A good friend who serves on the Federation for American Immigration Reform’s National Advisory Board—which I co-chair—recently asked Dan Stein, FAIR’s President, if the Obama’s new illegal alien deportation policy, which claims to focus on criminals, was one small step in the right direction.
She referred to the Los Angeles Times November 27, 2011 editorial A Small Piece Of Immigration Reform, which opined:
“Next week, the Department of Homeland Security will roll out a pilot program intended to speed up the deportation of immigrants with criminal records by weeding out low-priority cases. It`s a sensible plan, and one that could restore some sanity to a deportation system that wastes time with harmless immigrants [VDARE.com note = illegal aliens] and thereby allows dangerous ones to escape its attention. Under the pilot program, teams of prosecutors in Baltimore and Denver will review all pending immigration cases in those cities and then decide whether to issue temporary reprieves to the elderly, students, children, victims of domestic crimes and those with a close relative who is a U.S. citizen”.
Go after the likely terrorists and felons—but let the others stay. How many? No one knows. But Newt Gingrich’s suggestion of letting local Selective Service-type boards decide would likely mean most of them.
Remember, some 7 million are working at jobs Americans could be doing. Our own college grads are having a terrible time getting work—including one of my granddaughters who just graduated with high grades from George Mason University—even though she speaks perfect English (maybe her Spanish needs improvement?) and would be willing to take any job that paid enough for her modest upkeep needs.
But leniency for illegal aliens was exactly what resurgent Presidential candidate, Newt Gingrich, proposed during the last Republican Presidential Candidates debate.
So if we get Newt as our next President, we will get a repeat of the Obama Administration on the immigration issue. Assuredly, more DREAM Act approvals and other benefits for illegal aliens will follow.
The LA Times presumably thinks that this “small piece of immigration reform” is popular in its circulation area, now heavily Hispanic and close to de facto Reconquista. It is will certainly echoing the opinion of the city’s Mayor, Antonio Ramón Villaraigosa, the third Mexican American to have ever held office in the city of Los Angeles and the first in over 130 years.
On the ethics side, Mayor Villaraigosa seems to have some baggage—something to do with soliciting a pardon for the son of a drug kingpin and campaign finance violations—but, hey, which big city mayor doesn’t?[See “Justice Undone: Clemency Decisions in the Clinton White House and Mayor accused of ethics lapses by Patrick Mcgreevy, Los Angeles Times, May 2, 2007]
A “Small Piece Of Immigration Reform”? FAIR’s Stein replied to my friend by email on December 6, 2011:
“Hi. Nice to hear from you. I think it would be a small step if the Administration would just go about the business of enforcing the immigration laws of the United States. Instead, they’ve concocted this scheme to try to suggest that resource shortages prevent them from deporting really bad criminals—and therefore they have to close all other immigration deportation cases and let people go. In effect, they’ve usurped Congress’ role in this matter; all immigration is now unlimited, subject only to a few deportations for those really serious violent felons”.
Folks, we are truly in an immigration war.
With the sort of bipartisan non-enforcement immigration leadership surfacing now, America will surely need good luck.