Passion or Logic

Sometimes the level of intestinal fortitude must be elevated when watching our elected leaders address the nation. As the President spoke, last night was no exception. The issue of illegal immigration is one that strikes an emotional, though well intended, response from everyone in our society. It is difficult to formulate a realistic approach when such intentions outweigh logic. History dictates that nations who fail to control their borders cease to exist. Likewise, a society, which refuses to enforce its laws, will collapse. Neither the open border advocates nor those who would build a wall around our nation seem to be inclined to take a hard, realistic look at the subject. They demonstrate a propensity of allowing their emotions to dictate their positions. Additionally, one would be hard pressed to believe that the government would actually act in the best interest of its citizens as opposed to its corporate sponsors.

Last night, our president pontificated once more, the preferred path chosen by the ruling elite. At the core is whether the corporate moguls will have a source of cheap, unrestricted labor from which to exploit. Some have even suggested that it is a “conspiracy” to destroy the middle class. Whatever the motivation, when inflation becomes synonymous with a living wage, we all lose.

Where the Libertarian Party seems to fail in its policy formulation is not realizing it has bundled separate issues into one plank. Border Security is a separate issue from Immigration, which is likewise separate from Naturalization. Though they are inexorably interwoven, they must be addressed separately in order to clarify the positions. Understanding this fact, and formulating rational policies can and will lead to support on this issue. We must, therefore, retool the message while remaining consistent with libertarian ideals, protect sovereignty and promote liberty abroad.

Border Security

Can anyone competently suggest that landowners along our southern and northern borders have somehow relinquished the right to protect their property? It is often cited as a “right,” either unalienable or human, for non-citizens to cross our borders unimpeded. However, these very same people ignore the fact that only 820 of the 1900 mile border (43%) with Mexico is “owned” by the federal government. (1) Conversely, of the 4000-mile Canadian border, only 1016 miles (25%) is “owned” by the federal government. Even within libertarian circles, supposed champions of private property rights seem more than willing to deny the rights of their fellow countrymen to secure their property in order to promote philosophical dogma.

We often cite sovereignty, and denounce as unconstitutional, egregious trade agreements that circumvent our right to self-governance. How then, can we as a party suggest that sovereignty not be maintained or suggest that the Constitution be ignored when it concerns our national borders? These apparent inconsistencies lend credence to the perception that the LP is not a viable alternative to those currently in power. I reject this perception just as I reject the attempted rationalization of trespassing as a “right.”

Government has but few functions. Paramount is the requirement to protect the rights and property of the governed. Just as a family can not be secure in their home by leaving the windows and doors open and allowing all to enter, neither can our nation be secure without controlling our borders. There is a genuine public interest (general welfare) to screen those seeking entry for criminal background and untreated contagious infections. It becomes quite clear, once divorced from immigration, that border security becomes a matter of national security and is a fundamental necessity to maintain sovereignty. Treating it as anything else would be illogical.

Immigration

This matter is very complex. I have spent weeks, trying study statistics and they are inherently confusing. Utilizing the 2004 Yearbook of Immigration Statistics (2), which is the last available, one can clearly see that the claim of discrimination against Hispanics by open border advocates is disingenuous at best. There are basically four classes of immigrants which include immediate family, family sponsored, employee based and refugee / asylees. Each class has its own restrictions and requirements.

Strictly looking at statistical sampling produces a picture that indicates that immediate family and family sponsored visas are by far the most utilized immigrant visa mechanism for entry into the U.S. Employee based visas would appear to be highly under utilized at first glance. However, these figures are convoluted and disingenuously reported. Lacking better figures and utilizing a separate source (3), we find that in 2003 “temporary worker admissions for categories such as H-2A temporary agricultural workers and holders of NAFTA visas for professionals declined to 650,000 in 2003, a continued decline from 2002 levels of 688,000.” The government would have us believe that we currently lack a “guest worker” program. The opposite seems to be the reality.

Having lived on the border, observing the level of traffic coming into and leaving the U.S. can only be described as mind boggling. Literally tens of thousands of people, in constant movement towards destinations unknown, funnel through these entryways. Bidirectional cross-border traffic is not a new concept. It has occurred throughout our history. The vast majority of these “migrants” require no visa. They have a clear defined pattern of behavior and as a result they may come and go as they please. They must simply identify themselves as they pass.

It is noted from various sources that the applications for employer based and diversity immigrant visas are completely filled upon the first day of acceptance. What results is a backlog of applications to process. In our rush to judgment, we tend to lose sight of human limitations to process and screen information.

Could the level of immigration be increased? I believe that it could and should. However, I also realize that those seeking to participate in our economy, must not mean their neighbor ill will. The issue then remains whether or not immigrants are required to undergo the screening necessary for public safety purposes.

Naturalization

Naturalization is constitutionally regulated by Congress. Currently I do not have an issue with the requirements for citizenship. I do have an issue the slow response time for applications to be processed. Can we do better? I am sure that we can. However, I feel that if the government is to actually take control of the situation, efficiency in the Naturalization process will take a back burner to other immigration-related issues, which are sure to inspire a more impassioned response.

Watch how the government will twist the debate. Just as they tell us that there is no inflation, they too suggest that there are no guest workers. Or, that what little manufacturing positions remain in the U.S., Americans will not perform. Well, I find that notion difficult to believe. I am convinced that the issue here is whether or not there will be a class of worker that Corporate Moguls can exploit by paying near slave labor wages. After all, when they say we need to be more competitive with China, they are not talking about our abilities, production or level of education. They mean that you and I make far too much money to suit their taste.

We should all desire to participate in a free and fair market. Let us, however, be very clear in our morality as well. One can not compete against those who utilize slave labor. Nor can we allow quasi-slavery to exist within our own borders. Let us remain logical with our ideals and rational with our solutions. This debate is not whether to grant amnesty to millions. It is whether to grant amnesty to the few. Those same few, who have violated the laws, time and time again. Those same few who have aided and abetted in the identity theft. Those same few who would have their own businesses raided by ICE, so as to avoid paying their employees. For if we open the gates, the corporate slave traders will create a new class once thought extinct, and it will be called chattel. God help our children if we allow this to occur.

(1) http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d04590.pdf
(2) http://www.uscis.gov/graphics/shared/statistics/yearbook/index.htm
(3) http://www.migrationinformation.org/USfocus/display.cfm?id=263#5