The Christian Science Monitor comes out with a pretty firm recommendation for the politicians trying to work out an agreement on immigration reform. It will sound real familiar to regular readers of this blog.
That unease over rewarding outlaws with US citizenship touches on the most difficult balancing act for immigration reform: If the penalties are too stiff, illegal immigrants will not come forward and will remain underground, eroding respect for the rule of law; if they are too weak, there's little disincentive for millions more would-be immigrants to keep crossing the border or for those arriving with temporary visas to overstay illegally – also eroding rule of law.
To get around that problem, the "grand bargain" bill tried to put enforcement first. A digital checking system was set for employers to verify a worker's legal status while beefing up enforcement at the border with more agents, more effective electronic detection, and longer fences. Other provisions in the bill would not have kicked in until that system was in place.
But Congress still faces a huge credibility gap. Another "grand bargain" law passed in 1986 promised border enforcement and a crackdown on employers while granting an easier amnesty. The illegal migrants got their amnesty (helping to lure more illegals) but the federal government didn't deliver on enforcement.
To make its case to skeptical Americans, the Senate needs to pass a bill simply aimed at enforcement, hope the House passes it, and then await the reality check on its outcome. It may take a few years of effective enforcement – not just creating the bureaucracy for it – to reclaim the border and keep employers honest.
The initial task in defining who can be an American should be easy: First, obey US law. Senators should reassert their own Americanness by making sure the laws are obeyed at the border and in the workplace.
Look, there is a lot of screaming coming from left right and center about this bill. The fact is that we have seen this grand bargain before; it did not work because the enforcement was never implemented properly. Last time it was 3 million. 20 years on it is 12 million. In another 20 years, if precedent holds it will be 50 million. People – people who vote, mind you – are angry and mistrustful of the "reforms" being touted. And the CSM is exactly right: people are mistrustful because they want that border controlled first. Until it is, they will not trust Congress is doing the right thing with this massive, complex law. I really believe that if that is taken care of first, the rest can be hammered out. But the border has to be first.
