Site Presented By
Sunday, Nov 8, 2009
Ironclad
Published Letters: 68 Editor's Choice: 19
The one argument that never seems to pop up in this whole immigration battle is the issue of citizenship at birth - specifically for the children of our undocumented workers. If the 14th amendment were to be clarified to only grant citizenship to the children of citizens OR legal residents of the USA, that seems to me to be a huge way of reducing the appeal of migration. If the children are not automatically citizens - then the "anchor" provided by having kids to generate a legal foothold here is cut.
The fundamental principle is "you should not profit from a crime" - and gaining citizenship for your kids just because you decided to have them on this side of the border is just that - a gain from an illegal action. (The kid is not being punished either - he still has citizenship off his host country).
This would be a "third rail" issue I realize - since it strikes at the heart of how many families establish residency. But to me, at least it would give the legal immigrants - the ones that waited in line for permission - something of a reward for their patience and their "playing by the rules". At least it would stop the argument that you cannot deport the parents because all the kids are citizens.
Lobbies are the great reality of all politics - and every side has them - all pushing hard to influence and twist the actions of government (US or otherwise) toward their goals. Is the pro-Israeli lobby successful here? - Certainly! Do they dictate the policy of the US government - perhaps not so much as they believe.
The reality of the Middle East is oil - and in a logical world, the policy of the US government would be to insure a continuous and reliable supply. So, just support all of the existing governments and look the other way when it comes down to their abuses or treatment of their populations. Dump Israel too - because the majority in that region can't tolerate the idea of Jews in the neighborhood. And then sit back and collect the good will from the region (as well as the business) Right! - sounds a lot like Oil for Food to me..
Well, it is not a logical world that we live in. We don't euthanize older people and babies with disabilities because it would be economically favorable to do it either. And in the end, that is what it boils down to in the Middle East. Because most people understand that the conflict is about two groups of people fighting over the same area of land - where one side has the expressed aim of killing ever other member of the other side as an equal goal. And I think in the end, most people who "support" the Israeli lobby boil it down to this level. And I think this is why on a fundamental level that the Israeli lobby is so successful in making the US act against its "interests".
I think that Stephen Walt and John Mearsheimer have every right to open the discussion on the impact of the Israeli lobby in the USA. And many of the policies that they cite - do cause us grief in the region. But at the same time, I think that if they want to work to diminish the "power" of the Israeli lobby - they have to be brutally honest on the effects of an alternative policy - which I see as the main fault of their paper. After all, Logic sometimes does not work when the players themselves are illogical.
I would hope that one issue that both left and right could agree on would be that the first priority should be to plug the leak before we try to fix the immigration mess. By the leak, I mean the borders that are spilling "undocumented guests" into the country by the millions. If we could at least throttle down the numbers of people entering the country to a manageable level, perhaps some of the pressure might be taken out of the argument.
A fence or a wall or a barrier on the border would not be pretty (and certainly not impermeable) but at least it is something that would allow us to catch our breath on the issue - and hopefully stem the "leagalize" and "refill" two step that seems to happen every time this issue comes up for debate.
One may argue that a barrier would encourage more human trafficking of desperate people trying to enter the USA.
I would hope that the penality for this activity would be increased with the contruction of a fence.
The question is - can we agree on a first step and implement it - then debate the merits of anmensty and employer penalities and unionization of the "guests" currently here? I would rather see this problem addressed in small steps rather than wait for a "grand compromise" that at this point - seems on the far horizon.
Much of the initial coverage about Fort Hood turned out to be wrong. Is there anything wrong with that?
The accountability imposed by another country for the CIA's kidnapping and torture reveals much about our own.
Fox News' morning show plays to type, talking about whether Muslims in the Army should face "special debriefings"
The survivor and author is upset about comparisons some on the right are making to genocide
Once seen as a lunatic fringe, reactionary anti-women groups are courting respectability
Salon headlines in your mailbox
