's history, pay a fine for entering the country illegally, submit to a security check, maintain a job, and pay taxes, they should have an opportunity to legalize their status in the United Sates, and work towards the privilege of becoming a United States citizen."

Date: 7/19/06

	Web hpj.com

Copyright/Privacy
Copyright 1995-2011.  High Plains Publishers, Inc.  All rights reserved.  Any republishing of these pages, including electronic reproduction of the editorial archives or classified advertising, is strictly prohibited. If you have questions or comments you can reach us at High Plains Journal 1500 E. Wyatt Earp Blvd., P.O. Box 760, Dodge City, KS 67801 or call 1-800-452-7171. Email: webmaster@hpj.com